An 8 year old and a 6 year old playing dirty doctor is not child molestation. Its actually considered normal behavior by many psychiatrists.
It was two children. Not molestation. What kind of garbage is this?
George Zimmerman Accused of Molestation by Childhood Friend: Smear or Relevant?
Fef
2012/07/16 22:34:19
|
|
|||||
|
350 votes
|
|
74% | |||
|
124 votes
|
|
26% | |||
An unidentified female witness, better known as Witness 9, claims that George Zimmerman made sexual advances at her during their childhood. George Zimmerman faces a second-degree murder charge from the February 2012 shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. So, what's the relevance?
Witness 9 says she knew George Zimmerman during his childhood and would stay with him and his family. She also said Zimmerman used his two-year age difference and bigger size to intimidate her and reported Zimmerman "would put his hands under my pants, under my underwear … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older."
The unidentified witness continued to say that she never witnessed any racism from Zimmerman or his family. Other than her experience with Zimmerman over two decades ago, she didn't add anything else to the case. Did prosecutors need to include her as a witness for character development? Or was it just an attempt to smear George Zimmerman?
RADARONLINE.COM reports:
Witness 9 says she knew George Zimmerman during his childhood and would stay with him and his family. She also said Zimmerman used his two-year age difference and bigger size to intimidate her and reported Zimmerman "would put his hands under my pants, under my underwear … I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older."
The unidentified witness continued to say that she never witnessed any racism from Zimmerman or his family. Other than her experience with Zimmerman over two decades ago, she didn't add anything else to the case. Did prosecutors need to include her as a witness for character development? Or was it just an attempt to smear George Zimmerman?
RADARONLINE.COM reports:
A woman told prosecutors in the Trayvon Martin case that murder suspect George Zimmerman molested her for 10 years, RadarOnline.com has learned.
Read More: http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/07/geor...
Top Opinion
-
☆ElenaDiamond☆ 2012/07/16 23:04:56
![[VIDEO] Flying Drone With Handgun: Protected by Second Amendment?](http://images.sodahead.com/polls/003754845/Drone-Gun-Video-111595454537_large.png "[VIDEO] Flying Drone With Handgun: Protected by Second Amendment?")
Two kids where not playing doctor.
one kid was put his hands down the others pants multiple times. the other child would try to push him away. THAT is not playing doctor. that is sexual assualt when one child very obviously does not want to be touched sexually.
tell you wat come and visit me and if I start touching on your privates when you do not want me to and we will just tell the police I was "playing doctor" with you
Now I have some experience with this as a girl close to her age. Boys pulled down our tube tops, they copped a feel during jailbreak and basket ball, etc. You don't play with those boys anymore, you stay away well that's only if you don't like it.
Your comparison to Sandusky is totally out of bounds and outrageous.
"I would try to push him off, but he was bigger and stronger and older."
that is sexual assault.
I cant believe you are trying to make an excuse for him. yes he was a child, hell I used to rub on my neighbor's butt when I was that age and she let me. but the moment she told Zimmerman "NO" or try to push him away and he continued it became sexual assualt
Now as they got into their teens, that's something different. But the 'hands inside pants' was when they were under the age of 8.
I understand that it made the accuser uncomfortable, but it doesn't make the accused a sexual deviant. That is, unless he has been molesting other people up to today. And you are assuming bit with the age of Zimmerman. He is less than 2 years older than her, making him between 7-8 when the first offense occurred. The horse claims he was 7 at the time. The media assumes he was 8. Granted, the media at times neglects to mention he was also a child, making it appear he was a child predator.
Just to note, I'm not defending his actions. There's a lot to this story that needs to be dissected. But as far as this case is concerned, it is irrelevant.
You know better. You assume your children know better.
I dont know how you feel about his up coming trial but you seem to want to make excuses for Zimmerman. If he did what he did as a child he is wrong. if it is true. he physically and mentally hurt another person to get what he wanted.
as for what Zimmerman did I do not see it as self defense because he made the conscious decision to run after the young man after saying that he thought martin was "on something" and "has something in his hand" which I believe he was refering to a weapon.
in other words I believe that an adult 28 years old would not reasonably go after a person they think is on drugs and probably armed unless he was looking for an altercation. he PUT his self in a complete avoidable situation then claimed self defense.
LOL! I see...You must love Angela Correy. Angela Correy: Tough on Children...Tough on Crime!
"he made the conscious decision to run after the young man"
"dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running?"
So dispatch orders him to find out where the subject has ran off to...can I use "orders him" since for some reason telling someone "We don't need you to do that" Is an order to not leave your vehicle...despite the fact that the person is already outside of the vehicle.
telling him we dont need you to do that is advice not an order. and it was good advice.
the dispatch asked him which way is he running, that is a question, NOT an order
I dont know who the heck angela corry is nor do I care.
as far as the rest of your assertion you probably have me confused with someone else.
here is Zimmerman's problem. he should never have ran after Martin. especially when by his own words he thought the kid had something in his hand, is reaching in his waistband and is on something.
when you chase a person you think is high and has a weapon, it shows that you are looking for a fight.
2) If you do not know who Angela Correy is, you have no reason to involve yourself in the "Justice for Trayvon" crowd.
3) You never provided the direct quote from Zimmerman where he claimed he was running after Martin. It might have been on a video or interview that I overlooked, but none that I have read claim he ran after him. None even allude to him chasing down Martin. He only got out of his vehicle once dispatch asked which way Martin was heading to. Not before, after. Think about that when you ask why did Zimmy get out of his vehicle.
