I'm a killer! I'm a murdering bastard, you know that. And there are consequences to breaking the heart of a murdering bastard ~ Bill, the title character from the 2004 Quentin Tarantino film Kill Bill Volume 2, as portrayed by David Carradine.
The blogger Willis Hart is still at it; continuing to put up commentary after commentary on his site declaring his belief that Trayvon Martin was responsible for his own death. All the evidence points to it (in his mind). George Zimmerman, while perhaps not acting prudently, was within his rights in defending himself against a violent thug. And the Hartster continues to lie about me saying all GZ's injuries were caused by tripping. First GZ tripped and fell on his face (breaking his nose), then he tripped and hit his head (causing the injuries to his scalp).
Of course I never said that, because it is utterly ridiculous (which I pointed out in my last post). But does that stop the delusional liar Hart from telling blatant, obvious and ridiculous lies? No way. He continues to do it because he knows all his regulars are hip to his dissembling. They eat it up, in fact. Specifically I refer to rAtional nAtion, dmarks, and Rusty Shackelford. These bloggers all cheer as Mr. Hart lies, as they are delusional liars themselves. And then this Rusty fellow comes rushing over here to tell me that "Will and his friends are tearing you a new ass over at his place", and that "Will has caught you in about a dozen lies and is commenting on each one".
Of course this is utter bullshit. But, given the fact that I am banned from this doofus' blog, and given the fact that he continues to insult me (referring to me as a pathological liar in one post)... clearly a response here (on my blog) is necessary. Since I published my last commentary, the prolific White-rager has authored 13 (count em, THIRTEEN!) posts concerning the killer George Zimmerman and his victim Trayvon Martin, as follows (along with my replies)...
[1] The Slippery Slope of Blackness/Whiteness 7/24/2013
Willis Hart: If President Obama had married a white woman and had fathered some kids with HER, those kids would have exactly the same amount of African DNA as Zimmerman's mother and uncle. At what point does a person cease being black?
My Response: An utterly stupid and irrelevant question, but I'll have a go at it none-the-less. A person ceases being black when their skin color is light enough such that there is no question about whether or not they have any DNA from Africa. The reason for this is SLAVERY. White slave owners who raped their "property" (White men raping Black women) wanted to be certain that the children that resulted ("mulattos") would always be regarded as property. While other races... Hispanics, Indians and even Whites were held as slaves (or indentured servants), ONLY African Americans were brought here in large numbers and specifically regarded as a slave race (Black = slave).
This percentages argument that Mr. Hart puts forward is bogus for this reason. Does George Zimmerman appear to be a Black man? No, he does not. Does he identify as Black? Again, no, he doesn't. Does George Zimmerman having a Black great grandfather preclude him from holding any racial biases against Black people? Clearly not.
We already know that GZ's European White (with a German last name) dad holds some racial biases against Blacks. GZ senior made this clear when he authored an e-book in which he pointed his finger at the "true racists", who, according to GZ SR can be found in the NAACP, the Congressional Black Caucus and in the Obama Administration (the president himself as well as Attorney General Eric Holder).
In my opinion anyone who says Black people are the "real racists" are racist themselves. It's a reactionary deflection. "Who me, racist? No, it's the Blacks who are the real racists". Sure. So, given the fact that GZ was raised by a racist dad, is it probably or at least possible that some of his dad's racial biases rubbed off on little Georgie? Of course. So what if his Whiteness isn't pure? That does not point to any kind of impossibility in regards to GZ harboring any racial biases... despite what Mr. Hart may believe.
And we also The racially biased White dad raised at least one racially biased son. GZ's brother Robert Zimmerman Jr let the world know he shares his pop's racist proclivities with a series of tweets back in March defending his brother. So we've got a racially biased dad, a racially biased junior, and another son who shot an unarmed teen after following him because he looked "suspicious" for wearing a hoodie and walking slowly. All this points to it being very likely that GZ didn't racially profile Trayvon? Color me highly skeptical. Basically what Mr. Hart is saying is that GZ can't possibly hold any racial biases based ONLY on the fact that he had a Black great grandfather, which is nonsensical.
