Current Events > George Zimmerman's story is full of holes, embellishments, and lies.

(+) Yeah! (+)

He was clearly at fault. The argument this guy presents is interesting and was also apparently presented by one of the law enforcement agencies at the time:

2nd degree murder in this case couldnt really be PROVED in a court of law. But Zimmerman should have at the very least been charged with manslaughter. It would have been very provable in court.

https://youtu.be/PE84fH_Pc9c

---

Mods close this please it's been rehashed too many times and always ends with tears and name calling and suspensions

Zimmerman's a fucking loser wannabe vigilante who picked a fight with a kid

---

Doom_Art posted...

Zimmerman's a fucking loser wannabe vigilante who picked a fight with a kid

A kid who beat the shit out of him

Not according to UnfairRepresent
---

coh posted...

A kid who beat the shit out of him

If he had hit him any harder, he might have been able to survive Zimmerman's murder attempt.

---

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

If he had hit him any harder, he might have been able to survive Zimmerman's murder attempt.

It was self defense.

No shit he was at fault. Whats a dead person gonna say about the story?

---

White people love this story, especially after Zimmerman got acquitted, it's "payback for OJ Simpson" and "haha we win"

---

coh posted...

It was self defense.

Yes, self defense because Zimmerman was stalking him with a deadly weapon with malicious intent. Glad we agree.

---

coh posted...

It was self defense.

Anything that you say about Martin can also be said of Zimmerman. Seriously coh, if you honestly believe what you say here, watch the video. I know its 40 minutes long and its a lot to ask, but if you are serious its only the length of a TV episode and its a persons life and a matter of justice we are talking about here. Its a well-presented argument and not overly hostile toward Zimmerman.

e: heck, watch it at double-speed if you want.

---

My understanding of it is that Zimmerman didn't follow Martin with the intention to kill him, it was only after Martin attacked that he did.

Didn't most people agree that Zimmerman could have been found guilty if the prosecutors didn't overreach with the murder charge?

I mean, it wasn't really their fault though because the public, stupid as they are, demanded murder over manslaughter because they continue to not understand the definitions in law.

---

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Didn't most people agree that Zimmerman could have been found guilty if the prosecutors didn't overreach with the murder charge?

I mean, it wasn't really their fault though because the public, stupid as they are, demanded murder over manslaughter because they continue to not understand the definitions in law.

A manslaughter certainly would have been a more achievable goal. It was going to be hard any way you go because of lack of real evidence to contradict his story. People just get all up in their feels about his behavior since it is icky, but he didn't break any laws by his story and we can't really prove otherwise.

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Didn't most people agree that Zimmerman could have been found guilty if the prosecutors didn't overreach with the murder charge?

I mean, it wasn't really their fault though because the public, stupid as they are, demanded murder over manslaughter because they continue to not understand the definitions in law.

No, what's stupid is disregarding that law and justice are open to interpretation. Calling it an overreach to charge Zimmerman with murder is no different than stating you don't believe he's guilty of murder. He stalked a child and killed him. That's murder. If the races were reversed, the result would have been different. That's the reality. Not an overreach.

Jesus christ, some people.

---

EnragedSlith posted...

No, what's stupid is disregarding that law and justice are open to interpretation. Calling it an overreach to charge Zimmerman with murder is no different than stating you don't believe he's guilty of murder. He stalked a child and killed him. That's murder. If the races were reversed, the result would have been different. That's the reality. Not an overreach.

Jesus christ, some people.

I agree with you 100% but the video does present a good take on why manslaughter would have actually gotten him. Despite how obvious it seems that he murdered Trayvon, the proof isnt irrefutable enough despite Zimmermans many reckless decisions and lies, for a court of law in our current (shitty) legal system at least.

---

For the record, TC refuses to actually look at the trial and just insults people who prove him wrong

He even brags about doing this. He'll look up random vids, blogs and CNN articles that back up what he already believes with rhetoric but won't actually look at the trial, the evidence, the testimony, the police reports etc

realnifty1 posted...

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Didn't most people agree that Zimmerman could have been found guilty if the prosecutors didn't overreach with the murder charge?

I mean, it wasn't really their fault though because the public, stupid as they are, demanded murder over manslaughter because they continue to not understand the definitions in law.

A manslaughter certainly would have been a more achievable goal.

False.

Zimmerman got off on basic 101 self-defense laws. His actions were seen as legally valid. Any charge placed against him be it murder, manslaughter, assault etc all would have fallen under the same ruling.

The "IF only we pushed Manslaughter" or "If only it wasn't Florida's stand your Ground laws" are a myth the media pulled to try to make the people they duped be angry at the courts rather than angry at the media that lied to them.

And it worked sadly. People like you and TC are too proud to go "Damn, I was wrong about something, I needto be more careful about what I accept at face value in the future" and so instead go "Well I'm never wrong and I was mad about this so clearly the courts are wrong and it's all one giant screw up conspiracy"

Stand your ground was not used or relevant to the case whatsoever and the charge of murder or manslaughter would have made zero difference.

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

If he had hit him any harder, he might have been able to survive Zimmerman's murder attempt.

That doesn't make any sense

"If his attempted murder was successful the other guy couldn't have murdered him." well then you've just admitted the latter was self-defense didn't you?

Shablagoo posted...

Anything that you say about Martin can also be said of Zimmerman.

False.

Zimmerman didn't attack Martin.
Zimmerman didn't get home, turn around, hide behind a bush and attempt to kill Martin.

Not only are you lying, your point is still flawed.

Even if you go "Well they both were wrong to walk down a public street" which is absurd. Trayvon's still at fault for attacking. Which is something you can't say of Zimmerman
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

That doesn't make any sense

"If his attempted murder was successful the other guy couldn't have murdered him." well then you've just admitted the latter was self-defense didn't you?

I don't think the words I have spoken have broached your comprehension.

---

ChuckSDeuces posted...

Didn't most people agree that Zimmerman could have been found guilty if the prosecutors didn't overreach with the murder charge?

I mean, it wasn't really their fault though because the public, stupid as they are, demanded murder over manslaughter because they continue to not understand the definitions in law.

It is understandable though as it doesn't help that each state defines various terms in different ways. This is especially true for sex related crimes. Rape vs sexual assault is defined at least half a dozen different ways depending on where it takes place.

---

The question I always poach to Zimmerman's detractors and in 8 years have never once recieved an answer to is the hypothetical of what they would do in his place.

It's nightime and you're alone. A man much fitter and stronger than you jumps out from behind a bush bush, attacks you, punches you, you fall down, he mounts you and punches your face repeatedly. The back of your head smashes into the sidewalk on each blow, blood wis pouring into your eyes and mouth so you can't see or breathe, you're pleading for mercy and the guy just continues to punch you while saying you're going to die tonight.

You have a gun in your pocket.

What do you do?

You're in that moment, you can't change anything that happened before it. All you can do is either shoot or lie there and hope he's lying and doesn't really kill you while he beats you to death.

They will never ever ever answer it. Because they can't without admitting the media duped them
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

It's nightime and you're alone. A man much fitter and stronger than you jumps out from behind a bush bush, attacks you, punches you, you fall down, he mounts you and punches your face repeatedly. The back of your head smashes into the sidewalk on each blow, blood wis pouring into your eyes and mouth so you can't see or breathe, you're pleading for mercy and the guy just continues to punch you while saying you're going to die tonight.

You have a gun in your pocket.

What do you do?

I didn't know Zimmerman jumped out from behind a bush when he assaulted Trayvon Martin, but I'm pretty sure Martin didn't have a gun.

---

Case and point

They never can answer it.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Zimmerman didn't attack Martin.
Zimmerman didn't get home, turn around, hide behind a bush and attempt to kill Martin.

Prove that Martin did either of those things without using an unreliable witness (Zimmerman) who had reason to lie and showed many times that he would. Watch the video, seriously. Its not just some random vid, its well-done. 20 minutes if you watch it at 2x speed. Maybe it will expand your perspective some, if youre willing to be open about this thing rather than dogmatically sticking to the view youve held thus far. Im not saying it will or should change your mind, just that it is an added perspective for you to examine.

---

I've done that at least 7 times with you before TC

You just ignore it and run away or insult me.

Tell you what, I'll watch the shitty video if you actually go look at the trial and se-

and he was never seen again
---

What is so bad about watching a video and considering a viewpoint different from your own? I have looked at the trial.

---

Shablagoo posted...

What is so bad about watching a video and considering a viewpoint different from your own?

I have seen dozens. I followed the Zimmerman case when it was a local Florida story that was dropped by the local police immediately for being so open and shut. Before the national media picked it up, ran doctored phone calls to make Zimmerman sound racist and forced the case to be reopened as a media circus.

I think I'm literally the only person on CE that is true of. I've probably seen over a hundred videos about the case.

And how can I say it has a different viewpoint than my own before I see it? That's madness.

It's just these shitty youtube videos are designed to make you feel a certain way. Not a presentation of facts, hell the thumbnail alone of a giant skull and "The Killing of Trayvon Martin" in big bold sensationalistic caps Sells that.

Doesn't matter what the rhetoric is, I'm not interested in rhetoric.

There's nothing in these videos that will add anything to what came out in the trial, what the police said, what the testimony was, the physical evidence etc.

If there was they wouldn't be on Youtube they would be handed to the Florida police as new evidence.

I have looked at the trial.

You're lying. You've even bragged about not looking at the trial before.

You argue in such bad faith 24/7. You just lie, ignore points (you've ignored all mine in this very topic) and insult people.
---

his story makes no sense. in one part, he gets out of his car to look at a sign and figure out where he is. yet he supposedly patrolled that neighborhood for years and knew it like the back of his hand. how would he get lost?

Zikten posted...

his story makes no sense. in one part, he gets out of his car to look at a sign and figure out where he is. yet he supposedly patrolled that neighborhood for years and knew it like the back of his hand. how would he get lost?

It was night and rainy and he'd just gone down a path that split and got turned around.

Although let's ignore that for a moment and explore this line o thought. Let's pretend Zimmerman didn't get lost and lied about a streetsign. What does that even mean?

You're acting like the only evidence in line to defend Zimmerman's actions was Zimmerman's word, taken at face value and all other evidence doesn't exist....

Look up the trial. Not talking points you heard on facebook and CNN
---

Zikten posted...

his story makes no sense. in one part, he gets out of his car to look at a sign and figure out where he is. yet he supposedly patrolled that neighborhood for years and knew it like the back of his hand. how would he get lost?

Exactly! His neighborhood is 3 (short) streets wide and he was the head of the Neighborhood Watch. Much of his entire story is ridiculous.

---

coh posted...

It was self defense.

Still not sure how you are defending yourself if you start a fight and get your ass kicked.

---

Hey what a surprise, you both dodged all the points and evidence again

Who ever could have seen that coming?

ScazarMeltex posted...

Still not sure how you are defending yourself if you start a fight and get your ass kicked.

There is no evidence Zimmerman started a fight.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

It's nightime and you're alone. A man much fitter and stronger than you jumps out from behind a bush bush, attacks you, punches you, you fall down, he mounts you and punches your face repeatedly. The back of your head smashes into the sidewalk on each blow, blood wis pouring into your eyes and mouth so you can't see or breathe, you're pleading for mercy and the guy just continues to punch you while saying you're going to die tonight.

Is this like one of those "Your daughter comes home from college for thanksgiving and brings her new boyfriend, but he's an alien from the planet marklar. How do you react?" scenarios that you like to post frequently?

---

Zimmerman was well within his rights to follow Trayvon. You don't just fight someone because they're following you or trying to ask you a question. You can continue to ignore them if you want and go about your business. Was it something I would have done? No. If Zimmerman never left his car, this wouldn't have happened. But he did leave his car and it was not illegal to do so.

For the record, Trayvon was tall and buff. Zimmerman was 5'7 and Trayvon was 6'2. Here's a picture of Trayvon for reference.



---

Machete posted...

Your Marklar comes home from college for Marklar and brings her new Marklar, but he's an Marklar from the planet Marklar. How do you react?"

Jesus Christ. If your are going to reference a culture, at least respect their customs.

---

Houston posted...

Zimmerman was well within his rights to follow Trayvon. You don't just fight someone because they're following you or trying to ask you a question. You can continue to ignore them if you want and go about your business. Was it something I would have done? No. If Zimmerman never left his car, this wouldn't have happened. But he did leave his car and it was not illegal to do so.

For the record, Trayvon was tall and buff. Zimmerman was 5'7 and Trayvon was 6'2. Here's a picture of Trayvon for reference.

Ok Manlet

---

Houston posted...

Zimmerman was well within his rights to follow Trayvon.

No that is literally harrassment to follow someone. Which is illegal in Florida.

---

ncsonic posted...

