Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Witness: Zimmerman 'Never ... Tried To Help' Trayvon Martin
MSNBC ^ | March 25, 2012

Posted on 03/25/2012 12:30:48 PM PDT by Steelfish

Witness: Zimmerman 'Never ... Tried To Help' Trayvon Martin

By NBC News, msnbc.com staff and news services

A woman who says she and her roommate witnessed the final moments of Trayvon Martin's life told Dateline NBC that George Zimmerman had "his hands pressed on his back" and "never turned him over or tried to help him."

Zimmerman's lawyer, when shown part of the interview being aired Sunday night on Dateline, emphasized that his client would be claiming self-defense.

"I think there were efforts made to render aid to Trayvon," Craig Sonner told NBC's TODAY show.

Mary Cutcher told Dateline that she and her roommate both saw Zimmerman "straddling the body, basically a foot on both sides of Trayvon's body, and his hands pressed on his back."

Cutcher added that Zimmerman told her and her roommate to call the police. "Zimmerman never turned him over or tried to help him or CPR or anything," Cutcher said.

Sonner also reiterated what he had said in recent days, that Zimmerman suffered a broken nose and a gash to the back of his head.

A friend of Zimmerman's who appeared on TODAY with Sonner added that Zimmerman, 28, was distraught over the teen's death.

"Right after the shooting he couldn't stop crying," said Joe Oliver, who is African American and a former TV reporetr and anchor in Orlando.

Zimmerman has not been charged in the Feb. 26 shooting that has ignited racial tensions and raised questions about the Sanford police's handling of the case. Martin was black, and Zimmerman's father is white and his mother is Hispanic.

In a separate interview Sunday, Oliver said that "I'm a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color.''

(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: georgezimmerman; trayvonmartin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 551-575 next last
To: TASMANIANRED

Yep.

I miss-remembered one fact about the Federal trial, though. Briseno was tried, and acquitted.


201 posted on 03/25/2012 3:22:54 PM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: pops88

Yes, and when I use a real key board you may have a point, but you probably are covered up going after the people that use text in their writings, do u pull your hair out.


202 posted on 03/25/2012 3:22:54 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: 101stAirborneVet
Sanford police turned over an investigative summary packet that included a charge of manslaughter.

782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—

(1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(2) A person who causes the death of any elderly person or disabled adult by culpable negligence under s. 825.102(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3) A person who causes the death of any person under the age of 18 by culpable negligence under s. 827.03(3) commits aggravated manslaughter of a child, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(4) A person who causes the death, through culpable negligence, of an officer as defined in s. 943.10(14), a firefighter as defined in s. 112.191, an emergency medical technician as defined in s. 401.23, or a paramedic as defined in s. 401.23, while the officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician, or paramedic is performing duties that are within the course of his or her employment, commits aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic, a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

History.—RS 2384; GS 3209; RGS 5039; CGL 7141; s. 715, ch. 71-136; s. 180, ch. 73-333; s. 15, ch. 74-383; s. 6, ch. 75-298; s. 12, ch. 96-322; s. 2, ch. 2002-74.

203 posted on 03/25/2012 3:23:04 PM PDT by Alice in Wonderland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: BCR #226
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." Albert Einstein.

George, IMO, has stood up to evil. Until evidence comes forward that convinces me otherwise, I will stand with him.

204 posted on 03/25/2012 3:23:45 PM PDT by alligator (To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

Knock off the personal BS, you line has nothing to do with the discussion.


205 posted on 03/25/2012 3:25:52 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I don’t agree with you that following someone is ‘starting a fight’. A poke in the nose is starting a fight, not following someone. Following someone is just that, followoing someone. Don’t tell me that following someone is starting a fight.


206 posted on 03/25/2012 3:26:33 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: BCR #226
-- Define a "non-deadly" attack.
Any physical attack must be considered potentially deadly.
--

I don't know if I can define it, but I can describe a few.