[2] Self-Describe This 7/25/2013
Willis Hart: The population of Mexico is approximately 115,000,000, and of that... approximately 70,000,000 are considered Mestizo (a mixture of Native-American and European ancestry). Is it safe to assume here that the media and leftists of this country are now willing to go out on a limb and call these people, "self-described Hispanics" as well?
My Response: Nope. I'd refer to them as Mexican (nationality) and Mestizo (racially). How they "self describe" is up to them. I've never been to Mexico so I wouldn't know. As for George Zimmerman, apparently he does identify as Hispanic, although the initial police report (after the shooting) referred to Zimmerman as White. That report says that Officer Timothy Smith (first officer on the scene) had a "white male, later identified as George Zimmerman, in custody". So the Media takes WHAT THE POLICE REPORT SAYS, goes with that, and the Right-wing attacks them for trying to push a false narrative (racist White man shoots Black teen).
But that isn't what happened. The media did not invent/fabricate GZ being identified as White! Later, when the information that Zimmerman was not a racially pure White man came out, the media corrected itself and determined GZ was a "self described" Hispanic. This the Right spun as the "Liberal Media" acknowledging GZ's Hispanic heritage but still implying he was White ("self described" Hispanic but still actually White). But that's bullshit. They said "self described" because that is how he described himself! Bottom line: take your conspiracy theory BS and shove it up your ass, Hart. The only reason for this spinning is to discredit the idea that GZ could have racial biases that lead him to make assumptions about TM he shouldn't have. How the media identified him has nothing to do with that.
[3] More Media Bias in the Zimmerman Affair 7/28/2013
Willis Hart: ...back when Trayvon Martin was first suspended in 2011 (ostensibly for vandalism), school authorities went through his backpack and found 12 pieces of women's jewelry, a man's watch, and a screwdriver that they had delineated as a "burglary tool" [and for this reason GZ was right to suspect TM was up to no good on the night he followed and shot him].
My Response: You didn't prove any media bias in the first place (prior WH post failed in that regard). Secondly, the media didn't mention any of TM's troubles because they had nothing to do with GZ shooting him. It also has nothing to do with (and does not justify) GZ suspecting TM (because he had no knowledge of it). That the media didn't do an expose trashing the victim (when those facts have nothing to do with the case) is NOT an example of "media bias". Overall I rate Willis' "media bias" charge as a enormous fail. There wasn't any.
Willis Hart: Now, this of course doesn't mean that Trayvon was necessarily up to no good on that particular evening. The dude absolutely could have been just out for a walk. But to try and say here that Zimmerman was totally off is bull.
My Response: He wasn't up to no good, "necessarily"? Here WH profiles TM. He assumes that because TM got into a little trouble then anything and everything he does is suspect. Also, how the hell can GZ be rightfully suspicious given TM's history when he HAS NO KNOWLEDGE of this history? The Hartster's argument makes no sense. Indeed he is saying GZ was right to racially profile TM. He's saying it is a reasonable assumption to assume TM may be looking for a apartment to break into (even though TM has no criminal record). Why? No reason at all... except for things GZ had no way of knowing. And there is also the fact that TM was a young Black male.
But Willis claims that TM should have had a criminal record. That he didn't was due to "politics". According to WH's post "the Sanford police, in an obvious effort to keep the teenage African-American crime rate low, apparently decided that this case should instead be handled by the school system and, hence, the suspension..."
Apparently, huh? I would ask if he had any proof of this, but does it really matter? The fact is TM, for whatever reason, had no criminal record, and even if he did GZ didn't know any of this history. It doesn't matter because GZ's involvement should have ended when he called it in to the police - which is all a Neighborhood WATCH person is supposed to do. That GZ got out of his car to look for an address because the dispatcher asked for one... that is completely false. The dispatcher asked for George's apartment number and then he asked if the officer he was sending could meet George at the mailboxes. He never asked for an address. That was a fictitious detail GZ added later to explain why he continued to follow TM when he was asked not to. (read the transcript to confirm this for yourself).
Willis Hart: ...can we also just knock it off with this whole Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon crap? If Trayvon had been a young black businessman holding a laptop and walking on the sidewalk, or an elderly black woman, Zimmerman wouldn't have given him the time of day. But because he was dressing like a gang-banger and walking in between houses, he did, and he should have.
My Response: Dressing like a gang banger? Many people wear hoodies. Bill O'Reilly and Geraldo Rivera wear hoodies (see picture below). A hoodie is not gang attire. While Willis is correct that GZ probably wouldn't have paid attention to a Black grandma or businessman... I say so what? That does not mean GZ did no racial profiling. He clearly did. His 46 calls to the police to report suspicious Black males (including a 7 year-old) are proof that GZ was racially profiling (young + Black + hoodie = gang banger).
Does that mean he shouldn't have been suspicious at all? No, I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that he should have identified himself (could have done this when he says TM circled his truck) and he should have listened to the dispatcher when told to stop following TM (which we know he did not do. We know he CONTINUED to follow TM due to his bogus story of getting out to look for a house number).
As far as Trayvon "walking in between houses" goes, he was following the sidewalk! He never walked between houses.
dmarks: Martin had a significant crime problem. If law enforcement had been doing its job, he would have been safely off the streets: no longer a danger to others or himself.
My Response: No, he would not have. He was a juvenile (under 18). The law is lenient on offenders under the age of 18. Because reasonable and empathetic people look for other methods to correct bad behavior for offenders under 18... because that is too young an age to hold anyone to an adult standard of personal responsibility. But if people like Dennis had their way we'd be locking up Juveniles (and dramatically increasing their numbers in our prison system) instead of trying to help them.
Rusty Shackelford: Will, please stop quoting actual facts about this case. Now you'll stir the fool on the hill to write a ten page fictional account how George Zimmer hid behind a tree waiting to kill the valdictorian Trayvon Martin while hitting him self on the nose with a large rock and banging his own head against a brick wall. So, please stop making sense.
My Response: This a**hole is greatly exaggerating/twisting what I wrote in my "Truthy Dramatization" post. I kept to the facts and filled in the gaps (discounting GZ's account). I never added anything that was provably false as Rusty suggests (what's with these Cons and their straw men?). As for the "making sense", by this Rusty means believing GZ's account. That, to Rusty, "makes sense". Of course the guy who killed an unarmed teen couldn't possibly be lying to save his own skin! No, we should believe him without question. His is the only account of the events we have, so that MUST be what actually happened, right?
Willis Hart: The thing is, I'm just so teed off at the media/leftists for the way that they've covered this sucker; this whole narrative that a racist white man (who isn't even white) gunning down an innocent black "child" simply 'cause he wanted to, that I've totally had to vent on it.
My Response: Continue to get "teed off" Will. I really do not care. I am teed off by suckers like you who lie about people "lying" simply because they disagree with you (Will's post #6). And it was the cops who (when they filed their initial report) described GZ as White (as I already pointed out).
Willis Hart: As for who started the fight, it makes absolutely NO sense that a person with a weapon would engage somebody in a fist fight... You also have to look at the injuries and see that Trayvon only had injuries to his knuckles AND that Mr. Zimmerman passed multiple polygraph tests. Mr. Martin wasn't trying to put Mr. Zimmerman in a coma? The fact that he was doing ground and pound... AND slamming Mr. Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk is pretty much proof-positive that you are full of shit...
My Response: I never said it was GZ who started the fight. This is another point Willis lies about (or is mistaken about, or simply does not care to find out what I actually said)... I think GZ tried to "arrest" TM and TM "resisted". That is how the fight started. Also, the "Ground and pound" MMA reference is something I always found suspicious. It was GZ who took classes at the gym in MMA, not TM. And that witness (John Good) also said he "couldn't be certain the person on top was striking the person on the bottom" and "he didn't see the person on top smashing the other person's head into the sidewalk".
He couldn't see the person on top striking the person on the bottom because there was no "ground and pound" taking place (Willis places a LOT of significance on the fact that JG uses this term). What was going on was a struggle for the gun. Yes, this is my speculation, but one based on my belief that GZ had his gun out already. And I believe he had his gun out for three reasons...
[1] GZ already suspected TM had a gun of his own (the "hand in his waistband" comment to the dispatcher); [2] GZ (in the taped walk though with the cops) said he reached for his cell phone (after TM asked him if he had a problem)... GZ is NOT going to take out his phone if an individual he believes has a gun approaches him - he's going to take out HIS gun; [3] GZ says he reached for and drew his gun with TM straddling him... a nearly impossible feat (as argued by the prosecution).