White people love this story, especially after Zimmerman got acquitted, it's "payback for OJ Simpson" and "haha we win"

Eat a lot of paint chips as a kid??

We still talking about this? It was 8 years ago.

Kastrada posted...

No that is literally harrassment to follow someone. Which is illegal in Florida.

Zimmerman walked down a public street.

That's not harrassment or stalking or illegal and it's really insulting to victims of those crimes to pretend that it is.

It's then doubling down on the insanity to take that to the next extreme of "Also it's grounds to attempt to murder someone."

Thirdly, it's hypocritical because Trayvon got home, turned around and followed Zimmerman

So if you're calling that stalking and harrasment you're claiming Trayvon stalked Zimmerman.

It's such a silly claim to make on so many different levels.
---

EnragedSlith posted...

He stalked a child and killed him. That's murder.

Entire situation summed up in nine words.


---

Umbreon posted...

Entire situation summed up in nine words.

Summed up incorrectly.

There was no stalking, no murder

And that "child" was 6'2 17 year old who attacked him and tried to kill him.

You're showing your colors though. You got duped by the media
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Zimmerman walked down a public street.

That's not harrassment or stalking or illegal and it's really insulting to victims of those crimes to pretend that it is.

It's then doubling down on the insanity to take that to the next extreme of "Also it's grounds to attempt to murder someone."

Thirdly, it's hypocritical because Trayvon got home, turned around and followed Zimmerman

So if you're calling that stalking and harrasment you're claiming Trayvon stalked Zimmerman.

It's such a silly claim to make on so many different levels.

So to summarize:

Quoted text said that it's within a person's right to follow another person.

I said that's not right because it falls under Floridian law as harrasement.

I never said anything else.

You post a long ass diatribe arguing stuff I never even addressed.

Do I have that right?

---

Kastrada posted...

I said that's not right because it falls under Floridian law as harrasement.

Walking down a public street is not breaking the law as harrasement.

You are lying.

It's also not a justification for attempted murder

I shouldn't even have to say that. It's shocking that I do

And Trayvon then followed and ambushed Zimmerman. So if it's harrasment then Martin broke the law too you silly moo. Your own argument is not only wrong, it still defends Zimmerman.

It's mindboggling
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Walking down a public street is not breaking the law as harrasement.

You are lying.

It's also not a justification for attempted murder

I shouldn't even have to say that. It's shocking that I do

And Trayvon then followed and ambushed Zimmerman. So if it's harrasment then Martin broke the law too you silly moo. Your own argument is not only wrong, it still defends Zimmerman.

It's mindboggling

And you are trolling.

I'm not speaking about the case at all. Not really.

A person said someone (specifically a Floridian) has a right to follow another person. I said that is illegal based on Florida law.

You are having a breakdown and arguing things I have never said. You are trolling.

---

Kastrada posted...

I said that is illegal based on Florida law.

But it isn't illegal in Florida law to walk down a public street. Aka what Zimmerman and Martin did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3hTwsvJV_A
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

But it isn't illegal in Florida law to walk down a public street. Aka what Zimmerman and Martin did.

Show me where I said Zimmerman did this. Show me even saying his or Martin's name.

I corrected someone to say following a person is illegal in Florida. I said nothing else and you are having a breakdown over it for.....some strange reason.

But keep this up. I'm bored at work and this is entertaining. My lesson plans for the year are finished and students don't come back for another two weeks.

---

Kastrada posted...

Show me where I said Zimmerman did this.

Kastrada posted...

Houston posted...

Zimmerman was well within his rights to follow Trayvon.

No that is literally harrassment to follow someone. Which is illegal in Florida.

Unless you're now claiming "Oh I wasn't saying he did break the law. I was just saying that if he had broken the law then he would have broken the law"

Which would be hilarious if that's what you're now going to pretend.
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Unless you're now claiming "Oh I wasn't saying he did break the law. I was just saying that if he had broken the law then he would have broken the law"

Which would be hilarious if that's what you're now going to pretend.

The Houston user said their names. He said one was within their rights to follow another.

I said following someone is illegal in Florida.

Now show me where I said Zimmerman followed Martin. Show me where I said Martin did not follow Zimmerman. Show me where I said it was a "justification for murder". Show me where I am being a hypocrite. Show me anything.

Edit: @UnfairRepresent plz respond. :*(

---