In response to:

Another Black on White Beat Down: Why George Zimmerman Carried a Gun and Why You Should

AmyDB Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 9:31 PM
Lil'Denny said.... Amy, Again, what physical evidence is prevalent that shows Trayvon attacked Zimmerman? What eyewitness saw the initial points of the altercation that proves that Trayvon was not defending himself? None. Only evidence available shows that Trayvon whipp _______________ It is not one piece of physical evidence that leads to the conclusion that Martin did in all probibility initiate the physical confrontation, it is the whole of the physical evidence. If Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation then why are there no marks or bruising on Martins body? With the tech available now had Zimmerman struck a blow, any blow, to initiate the physical side then it would have been found. None was. Yet there was ample evidence on Zimmerman that someone had opened a can of "whuparse" on him. Your argument is without evidence, merit, or fact but you carry it with emotion to be sure.
Denmark Vesey Wrote: Aug 12, 2013 12:28 AM
Amy, my sweet:
You are looking at the incident only through the lens of Zimmerman and accepting his word as gospel. Why are there no marks on Trayvons body? What if Zimm showed Trayvon his weapon initially upon confronting Trayvon which prompted Trayvon to then open a can whuparse on Zimm? My point is neither of us was present when the fight started and only one of the participants can give his version of what happened. Anything beyond the fact that Zimm got whipped is strictly supposition. Without the weapon, Zimm was a coward and could not handle a 17 yr old 158 lb. kid. I am 65, about 200 lbs. as Zimm, and definitely would not let a skinny 158 lb. 17 yr old kick my butt. And I don't understand the argument that a butt whipping proves who initiated the altercation anyway. It only proves Zimm cannot fight, nothing else. However, if you refuse to entertain the thought that Trayvon may have been defending himself, it is possible to believe only Zimm's account.
Denmark Vesey Wrote: Aug 12, 2013 12:39 AM
BTW, the eyewitness you guys keep muttering about did not testify as to who initiated the fight. He only saw the aftermath. So what he confirmed was that Trayvon was getting the best of Zimm which we all know to be factual. What we don't have is evidence why and when Zimm's got hit in the nose. Was he hit after he tried to pull his weapon? Trayvon is not here to say but you folks believe Zimm when he says that Trayvon punched him for no reason in the nose. No provocation whatsoever. I believe Zimm is a liar. There is no evidence to prove it just as there is no evidence to prove Trayvon hit Zimm for no reason.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:09 PM
As I recall, Amy, Trayvon had marks on the back of his hands consistent with hitting someone.
AmyDB Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:39 PM
You are absolutely right Bill...offensive marks from Martin pummeling Zimmerman's face with his fists. No other bruising however.
Maybe Lil'Denny feels that Zimmerman initiated the fight by hitting his own nose with Martin's fist.
rightmostofthetime Wrote: Aug 11, 2013 10:55 PM
Yep, and silly Denmark completely ignores the PROSECUTION witness who said he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, pounding away MMA style. I can't relate to someone who stares facts in the face and completely ignores them. I hope I never, ever become that reactionary.
Don't Tread On Me3 Wrote: Aug 13, 2013 10:27 AM
Yeah, George attacked Martin by hitting hit Martin's fist with his nose, then pulled Martin down on top of him & jerked his arms around by forcing Martin to hold his head while banging it on the concrete.