Attempting to restrain a person from moving, when you have no right to do so. Blocking their exit from a car, for example, without touching them. Or, a bear hug, but not so tight as to prevent breathing. Some drunks in bars get feisty as far as "stealing kisses" and/or "copping feels."

-- If the reports of the punk attacking the shooter first are accurate, the punk got what he deserved. --

I don't think he deserved to die, and it's too bad Zimmerman couldn't turn the tables without resort to a firearm. But, the law will easily find that Zimmerman was reasonably in fear of serious injury, and therefore justified in use of deadly force to make it stop.

I feel bad for everybody involved. And those who are assigning blame to Zimmerman ought to be ashamed.

207 posted on 03/25/2012 3:26:35 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I don’t agree with you that following someone is ‘starting a fight’. A poke in the nose is starting a fight, not following someone. Following someone is just that, followoing someone. Don’t tell me that following someone is starting a fight.


208 posted on 03/25/2012 3:26:50 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: kanawa
All we have done in this case is strike fear in the hearts of all our brave neighborhood watch LEO’s and will lead to their being less diligent crime they see about to take place in their neighborhood block jurisdictions.
209 posted on 03/25/2012 3:27:40 PM PDT by Uncle Slayton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
-- Wanna buy a bridge in Brooklyn? --

Thanks, but I mortaged my house and now hold title to three bridges in Brooklyn! I don't know what I'd do with a fourth.

210 posted on 03/25/2012 3:29:35 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Alice in Wonderland
THe key wording in your post is without lawful justification.

The authorities decided at that time there was justification. Do you have evidence that contradicts their findings?

Public opinion from professional race baiters may convince authorities to put this man to trial after all, but that remains to be seen.

Pandering to the black community is a disgusting habit in this country that must stop. Either it stops, or there will be a war that will put an end to many “wrong” behaviors in this country by way of massive bloodshed.

211 posted on 03/25/2012 3:30:27 PM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel
He appears to be basing it on Martin's gf's opinion...
She told attorneys she then heard the 17-year-old ask "What are you following me for?"

Then a man, presumably Zimmerman, replied: "What are you doing around here?"

The girl said Trayvon must have been pushed because his headset fell off and the phone call ended.

Her opinion is just that, an opinion. No evidence at all to back it up.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-girlfriend-speaks-details-20120320,0,1939033.story

212 posted on 03/25/2012 3:31:29 PM PDT by kanawa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I’m very glad I’m not your neighbor.

I’ve called the police before when things haven’t been right in the neighborhood.

Simple clothing is not a indication but there are plenty of indicators of hunting behavior.


213 posted on 03/25/2012 3:31:49 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties
You can write the man that authored the law and tell him he is wrong.
214 posted on 03/25/2012 3:32:30 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Aria
I heard the 911 call. Sounded to me like Zimmerman should have done what the dispatcher said.

Amen. He clearly stated he was following the boy and was clearly told to stop doing that. If he had done that, the kid would still be alive. Sorry but IMO the kid was not looking for trouble with tea and skittles, no weapons on his person.

215 posted on 03/25/2012 3:34:26 PM PDT by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

Zimmerman has a history of being a stand up guy.


216 posted on 03/25/2012 3:35:32 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Are you retarded, if so, get help, other wise you maybe violating the rules here.

I saw no ad hominem attack in post # 98. Interesting that you felt compelled to respond.

217 posted on 03/25/2012 3:35:32 PM PDT by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Alice in Wonderland
So you've posted a Florida statute, but not any evidence to establish probable cause to arrest Zimmerman for violating it.

Indeed, Zimmerman is promptly excused by: without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder

It is an affirmative defense to this statute if the person is acting in self defense. Even if you attempt to make the point that Zimmerman was the "initial aggressor", he remains excused by 776.

218 posted on 03/25/2012 3:36:22 PM PDT by 101stAirborneVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Hattie
was clearly told to stop doing that.

As has been proven dozens of times in these threads, no he was not.

219 posted on 03/25/2012 3:37:43 PM PDT by 101stAirborneVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Knock it off yourself. You started it.


220 posted on 03/25/2012 3:38:25 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

How do you know he DIDN’T do what the dispatcher said? When he was Todd to stop following, he said “ok”


221 posted on 03/25/2012 3:40:28 PM PDT by DrewsMum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

You ask a childish question and I answered it then you come up with something that has nothing to do with the discussion. If you do not like the governors position write him a letter. But he is correct.


222 posted on 03/25/2012 3:41:00 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

“The ALTERCATION started FIVE minutes before the shooting, when the kids phone went dead. You are trying to say that what happened before the on the ground shooting has nothing to do with the shooting. If you do not mind me saying so, that is as silly as hell.”
***********************************************************
Up thread you suggested another poster use a dictionary. I’d suggest YOU use one.
The following is from a middle school dictionary:
ALTERCATION—”a noisy heated angry dispute”.
So from what source document are you deriving the existence of this 5 minute long noisy, heated angry dispute? Or is that another one of your fairy tales you’re trying (unsuccessfully) to spread here?


223 posted on 03/25/2012 3:41:31 PM PDT by House Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

The law said nothing about following someone being ‘starting a fight’. IAC, interpreting this law is a matter for the legal system, not public opinion.


224 posted on 03/25/2012 3:42:01 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

All sorts of humans kill all sorts of other humans. When they do it is not my fault. If some white person kills a black person or it is the other way around it is not the fault of all the other people that happen to have the same skin color.

This “story” is about two people. And two people only. The rest of us are not responsible for their actions. I certainly am not. And honestly I don’t care about these two people. I really don’t. The only thing I find mildly interesting is that the “story” is being spun such that it is being used to help get someone re-elected. Someone who has destroyed race relations in this country.


225 posted on 03/25/2012 3:42:01 PM PDT by isthisnickcool (Sharia? No thanks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

You make a good point. From the perspective of the attacker. Can you determine the intent of the attack as the victim in those cases? Can you as the intended victim afford to say that an attack is not intended to be deadly? I can’t answer for you or anyone else but myself. My answer is no, I cannot sanely make that determination while being attacked.

That’s what people seem to forget. It’s not the intent of the attacker, it’s the perception of the victim. If Mr. Zimmerman felt that his life was in immediate danger, and I believe he felt that way, then he was completely justified in using lethal force to defend himself.

I couldn’t care less if the idiot attacking him intended on killing him or not. If he didn’t have that intent, he should have not engaged in the attack in the first place.

I agree with your assessment on blame. Zimmerman should not be blamed.


226 posted on 03/25/2012 3:42:01 PM PDT by BCR #226 (02/07 SOT www.extremefirepower.com...The BS stops when the hammer drops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

The law said nothing about following someone being ‘starting a fight’. IAC, interpreting this law is a matter for the legal system, not public opinion.


227 posted on 03/25/2012 3:42:28 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Pox
Pandering to the black community is a disgusting habit in this country that must stop. Either it stops, or there will be a war that will put an end to many “wrong” behaviors in this country by way of massive bloodshed

It will, unfortunately, and its coming (also unfortunately).

228 posted on 03/25/2012 3:43:27 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: 101stAirborneVet
was clearly told to stop doing that. As has been proven dozens of times in these threads, no he was not.

Well I'm sorry but I heard the 9-11 call myself several times and he was told to stop following the boy because the police were on the way. That is fact.

229 posted on 03/25/2012 3:44:52 PM PDT by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I think you just proved my point.


230 posted on 03/25/2012 3:44:58 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Hattie
Sorry but IMO the kid was not looking for trouble with tea and skittles, no weapons on his person.

If you were confronted by Trayvon Martin, how would you know that?

Be specific.

231 posted on 03/25/2012 3:45:37 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

You had no point, all you wish to do is start a personal fight.


232 posted on 03/25/2012 3:49:19 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: Aria

Many years ago, I pulled into a 7/11 at a beach city in So Cal. Had my wife in front, my little girl in a car seat in the back. Went in, made my purchase, then came out to my car. I opened the door, sat in the seat, when suddenly the back door opened and a young Hispanic male opened the back door and jumped into my car.