Supporting my theory about a struggle for the gun is a statement by "Mark Osterman, a good friend of Zimmerman and the author of a book on the case" who "said that Zimmerman told him that Martin had grabbed his gun during their struggle, but that Zimmerman was able to pull it away". This is further proof that the other account (the one where TM saw the gun and tried to grab it but failed) is likely a fabrication. John Good saw GZ and TM struggling for the gun, not a "ground and pound" from TM.
Regarding the passing of "multiple polygraph tests"... this is a false assertion. GZ passed two voice stress tests. A "voice stress test" is NOT the same as a polygraph. Wikipedia notes that "there are no independent research studies that support the use of VSA [voice stress analysis] as a reliable lie detection technology, whilst there are numerous studies that dispute its reliability".
[4] On Rachel Jeantel's Preposterous Testimony 7/28/2013
Willis Hart: Jeantel's preposterous testimony makes zero sense. A) She claimed that Trayvon was having trouble "shaking" Zimmerman. Trayvon was a frigging football player... He could have [run away fast]. B) She claimed that Zimmerman started the altercation by jumping on Trayvon. Why would a person with a gun willingly jeopardize their advantage... C) She claimed that Trayon uttered to Zimmerman, "Get off me". [but] Trayvon Martin relished fighting. His text messages were laced with violent imagery and confessions of numerous violent episodes.
My Response: RJ was on the PHONE with TM, she wasn't there in person! She said "shake", but that only meant that TM was trying to "shake" GZ by WALKING away from him (he kept looking back as seeing that GZ was still following him. TM didn't run until later. As for the jumping on... again, RJ wasn't there! The jumping on was, IMO, them only running into each other. The "get off" was TM complaining about GZ being too close to him. Both were surprised to find each other in the dark just prior to their altercation... i.e. TM didn't double back to administer a "whooping"; he was checking to see if GZ was still following him before he went home (he didn't want GZ knowing where he lived).
As for fighting being something TM "relished" and that a brother asked him to teach him to fight does not mean TM went looking for fights with strange adults. That is a leap, and exactly why the prosecution argued the texts should not be disclosed during the trial. Prosecutor John Guy said "it would mislead the jury and be prejudicial"... yes it would mislead the jury, just as Mr. Hart has (willingly) allowed it to mislead him.
dmarks: Jeantel's poor grasp of English is a testament to the incompetence of teachers and schools who let her get past the 2nd grade. It's her NATIVE LANGUAGE. I am willing to cut her a lot of slack if she is special needs. But if she is of normal intelligence and ability, it is really terrible that grammer school has instilled her that awful babble [she] spouts. How did the "Miami University of Ohio" supposedly admit her?
Darth Bacon: I heard that she's SO smart she speaks 3 languages. zoolo, Ubangi, and Ebonics.
Willis Hart: Those first 2 languages would probably impress me. The 3rd one, eh, not so much (especially not during a job interview).
My Response: Dennis seems so sure of himself. Dennis caps "native language", but it simply isn't true. During RJ's testimony defense attorney Don West asked, "When someone speaks to you in English, do you believe you have any difficulty understanding it because it wasn't your first language?" Her native language is Haitian Creole, you stupid lying idiot. I say Dennis is lying because he speaks with such assuredness it is obvious he simply does not give a crap what the truth is... he makes up his own truth. And he knows her Facebook page says she attends the "Miami University of Ohio" but he doesn't know English isn't her native language? Also, Willis Hart says nothing about Dennis' obvious BSing/lying/willful ignorance?
As for Darth, he "heard" that RJ speaks 3 languages from me. He voiced his opinion about RJ being stupid on my blog and I told him that she speaks Haitian Creole, Spanish, and English. Obviously the facts mean nothing to him, so he goes ahead and, for clearly racist reasons, continues to insist she is dumb. Look at the languages he falsely says she can speak: Zulu (actual spelling), Ubangi, and Ebonics. Obviously his point is that he believes she is a primitive/ignorant BLACK (for the record I'm NOT saying anyone who speaks Zulu or Ubangi are primitive/ignorant, I'm saying Darth picked those languages because that is how HE views them).
