a trial to clear his appearance of guilt


if the boy should have just been open to answering zimmermans questions, ,zimmerman should have no problem being open to answering the family's.....



fair play,,,except zimmerman will walk away from the questions alive,,,

they are several probable causes in the case

because of Zimmermans past record of aggressive action against others
because of his words to the dispatcher about his frustration with 'aholes' 'getting away'

and , recently, because of a portion of a dispatch recording that was initially edited out where he can be heard to say the word 'coons'

there should be a trial,,,

IF there is no evidence that Treyvon INITIALLY Attacked zimmerman, there should be a trial

if there is nothing to hide and Zimmerman is justified, he should hope for a trial,,,

what am I not understanding?

that they take pictures when someone has been assaulted and injured?

Cause I have been an assault victim, so I think I do have an experience to draw from.


I dont want someone to be able to approach, me, my child, or anyone else after intimidating them and insist they answer their question and then be permitted to SHOOT if a fight ensues where they cant back up the woof ticket they sold,,,,


I want the EVIDENCE to come out because those involved with the investigation are suspicious, because the MANS actions and words that night were suspicious and REASONABLY could have intimidated a kid in this day and age of pedophiles


I want it to come out because this MAN has a history of pushing when he is frustrated and its possible since he was in PURSUIT could have also pushed this boy while confronting him and making it REASONABLE for the boy to fight

and if that is what happened, he should not be justified in SHOOTING someone just because he couldnt physically intimidate them into submission,,,

then Im sure the pictures of those injuries and the medical exam will come out in a trial,,,,,


usually, when someone has been assaulted and injured there are pictures taken,, just saying


and if he had those injuries, were they justified of a young man fighting for his life against a strange man who had followed him and then confronted the boy about HIS intentions while the man carried a gun,,,,,?

did that justify being shot after all that initial intimidation because he wasnt able to detain him or beat him when he had finally intimidated him into fighting for his life?


IF he attacked him by his car,, how do they END up in the back of the building? sounds more like he followed him there

if the boy initially ran, why would he come back? does he have any recorded history of initiating physical threat? does that sound logical or likely for a boy because he had a marijuana baggy?

all Im saying is disclose the truth and give the boy justice,,,,witnesses can lie, on both sides, and witnesses can be mistaken about what they saw,,,,

what does the EVIDENCE and common sense say? Did this mans background and tendency to be a wanna be cop, mixed with his having a gun on his person,,,make it likely that he continued to pursue and possibly push (like he has done to his ex wife and a cop in his pasat) to intimidate them into submission?


or does this boys empty baggy, and flee AWAY from zimmerman, make it likely that he then decided to come back and confront him, although no history has been disclosed to back this up about the boys character,,,?


I just want the evidence shared, I want the facts. The cop on the scene had been known to cover for people before. The original dispatcher tapes had edited out some things that seem damning to Zimmerman, which also indicates possible cover up.

If they followed their procedures they should be able to mark where they found the boy,, approximately where the altercation began as well as ended, whether there is the blood dna and spatter that there was a scenario the way Zimmerman described it, and whether Zimmerman harmed or otherwise physically intimidated the boy as opposed to just being 'sucker punched'.....

drug using? really?

how about this. Zimmerman was a domestic abuser and a police assaulter,,,,,

does that still make him the innocent victim of some 'punk'

what is the documentation of the drug use? there is documentation of charges against Zimmerman

its a good majority of americans, especially parents who have kids that may sometimes wear 'hoodies' or be in areas where they 'look suspicious'

there is no WITNESS that he did or did not detain the boy, ,that is the point

there are various witnesses to the altercation at different moments of the altercation

some saw the man on top, noone has said they saw someone with a grey hoody on top, w hich is how the boy was described BY ZIMMERMAN himself

the JOHN who supposedly saw them on the street has not yet had any 911 recording released that he called for help after

there IS a 911 call from a black boy who was later interviewed who only said he saw someone BEHIND the houses (not on the street near cars as Zimmerman is claiming it initiated), ironically, t his boy says HIS DOG got loose and then he ran in the house to call 911 and 911 recordings confirm this BOYS story

you assume this boy is a punk, although he is a volunteer, an A and B student, a volunteer, with no history of run ins with the law, or history of aggression or temper, who (by zimmermans own account on the phone) RAN AWAY from ZIMMERMAN

to believe its more likely this same boy came back and assaulted ZIMMERMAN than it is that this man who was already FOLLOWING HIM and had IDENTIFIED him in his mind as no good, and who himself has a RECORD of domestic abuse allegation and violence against an officer (both of which started with a PUSH from ZIMMERMAN)

is beyond me

but people can keep looking for justification why this man pursued and then ended up shooting this boy who had harmed and done nothing to anyone , except maybe not be SUBMISSIVE enough for Zimmermans taste if and when he approached him asking him what he was doing there (as if someone owed him an explanation when he IS NOT a police officer) and carrying a weapon that would only initiate further fear in a young man who was aware of the man following him ,,,,,,

its not really that odd that billions of people dont all have 'physical' evidence of their existence left behind thousands of years later

they didnt have printing presses in biblical days and material deteriorates,,,,

preach on,,,,,

I dont recall the parents having an issue with his race, I do recall that they wanted justice for their son and questioned the police handling of his death

