toomom
member
Reged: 05/13/12
Posts: 141
|
|
Things are not looking good....no broken nose, no head lacerations and no black and blue eyes. He told the police he didn't need treatment. He followed up with a friend that was a family doctor that wrote in the chart to immed. see an ENT. He never did. Police say there were at least 2 times George had the oppertunity to identify himself. Bye George.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30195
|
|
LOL, so the PICTURES the POLICE took at the station the night of the shooting, showing the injury to both his NOSE as well as his FACE are fake? Cause the police RELEASED them quite a while ago (here is the link [censored]://[censored].huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/george-zimmerman-photos_n_1526045.html#slide=990868)
These are FACTUAL, and beyond reproach.
"He followed up with a friend that was a family doctor that wrote in the chart to immed. see an ENT. He never did."
So now a DOCTOR helped with the cover up? Why would a DOCTOR send him to an ENT if there were NO injuries?
"Police say there were at least 2 times George had the oppertunity to identify himself."
He had ZERO obligation to ID himself to Martin. And guess what, you cannot walk up to someone on the street, or in an ALLEY, or in ANY public place, and begin ATTACKING them because they didn't IDENTIFY themselves. George is looking really good right now, except for people like you who IGNORE the actual evidence, make up LIES to make him look guilty, and think they are superior because they can read the HEADLINES and make up their minds.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
toomom
member
Reged: 05/13/12
Posts: 141
|
|
"LOL, so the PICTURES the POLICE took at the station the night of the shooting, showing the injury to both his NOSE as well as his FACE are fake? Cause the police RELEASED them quite a while ago (here is the link [censored]://[censored].huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/george-zimmerman-photos_n_1526045.html#slide=990868)"
Not fake at all. Pictures cannot diagnose injuries. What we DO KNOW the corner doctor says he may have had a "Closed Nose Fracture" meaning no skin was "broken". We will never know because George never followed up on the instruction to see an EMT His head "wounds" are surface scrapes. Three to be exact, none of which needed any stitches. Hardly consistent with the 25 blows to the head that George said happened, that almost left him unconscious.
"These are FACTUAL, and beyond reproach." See above
"So now a DOCTOR helped with the cover up? Why would a DOCTOR send him to an ENT if there were NO injuries?"
Not at all. The doctor told police that he put a bandage on his head and referred him to a specialist. Zimmerman never followed the recommendation of the "URGENT CARE" doctor. Have you ever been to a corner doctor? They always refer to a specialist.
"Police say there were at least 2 times George had the opportunity to identify himself."
"He had ZERO obligation to ID himself to Martin."
Under Florida law, I guess you do if you wan't to use the SYG law...ooops
"And guess what, you cannot walk up to someone on the street, or in an ALLEY, or in ANY public place, and begin ATTACKING them because they didn't IDENTIFY themselves."
No, but George said Trayvon said" What is your problem, why are you following me?" George said," No, don't have a problem." The police say he should have identified himself. Apparently he did have a problem.
"George is looking really good right now, except for people like you who IGNORE the actual evidence, make up LIES to make him look guilty, and think they are superior because they can read the HEADLINES and make up their minds."
I guess the entire police department is a racist group.
|
spinnerdegrassi
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 08/20/06
Posts: 7947
|
|
I don't worry about this George Zimmerman guy. I know that if he had ever mouthed off to me, I would have kicked him in the nuts, taken his gun, and then sent his illegal immigrant ass back to Costa Rica.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30195
|
|
Here we go again, let me explain HOW wrong you are:
"What we DO KNOW the corner doctor says he may have had a "Closed Nose Fracture" meaning no skin was "broken". "
But the NOSE was most likely broken.
"We will never know because George never followed up on the instruction to see an EMT His head "wounds" are surface scrapes. Three to be exact, none of which needed any stitches. Hardly consistent with the 25 blows to the head that George said happened, that almost left him unconscious."
Please show a source for the "25 blows", as I have seen NOTHING of this statement. I am willing to look, but personally, since you have made up SO much and been wrong SO many times, I need to see a source on this.
"Not at all. The doctor told police that he put a bandage on his head and referred him to a specialist. Zimmerman never followed the recommendation of the "URGENT CARE" doctor. Have you ever been to a corner doctor? They always refer to a specialist."
It was a well respected family practice. Not a corner doctor, or some fly by night place. Regardless, he has DOCUMENTED injuries, a far cry from YOUR statement of NO black eyes (not only the doctor, but a NEIGHBOR saw the black eyes as well). As for the head injuries, they EXIST. Sorry they are not BAD enough for you.
"Under Florida law, I guess you do if you wan't to use the SYG law...ooops"
Only if you are a COP. But I will be MORE than interested in seeing your interpretation. Here is the actual text of the law, please cut and paste where is states a person has to IDENTIFY themselves:
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE[22]
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
"No, but George said Trayvon said" What is your problem, why are you following me?" George said," No, don't have a problem." The police say he should have identified himself. Apparently he did have a problem."
He COULD have, maybe he SHOULD have, but as stated, he is under NO obligation to do so, per the LAW.
"I guess the entire police department is a racist group."
I never said that, but considering the FACT that anyone who SUGGESTS that Zimmerman is innocent loses their JOB, I would say there are a BUNCH of racists. Of course, not racists that believe blacks are always WRONG, but the WORST kind of racists, the kind that think the black person is ALWAYS innocent.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30195
|
|
Personally, I think he is very immature, and I am not impressed with some of the things he did in the past, such as his drinking problems, etc. But that does not make him a murderer.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
toomom
member
Reged: 05/13/12
Posts: 141
|
|
"Here we go again, let me explain HOW wrong you are:
"What we DO KNOW the corner doctor says he may have had a "Closed Nose Fracture" meaning no skin was "broken". "
But the NOSE was most likely broken."
Says who?
"We will never know because George never followed up on the instruction to see an EMT His head "wounds" are surface scrapes. Three to be exact, none of which needed any stitches. Hardly consistent with the 25 blows to the head that George said happened, that almost left him unconscious."
"Please show a source for the "25 blows", as I have seen NOTHING of this statement. I am willing to look, but personally, since you have made up SO much and been wrong SO many times, I need to see a source on this."
"He was whaling on my head, maybe 25 times." Zimmerman said. In an interview recorded on February 27, the day after the shooting
"Not at all. The doctor told police that he put a bandage on his head and referred him to a specialist. Zimmerman never followed the recommendation of the "URGENT CARE" doctor. Have you ever been to a corner doctor? They always refer to a specialist."
"It was a well respected family practice. Not a corner doctor, or some fly by night place. Regardless, he has DOCUMENTED injuries, a far cry from YOUR statement of NO black eyes (not only the doctor, but a NEIGHBOR saw the black eyes as well). As for the head injuries, they EXIST. Sorry they are not BAD enough for you."
The Doctor's curriculum vitae shows he has been in practice for 2 years after graduating from the St. George's University in Grenada.
"Under Florida law, I guess you do if you wan't to use the SYG law...ooops"
"Only if you are a COP. But I will be MORE than interested in seeing your interpretation. Here is the actual text of the law, please cut and paste where is states a person has to IDENTIFY themselves:"
I don't have to. The investigator say he did. He was acting as a community patrol person with a gun. The problem is, he made a 911 call reporting the problem. Have you seen the HOA booklet found in his car regarding suspicions behavior?
"No, but George said Trayvon said" What is your problem, why are you following me?" George said," No, don't have a problem." The police say he should have identified himself. Apparently he did have a problem."
He COULD have, maybe he SHOULD have, but as stated, he is under NO obligation to do so, per the LAW.
"I guess the entire police department is a racist group."
"I never said that, but considering the FACT that anyone who SUGGESTS that Zimmerman is innocent loses their JOB, I would say there are a BUNCH of racists. Of course, not racists that believe blacks are always WRONG, but the WORST kind of racists, the kind that think the black person is ALWAYS innocent. "
Why is racist always an issue with you?
You are not "impressed" with the FACT that George is a drunk, yet Trayvon is a thug because he had weed?
|
english7
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/27/09
Posts: 3001
|
|
"Personally, I think he is very immature, and I am not impressed with some of the things he did in the past, such as his drinking problems, etc. But that does not make him a murderer."
And Martin, at 17, was not immature? Seventeen! What did the SCOTUS just rule about those under age?
And Martin, because there is some evidence he used pot at some point prior to this incident, is a---what do you call him---thug?
Let's get rid of the color of their skin. I am not at all focused on that--as many people are not.
Martin was only 17. He was likely a kid who smoked pot, as you do, Gr8. No big deal, right?
You've made a big deal about the contents of his backpack to support your "he's a thug" theory.
You can forgive Zimmerman for killing this kid, but you can't forgive the kid for defending himself.
Who had the gun? Who had the intent to injure? Who had the intent to take the other down????
Martin was just trying to get back home. Zimmerman was intent on eliminating what he "saw" as a danger to his community. Zimmerman instigated the assault. Zimmerman was a man on a mission.
The "race" issue comes in with Martin expecting a white person to profile him--which I think is exactly what happened. Treyvon saw a white man with a gun threatening him and made the decision to defend himself. Zimmerman obviously was hell bent on getting this BLACK "thug." Martin was no such thug, but he knew he would be seen as such because he was black, so he fought for his life.
End of story.
Edited by english7 (06/26/12 11:52 PM)
|
toomom
member
Reged: 05/13/12
Posts: 141
|
|
Let us not forget George's statement when addressing the court:
"ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am."
As if???? that would have made him less in fear of his life? And would not have taken a gun out and shot the yougster? His own words are going to send him to jail. If I am in so much fear of my LIFE that I have to KILL someone, it wouldn't matter if the person was 6, 16 or 60 years old.
|
toomom
member
Reged: 05/13/12
Posts: 141
|
|
"Personally, I think he (Zimmerman) is very immature."
Do you support an immature grown man running around a housing area with a loaded gun?
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
