224649 Bullies, 3909 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 661 to 670 of 2310
Page 67 of 231 FirstFirst ... 17576364656667 6869707177117167 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,973

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 2:34pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    It's possible that Zimmerman was lying about calling out--but he was corroborated at the time by an eyewitness.
    You are going in circles now. When I brought this up everyone became apologists to Rabbit and Bobby.

    The funny thing is, that might very well be true. We have no clue how long the scuffle went on. Zimmerman screamed for help, got his gun free, brandished it at Trayvon who was THEN caught on tape screaming for help and being murdered.
  2. Res Judicata is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,633

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 2:46pm


     Style: Judo & BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    You are going in circles now. When I brought this up everyone became apologists to Rabbit and Bobby.

    The funny thing is, that might very well be true. We have no clue how long the scuffle went on. Zimmerman screamed for help, got his gun free, brandished it at Trayvon who was THEN caught on tape screaming for help and being murdered.
    If there were two voices, I imagine the eyewitness would have mentioned that fact. All we have is what Zimmerman said he said and what the eyewitness said he heard. There's also some recording but I have not heard it.

    My point is that we have what he says he says, but whether he (or anyone else) is telling the truth is another matter. The eyewitness could be lying or mistaken.

    I guess the scenario you posit could have happened, but it doesn't seem likely. Key evidence, I think, is the ballistic evidence about where the bullet entered and the range. If it suggest that Martin was on top and the entry was close to where Zimmerman could have gotten his gun free with one hand, that supports Zimmerman I think.
  3. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,973

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 2:53pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Res Judicata View Post
    If there were two voices, I imagine the eyewitness would have mentioned that fact. All we have is what Zimmerman said he said and what the eyewitness said he heard. There's also some recording but I have not heard it.
    Rabbit posted links, that apparently you missed, where experts say that the voice heard on the tape strongly suggest it is not Zimmerman. These were analyzed by experts. I am creating a scenario, like the rest of you, where it is possible that the tape isn't wrong and the story Zimmerman and the witness states isn't wrong. Remember, the eye witness went into the house and made the phone call. Time elapsed between what he saw and then what he heard at the time of the shooting. So, he is an eyewitness to part of the fight, but he has not said he witnessed the actual shooting.

    Edit:
    http://www.christianpost.com/news/tr...e-claim-72149/
    "The guy on the bottom who I believe had a red sweater on was yelling to me help, help. I told him to stop and I was calling 911. And then when I got upstairs and looked down, the person that was on top beating up the other guy was the one laying in the grass. And I believe he was dead at that point,"
    My point is that we have what he says he says, but whether he (or anyone else) is telling the truth is another matter. The eyewitness could be lying or mistaken.
    I'm not going to play the truth or lie game others are to make my point.
    I guess the scenario you posit could have happened, but it doesn't seem likely.
    Then according to the first expert tape analysis Zimmerman is lying.

    Key evidence, I think, is the ballistic evidence about where the bullet entered and the range.
    We will disagree on the point of key evidence. I think his intent is going to be just as important as the ballistics.
    Last edited by It is Fake; 4/02/2012 3:03pm at .
  4. Res Judicata is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,633

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 3:08pm


     Style: Judo & BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    "Experts" can be dubious (and I deal with them all the time). Some of them are fucking whores who will say the opposite of what another says. Some are self-promoters looking to get their names in thew news and make a buck.

    The problem, as I understand it, is that you have to compare voices at equivalent vocal stress. So, if someone is screaming in the tape, you have to have a screaming sample. And it's more like "not match" rather than an affirmative "it's not him"--different things. Even so it was a 48% match.

    Look here for a more in-depth analysis:

    http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...t-be-done.html
  5. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,973

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 3:17pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Res Judicata View Post
    "Experts" can be dubious (and I deal with them all the time). Some of them are fucking whores who will say the opposite of what another says. Some are self-promoters looking to get their names in thew news and make a buck.

    The problem, as I understand it, is that you have to compare voices at equivalent vocal stress. So, if someone is screaming in the tape, you have to have a screaming sample. And it's more like "not match" rather than an affirmative "it's not him"--different things. Even so it was a 48% match.

    Look here for a more in-depth analysis:

    http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...t-be-done.html
    *facepalm* I know about voice analysis that's why I haven't argued the voice thing at all. Like I said earlier, you can hear what you want. I know inflection, stress, a cold, audio quality, accents, and adrenaline can affect analysis.

