thoughts on the Trayvon murder

A strong statement to make in public...

Sanford, Florida (CNN) -- George Zimmerman's brother said medical records will prove that his brother was attacked and his nose was broken by Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the teen.

Robert Zimmerman Jr. spoke to CNN's Piers Morgan Thursday night saying he wanted to correct some of the "mythology" and untruths that have been spread about the controversial shooting.

"We're confident the medical records are going to explain all of George's medical history," Zimmerman Jr. said. "His nose looks swollen in that video. I'm his brother."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/30/justice/f ... ?hpt=hp_t2

He better be telling the truth.

Martin was probably hopped up on Skittles.

MMMM. I'd kill for some Skittles right now. :candy:

OK, that was bad.

Are you saying they are to die for?

Only in Florida.

Photo-fish wrote: MMMM. I'd kill for some Skittles right now. :candy:

Here's you chance...

https://twitter.com/?tw_e=screenname&tw ... lZimmerman

PM me for the skittles.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: A strong statement to make in public...

Sanford, Florida (CNN) -- George Zimmerman's brother said medical records will prove that his brother was attacked and his nose was broken by Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the teen.

Robert Zimmerman Jr. spoke to CNN's Piers Morgan Thursday night saying he wanted to correct some of the "mythology" and untruths that have been spread about the controversial shooting.

"We're confident the medical records are going to explain all of George's medical history," Zimmerman Jr. said. "His nose looks swollen in that video. I'm his brother."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/30/justice/f ... ?hpt=hp_t2

He better be telling the truth.

I wonder if Zimmerman went to his family doctor the next day? If so, I'm guessing some on the left will dismiss anything the doctor says (after all, the doctor's known Zimmerman for years) and probably twitter the doctor's address too (hey, they've already done it with Zimmerman's friend).

Hopefully the paramedics who treated him first will also have statements. But I don't know if paramedics would diagnose a broken nose. They could at least verify it was bloody as stated in the police report.

Joe Scarborough On Trayvon Martin: Conservatives Are 'Fools' For Taking Political Stance (VIDEO)

Joe Scarborough condemned some conservatives and right-leaning websites for trying to turn Trayvon Martin's death into a political cause on Friday's "Morning Joe."

"Why is it that some on the right are actually taking this up as a cause?" Scarborough asked. "As National Review said almost immediately after it happened, this has nothing to do with gun rights, this has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, this has nothing to do with stand your ground laws, this has nothing to do with the NRA. This has everything to do with a guy that's trying to play security cop, who is unhinged, who chased down and shot a 17-year-old kid armed with Skittles and iced tea.'"

He said, "some racist websites, but also sadly some fairly mainstream websites are actually going into Trayvon Martin’s social media pages, be it Twitter or MySpace, and they're trying to find ominous looking pictures while skipping over pictures of him holding up a birthday cake smiling, him fishing with his dad, him standing outside proudly of his home dressed in a tux ready to go to prom."

"This is beneath contempt," Scarborough railed. "These people on the far right are being fools to try to make this a political issue.”

"Some out there are marginalizing themselves, making fools of themselves," he continued. He speculated that they took issue with President Obama's remarks about Martin's death. "I guess in their warped, twisted, distorted, political worldview, that makes this dead 17-year-old boy — who was kept in the morgue for three days before they even notified his parents of his whereabouts — I guess that makes it okay?" he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/3 ... ref=topbar


Wow... Even a conservative like Scarborough has had a belly-full of the knuckle-draggers of the right-wing.. "Beneath contempt"... Yep, that about sums it up.... The video says it all...

plaidvillain wrote: Zimmerman was the aggressor the moment he ignored a direct order from police, stepped out of his car, and accosted Martin with absolutely no authority to do so. -Hey, what are you doing walking around here at night?- -None of your damn business.- Whatever happened after Zimmerman followed and approached Martin is absolutely a result of Zimmerman's mistake, and his responsibility for this at least demands a thorough investigation. By every account, the police did not conduct a thorough investigation (there should not be new witnesses coming up weeks later, for example). Simply be fair to the deceased and I will be satisfied. Fortunately, due to public pressure, a thorough investigation will be done...we'll have to see what comes of it.

Tell me PS, is it fine to provoke, accost or harrass somebody, then use lethal force as self defense when they respond? Granted, each individual must control their reactions, and Martin bears responsibility for whatever he did as well, but to presume the innocence of andgrant protections to the shooter, seems to me to negate the deceased's right to defend themselves.

It's almost like you see it as Zimmerman's word against Martin's, and you don't mind Martin not saying anything.

Tell me PV, where is your support for your statement that Zimmerman accosted Martin? I can point you to a couple of places in the 4 minute call he had with the dispatcher, who told him they didn't need him to follow the suspicious person as opposed to giving him a direct order not to do so as you allege, that establishes that Zimmerman lost all contact with Martin after exiting his vehicle. I haven't seen anything from any witness that establishes that Zimmerman initiated any physical, or even verbal, confrontation between the two of them. I have yet to see a single witness state that they saw Zimmerman approach Martin. If you have that support, please provide me a link to it so that I may review it. I know you believe that Zimmerman accosted Martin, but knowledge and belief are not synonymous terms. Who struck the first blow PV? Verbal exchanges, regardless of content, do not give anyone the sanction to strike someone else physically. You and I could be verbally confrontational or even verbally belligerent with each other without violating any laws - but if as a result of our verbal exchange you were to strike me it would be you who initiated the physical confrontation. Even at that, should I gain the upper hand and continue to assault your person such that you became fearful for your life, would you have lost the ability to defend your life simply because you struck me first? Would or should you be required, or even expected, to allow me to bludgeon you to death simply because you struck me first?

I, along with you, find it interesting that people who were witnesses to the actual event on the night of the event didn't go out to the police that night when there were emergency lights flashing for hours, sirens, yellow police tape around the scene and police officers canvasing the area looking for witnesses to give their statement regarding what they saw. You are correct, there should not be new witnesses coming out of every crack 3 or 4 weeks into the investigation after it has received national attention with the hysterics of racism attached to it to tell for the first time what they witnessed that night. I would have to hazard a guess and say that if I were in a jury I would have a hard time finding them to be credible and reliable witnesses under those circumstances. They would need to explain to me why they didn't provide their account that evening and have a credible reason why the failed to do so before I would accept as genuine anything they had to say.

Zimmerman became the aggressor the moment he stepped out of his vehicle.