I have heard much more about him being profiled for his clothes than I have his race, although there is the question of whether race played a part. Even if Zimmerman had been black, with his history, the question of racial profiling would be relevant. Profiling doesnt only happen interracially,,,,,

I cant deny that racism is real or that some people may be having the issue with the race

but the INITIAL complaint and the consistent complaint of the parents is that their son deserves justice


all whites arent racist, but most americans because of our history and our media, will subconsciously profile and stereotype other americans

thats the elephant in the room noone wants to face, but its true

a tragedy was quite possibly going to be written off as an 'oops', and that would have been the real tragedy

at least now their will be pressure to truly look at the details and disclose to the parents why their son had to die that night...

research can answer those questions

1) http://www.onenesspentecostal.com/originalbooks.htm

2)http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/history-of-the-apostles-faq.htm

3) My answer would be, he was here to fulfill gospels already existing, not to write his own.

4) there are conflicting theories regarding the flood, no concrete proof that it did or did not cover the earth (as it would have been referred to in biblical times, not as it is now...)



4)

different incentives work for different kids, despite the 'experts', child rearing is not one size fits all,,, lol

its cool your kids did well academically

I dont think I ever had a defined monetary reward for anything, I was expected to contribute at home and make good grades and sometimes I would randomly and suprisingly get 'rewarded'

I think I appreciated those rewards much more because they were random and not an entitlement,,,,

you know that everything with a beginning must end,,,,,

thats life


I dont see the evidence to indicate that such actions are coming soon,, but then again 'soon' is subjective

Im much more worried about things like poverty, the growing gap between the haves and have nots, the decreasing ability of our kids to compete globally with our educational system,,,,stuff like that that really is happening NOW,.,,,,

its not exactly something OBAMA can lay individual claim to

The Defense Production Act (Pub.L. 81-774) is a United States law enacted on September 8, 1950, in response to the start of the Korean War. It was part of a broad civil defense and war mobilization effort in the context of the Cold War. Its implementing regulations, the Defense Priorities and Allocation System (DPAS), are located at 15 CFR §§700 to 700.93. The Act has been periodically reauthorized and amended, and remains in force as of 2012.

The Act contains three major sections. The first authorizes the President to require businesses to sign contracts or fulfill orders deemed necessary for national defense. The second authorizes the President to establish mechanisms (such as regulations, orders or agencies) to allocate materials, services and facilities to promote national defense. The third section authorizes the President to control the civilian economy so that scarce and/or critical materials necessary to the national defense effort are available for defense needs.[1]

The Act also authorizes the President to requisition property, force industry to expand production and the supply of basic resources, impose wage and price controls, settle labor disputes, control consumer and real estate credit, establish contractual priorities, and allocate raw materials to aid the national defense.[1]

The President's authority to place contracts under the DPA is the part of the Act most often used by the Department of Defense (DOD) since the 1970s. Most of the other functions of the Act are administered by the Office of Strategic Industries and Economic Security (SIES) in the Bureau of Industry and Security in the Department of Commerce.[2]




..these policies have been in place under every president since 1950

do you get that he committed NO Crime....????

seriously?

wow?

thats the whole focus of the outrage about his pursuit and death....

no, he wasnt arrested because they couldnt yet prove he had broken the law,,


,it had nothing to do with whether Martin committed a crime,,,


IM surprised at the intellectual dishonesty to make the suggestion that one has anything to do with the other,,,

oh my goodness, he FOUGHT Someone with a gun and a threatening disposition?

yeah, certainly deserves the death penalty,,,,

what crime could be in progress from a sidewalk?.. please enlighten me...

if you approach someone to try to arrest them and they have not committed a crime,, you will be legally liable if any harm results,,,,




thats one reason why people dont do it everyday, because most understand if their ASSUMPTION is wrong they can be held liable,,,,

trying to detain you like what? following you? confronting you with a gun? asking you (threateningly) what you are doing there? exposing they had a gun? reaching for you?

would any of those actions, at 17, after being followed by a grown man who left his car to do so, cause you to just be calm and sit there till cops come?


,,ok,, if you say so,,,,