I see it as Martin standing his ground against a person who is stalking him. he had no idea who zimmerman was
2) You know, Stand Your Ground doesn't give you the right to initiate an attack on a person, whether with fists or other weapons, unless there is a clear and credible threat. I don't recall if Angela Correy claims GZ stalked TM. She probably did. She has a penchant for overcharging.
Is Martin dead?
did George Zimmerman have a pistol?
if the answer to thequestions is yes, then Zimmerman was a clear and credible threat.
You finish your first statement by including "dumbests things you have said". Then you include "was a clear and credible threat". You are a clown. You do not know, not yet at all, who initiated the aggression. You can assume as much, you can feel it in your gut, in your heart, or whatever the hell is inside you that causes you to feel this way, but you do not know whether Zimmerman chased the kid down, that he grabbed him, that he said anything contradicting what he told authorities. NOTHING.
We know there was a struggle. We know this because one person is injured, and the other one is dead. We also know that one has offensive wounds, and the other does not. Isn't it strange how the one with injuries has no offensive wounds, yet the deceased has offensive wounds and only one mortal defensive wound? Wrap your head around that one...then again, questioning Martin is grounds for a beating.
Zimmerman initiated the aggression by stalking a person AND YES by florida definition of the word, he was stalking.
therefor Martin has a right to defend without having to be attacked first
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.
note article (1)
in other words, Martin does have the right to attack first with and including the use of deadly force (without the right of retreat) if he believes great bodily hard may come to himself. It does NOT however state that he can only counter with force.
thus Martin can attack if he feels the person is a credible and immenent threat. and Zimmerman wa...
Zimmerman initiated the aggression by stalking a person AND YES by florida definition of the word, he was stalking.
therefor Martin has a right to defend without having to be attacked first
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.
note article (1)
in other words, Martin does have the right to attack first with and including the use of deadly force (without the right of retreat) if he believes great bodily hard may come to himself. It does NOT however state that he can only counter with force.
thus Martin can attack if he feels the person is a credible and immenent threat. and Zimmerman was a credible threat by stalking/following/chasing without identifying himself.
lastly if you werent so ignorant you would also know that a person who is dead will not show injuries, bruising etc. why?
because bruising is caused by the accumulation of blood from the damage to capilaries. if a person is dead the heart does not pump and the blood sinks to the lowest part of the body. thus why a person who is recently beaten and killed immediately show very little or no bruises
It is interesting how so many people dislike self defense laws and Stand your Ground laws, yet defend the action when it comes to their cause (Free Mumia!), No. You are assuming way too much information, information that you do not know yet. Was Zimmermans intention to go and kill the kid? Following is not illegal. It is only illegal if it is done with malice. Beating up a person for following you is malice.
You are outright stupid There would have been a laceration, namely on his face or elsewhere an obvious wound would be. There would have been something other than that little cut on his fist.
No wonder you get easily confused.
"“Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose. "
did you get that part that says acts OVER A PERIOD OF TIME HOWEVER SHORT,?
now that I have shown you the law,
please show me the part that says it has to be MALICIOUS
(2) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person and makes a credible threat to that person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
784.048.(1) are definitions. Note how (a), (b) and (c) all are defining the language of the law? Look at (a). Can you explain why Zimmerman would have no legitimate purpose in knowing where Martin went?
What do you mean "no legal authority"? Since when are we barred from follow someone? Imagine this scenario: You see someone attack an innocent victim. You follow that person. He notices you and tells you to back off. Under your logic, you would be charged with stalking, and he would have the right under the law to beat your ass into a hospital. You have no legal authority, nor a police officer.
Zimmerman was not 8, or at least there are claims otherwise. She also never claims he is 2 years older than her. Following such logic, it is possible to believe he wasn't 18 either during their last interaction. I understand what molestation means. I think claiming that an 8 year old knows what molestation is or if its wrong is wrong in itself. They haven't developed such a thought.
Now, what am I unable to read?
There you go, you did the same thing. Did she keep coming back to play with you?
IF this girl was assaulted she would not have come back to play. He held no power over her, they were young kids.
so... the kids who kept being molested by the priest they kept coming back because they liked it?
the girls family was friends with his. they would go over.
your statement is absurd
Adult on child, 8 yr old child on a 6 yr old child. The children in the priest scandal were under the control and power of them through either school attendance or camp, etc.
I've been in the situation of saying no at 16 years old, the two guys who wanted to sexually assault me had another thing coming, a crazed woman with a pair of stillettos ripping them apart. Yes, they were family friends, no I never went back, no I never told but only to keep my Dad out of jail for murder.
She's embarrassed by her lifetime relationship with a man being charged with murder. I bet she's gotten a lot of grief about that.
Tell me why this woman continued her relationship with Zimmerman as an adult of 26 yrs old to discuss politics and Obama of all things?
You can't you don't have her full testimony just like the rest of us.
You've already convicted him in your mind.
I've never heard of a case so full of leaks and intentionally putting this testimony out to the public is so bizarre, they're setting it up so that there is no jury pool untainted. Perhaps that is what the desired outcome is, to justify the riots that would surely follow.
Like I already said, I have been in a situation of attempted sexual assault by kids of a family friend. The friendship ended that day.
There's no way in the world I'd be sitting in their home 20 years after the start of these 10 years of sexual advances to talk about politics of all things.