And, I for one do not believe for one second that Mr. Hart did not pick up on this "subtle" racism. Yet he offers no push back at all. Instead he plays along. I find this behavior (acceptance of racist comments) unacceptable. Shame on you Hart. BTW, "Ubangi" isn't actually a language, but rather "a fairly close-knit language family of some seventy languages centered on the Central African Republic". "Ubangi" does not identify any one specific language, therefore RJ couldn't possibly speak it.
Also, in regards to "Ebonics" (or African American Vernacular English), wikipedia says it, "shares... many characteristics with African Creole dialects spoken in much of the world". Given that RJ's native language is Haitian Creole it makes perfect sense that she'd be comfortable with Ebonics (which is a "natural language developed from the mixing of parent languages"). The point here is that some people (Darth, Dennis and Will) are very quick to judge without knowing any facts at all. Shame on you Hart... again (another one here is totally justified and necessary IMO).
[5] Trayvon's Texts 7/29/2013
Willis Hart: To Trayvon, "So, you're just turning into a little hoodlum?" Trayvon's response, "Na, I'm a gangsta". 2) To Trayvon (from his OLDER brother), "So, when you gonna teach me to fight?" 3) To Trayvon (from his girlfriend), "You gotta stop fighting". Trayvon's response, "Na, I'm not done with da fool". 4) Trayvon texts, "Duh way I fight nd golds I had last year". Friend's response, "Ub fightn. yeah, a lot".
My Response: Fighting with peers, not strange adults. None of these texts indicate he ever engaged in fights with adults he didn't know. The "gansta" comment was a teen projecting false bravado. TM was not a real gansta or gang banger. The Right-wing media has done an excellent job digging up all the dirt they could on TM (drug use, trouble with the law and suspensions) and they have NEVER produced a scintilla of evidence suggesting he was a gang member. None.
Willis Hart: Alright, let's back-peddle a little bit here. Who would be the individual more than likely who started the fight; the 17 year-old self-proclaimed gangsta wannabe... who's history is full of fighting, or the short and stocky 29 year-old who's own gym manager essentially called a wimp (and who, according to wd, trips a lot)?
My Response: Wrong question. The right question is did GZ have his gun out (or take it out) near the beginning of the encounter? I say he did (see #3 above). As for the "trips a lot" comment... this is NOT according to me. I never said anything of the sort (tripping onto his face). And, if you look at this picture you will see that there is a slight incline from the apartments on the right to the sidewalk. If GZ backed away from TM up the incline he could have easily tripped, and then sat down hard (injuring his tailbone). It is a perfectly reasonable and plausible explanation for how he got on the ground.
dmarks: Will, [you said] "And the only person who committed a crime... was Trayvon Martin (assault and battery and maybe attempted murder)". There is also this crime to consider: Florida statute 856.021 [which says] it is unlawful for any person to loiter or prowl in a place... This particular crime is exactly what Zimmerman noticed and reported to the dispatcher.
My Response: Assault and battery? Again, here we have someone who presumes GZ's version of events are unquestionable. I don't buy that at all. Also, even if TM punched GZ the Stand Your Ground law could apply to him. An individual who never identified himself and who HE found suspicious was following him. Why should he not be able to stand his ground? Also, walking home isn't "loitering" or "prowling". GZ never noticed this "particular crime" because TM never did either of those things.
[6] On wd's Assertion that Zimmerman A) Uttered, "You Gonna Die Tonight, Nigga" and B) Gunned Down Trayvon in Cold-Blood 7/29/2013
Willis Hart: There exists no evidence to support either of these charges. The FBI interviewed over 40 people and could not find one scintilla of evidence that George Zimmerman (who is 1/8 black and 3/8 Peruvian himself) has ever harbored racist views...
My Response: First of all, I never asserted that GZ said "You Gonna Die Tonight, Nigga". I do have him saying "You're going to die tonight ni**er" in my truthy dramatization (which I was upfront about being a blend of fact and fiction). I based this on GZ saying TM told him he was "going to die tonight". Honestly I think it more likely nobody said that. GZ probably added it to bolster his case for self-defense. He was saying "he SAID he was going to kill me, so I had no choice". I don't believe it.
If anyone said it I think it was GZ. It would explain why TM said "I'm begging you" and then screamed (for 45 seconds). Others (including Hart) contend that it was GZ who screamed, but a CBS News story reports that a voice expert who listened to the tape says that the "screams on 911 call were almost entirely those of Trayvon Martin". Alan Reich, the expert, bases his conclusions on "hundreds of hours listening to the tape".
