Not part of the narrative

I didn't want to bury this under the Trayvon postings because it doesn't fit with the very popular narrative being used by the main street media to fuel thier race quota. But here are some inconvenient facts.......The medical report from George Zimmerman’s family doctor after the Trayvon Martin shooting shows that Zimmerman’s nose was broken; he also had a pair of black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head, a bruised upper lip, and a back injury. He was examined by the doctor the day after the shooting. The three-page medical report will likely be used as evidence for the defense.

Meanwhile, the Trayvon Martin autopsy shows that other than his gunshot wound, the only injury on Martin was that the skin on his knuckles was broken. Combined with the evidence from Zimmerman's medical report, the logical conclusion is that Martin was beating up Zimmerman severely before Zimmerman shot him.

No votes yet

But, but, but, Fred...If George Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his car and "stalked" Trayvon Martin then Martin would still be with us. Or some other ridiculous liberal meme that completely ignores the whole Martin assaulting Zimmerman thing.

Yes. In other news, all the shootings of citizens by police just wouldn't happen if the police would just stay in their patrol cars. Better yet, they shouldn't even arrive for their shifts each day. Wait, maybe they shouldn't even leave their houses. Yes, that sounds like the logical extension of the Liberal narrative.

Zimmerman's trial will be a sham. When the facts don't fit, you must acquit, and the facts in this case sure as fuck don't fit the requirements for 2nd degree murder. But the political establishment had to let the arrest happen, since the family can now sue the bajeezus out of everyone involved, looking for their big payday.

By stating the ridiculous about police officers, you are showing that Zimmerman was acting as if he was a police officer. That's called vigilantism!

Let me be crystal clear. I fully support the police. The police were on their way. As a concerned citizen, Zimmerman should have let the professionals do their job! Instead, Zimmerman took a human life, and placed an unnecessary burden upon a small town police department.

Zimmerman was an experienced Block Watch person. He knew the rule that BW people were to report, and NOT pursue. He was reminded of this by the professional police dispatcher. Furthermore, Zimmerman reported suspicions only. Zimmerman witnessed NO CRIME. Martin was unarmed and had NO CRIMINAL TOOLS! I am anxious to hear Zimmerman's version of why he continued to pursue Martin and why he left his car. Of course, Zimmerman may never testify. He has that right.

Under Florida's law, Martin was within his rights to defend himself against a much larger man who first followed him in a car, then exited the car to continue stalking Martin on foot.

Let me be crystal clear.

Where have I heard that before? It seems like another famous liar used similar language once. It'll come to me.

Go back to your classroom and captive audience, Pertcheck. The only people buying into your emotional arguments here are Moonbat extremists. Intelligent people see you and your arguments for what they are - pathetic.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Chief Bill Lee, Jr.'s words: "There is a perception that we were trying to protect George Zimmerman. We think what he did was terrible. We wish that he had just stayed in his vehicle."

Is Chief Lee a "Moonbat extemist"?

Those who lack good arguments also do a lot of name calling. That is done to intimidate those with whom they disagree to shut them up. If the proverbial shoe fits, MJ...

... you're wearing them.

Chief Lee is going to say whatever it takes to keep him in office just like you're going to say whatever it takes to vilify Zimmerman. Your real problem, like all the other Moonbats, is that you are beginning to believe your own fairytales. This is the world according to Dale Pertcheck, and everyone should just recognize the truth of that statement and quietly do as they're told.

Sorry Dale. That argument doesn't work on rational adults. Some kids will buy into it, but not adults.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

You failed to note the one thing Chief Lee didn't say: "What Zimmerman did was illegal."

"Terrible" is an opinion, but what Zimmerman did was still not illegal.

"Wish he stayed in the car" is an opinion, but what Zimmerman did was still not illegal.

I also wonder why you failed to mention that Zimmerman was active in addressing police corruption in Sanford, including the police Chief. Of course, that discredits the Chief's comments, and as such, doesn't fit your Liberal Narrative.

...Zimmerman was active in addressing police corruption in Sanford, including the police Chief.

Okay, this is the first I've heard about that topic. Interesting. Do you have any links worth posting?

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack


Here is Zimmerman's flier about the case:

The man Zimmerman was speaking out to defend is Sherman Ware, who is Black. The reason why you don't hear about that is (unsurprisingly) because that doesn't fit the Liberal Narrative.

So Zimmerman has a documented beef with the police, personally and professionally. So no wonder the police chief in Sanford is spitting out more parts of the Liberal Narrative.

