Do you believe that George Zimmerman is truly guilty?

No I love facts, You just don't seem to understand them. There is nothing in that law that says it is harassment to follow a child.

Let me direct your attention to this segment,"and serves no legitimate purpose."
Zimmerman had police on the way and wanted to be able to direct them to Martin, Therefore, his action had a legitimate purpose. And if you did a little research you would find that the very same statue you referenced in paragraph 5 mentions minors as anyone under 16. which automatically turns stalking into aggravated stalking. But Martin was 17 so it is irrelevant. It is also irrelevant because Zimmerman did not fit the definition of stalking, just as he did not fit the definition of harassment.

If you had paid any attention at all to the statue you posted reference to you would see that it specifically says "Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person"
read it again
"Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly"
again
"willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly"
one more time
"and repeatedly"

This was a single incident, therefore even if he had fit the definition of harassment or stalking, this statue would not apply.

Your claim to the age of 21 is one of pure stupidity or ignorance but most likely both. 21 is only the legal age for the consumption of alcohol not the age age when you stop being considered a minor, That for age varies for different purposes. Normally in most states it is 18 for most purposes.

I understand the legal precedents surrounding this case quite well, you really don't stand much of a chance trying to prove me wrong here. But troll on if you must, I rather enjoy watching you struggle.

True, but none of what he did (as far as can be proven by evidence available to the public at this time) was illegal. Zimmerman's purpose was legitimate as far as the law is concerned. When the term legitimate is used in this statue it means he had a purpose other than to harass Martin, which he clearly did. Did he go to the extent that it normally should be handled by the police? Yes, I believe he did, but that is a personal opinion and not law, and therefore irrelevant to his legal rights. So far they have no evidence to prove he has done anything illegal, which is why the arrest affidavit was based entirely on speculation and pushed by public outcry, rather than by evidence of criminal actions.

Regardless of what Zimmerman did, if Martin assaulted him in a physical manner, then Martin was wrong and Zimmerman had the right to defend himself by whatever means he deemed necessary, up to and including deadly force, as long as he had a reasonable fear of great bodily harm. Since "reasonable fear" is a relative term, he can easily argue that having his head pounded against the ground was in his eyes enough to cause fear of great bodily harm.

I challenge you to find anything he did that you can prove (with solid evidence) illegal. I believe you will find it quite impossible at this time.

This is the reason there was such a long delay in his arrest, which I believe will be found to be in error, due to the Florida statue 776.032 and the requirements of evidence for an arrest described therein. Unless they release more evidence that can place Zimmerman squarely in the wrong and prove that he initiated the assault. Which I believe will be nearly impossible, unless there is a video recording of the start of the fight hiding somewhere that has avoided media attention. Which I highly doubt at this point.

True, if Zimmerman would have stayed in his car, this may have all been avoided. Zimmerman however was not legally obligated to stay in his car, he has every right to get out of his car without being attacked. granted there is no proof that Martin attacked him other than his word. There is also no proof that Zimmerman attacked Martin, and in the US, you are innocent until PROVEN guilty. Which they have failed to provide any evidence to prove.

The witness only retracted his statement as far as to say he was not sure who was screaming for help. He said his assumption was that it was Zimmerman because he was the one on the ground and it made sense that the guy on the bottom getting beaten would be the one screaming. you can read more about it here: http://globalgrind.com/news/k...

There is nothing to show that Zimmerman continued to chase Martin after the hot line operator said "we don't need you to do that". in fact the evidence suggests that he did in fact quit chasing him, even though that was not a legally obligating order. If you listen to the unedited recording, it's easy to tell that he had quit following Martin. After the hot line operator said "we don't need you to do that", Zimmerman responded "okay" and "he ran". ~1 min. later in the phone call the hot line operator asked Zimmerman for his personal address, which he started to give, then stopped because, as he stated, he didn't know where Martin was and didn't want him to hear his personal address. This is pretty good evidence to suggest that Zimmerman had in fact quit following Martin. After all, you cant follow someone if you don't know where they are. Also, this amount of time would have given Martin plenty of time to get home or at least much closer to home than where he was killed, given the short distance between where Zimmerman was parked and where Martin was staying. If he was in fact headed home. It would seem to suggest he doubled back.

"We know that region was running away when Zimmerman caught up to and confronted him, which he should not have done"
Region??? I'm guessing you mean Martin, and the following statement will be based on that assumption.

I have yet to be able to find evidence to support this claim. Every claim I have seen that Zimmerman initiated the fight is based on speculation of people who have no evidence to back up their theory. If you do have any actual proof based on evidence rather than speculation that Zimmerman caught up to and confronted him, (mind you, we're talking about a overweight office worker catching an athletic high school student in good shape) please share.

"We know that Zimmerman didn't identify himself to the kid he'd been harassing."
I've seen no evidence that he was even given a chance to identify himself or that he did anything to fit the legal definition of harassment.

"we know that trayvon didn't have damage to his hands or knuckles so he never threw a punch"

COMPLETELY FALSE! The autopsy shows that he did in fact have damage to his hand, not that it proves anything one way or the other. The damage could have come from hitting any number of things, and you DO NOT always damage your hands when throwing a punch, in fact if you know how to throw a proper punch, it's easy not to damage your hands. Besides, Zimmerman had the injuries to prove it.


"It makws sense that Zimmerman, the wannabe cop, didn't want to back off, he was armed and very dangerous and was determined to find this child and hold him for the cops. Zimmerman didn't consider the fact that this scared kid would resist when Zimmerman put his hands on him to detain him."

While all that is plausible, it is nothing more than SPECULATION. There is no evidence to support it. It is no more believable than Zimmerman's story. I would venture to say even less so, due to the fact that Zimmerman was at least there for the attack, so knows more about it than anyone. And so far there has been no evidence to show that he has lied about it. I have no reason to believe that the story based on speculation is true vs the story by the person who was actually there.

Sure, he could lie to protect himself, but he could also be telling the truth. I have no reason to believe that he has lied thus far. This would be a very detailed lie, that has so far been unable to be proven a lie, and he would have only had a couple minutes to come up with it. Plus, his story has remained unchanged from that night, and even when more evidence was submitted, nothing was able to show his story was any less than true.

He may be guilty, but so far there has been absolutely nothing to prove it.

The girlfriend that didn't come forward until long after the incident hit the major news networks? Even if she is telling the truth, it's her word against his, not proof. It still does not explain why Martin was still in the area if he was supposedly trying to get away. He had plenty of time to get much farther away between the time he ran from Zimmerman and the time that Zimmerman got off the phone, yet he was still fairly close to Zimmerman's truck when it happened. If he was running so hard he was out of breath and could not run any farther he would have been home or much closer to it by the time of the shooting compared to the time he ran from Zimmerman. Instead he was shot roughly 100yrds from Zimmerman's vehicle. What kind of logic would allow you to believe that from the time he ran from Zimmerman till he was killed, he would only would have made it ~100yrds. Even if he shot him the second he hung up the phone. that would have been at least 1.5 min from the time he ran. Are you going to try to tell me that Martin, described as athletic, was only able to run ~100yrds in 1.5min likely longer? I'm out of shape and a horrible runner with exercise induced asthma, and I can still run that distance in 20sec or less. No way her story is true.

Obviously you are not Ms, current events. You claim there is no damage to Martins hands, but the autopsy report says otherwise, and that is an ignorant claim to start with. You don't always hurt your hands in a fight. Lack of injuries on Martin proves nothing. Also the police have released photos of Zimmerman's injuries now. There is also a doctors report describing Zimmerman's broken nose and black eyes.

There is no need of a life or death battle for a person to use deadly force under the SYG law. Only a fear of great bodily harm, which is easily achieved through a head injury which Zimmerman had received during the fight.

She was not interviewed until later because she never came forward till later. Don't you think that if she had heard her friend killed she would have said something right away, instead of waiting till it became a national issue???

Exactly what I said, an injury to the hand. The finger is part of the hand. And as I said before I don't know what gave you this misconception that he could not hit without receiving injuries, but it is not true.

"Zimmerman documented evidence taken during police custody is all that matters. Police reported cuts to nose and back of head, no broken nose documented."

Completely false, police are not medical experts and do not have proper equipment to do a proper examination. I assure you the doctors reports will be taken in as evidence. This is not some unprecedented practice, in fact it is rather common. I don't see how you have a problem understanding that. The police report WILL go to support this doctors report though.

Once again "if there is facial damage there will ALWAYS be more damage to the hands". NOT A FACT, you are not punching bones, you are punching flesh covering those bones. And the nose bones are very easy to break, your claim is completely bogus. You can try to twist the evidence this way, but no one is going to believe you. It a verifiable fact that you can injure a face without injuring a hand. There are already thousands of medical reports on file that will support this, not to mention medical professionals and common sense. You can keep claiming this if you want but there is no evidence to support your bogus claim so you are just going to come off as a retard.

"BTW blood clots immediately or we'd bleed to death, fibrin acts when it hit the oxygen."

Ok, now I know you are certifiably ignorant. If blood clotted immediately it wouldn't run at all. Which we all know it does. He was standing up walking around after he shot treyvon, at any point he could have looked down and had the same result as if he were standing over Treyvon. So once again you are wrong and your point is proven false, just the same a your BS about the face always taking less injury than the hand.

Even if he was on top(which the actual witnesses say he was not), he had already sustained injuries and was engaged in the fight so it makes no difference under Florida law.


"Zimmermans blood flow matches martins girlfriends statement when he heard trayvon yelling "get off," "get off" to Zimmerman. "
First of all, unless she has changed her story she never said that he was yelling "get off" She claimed to have been disconnected after Zimmerman supposedly said "what are you doing here" and tried to call back but couldn't get an answer. Yet another of your claims debunked. Is this the same girl that claimed he ran till he couldn't run anymore, and ended up only 100yds from Zimmerman's truck after 20 seconds of Zimmerman following him and at least 1.5 min of Zimmerman on the phone with the police after he quit following him. Her story doesn't carry any weight, it doesn't even make sense or fit the scene.

"Zimmerman. Zimerman lied on the stand about Trayvon's age"

Another lie from you.


"He lied about being sucker punched and returning to his car, girlfriend heard him confront trayvon."

Another claim with no proof to back it up.


"Florida statue on stalking, 784.048, fits Zimmermans behavior 100%."

Read it again, It specifically say REPEATED, this was a single incident. you are wrong get over it.

"Bottom line is that the girlfriend's statement is contradicting Zimmermans self defense claims."

Yes, they do, but her statement also contradicts the evidence. Her statement isn't proof of anything.

This is viewed as a single incident, not considered repeated as far as the law is concerned.

the abrasion on his hand is what it is, an injury that could occur during a fight. But it still means very little. Witnesses saw him on top of Zimmerman hitting him. Regardless of what you believe about hand injuries and facial injuries, you can break someones nose and give them black eyes without injuring your hand, you can also pound someones head against the ground without injuring your hand, in fact there are a great many injuries you can cause by punching without injuring your hand. Some of which are even deadly. In fact the only time you really sustain much if any injury is if you land a punch to the wrong portion of the head, such as the forehead. All of the injuries sustained by Zimmerman could easily happen without causing any injury to the hands.

The only part of the statement he retracted was that it was Zimmerman screaming. And the only reason he retracted it was because he had no way to be absolutely certain it was Zimmerman.
"At first I thought it was the person on the ground, because me thinking rationally, if someone was on top, the person on the bottom would be yelling," the witness aid. "I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it is so dark on that sidewalk. You can't see a mouth."

"he continued following until finding him"
This keeps getting repeated, but there is nothing to substantiate this story. As I said before if Martin was trying to get away, he had at least 2min yet he was shot ~100yrds from Zimmerman's truck.

Martin's Girlfriend's statement does not fit the claims that you make say it makes. Even if her testimony is true, she heard very little and nothing to prove anything relevant.

You claimed that she said he ran till he couldn't run anymore (unlikely in less than 100yrds), you also claimed she said she heard martin yell "get off", but if you listen to her testimony she specifically says she did not hear anything like that. So either you are spreading lies or she is. And since it's your word against hers, about what she heard, I'm inclined to believe that you are the one spreading lies.

Recording of her statement:
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/20...