Of course the expert could be wrong, and obviously the jury discounted his testimony, but what this shows is that not all the evidence points to the conclusion reached by Mr. Hart. And the other evidence (grass on GZ's jacket and injuries to GZ's head, etc) does not conclusively point to TM being the aggressor and GZ simply defending himself. This was NOT proven "textbook self defense"... not at all.
Willis Hart: ...the way that the bullet passed through Trayvon's shirt indicating that the youngster was on the top...
My Response: TM was wearing multiple layers of clothing and the hoodie was baggy. The way the bullet passed through his shirt did NOT indicate he was on top (as the outer layer could have been several inches away from his body due to the article of clothing being baggy). In any case, I postulated (see my response to #3 above) that there was a struggle for the gun... so TM being on top (if he was) does not make him the aggressor.
[7] wd Lies AGAIN 2 8/1/2013
Willis Hart: [Dervish is] still insisting that Zimmerman said, "fucking coons" on that 911 tape. Never mind the fact that the FBI and police fully examined it... [he] finds another crazy-assed lying blogger who apparently heard the same nonutterance that literally nobody else has been able to verify and which even the prosecution didn't hear and tries to pawn this off as verification.
My Response: The other crazy-assed lying blogger I found is Nicole Sandler (former host for Air America and current podcaster at Radio Or Not and fill-in host for Randi Rhodes). Mrs. Sandler says that, after listening to the tape, it is clear to her that GZ used the racial epithet "coon". I agree with her. This is not a "lie" but our opinion (one supported by what is on the tape). The prosecution didn't go there because the judge told them they couldn't. Remember when prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda said GZ "profiled Trayvon as a criminal"? That was to sidestep the judge's ruling that racial profiling not be brought up. The "coons" utterance was a part of that. The prosecution didn't go there because they were forbidden from doing so. This decision was political. The powers that be didn't want to inflame the Conservative community or the Black community... so they decided on a show trial and no mention of any evidence that painted GZ as a racist.
Willis Hart: Holder is only posturing and throwing the NAACP a bone [in regards to a possible civil rights violation case against GZ]. Yes, he's dumb but isn't dumb enough to bring a case that that he knows he's going to lose and be humiliated over.
My Response: Wrong. There may be no civil rights violation case because they want to avoid the political heat from the Right. We already have racist idiots on the Right who are accusing Obama of trying to incite a "race war". If Barack Obama were not the nation's first Black president the case that GZ violated TM's civil rights would probably have a better chance of moving forward. When George HW Bush commented on the Rodney King verdict (the one that found the cops who administered the beating innocent) and said, "it was hard to understand how the verdict could possibly square with the video"... people accepted his words because he is WHITE. But when Barack Obama said if he had a son he would look like Trayvon? Unacceptable... because he is BLACK. If there is no civil rights violation charge it will be because the Right-wing won't stand for it, not because Holder would lose and be humiliated.
Willis Hart: And the FBI interviewed over 40 people looking for something, ANYTHING, that they could nail Zimmerman with and they couldn't find a thing. Zimmerman... isn't a racist and he broke not a solitary law that night.
My Response: Wrong again. A Miami Herald article from 7/17/2013 reports a witness was located who says "Zimmerman and his family were racists who disliked blacks". This individual, a female cousin who is referred to as "Witness 9" to protect her identity, also says Zimmerman "molested her for 10 years when they were both children". Even if you think she's lying the fact that she exists and gave a recorded statement proves that you saying "they couldn't find a thing" is FALSE. They found at least one something (and perhaps more, given this person is the ninth witness).
As for what law GZ broke... he shot and killed another human being. That's illegal. The initial police report described the shooting as a "negligent homicide" and an "unnecessary killing to prevent an unlawful act". The unlawful act would be the fight started by TM. So even when the cops took GZ at his word and decided everything went down exactly as he said... they STILL said his action was unlawful. Yes, the jury decided it was self defense, but that was after the show trial and instructions from the judge that said the jury HAD to base their decision on Stand Your Ground. The only one railroaded here was Trayvon Martin.