Now I hear our Kenyan Racist-in-Chief is having his FBI try to pin a "hate crime" on Zimmerman, allegedly punishable by the death penalty. Justice is being murdered before our very eyes:

I couldn't make this shit up if I tried, since I'm not that mean. Unfortunately, Obama and Holder are that mean.

Thanks GZ. I hadn't seen any of that before, but then I've been trying to ignore the entire business until it either goes to trial or is dismissed for lack of evidence.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Ignoring it was probably the smarter move. I feel that there are brain cells I'll never get active again, with all the Liberal blather from Dale that's resulted from this case. Drinking heavily might have been the wiser, alternative choice; the same dead neurons, but I'd have had some fun along the way.

Dale, I used the police example to show how silly the Liberal Narrative is, in this case.

And once again, we must remind you that law enforcement is EVERYONE'S job. In fact, that's encoded into the law itself, either by implication (citizen's arrest) or directly (the Second Amendment).

The only reason Zimmerman took a Human life is that he defended himself. That's what the published facts say. Did you even bother reading the police report on Scribd? Probably not, since the facts recorded therein don't fit the Liberal Narrative.

The rest of your Liberal crap isn't worth dealing with, since it was all thoroughly debunked before, but we must address this one:

"Under Florida's law, Martin was within his rights to defend himself against a much larger man who first followed him in a car, then exited the car to continue stalking Martin on foot."

No. You have no such right of physical self defense against anyone confronting you on the street. Martin physically attacked Zimmerman; there is no legal right to do that encoded in the law of Florida.

Dale you continue to prove that as a poster child of Liberalism, we must be eternally vigilant against your stupidity.

The so-called "Liberal crap" you don't want to deal with includes the fact that Martin was doing nothing but walking around the neighborhood unarmed with no criminal tools. If this had been your teenaged son or cousin or nephew or friend, I know that your opinion would be 180 degrees opposite of what you espouse about a stranger.

Police work is best left to the police. According to Chief Lee, Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. If you continue to argue that Zimmerman was right to continue his pursuit of Martin and to leave his car, you are now arguing against the opinion of someone who understands police work better than you or I, the Chief of Police of Sanford, Florida.

I've pointed out before, a number of years ago, one of my cousins saw someone fleeing from a bank with a bag as alarms were ringing. As a good citizen, he chased the man down and tackled him. He held the man until security and the police arrived. There was a crime in progress. Zimmerman saw NO CRIME. THAT'S the difference.

Vigilantism doesn't always result in someone's death. In this case it did! No vigilantism!

Once again, Zimmerman did nothing illegal. It is not illegal to confront people on the street. You've been told this many times.

Be sure to take your medicine when the jury finds the charge of SDM to be totally bogus and they reject it with a "not guilty" verdict.

I see your Racist-in-Chief in the Half-White House is now trying to bring Zimmerman up on "hate crime" charges, even though there's no way such a thing is legally viable. THAT is the sort of government you've always loved: It targets people and tries to destroy them for political reasons.

The people are seeing exactly what a horror now resides in the Half-White House and there's now significant movement to clean that up. See you in November, chum. Be ready for some bleach. LOL!

who makes racial statements here. You should use bleach to sanitize your typing fingers.

Keep arguing with a police chief. Don't let an expert's opinion sway your own! Never, ever, ever!

What's not obvious here (to you) is that I make use of the language to draw out the Liberal extremists like you, just to watch you trip over your own illogic. It's sad but expected that you weren't smart enough to see that. But then you came from a system that valued conformity over intelligence.

Once your Kenyan President decided to play the race card in the face of all available evidence to the contrary, we're not going to let you play that one yourself. He discredited himself as you do constantly.

Speaking of discredit... as for the police chief, I'm not arguing with him. That implies he has a position in the first place, which he doesn't. He's already been thoroughly discredited. You apparently don't understand what a "conflict of interest" is. He and/or his department has a COI with Zimmerman. Given your positions on just about everything, it's expected you can't understand; you live and breathe conflicts of interest. It's defined your life.

He's only a police chief, after all.

Your own words define you. You try to hide behind enigmatic, incomprehensible motives so that you can use the language with which you are comfortable. Go for it!

He's only a police chief, after all.

Look stupid, your argument is based on a logical fallacy; the classic appeal to authority. If you actually attended college as you claim, you'd know better than to try something like this.

Of course this argument will work in public school, mainly because your students didn't dare disagree with the almighty Pertcheck. How many of those students had to sit there the entire school year, listening to you run your fat, stupid mouth and knowing for a cold hard fact that you were wrong? How many knew you were full of crap and couldn't actually quantify their thoughts?

Your arguments are spurious and completely without merit.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

EVERY TIME, in a criminal case.

If he had supported your position, you would be quoting him!

Keep arguing with the expert!

Your comments about how I did my job show three things simultaneously.

First of all, you reveal that you would demand total compliance and allow no one to disagree with you if or when you are in a position of authority. I encouraged debate. I never "put down" students who had a different view.

Secondly, it is obvious that you have never been in charge of a room full of modern teenagers. If you think that they sit there like little meek sheep hanging on the every word of their teacher, go to Disneyworld. You are in Fantasyland.
Some of my best students had strong political opinions. Many had political discussions frequently at home, and many were strong conservatives. One such student, when she was in high school, I nominated for a program in which she would be a student ambassador in the summer. She was accepted into the program and spent several weeks in Europe representing us. She is now a student at BGSU and last summer I took my whole immediate family down to BG and we all met her for dinner. As Thomas Jefferson stated, "I have never known a difference in politics or religion as a reason to withdraw from a friend."

Thirdly, your continuing statements make it obvious that you have no idea what my job was. I taught, primarily, history. I spent a lot more time on King George III than I ever spent on either George Bush, or both put together! When we did have a "Current Events Day" (once every week or two, depending on how much of the curriculum we had covered), I would ALWAYS label my opinions as opinions, and not, as too many do here, state them as undeniable facts. And I did encourage debate! Many of their comments were very well stated and they never got nasty or personal.

You may believe that my arguments are "spurious and without merit". I think the same of yours! I appreciate when you use language such as this rather than when people name-call and use profanity. -

Of course this argument will work in public school, mainly because your students didn't dare disagree with the almighty Pertcheck. How many of those students had to sit there the entire school year, listening to you run your fat, stupid mouth and knowing for a cold hard fact that you were wrong? How many knew you were full of crap and couldn't actually quantify their thoughts?

There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

Racism makes you look ignorant, but dog whistle racism makes you look ignorant and smug.

There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

OK, this has gone on far enough. What racist utterance did I make? Make sure you know what you're talking about before I totally obliterate your response.

no matter who occupies the Office of the President.

And I never used the word "racist" when referring to your comments. I did use the word racial.

I called it the Half-White House as a play on the term "Half-Way House", to indicate Obama was supposed to be in recovery from Liberalism. The Presidency was supposed to convert him from a Chicago Liberal into a true leader who represents everyone. (But it didn't.)

Why, what did your race-addled Liberal mind think I meant?

And when you get right down to it, Obama identified himself with Martin, SOLELY BASED ON SKIN COLOR (as his "son"). Obama made this a race issue, along with the media, all following the problem other posters (better than I) raised: The Liberal Narrative.

You Liberals try to make EVERYTHING about race, since that's the only argument mode you were trained to make: Find the racists and deny them media coverage. It's called "playing the race card", and you folks do it all the time.

And still you Liberals wonder why you're hated.

Half-way house! Nice deflection!

It oughta be easier to straighten out a piece of steel wool, than a Liberal like you with your demented ideas of how society should be organized.

I love baiting you people. You end up showing everyone how extreme Liberalism is today.

Sure! Go with that GZ!

I'm not even sure the trial will run to completion. The prosecution has no evidence as everything points to self-defense. The judge might simply throw the whole thing out due to insufficient evidence.

I think it's worth noting that without commercial media and the Ayatollah Obama there wouldn't be a trial at all.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

If liberals can discount horrific economic news as they have for 3.25 years.
They can easily discount injuries consistent with being assaulted by a gangsta that looks as though he could be President Food Stamps, son.

The enmity in Liberals, knows no bounds...

The evidence of injuries is proof that Martin was kicking Zimmerman's ass. Zimmerman unlawfully attacked the wrong guy. Also, Zimmerman is not a law enforcement officer. He had no right to attack Martin. Zimmerman is guilty, guilty, guilty. Twenty years is the minimum he should be incarcerated to pay for his mistake.

The police report and physical evidence and news releases about witness statements, all support the conclusion that Zimmerman defended himself. There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman attacked Martin. Zero.

That's the truth that you will have to accept, especially when the jury sees no cause for a 2nd degree murder charge.

Zimmerman didn't attack anyone. Martin attacked Zimmerman, and now there are medical records to support Zimmerman's case of self-defense.

This case is so clearly self-defense that it shouldn't even go to trial. But thanks to commercial media, a good portion of Zimmerman's life will be ruined.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Stalk a guy 2/3 your size down the street in your car; get out of the car and chase him when tries to get away; shoot him when he's had enough and starts to beat the crap our of you.

Thanks Fred, how I've got it...


Bullshit, SensorG. Let some black gang banger hit you in the face and knock you down, then jump on you and start pounding your head on the sidewalk and we'll see just how long you stand for it before you draw your pistol and ventilate the little monkey.

Zimmerman was well within his rights to follow Martin, get out of his car and follow Martin on foot, and defend himself when big, bad Martin opened the door to violence and just a little more violence than he expected walked in.

Yeah, Martin was going to teach Zimmerman a lesson about just who he had a problem with, only it didn't work out so well for Martin. Gee, too bad. Now we're out one gang banger and the court system is going to be tied up forever on a trial that shouldn't be happening.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

A black guy in a hoodie is a gang banger and a monkey? Racist much MJ?

Mainly after reading your posts on Zimmerman - Martin. You wouldn't tolerate having your head pounded into the sidewalk for two seconds and you know it. Yet because Martin is black, you hitch your float to commercial media and join the crowd trying to lynch Zimmerman for defending himself.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

I wouldn’t have staked a guy and ran after him either. At best Zimmerman is looking at manslaughter. If a guy was trying to rape a woman and the woman started to beat the man’s head into the sidewalk, is the man justified in killing her?

doesn't hold water. Zimmerman wasn't trying to rape Martin. Consider what is known so far, then tell me what crime Zimmerman committed.

Zimmerman saw Martin in the neighborhood, decided Martin looked suspicious and followed him. Martin took evasive action (according to Martin's girlfriend). Zimmerman lost Martin, then got out of his vehicle so as to pursue Martin. The two confront each other on the sidewalk and heated words are exchanged.

So far no crime has been committed.

Martin punches Zimmerman. That's a crime - assault and battery. Had Zimmerman immediately drawn his pistol and killed Martin, you might have a case for manslaughter, but more then likely it would be use of excessive force with the caveat of self-defense.

Martin jumps on top of Zimmerman and starts pounding Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk. That's a crime - felonious assault at a minimum, attempted murder at the maximum. Zimmerman draws his pistol and shoots Martin to death.

Note that Zimmerman fires one shot and one shot only. He isn't trying to kill Martin, he's trying to save his own life. That, and Martin's instigation of a violent attack are what make this self-defense.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

is only 2/3's the size of George Zimmerman ?!
From the lying medias picture of Martin, when he was 10 years old ?!

Martin , is 6'2" and George, looks to be 5'6" at best !?

Your Woodward GED, is mathematically inept if you can attain 2/3's from that comparison !
A more stupid & obsequious comparison has yet to be made !

According to the narrative Sensor is following Zimmerman is stalking a guy who is 2/3rds his size. Trayvon Martin was 6ft and 150 pounds. Using basic math principles that means George Zimmerman would have to be 9ft tall, and weigh 225 lbs. Highly unlikely but it makes for a great story line. In fact some reports list Zimmerman as 170 and 5'9 but that doesn't fit the narrative.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

Sometimes I think you’re trying to be cheeky, and then I thought you were simply ignorant; but I’m quickly coming to the conclusion you’re just not that smart.

First thing, Zimmerman is over 200 pounds and Martin was 150 pounds.

That being said, when someone says “that football player is twice his size” they don’t mean the guy is 13ft tall. It’s an abstract reference to imply the guy is MUCH larger. Hope that clears it up for you.

Please also see “Literally and Figuratively”…

True but in this case rather than say Zimmerman was slightly heavier but not as tall as Trayvon you go for the figurative 2/3rd his size. That helps you convince people that BIG bad Zimmerman was stalking little Trayvon, and of course makes it harder for someone to believe that little Trayvon could overpower BIG bad Zimmerman. And I don't have to be "that" smart to figure out your angle, just smart enough.

Any statement I make is the opinion of me exercising my first amendment right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and is generally permitted.

I don't know what you are trying to pull, Fred, but I saw the pictures of Treyvon Martin in the "mainstream media".

Treyvon is a sweet little 9 year old. Looks like he probably helps little old ladies across the street, is definitely a Boyscout, loves puppies and kitties, and should be nominated for sainthood.

Just look at this little darling. Don't you just want to pinch his cheeks and pat him on that sweet little head?

We all know that the doctor report saying Treyvon's knuckles were bruised is because EVIL George Zimmerman repeatedly hit Treyvon in the fists with his face.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

Good one, LibsCanBlowMe.

Yeah, cute little Treyvon Martin was skipping along on his way to choir practice when that no good Zimmerman started to follow him - and for what nefarious purpose, we wonder. Maybe it's best that Martin is no longer on Earth where Zimmerman can follow him around.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

I predict, acquittal, and then, riots.

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

The facts don't fit, hence the jury must acquit. I hope Zimmerman's lawyer doesn't let the state run voir dire and/or change of venue into a Liberal hellzone.

As for riots, the rest of us have the right to keep and bear arms, and have a duty to keep the peace in the face of insurrection. And I'm a pretty good shot.

Another item that doesn't fit the narrative is the fact that Zimmermans has a Black grandparent. So that must mean he should now be identified as a White-Black-Hispanic man?

Witness Told Cops He Saw Trayvon Martin Straddling George Zimmerman And Punching Him "MMA Style"

Interviewed by cops about 90 minutes after the shooting, the witness--whose name was redacted from police documents--said that he was inside his home when he heard a “commotion coming from the walk way” behind his residence.

The man recalled seeing “a black male, wearing a dark colored ‘hoodie’ on top of a white or Hispanic male who was yelling for help.” The black male, he added, “was mounted on the white or Hispanic male and throwing punches ‘MMA (mixed martial arts) style.'”

The witness--who was in his living room and about 30 feet away from the confrontation-- said he called out to the two men that he was dialing 911. “He then heard a ‘pop,’” police reported, and saw the black male “laid out on the grass.”

That's totally in line with Zimmerman's claim of self defense.

There are also a couple more pictures of the injured Zimmerman, which the Liberal Narrative morons still try to claim don't exist.

Comments, Dale? LOL!

Obama's gonna regret opening his fucking mouth about this case. That means: He's going to watch his DOJ undermined, and/or lose the November election. Time to send the Kenyan back to Chicago.

Don't forget, GZ, the medical report stated he was on dope as well. That doesn't fit the narrative, either

From ABC News: "The autopsy report shows traces of the drug THC, which is
found in marijuana, in Martin's blood and urine."

Although you're right, that it also wasn't part of the Liberal Narrative, I don't give it much weight if at all, since it's not much of an indicator in the case. Marijuana is a calming drug if anything, and the levels present weren't released. Martin could have toked a joint some hours before, or been in a room with others who were smoking it.

What would concern me as a citizen and jury member, would be the presence of drugs that promote extreme behavior, like crack cocaine and crystal meth. But I'd be willing to consider the entire package; the official autopsy may indicate that Martin was significantly high at the time of his attack on Zimmerman. Although MJ is calming, a "high" produced by any drug you take can lead to disconnection from the personal consequences of your actions.

Thanks again, GZ. This whole business is starting to look worse and worse for the persecution. Now it turns out Martin was all screwed up on pot before he jumped Zimmerman - instead of the other way around, which the Moonbats have been screaming since Martin hit room temperature.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Zimmerman is sorry. You seem to relish Martin's death!

It appears that many on this site have expressed their belief, if a minority is attacked he or she should accept the ass-whooping and not fight back. If the minority does fight back then the death penalty is appropriate. Zimmerman took it on himself to institute the death penalty because he unalwfuuly attacked someone, and, when he found himself getting his ass kicked he imposed the death penalty. I sincerly hope people don't start imposing the death penalty for whistling at a non-minority woman.

What do you mean? Zimmerman (a minority) was attacked, and he fought back, shooting Martin in self defense. This is a case that doesn't even involve FL's "stand your ground" law; it's pure self defense that would apply equally in any state in the union.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman attacked Martin before the defensive shooting. If you have such evidence, please post it. Note well that you can't post the police report as that sort of evidence, since it's not in there. Note also you can't post reported summaries of witness statements, since those also support Zimmerman's defensive action. Note again that you can't post the medical evidence, for the same reasons. So it's curious what actual evidence you really are working off of.

Despite the efforts of the media to promote your Liberal Narrative, each release of evidence destroys that narrative step by step. Your side lost. You backed the wrong horse. People like you and Obama should choose a non-thug, the next time.

Comment viewing options

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