    I explained my scenario, which is 100% conjecture, supposition and a theory. If you want to rip apart the explanation go ahead. It is just as plausible as most ideas floated in this thread so far.
  6. Res Judicata is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,633

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 3:47pm


     Style: Judo & BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    The scuffle apparently lasted less than a minute. As you point out, we also know that an eyewitness said he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman beating him (which is consistent with Zimmerman's account"). It seems implausible that the guy on top would be calling for help in that scenario. Frankly, I doubt Martin ever saw the gun--certainly not while they were standing at least. If he saw it while he mounted Zimmerman (assuming that's correct) then he probably would either have attempted to wrestle it away or would have gotten off of Zimmerman. Punching and then mounting someone who has a gun is implausible/suicidal/retarded.

    The problem is that, legally, "equally plausible" doesn't work in a criminal case because of the reasonable doubt standard. That's a huge burden. If the "guilty" and "not guilty" scenarios are equally likely, that should be an acquittal every time.
  7. wetware is online now

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    1,129

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 4:56pm


     Style: BJJ/MT

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    We will disagree on the point of key evidence. I think his intent is going to be just as important as the ballistics.
    This, this right here.

    Honestly, I don't think the ballistics are going to be very important at all. I don't think anyone is going to argue where the shot came from. Zimmerman's intent is going to be the difference here between self-defense and manslaughter. With two known prior incidents in 2003 where Zimmerman followed someone he believed guilty of a crime, one guy who supposedly spat on him and a pair of thieves who stole a pair of 13 inch televisions I don't think it'll be hard to paint him as a vigilante looking for a confrontation.

    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/rallie...n-marti/nLXJ7/
  8. Jim_Jude is offline
    Jim_Jude's Avatar

    Shime Waza Test Dummy

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    3,555

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 5:15pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: StrikeyGrappling & WW2-fu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Okay, so why did Florida legalize murder? I don't think anyone answered my question.
    "Judo is a study of techniques with which you may kill if you wish to kill, injure if you wish to injure, subdue if you wish to subdue, and, when attacked, defend yourself" - Jigoro Kano (1889)
    ***Was this quote "taken out of context"?***

    "The judoist has no time to allow himself a margin for error, especially in a situation upon which his or another person's very life depends...."
    ~ The Secret of Judo (Jiichi Watanabe & Lindy Avakian), p.19

    "Hope is not a method... nor is enthusiasm."
    ~ Brigadier General Gordon Toney
  9. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,973

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 5:20pm

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Res Judicata View Post
    It seems implausible that the guy on top would be calling for help in that scenario. Frankly, I doubt Martin ever saw the gun--certainly not while they were standing at least. If he saw it while he mounted Zimmerman (assuming that's correct) then he probably would either have attempted to wrestle it away or would have gotten off of Zimmerman. Punching and then mounting someone who has a gun is implausible/suicidal/retarded.
    Frankly, the fact you are tailoring my conjecture to fit your dissent is pretty damn stupid. If it turns out Trayvon was saying "help me" then what does that say? See, your belief is predicated on Martin not seeing the gun. My conjecture is based on Zimmerman pulling out his gun, while being mounted, Trayvon seeing the gun and screaming help, Zimmerman getting up with gun in hand and shooting Trayvon. Can I prove it? Nope. Am I saying it is right? Nope. Do I believe that happened in this case? 90/5/5 in the negative. Would it stand up under your withering dissection? Nope. Did I say this is all supposition, a theory and conjecture? Yep. It is a scenario, I created, where two different people can be saying help in the same incident.

    The problem is that, legally, "equally plausible" doesn't work in a criminal case because of the reasonable doubt standard. That's a huge burden. If the "guilty" and "not guilty" scenarios are equally likely, that should be an acquittal every time.
    Weird, are you hoping someone won't take me theory and write an article? I mean you are investing quite a bit in debunking a scenario I have basically said is bullshit. Wait before you do it, you have said many of the other scenarios are "bullshit." So, when I said "equally plausible," it was in context to your dissection of the other scenarios you deconstructed.
  10. Res Judicata is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,633

    Posted On:
    4/02/2012 5:26pm


     Style: Judo & BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by wetware View Post
    This, this right here.

    Honestly, I don't think the ballistics are going to be very important at all. I don't think anyone is going to argue where the shot came from. Zimmerman's intent is going to be the difference here between self-defense and manslaughter. With two known prior incidents in 2003 where Zimmerman followed someone he believed guilty of a crime, one guy who supposedly spat on him and a pair of thieves who stole a pair of 13 inch televisions I don't think it'll be hard to paint him as a vigilante looking for a confrontation.

    http://www.wftv.com/news/news/rallie...n-marti/nLXJ7/
    That can't come in to evidence at trial unless he was convicted--and then only sometimes. It's also 9 years ago, so he'd be ~18 then. It would be very difficult for a judge to let that in.

    Yes, a key point is whether he legitimately feared for his life. But how he got in the position to use the gun is going to be a critical factor in establishing self-defense. If he shot the guy standing from three feet away, well that's different from shooting him from underneath.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.