Adrenaline hit me. I jumped out of the car and started screaming at the guy. As I ran around to pull him out, he got out and started running. I chased him a half of block, and he headed into a dark alley... I continued to pursue him. He stopped about fifty feet away in the alley, turned around, and grabbed put his hand in his pocket... staring at me. I stopped, stared back... then common sense came back to me. I slowly walked back to the parking lot.

OK... so I was smart enough to make a scene and chase him away from my family... but in retrospect, stupid to continue the pursuit. Thank God I refrained from running down the alley... the hunter would have become the hunted.

What legal right would I have had if I pursued him, and one of us had gotten hurt or killed? Would my action to continue the pursuit have been justified, even after the threat from his action to my family was removed? Would he be able to claim a threat from my actions and his response would justify self defense?

In the Zimmerman case, Zimmerman was a wanna-be cop, overzealous and always suspicious. Over 40 previous 911 calls. Perhaps he was justified in his concern about this individual. His 911 call was made, and he was TOLD to not follow... yet he did. And no doubt the kid knew he was being pursued, but not knowing by whom or for what reason. So, at some point, for whatever reason, the hunted became the hunter.

So who is to blame???? Zimmerman should have ceased a pursuit and waited for backup as was instructed.

Should the kid have jumped Zimmerman? No, and maybe he did, maybe he didn’t.

Reverse the situation... you are walking down the street, dressed in business attire, talking on a cell and carrying a bag, and you are pursued by someone dressed in a hoodie for no reason... they follow you, you fear your safety, you hide, and at a chance to jump out and surprise/defend yourself... would you? Or would you stop and ask him why he is following you?

Wait before we render a verdict on this. When is it justified for the hunted to become the hunter?


233 posted on 03/25/2012 3:49:37 PM PDT by dmzTahoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: BCR #226
-- You make a good point. From the perspective of the attacker. --

No, it was meant to draw the reader into thinking about the downside risk, from the point of view of the victim. "Steal a kiss" and "cop a feel" especially, don't justify use of deadly force to stave off.

Taking a beating does justify use of deadly force in reaction. Slam dunk, unless the person administering the beating is like some 5 year old kid (or a physical invalid) who can't cause much damage.

Contrary to your contention that "I cannot sanely make that determination while being attacked," I am pretty sure you could tell the difference between a beatdown by a person who is strong enough to break you, from one where the person is NOT strong enough to break you. If you can't tell the difference, they you run the risk of failing the "reasonably" part of "reasonably apprehended risk of serious injury."

-- If Mr. Zimmerman felt that his life was in immediate danger, and I believe he felt that way, then he was completely justified in using lethal force to defend himself. --

The evidence cuts 100% in his favor. He's on the ground, he's overwhelmed by force so he can't even get up to run away, he's yelling for help for at least 10 seconds, etc.

-- I couldn't care less if the idiot attacking him intended on killing him or not. --

Well, I care in the metaphysical sense, but as a matter of law, his ultimate intention is irrelevant. See too, manslaughter, which is often unintentional death. You are correct, the person at risk gets to make the call - and then will be judged as to whether or not the call was a reasonable one. This case is about as cut and dried as they come.

234 posted on 03/25/2012 3:51:26 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: 101stAirborneVet
A grand jury will be convened April 10 to consider whether to bring state charges, which could include second-degree murder or manslaughter.
235 posted on 03/25/2012 3:53:01 PM PDT by Alice in Wonderland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

You continually avoid the logic I am trying to get you to see.

Which of the decisions that I posted, approved of by “public opinion” do you disagree with?

The second question (implied) is: “What is public opinion?”

A) The Supreme Court (Dred Scott) decision

B) The Kelo Decision (The Supreme Court and the local municipal authorities deciding that it is for the “greater good” to take form Susette Kelo and give her property to developers in the hope of increased tax revenues)

C) ObaMao care individual mandate. - The “popular opinion” in 2008 elected Barack Hussein Obama and gave complete control of the government to the Democrats. They promptly enacted ObaMao care, with Tom Harkin stating health care is a right.