[8] On "Lean" 8/1/2013
Willis Hart: It doesn't show up on traditional drug tests. But the fact that A) Trayvon's liver was damaged... B) he had just purchased two of the critical ingredients of it, C) his behavior on that night was wildly violent and paranoid, and D) his text messages were laced with innuendo pertaining to lean, you gotta think that the youngster had a problem here.
My Response: Without Robitussin what he had was just Skittles and Iced Tea, not "ingredients". And there is no proof that TM's "behavior on that night was wildly violent and paranoid"... aside from GZ's version of events (a narrative he had a motive to insert lies into). I say GZ was acting paranoid by following TM, even after the dispatcher told him not to (which he concocted a lie about looking for an address to cover).
Willis Hart: Adderall is a prescription medication that is given with doctor's supervision and while it does have side effects, A) they're generally in the 1-3% range and B) the doctor will take you off of it if it becomes a problem. Lean, on the other hand pretty much has as it's stated effect paranoia and aggression AND it isn't given with doctor's supervision. (This comment was from the thread attached to WH post #3 but I moved it here because this heading is a better fit).
My Response: If "the doctor will take you off of it if it becomes a problem", how is it that Aderall is the most abused prescription drug in America? Why don't the docs just take the abusers off the drug? There is no evidence for your argument that GZ wasn't misusing/abusing/experiencing side effects, given the fact that GZ wasn't drug tested after he was taken into custody (so there is no proof he wasn't suffering side effect of drugs he was taking).
As for Lean not showing up in drug tests? wrong-o again Hart-o. Addiction Blog says that "for most standard blood or urine screens, codeine will be detectable for 1-2 days" (codeine is the active ingredient in cough syrup, the other "ingredient" in Lean) Also, it should be noted that for the codeine to exit your system you have to be alive (it doesn't dissipate, it gets flushed out. It cannot be flushed out if you are dead). Furthermore, Wikipedia notes that "the autopsy report stated that Martin had trace levels of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, in his blood and urine", although "the THC amount was so low that it may have been ingested days earlier and played no role in Martin's behavior".
So, given that his blood and urine was tested and no Lean was detected, this proves that TM was not under the influence of any drug at the time of the altercation. Lean did not cause him to be wildly violent or paranoid nor did marijuana (and, according to Rachel Jeanteal, marijuana only made TM hungry, not violent).
[9] Who Was Following Who? 8/1/2013
Willis Hart: [Blah, blah, blah... who really gives a shit? This idiot suggests that it was TM who was following GZ! I know, WTF, right?].
My Response: Get this... because GZ drove past TM, and then TM continued walking in the same direction (down the street toward where GZ had stopped to observe TM)... WH says that it was actually TM who was "following" GZ! This despite the fact that he was going home and did not alter course to do any "following". Willis also repeats the GZ lie that he got out of his vehicle to get an address the dispatcher never asked him for. Is this guy buying into the Right-wing narrative or what? That, or Willis is enjoying pandering to his new audience. When Rusty said my butt was being kicked over at Will's place one Darth Bacon took a look... and he loved what he saw. This is the one where Willis jumped the shark (IMO). Stick a fork in him, he's done. Or not. How many more posts will Mr. Hart author on this topic? Isn't it time for him to go back to bashing Green Energy? (No, not yet).
[10] On the Idiot's Assertion that Zimmerman's Injuries were "Minor" 8/2/2013
Willis Hart: A broken nose, 2 black eyes, 2 distal lacerations on the back of his head, and a bruised coccyx. Yeah, it could have been worse.. .AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WORSE HAD NOT THE MAN ULTIMATELY DEFENDED HIMSELF (this, after his having screamed for help for 45 seconds)! Now, as to whether Mr. Zimmerman's head was being rammed into the sidewalk or not, I don't know, I wasn't there. And, again, I ask you, if George Zimmerman's sole purpose was to murder an individual who he had never met before (simply because the fellow was black, allegedly), then why the hell didn't he just do it? Why did he wait until the fellow had him on the ground administering a vicious beating? It makes no sense!
My Response: What idiot are you talking about Mr. Hart? Is the idiot you are referring to lead investigator Christopher Serino who said "there were injuries, but he's seen worse working in the major crimes unit and didn't consider them life-threatening" and that GZ shooting TM could have been a "panic thing" (i.e. not based on any real possibility of him being killed by the "beating").
Or perhaps the idiot Willis refers to is Dr. Valerie Rao (Jacksonville FL medical examiner for Duval, Clay and Nassau counties) who testified that "The wounds displayed on Zimmerman's head and face were consistent with one strike, two injuries at one time and that "the injuries were not life-threatening" and "very insignificant"? Are one (or both) of those individuals the idiot Willis is referring to? Must be, because those are the people who's statements I based my conclusion on.
Also, as I already pointed out, a voice expert who listened to the tape for "hundreds of hours" says the "screams on 911 call were almost entirely those of Trayvon Martin". As for the waiting (not shooting immediately)... there was either [1] a struggle for the gun after GZ attempted to "arrest" TM, or [2] a struggle for the gun after GZ drew (or went to draw) his gun and said "you're going to die tonight". Either way I say Trayvon Martin stood his ground and defended himself.
As for the broken nose and black eyes, those could easily have been caused by him hitting himself in the face due to kickback/recoil when he fired his weapon. Or a punch from TM after GZ went for his gun.
[11] On Prosecution Witness, John Good, Saying that Trayvon was on Top of Zimmerman Administering "Ground and Pound" 8/2/2013
Willis Hart: So, was HE "hallucinating", too?
My Response: No. This was in response to me submitting a comment to WH's blog where I noted that GZ said TM continued to speak after he was shot (said "you got me"). I speculated that GZ hallucinated TM said that (since it was medically impossible). Hallucinations are a possible side effect of Adderall. John Good wasn't on Adderall, although he did say he "couldn't be certain the person on top was striking the person on the bottom" and "he didn't see the person on top smashing the other person's head into the sidewalk". So, not a hallucination (and absolutely moronic for Willis to suggest this) but absolutely a (probable) mischaracterization given his uncertainties due to the lack of light.
[12] Guilty Aspirations 8/3/2013
Willis Hart: So, it was bad for Zimmerman to be a "cop wannabe", but it wasn't bad for Trayvon to be SELF-DESCRIBED "gangsta' wannabe"? Zimmerman was sitting in his car looking at Trayvon AND TRAYVON WAS LOOKING BACK AT HIM. And not only was he looking back at him, he was making a threatening gesture while encircling the God-damned car. Oh, yeah, Zimmerman is definitely the bad guy here.
My Response: These posts are getting dumber and dumber. Both were bad (cop wannabe and gansta wannabe) but Trayvon was mostly hurting himself... while Zimmerman killed another person!!!! YES, he was the bad guy!!!!
[13] On Jerry's Assertion that Trayvon was Standing HIS Ground 8/3/2013
Willis Hart: Based on that logic, Zimmerman would have been justified in shooting Trayvon when the latter came up to the car, circled it, and put his hand in his waste-band. But just for the sake of argument here, let's say that Trayvon did feel threatened (which is ridiculous in that he was a good 100 feet and out of sight when Zimmerman got out of the vehicle), maybe you can punch the dude once, maybe get on top of him to subdue him, BUT YOU CAN'T KEEP GOING; grounding and pounding and slamming his head on the sidewalk when the guy is screaming for help for 45 seconds. That is battery and had Trayvon not been shot, he'd have been arrested.
My Response: A "threatening gesture" is grounds for shooting someone dead? Perhaps, given the case of a Florida man citing SYG after shooting a black teen over loud music, but that only illustrates how utterly ridiculous (and ripe for abuse) this law is. In any case, clearly Willis has completely and totally discounted the obvious reality that GZ could be lying. TM didn't slam GZ's head against the concrete (insignificant and minor injuries don't support the claim). Also it was TM who was screaming (according to the previously referenced voice expert).
The End?
My Commentary: Is Willis Hart finally done, or are dozens (or even hundreds) more posts defending GZ to come? Who knows? We shall see, but I think I'm done responding to these increasingly stupid commentaries from Mr. Hart. Time to move on to other topics, I think. What about you me-buck?
Image Description: Bill O'Reilly and Geraldo Rivera at a Yankees game dressed in hoodies. According to their own words this is the garment that identifies them as gang bangers.
See also: Severe Moderate Delusions: GZ Tripping Straw Man Edition Volume 1 (SWTD #184).
SWTD #187, wDel #33.
