46 votes

George Zimmerman’s A Better Man Than I Thought

After a day of very solid cross confirmed testimony in the Zimmerman / Martin case, it turns out that in spite of the fact that Trayvon Martin was pounding the daylights out of Zimmerman's face and skull on a concrete surface, Zimmerman never went for his side arm until he realized that Martin noticed he was armed and appeared to go for the gun saying, "You're gonna die tonight" to Zimmerman.

Only at that point of life or death decision did Zimmerman grab his weapon and fire one shot into Trayvon's upper torso.

Zimmerman testified that he did not realize that he hit Martin... he assumed that when Martin said, "You got me". Martin meant he was going to stop assaulting Zimmerman as Martin leaned back off of Zimmerman's chest.

Zimmerman then testifies that he slipped out from Martin where he was pinned down and jumped on Martins back to restrain his hands to stop his attacker from executing any further blows.

Zimmerman tossed his gun to the side and held Martins arms down as Martin lay face down.

It seems to me that the average person who took a beating from a larger stronger attacker, would go for his weapon much sooner and would not have stopped firing until he was sure the attacker was profoundly incapacitated.

Most people in that situation would have emptied their magazine on the attacker to assure their own survival.

Based on testimony and evidence, George Zimmerman exercised extreme restraint in the use of deadly force. And the single spent, shell casing proves that restraint beyond a doubt.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Exactly.

Exactly.

It seems weird people are

It seems weird people are outright defending Zimmerman when his innocence relies solely on whether he's telling the truth, and there is no way to confirm or deny it. This is the same website that doesn't believe entire administrations and government agencies at times right? And recognizes they initiate confrontations with people minding their own, by carrying an overly aggressive attitude right (ie cocking your gun right before going to see what an innocent person is up to)?

He has every reason to lie right now, he would be stupid not to. It's like an easy putt. And yes, he could be telling the truth. It may be there is no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict even if he is guilty, and that's fine. But I don't understand why the people on this site are just blindly believing and actively supporting a guy who could be getting away with murder.

Why defend the guy and say he's 'nice' or whatever, when you have no evidence to rule out that he's lying and actually not very nice. Just because it goes along with a pro-gun theme or something? I don't get it. What about pro-liberty, being able to walk from point A to point B without being hassled by self appointed authority figures when you are doing nothing wrong?

Most here won't even want to talk to an immigration officer for two seconds because it unconstitutional, but somehow I should have to answer to George Zimmerman after he slowly follows me down the street in his car and never identifies himself? stfu.

It's the prosecution's job

to prove the story isn't true. If you've followed the trial, the prosecution is calling witnesses who support the events of the night based on the physical evidence.

There hasn't been one witness called for the prosecution that provides any evidence that George Zimmerman is a racist. In fact, the only racism that was testified to, in court, under oath is Trayvon Martin's.

Would be a bit strange if GZ acted...

...racist anyway, being that he himself said he is a minority...Hispanic/American is what he said.

.

.

innocent until PROVEN guilty

or have you forgotten that.

That's fine if legally, by a

That's fine if legally, by a judge and jury, he is declared not guilty, to avoid potentially convicting an innocent person. That is a great thing. I'm not opposed to that.

But on the flip side he still, in reality, could be guilty of killing somebody even if no one can prove it. So why are people here declaring him innocent, and 'nice', without any facts at all, just their own interpretation of heresay?

to use your own words--

So why are people here declaring him innocent, and 'nice', without any facts at all, just their own interpretation of heresay?

You've answered your own question. Those of us watching the prosecution's case and heard their opening statement where they detailed what they were going to "prove" to us — like you say — have found little "proof". The kind that prove the elements needed for 2nd degree murder charges which I've posted in an above comment.

As to hearsay (and speculation) the judge has been very consistent in sustaining those objections.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

some people just enjoy when

some people just enjoy when the government cant do things to people, even if they are murderers. Which is ok, but its redundant to bring up an issue such as the guy getting away from government prosecution for murder. Its good in the way that the government is following the rules, its bad that its a murderer they are supporting. Sticky situation

That is the way our system works

you can never be sure a person is innocent unless you are there. Better a guilty man walk free than an innocent one put to death.

Yeah, again, I'm with you.

Yeah, again, I'm with you. But why are people on Daily Paul defending and calling 'nice' what may be a guilty man walking free? It's ridiculous.

'Not technically guilty' is way different from 'nice guy' and 'obviously justified in killing an unarmed 17 yr old', when the only way there will be proof of that is if Trayvon Martin comes back to life, or God comes down to earth and tells us himself what went down.

I agree

I agree

It's clear you have a bias

'obviously justified in killing an unarmed 17 yr old'

Why paint a guy who was an obvious miscreant in such an innocent light?
What does having a gun have to do with ANYTHING?

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

Why paint a young black man

Why paint a young black man as an "obvious miscreant"

I'm not painting anything

He was a miscreant. He had been kicked out school for drug possession and had been found in possession of stolen property. That's what a miscreant is.

Were you just taking up for the person i was replying to because you agreed with them and didn't have any facts?

Why don't one of you two tell me what having a gun has to do with anything? 10 to 1 you won't, because if you say what you really think you'll be outed as being anti gun.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

Drug possesion doesnt make

Drug possesion doesnt make you a miscreant, how is a non violent unjust law make you a miscreant? And 95% of this population has had possession of something stolen in their lives (bubblegum to hat etc.) Im pro gun i have more guns than you I'm sure. Im just pointing out your hypocrisy, you bashed the other guy for labeling someone then you went and labeled this young black kid with no evidence, you never met him you dont kno his personality you dont kno his friends or family, yet you already kno he a young black punk?

Yes, yes it does.

Perhaps you should look up the definition genius.

Miscreant- A person who behaves badly or in a way that breaks the law.

Stop making excuses for him, it's pathetic.

I'm pro gun i have more guns than you I'm sure.

Lmao, Feinstein owns a gun. Owning a gun doesn't mean shit, it doesn't mean you are pro second amendment or even pro gun. It just means you own an object. I can pretty much guarantee you don't own as many as me anyway. So tell us WHY Zimmerman having a gun was relevant? You can't or won't.

Im just pointing out your hypocrisy, you bashed the other guy for labeling someone then you went and labeled this young black kid with no evidence

There's no hypocrisy if the label is true. In this case it is, because there IS evidence. So now don't you look like a fool.

you never met him you dont kno his personality you dont kno his friends or family, yet you already kno he a young black punk?

You don't know him either. ha

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

You can love on Martin all

You can love on Martin all you want. There is not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman. The guy is going to walk.

It is better for a guilty man to go free than an innocent man go to prison or put to death.

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
― Ron Paul

have you forgotten it works

have you forgotten it works both ways, how do you know martin wasnt the innocent one, hes dead now so i guess we wont know.

So why 2nd degree murder?

Why not something sensible? Like 'manslaughter'? Particularly given corroborating eye-witnesses, evidence, and statements under oath, etc, waiving Miranda rights?

I've been following the trial live online and I hate to break the news to you, but here it is:

In this 40 minute some odd incident...the perceived victim changed hands—numerous times. (Because...the "aggressor" changed hands—in the mind of the two participants.)

In other words, it escalated from the word go [dark, raining, recent home invasions...]

Many opportunities lost...and both TM and GZ had reason to be suspicious of the other. Second by second. Real Communication? NONE: TM on the phone with Rachel...and GZ on the phone with 911...

A teensy-weensey bit of communication between the two, face to face, mano-a-mano...could have prevented this tragedy.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

A teensy-weensey bit of

A teensy-weensey bit of communication between the two, face to face, mano-a-mano...could have prevented this tragedy

very teensy-weensy...indeed!

Like when he first saw TM coming into the complex from the 7-eleven ... Maybe it's naive for me to think GM could've pulled up to TM, whose talking on his cell phone, and just say, "excuse me, hi. I'm GZ, the Neighborhood Watch coordinator. How are you doing? Are you new here? Just move in? Oh, I see. You're just visiting your father, Tracy Martin? Cool. I know Mr. Martin. Tell him hi for me. Have a good evening."

That scenario would probably be considered over-the-top to GZ and even TM. But I wish it had been given a chance. Knowing what I know now, I think it could've worked.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

he's not on trial

Zimmerman is. It is not the defenses job to prove Martin was up to no good or was attempting robbery. It's been established by the prosecutions own witnesses that Zimmerman was being bashed in the head and therefore had a reasonable expectation to want to defend himself.

Zimmerman's guilt or innocence is the question here. And it is he that at the moment is presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

MSM All Over the Zimmerman Trial

...so that they don't have to cover more important things going on (like the NSA abuses and the global pursuit and persecution of Snowden).

To tell you the truth

I've been trying to figure out what else was happening behind this facade in 2/12.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

reading comments,articles etc

reading comments,articles etc etc sounds like zimmmerman will be found innocent, but i have a feeling the prosecution will use the bush defense and try to use pre-emptive defense:) 0 faith in courts or the tory gov so flip a coin.

Ron Paul 2016

The predictable is already happening!

the same fear-mongers who turned this into a race-hatred case are already beating their war drums, saying if GZ is found innocent, they fear (got it) there will be riots.

Also, speaking of 'pre-emptive'...there's a side show going on which involves the accusation— with proof — by one of the Prosecutor's IT employees: that he and his boss withheld evidence from the defense. It's already very ugly. So, if GZ is found guilty, and I was de la Rionda, I'd be very worried.

flip-a-coin is not a bad idea in this case, with all the internal and external shenanigans being pulled.

"If you want something you've never had before, you have to do something you've never done before." Debra Medina

Wait - Zimmerman only fired once???????????

Instead of prosecuting this guy, the police should hire him as an outside consultant on gun control - lord knows the trigger happy cops these days could use it.

I know

Most cops would have unloaded a mag, got a couple of hits and then been reloading when they discovered the actor was dead

Don't let the facts get in your way...

FACT: Zimmerman was a trained and authorized neighborhood watch volunteer doing what he was authorized and trained to do.

FACT: Martin was acting suspicious in a place where thefts had recently been committed

FACT: Zimmerman was not pursuing Martin when Martin came from behind, declared that he was going to give Zimmerman a problem and sucker punched Zimmerman

FACT: Zimmerman did not use his weapon until it was clear to him that Martin wanted to take Zimmerman out

FACT: Zimmerman did not initiate a detention of Martin under threat of lethal force.

FACT: Zimmerman had called for police assistance and later gave police a full report without a defense attorney present.