236 posted on 03/25/2012 3:53:16 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: Hattie
Well I'm sorry but I heard the 9-11 call myself several times and he was told to stop following the boy because the police were on the way. That is fact.

"We don't need you to do that" is the same as "was told to stop following the boy"?

I didn't think so. Stick to the "facts".

237 posted on 03/25/2012 3:53:18 PM PDT by 101stAirborneVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Post Toasties

Man, the author of the law wrote it, he was giving his legal opinion as the author, his statement was, that you cannot pursue someone and then claim stand your ground as a defense. Now look it up, hundreds of elected people agree with him. None of them agree with you.


238 posted on 03/25/2012 3:54:37 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Pox

It would be insane to try killing someone with their bare hands when the other is openly carrying gun. No?


239 posted on 03/25/2012 3:55:42 PM PDT by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: kanawa

And we know the press always is trust worthy don’t we?

</sarc>


240 posted on 03/25/2012 3:55:51 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

Saying that something is “not necessary” is not an order.


241 posted on 03/25/2012 3:57:22 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

No logic there. Both an apple and an orange are round. To a degree.


242 posted on 03/25/2012 3:58:31 PM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: 101stAirborneVet

Sorry, but I have to agree with Hattie here. The 911 call did appear to me to tell Zimmerman to cease and desist.

You are arguing over semantics.


243 posted on 03/25/2012 3:59:10 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

Your “fact” is made up.

He was told “We don’t need you to do that”. His response was “OK”.

That isn’t “stop following the boy”

Even if the dispatcher said “stop following the boy” (highly unlikely, since the dispatcher didn’t know Martin was 17 years old at the moment) AFAIK it doesn’t constitute a lawful order from an LEO. Dispatchers cannot command you to not do something you have every legal right to do.


244 posted on 03/25/2012 3:59:22 PM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Have a nice day.

You’re hopeless.


245 posted on 03/25/2012 4:00:55 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

“Contrary to your contention that “I cannot sanely make that determination while being attacked,” I am pretty sure you could tell the difference between a beatdown by a person who is strong enough to break you, from one where the person is NOT strong enough to break you. If you can’t tell the difference, they you run the risk of failing the “reasonably” part of “reasonably apprehended risk of serious injury.””

That is a massive mistake. If a person is attacking you and they don’t have the strength to beat you down, you must, as the intended victim assume that the attacker has the ability to step up the attack using other means. That can include mace, stun gun, baton, knife, or gun.

With that being said, I’ve been in that exact situation. I was jumped in an attempted mugging. The mugger had the intention of knocking me out and taking my money. When I didn’t go down on the first blow, he resorted to his secondary means of attack. He stabbed me with a knife with the intent of killing me. I was able to draw my gun at which point he ran behind the building and out of site.

The person that attacked me was killed in a home invasion less than a year later. He killed the son of the home owner in that attack.

I’ve been down this road and I will won’t make the same mistakes again.


246 posted on 03/25/2012 4:01:04 PM PDT by BCR #226 (02/07 SOT www.extremefirepower.com...The BS stops when the hammer drops.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

It is what the press is trying to Inflame.

Never let a crisis be wasted.

They are hoping for a repeat of London after a thug was shot.


247 posted on 03/25/2012 4:01:44 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: TASMANIANRED

I know.

Our populace is dumbed down enough that this will happen.


248 posted on 03/25/2012 4:03:08 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

From the City Manager’s statement-

“...telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you
following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow....”

How does “you don’t need to do that” equate to an order to stop? And what does it matter, because the dispatcher can’t give a legal order? He also told the dispatcher, “Okay.”


249 posted on 03/25/2012 4:04:12 PM PDT by pops88 (Geek chick over 50)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: BCR #226

You get it.

I also have been mugged, although not with those consequences.

Stay safe, FRiend.


250 posted on 03/25/2012 4:05:17 PM PDT by sauropod (You can elect your very own tyranny - Mark Levin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 551-575 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson