What evidence does the prosecution have?

AJ Noiter · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
Can you prove that it is not true? NO!!!

This case is irrelevant, given what you stated was:

Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm.

I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.

I am referring to this case. So does your state allow people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?

LambChop · May 9, 2012

Lovelymountains said:
Could you please supply links to why it appears that TM was shot in the center chest area and the bullet traveled upwards, etc. I don't think the autopsy has been released, but if you have seen it I would certainly like to read it too. TIA

Notice I said IF. I believe it was mentioned in another article that it was about the center of the chest but I can't locate that one. No one has said the wound was over his heart. jmo

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57406725/martin-funeral-director-no-signs-of-fight-on-body/

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
This case is irrelevant, given what you stated was:

I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.

Are you a police officer?

zenreaper · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm. Most states don't have a "Stand Your Ground" rule. What would GZ have done if he lived in other states, like Maryland? We had a similar case here with neighborhood watchmen who knocked down a 15 year old teen, banged his head with a radio/walkie talkie, and broke his wrist. The older brother/neighborhood watchman was convicted of false imprisonment and second-degree assault, and cleared of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure. The younger brother was acquitted of all three counts.

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/artic...hborhood-watch-case-3532438.php#ixzz1uNgn3kST. http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php

False. LEGALLY taking a gun out of the house merely means you have a tool designed to protect yourself or someone else from harm. The difference between the case you describe and the case we are dealing with is that TM ATTACKED GZ.

Concerned Papa · May 9, 2012

I've never owned a small gun like this PF-9 and I've never felt the need for a concealed carry application. Out of the 25 or so guns I own, only 3 are hand guns. For fellow gun nuts here, I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Mag w/a western holster, a Thompson Contender with interchangeable barrels (.410 & .35 Rem.) w/a Uncle Mike's shoulder holster, and a 9 shot Ruger revolver .22.

As for hand guns, that's the limit of my personal experience or use. With that said, I've gone to various gun sites to read up on this notion of concealed carrying a gun inside your pants, because in all honesty, that's a new one on me. It's just not an option I find particularly comforting to have a loaded gun where my buziness is at, KWIM?

I don't know what kind GZ carried his gun in. I ran across 2 or 3 different types ranging from, what's GOT to be the biggest misnomer of all time, a "Smart Carry":

to this:

In any event, what I'm seeing, and what I'm reading is making me question, even more, the concept of GZ being able to reach into his pants and pull out his gun, while TM was allegedly on top of him, beating him senseless.

One site pointed out the following:

1. The PF-9 tends to get caught-up in clothing when a shooter tries to remove it in a hurry.

Carrying the gun in a proper holster and practicing drawing it from concealment dramatically reduces the chances of this potential problem. But many people who carry handguns this small and (lets face it) cheap dont invest in a good holster or spend much time practicing unholstering at the range. Even worse there are a number of people who simply pop one of these in a pocket and carry it that way, which makes getting the gun out and into the fight extremely difficult.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/foghorn/the-truth-about-george-zimmermans-kel-tec-pf-9/

Considering the above, the small size of this weapon,:

the mechanicaly failed condition of the gun when recovered,:

Police found a single shell casing at the scene, and when they seized George Zimmerman's handgun, a Kel Tec 9 mm, its magazine was full, according to a source close to the investigation. The only bullet missing was the one in the chamber, the source said.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...ing-shot-college-students-single-shell-casing

and a likely cause of this failure:

This is a condition we associate with something preventing the gun from cycling a fresh round from the magazine into the chamber after the shot was discharged. One thing that can cause that is another mans hand wrapped around the pistol, retarding its slide mechanism. This would indicate, as could certain gunshot residue patterns or cuts in certain places if found on Trayvon Martins hand(s), that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired.

http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/Mass...mmerman-and-trayvon-martin-what-we-dont-know/

It is my opinion that George Zimmerman had his gun drawn when this encounter began leaving Trayvon little choice but to fight for his life.

AJ Noiter · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
I am referring to this case. So does your state allows people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?

No, my state requires that if we see someone suspicious we can not be carrying a firearm, legally.

hoh: To be honest I'm not even sure I understand your question here, it seems a bit.. fragmented or something.

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

zenreaper said:
False. LEGALLY taking a gun out of the house merely means you have a tool designed to protect yourself or someone else from harm. The difference between the case you describe and the case we are dealing with is that TM ATTACKED GZ.

Where is the proof that TM attacked GZ? Can you please provide the link? Was there a video of this or is it just the ever changing words of GZ?

zenreaper · May 9, 2012

Lovelymountains said:
There is also nothing illegal about walking (I'm not sure what "Bopping" means, but does it call for execution?) along in the rain, wearing a hoodie, and talking on the telephone.
IMO the prosecution will prove that TM was doing nothing illegal. He was "Walking while black." That is not illegal. It is illegal to stalk someone and murder them, however because you don't like their looks.

Those who are in support of finding GZ guilty REFUSE to accept that it was not the WALKING that got TM shot, it was the ATTACKING that got him shot. GZ was not standing his ground or defending himself from a WALKER, he was defending himself from an ATTACKER.

vlpate · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
I am referring to this case. So does your state allows people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?

In my state, the people who look suspicious are carrying a gun too. Why should I be at a disadvantage? There's a great responsibility that goes with owning and carrying a concealed weapon, there's no such responsibility adhered to by those with illegal weapons. I think people confuse the two.

As far as the prosecution's case goes, his right to legally carry a gun won't come into it. If TM was not beating him, then his irresponsibility with the gun will. If TM was beating him, he used his gun as it was meant to be used.
JMO

zenreaper · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
Where is the proof that TM attacked GZ? Can you please provide the link? Was there a video of this or is it just the ever changing words of GZ?

Its right next to the proof that a DOG attacked GZ, or that GZ fired from a standing position, or that GZ was LOOKING to kill TM. It is SPECULATION. The difference between those three, and MY speculation, is that there is actually EVIDENCE to back up MY speculation. There are the injuries. A struggle occured. GZ has injuries, all reports we have say TM did NOT have injuries.

<modsnip>

zenreaper · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
I am referring to this case. So does your state allow people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?

Very few states, with the appropriate permits, do NOT allow you to carry. Keep in mind, althought the TM defenders have repeated it constantly, GZ was NOT on a neighborhood watch patrol. He had gone to the STORE. He was PERFECTLY within his rights to carry a firearm where he was going.

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
No, my state requires that if we see someone suspicious we can not be carrying a firearm, legally.hoh: To be honest I'm not even sure I understand your question here, it seems a bit.. fragmented or something.

How do you know what GZ's intensions were? Since he said there were several suspicious looking or acting people in recent months prior to the shooting, he may have wanted to take matters in his own hands. He may have become so frustrated with SPD that he may have decided that he was going to put an end to all suspicious looking people.

AJ Noiter · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
How do you know what GZ's intensions were? Since he said there were several suspicious looking or acting people in recent months prior to the shooting, he may have wanted to take matters in his own hands. He may have become so frustrated with SPD that he may have decided that he was going to put an end to all suspicious looking people.

Based on your quoting of my words, I have no clue what you're talking about. I haven't stated anything about GZ, in fact, I stated at one point that THIS CASE was irrelevant based on some of your words. Curiouser and curiouser I'm getting here.

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

zenreaper said:
Its right next to the proof that a DOG attacked GZ, or that GZ fired from a standing position, or that GZ was LOOKING to kill TM. It is SPECULATION. The difference between those three, and MY speculation, is that there is actually EVIDENCE to back up MY speculation. There are the injuries. A struggle occured. GZ has injuries, all reports we have say TM did NOT have injuries.

<Modsnip>

I am not trying to argue with you. I am trying to be open to other views, not one-sided.

If TM had no injuries besides the gunshot wound, wouldn't that prove that he did not punch or really fight GZ?

beach · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
I am not trying to argue with you. I am trying to be open to other views, not one-sided.

If TM had no injuries besides the gunshot wound, wouldn't that prove that he did not punch or really fight GZ?

BBM

Have we gotten the autopsy report confirming that?

Sun48shine · May 9, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
Based on your quoting of my words, I have no clue what you're talking about. I haven't stated anything about GZ, in fact, I stated at one point that THIS CASE was irrelevant based on some of your words. Curiouser and curiouser I'm getting here.

Maybe it's just my opinion of guns. I think that people who carry them as neighborhood watchman are looking for trouble. They are supposed to contact police with suspicous activity and let police handle the situation.

beach · May 9, 2012

Mod Reminder:

Reminder that is is okay to scroll past a post that you feel is not relevant or argumentative. No one is obligated to respond to anyone else.

What is NOT okay, is to respond rudely or respond in a personal way to another member.

AJ Noiter · May 9, 2012

Sun48shine said:
I am not trying to argue with you. I am trying to be open to other views, not one-sided.

If TM had no injuries besides the gunshot wound, wouldn't that prove that he did not punch or really fight GZ?

I am still of the belief that he used his phone instead of his knuckles, when "punching" Mr. Zimmerman. Given that scenario, and even if he punched Mr. Zimmerman with his knuckles, that doesn't necessarily mean he would have any injuries. Knuckles are hard, there's not a lot of tissue to bruise. Slamming someone's head into cement doesn't immediately tell me how he WOULD have an injury. Placing your hand over someone's mouth tells me you might have some of their saliva on your hand, maybe a bite mark.. but nothing definitive to state that there SHOULD be an injury.

Velouria · May 9, 2012

zenreaper said:
Its right next to the proof that a DOG attacked GZ, or that GZ fired from a standing position, or that GZ was LOOKING to kill TM. It is SPECULATION. The difference between those three, and MY speculation, is that there is actually EVIDENCE to back up MY speculation. There are the injuries. A struggle occured. GZ has injuries, all reports we have say TM did NOT have injuries.

<modsnip>

Other than the gaping bullet hole in his chest, you mean?

As for all that EVIDENCE you claim backs up your speculation, it does not support the theory that TM attacked GZ (as in attacked FIRST) any more than it does the theory that TM struck GZ in an attempt to defend himself against a stranger who accosted him.

What evidence does the prosecution have?

Little Bunny FooFoo

Verified Insider

Former Member

Verified Insider

New Member

New Member

Little Bunny FooFoo

Verified Insider

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Verified Insider

Little Bunny FooFoo

Verified Insider

Verified Expert

Verified Insider

Verified Expert

Little Bunny FooFoo

Active Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics