Photo shows Zimmerman's bloodied head - alt.law-enforcement

The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Message from discussion Photo shows Zimmerman's bloodied head
MIME-Version: 1.0
Path: r9ni121846pbh.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 21:36:29 -0500
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.politics.guns,alt.law-enforcement
Subject: Re: Photo shows Zimmerman's bloodied head
From: RD Sandman <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net>
References: <jK2dnUriwOLO4wHSnZ2dnUVZ_qGdnZ2d@mchsi.com> <jnkupl$1kh$1@dont-email.me> <XnsA0455C99CFD27hopewell@216.196.121.131> <32gtp7hiec4o3vqroc94fo73jqp1imnrhj@4ax.com> <XnsA0456ABE6E2B6hopewell@216.196.121.131> <2kjtp75uqd5q52o4lu4ekbt1hkujatib4u@4ax.com> <XnsA0457C4627529hopewell@216.196.121.131> <1vdup7l11lqtdjqkuq68a2bp73tie1st6k@4ax.com> <XnsA0465AEE6508Chopewell@216.196.121.131> <4fa00a20$0$16801$607ed4bc@cv.net> <XnsA04665D1BF0DDhopewell@216.196.121.131> <pb21q79mskdpidlu7jqdn68ftdc8tibqpe@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <XnsA046C77775F79hopewell@216.196.121.131>
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 21:36:29 -0500
Lines: 219

Lookout <mrlooko...@yahoo.com> wrote in 
news:pb21q79mskdpidlu7jqdn68ftdc8tibqpe@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 01 May 2012 12:00:33 -0500, RD Sandman
> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>>"Greg Arama" <TheAmboyDu...@bass.gov> wrote in news:4fa00a20$0$16801
>>$607ed...@cv.net:
>>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> "RD Sandman"  wrote in message 
>>> news:XnsA0465AEE6508Chopewell@216.196.121.131...
>>> 
>>> Lookout <mrlooko...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>> news:1vdup7l11lqtdjqkuq68a2bp73tie1st6k@4ax.com:
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 14:12:59 -0500, RD Sandman
>>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Lookout <mrlooko...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>news:2kjtp75uqd5q52o4lu4ekbt1hkujatib4u@4ax.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 12:29:35 -0500, RD Sandman
>>>>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Lookout <mrlooko...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>news:32gtp7hiec4o3vqroc94fo73jqp1imnrhj@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 11:06:10 -0500, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>William Smith <smit...@truth.gov.oc> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>news:jnkupl$1kh$1@dont-email.me:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 04/28/2012 09:31 PM, Oglethorpe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "William Smith"<smit...@truth.gov.oc>  wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:jngpdv$kgb$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 04/26/2012 01:37 AM, Zacharias Mulletstein wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Scout"<me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>  wrote 
in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> message news:jnal59$i8d$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "William Smith"<smit...@truth.gov.oc>  wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:jnagv4$2t9$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 04/25/2012 12:33 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You wouldn't believe the friggin' picture if the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> photographer was standing next to it and swore it was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be stupid to believe. Maybe the photographer 
faked
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get some bucks from a media company, and ABC fell for it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hook, line and sinker, how do I know? Faking it is easy,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is
>>>>>>>cheap
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or free software for it. An expertise would be needed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But have you shown that it was fabricated?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So let's see your evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Pop athiests have no evidence. They demand evidence from
>>>>>everybody
>>>>>>>>>>>>> else, but when it comes to providing evidence of their own,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they always make excuses.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you prove that it is real?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Since faking it is so easy, and the stakes are high, and it 
is
>>>>>>>>>>>> Z
>>>>>>>who
>>>>>>>>>>>> has to prove self defense, he is the one who must prove it 
is
>>>>>real.
>>>>>>>>>>>> What's the evidence it is real? None. The time on the iphone
>>>>>could
>>>>>>>>>>>> have been changed for this photo op. And a photo op was made
>>>>>>>>>>>> possible by the police not arresting the killer.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Since the photo was taken within minutes of the incident, 
what
>>>>>>>>>>> the fuck are you talking about? Did the EMTs lie too?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> EMTs did not testify yet. They did not put bandages and 
canceled
>>>>>>>>>> an ambulance. As for the date, it could be easily faked.
>>>>>>>>>> I seriously doubt the picture will be included into evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And if Zimmerman is acquitted, the Martin supporters will
>>>>>>>>>>>>> riot. Typical left wing extremists. The extreme leftists 
are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> no better than the extreme rightists.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If he is released without trial based on SYG, yes, they may
>>>>>>>>>>>> riot. Same if he is acquitted by an all white jury against 
all
>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence (which has not been presented yet).
>>>>>>>>>>>> Injustice begets violence and more injustice.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If he's released withoiut a trial it means the prosecutor
>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't have a case, dipshit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It might also mean a mistake on part of the judge, or worse.
>>>>>>>>>> You use of words reveals lack of better arguments and lack of
>>>>>>>>>> intelligence.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Their lead investigator tesitfied unde oath at the bond
>>>>>>>>>>> hearing that they had no idea who started the altercation.
>>>>>>>>>>> That's REASONABLE DOUBT.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Reasonable doubt is required for acquittal, not for dismissal 
of
>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>> case without trial but you obviously do not understand the
>>>>>>>difference.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The lead investigator Chris Serino did not believe Zimmerman's
>>>>>>>version
>>>>>>>>>> of the events but was overruled by state attorney.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Would that be the same Chris Serino who testified at the bond
>>>>>>>>>hearing that he had no idea who started the confrontation?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Until the EMTs testify he has no idea who started the fight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And probably won't even then.  The EMTs have no special skills as 
to
>>>>>>>determine who started a fight.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> They are experts at determining how a wound is inflicted.
>>>>>
>>>>>Most of them are.....some just end up driving a jeep.  ;)
>>>>>
>>>> It's an honor to drive for the Commanding General.
>>> 
>>> Hmmmm, guilty conscience?  I didn't name anyone.  ;)
>>> 
>>>> One that you could never hope to attain.
>>> 
>>> Why should I?  I was discharged in the 60s and am no longer in the
>>> service.
>>> 
>>> <^^^^
>>> 
>>> Now it's a "Commanding General?"
>>> I thought he said it was a Lt. General he drove around.
>>
> AHHAHA
> Thanks for proving you never served, dumbass. Lt General is a RANK.
> Commanding General is the man who commands the division. Depending on
> the division it can be Brigadier, Major, or Lieutenant.

Before you rant, you probably ought to look and see whose comment that 
was.  Then you won't look like such an idiot.  If you need a clue (and it 
looks like you don't have one), that comment came from Greg Arama not me. 
;)


>>It probably wasn't even a Lt. Most military don't take their good 
troops 
>>and have them drive jeeps instead of leading in their MOS. I was one of 
>>the best in the division on missile guidance systems so they kept me 
>>doing that........unless I was half lit when called in on an alert. 
Then 
>>they would put me on the gate to the complex with a loaded full auto 
>>Grease gun.  An M3 and feed me coffee until I was judged sober enough 
to 
>>check out live missiles.  Typical military.......
>>
> You never served, dumbass.

Yep, two hitches.  BTW, you finally got one right.  That was my comment 
right there.

>>> After all, the term "Commanding Generals" stopped being used in 1903.
>>> 
>>> 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commanding_General_of_the_United_States_Ar
>>my
>>> 
>>> Life must be pretty when yer on Ambien 24/7. 
>>> 
> You fucking idiot. They are talking about the General who head THE
> ENTIRE ARMY. See where it says it's now called Chief of Staff. A
> general who leads a unit is STILL called the Commanding General.
> 
> And you just proved you never served. Even if you served in a
> different branch you STILL KNEW about a Commanding General.

And you still don't have a fucking clue whose comment you are responding 
to, do you.



-- 

If it weren't for my lawyer, I still be in prison.
It went a lot faster with two people digging!!

Joe Martin


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
Account Options
