'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Se...

'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

There are 232648 comments on the thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com story from Oct 1, 2010, titled 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate. In it, thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com reports that:

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.

Uncle Tab

United States

#108846 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>Hi Jay, thanks for this info, I didn't see this. Very interesting and sounds exactly as I'd imagined it might be if it were me on the ground with someone on top of me beating on my head. You know when things such as this (on the ground) are happening, it all happens so fast I think most people act on instinct alone because there isn't time to consider or think things through.
It's truly sad a mother lost her child, I feel for her loss. This would be difficult for either side to have to live with.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/1...

Again.... The shot wasn't from the side, it was center chest. Front to back.

Someone's on top of him beating him but he shot him in the center of the chest.

None of Martins DNA is in the gun which means Martin didn't try to grab a gun he was getting ready to be shot with. Natural instinct (ari) you will push the gun away from you.

So you have to rethink it.

Sorry.... Facts are facts. Can't change science

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#108847 Jul 8, 2013
How did Trayvon Martin see Zimmermans gun if Zimmerman was on his back, and the gun was in the holster, on his back?

(a holster specifically designed to conceal the weapon)

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#108848 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, if I'm on top of you and I grab your face or the sides of your head with my hands, or even grab the sides of your hair, or your ears, and I start to push your head down onto the concrete, then pull up again, then smash it back down again, HOW am I going to get any marks of my hands? Please explain your logic in thinking he should have shown marks on his hands.
And how can you possibly know Trayvon didn't have a chance? Witnesses say he was on top.
I will also remind you the skull is very very hard. It takes extreme pressure to cause severe injuries to the skull.
Zimmerman claims Trayvon punched him, knocking him to the ground.
That's how I explain my logic.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108849 Jul 8, 2013
Jay wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. There have been other comments which I did not mention and that is, that Martin had Zimmerman's head in both hands slamming it on the ground. If it was on cement it would have been worse - perhaps - but the witness said they were on the grass. It is also possible that Zimmerman's weapon was under the shoulder type, or more like under the arm. I have not heard either way, have you?
Dr. Baden said it was close range, as I said, within inches.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/1...

Dr Baden could not have possibly looked at this autopsy report. It's opposite if what he said.

I guess you will ignore this fact Jay.

That's fine. What else can you do when you're wrong? Ignore facts.
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108850 Jul 8, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
True.... Because the one who was standing his ground is dead.
Zimmerman tried to use that law but couldn't because he followed Martin. You can't stand your ground as someone is walking away from you giving up ground.
Kinda perfect huh?
What in the world makes you think Zimmerman tried to use that law? How do you know this? IF we were talking about the stand your ground law, then whoever started the confrontation would be of importance because then the defendant would have to prove how he should not be held responsible for shooting.

Where is the evidence Martin was "walking away" as you claim? What makes you assume this?

To ILIH,
Whether Zimmerman had injuries that were not severe (in your opinion) is NOT relevant. The only relevant legal question is what was Zimmerman fearing or thinking at the time....not what already occurred. Most self defense cases have the person who fired the shot with no injury at all, but protected themselves from getting injured by shooting his attacker.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108851 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>What in the world makes you think Zimmerman tried to use that law? How do you know this? IF we were talking about the stand your ground law, then whoever started the confrontation would be of importance because then the defendant would have to prove how he should not be held responsible for shooting.
Where is the evidence Martin was "walking away" as you claim? What makes you assume this?
To ILIH,
Whether Zimmerman had injuries that were not severe (in your opinion) is NOT relevant. The only relevant legal question is what was Zimmerman fearing or thinking at the time....not what already occurred. Most self defense cases have the person who fired the shot with no injury at all, but protected themselves from getting injured by shooting his attacker.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida...

Guess you missed it?

Where is the evidence he was doing anything wrong to be confronted?? There is NONE!! ZERO!

The autopsy report I posted that made you look foolish says that Zimmerman approached Martin.
(Page 12)

Everything you say is falling apart.
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108852 Jul 8, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/1...
Again.... The shot wasn't from the side, it was center chest. Front to back.
Someone's on top of him beating him but he shot him in the center of the chest.
None of Martins DNA is in the gun which means Martin didn't try to grab a gun he was getting ready to be shot with. Natural instinct (ari) you will push the gun away from you.
So you have to rethink it.
Sorry.... Facts are facts. Can't change science
It is truly irrelevant whether it was front to back or at an angle. Matters not one bit in this case. What does matter is if George had fear of "either" bodily harm (which he clearly received) or fear of death. That is what matters in this particular case.

And why would you think Martin's DNA would have any business being on the gun? I cannot imagine any reason why anyone would expect it to there, unless of course they fought for the gun, which does not seem to be the case. There is no logical reason for his DNA to be there. Martin's hands were busy remember, smashing George's head into the ground. Simple. What don't you get about that?

There are instances where 2 people are easily within reach of each other when one gets shot. The eyes and hands unfortunately (in this case) are NOT faster than the speed of a bullet. If it were easy as pie to knock a gun out of someone's hand before the shot went off, a whole lot less people would be injured or dead. It's wishful thinking to think Martin ever even saw the gun at all.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108853 Jul 8, 2013
Autopsy FACTS have some of you kinda quiet right now.

Why??

Aren't facts important? A doctor on FalseNews lied to you Jay. I proved it.

Just admit that Zimmerman was following the kid for no reason and things got out of hand because Zimmerman wanted to be some sort if hero.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#108854 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>What in the world makes you think Zimmerman tried to use that law? How do you know this? IF we were talking about the stand your ground law, then whoever started the confrontation would be of importance because then the defendant would have to prove how he should not be held responsible for shooting.
Where is the evidence Martin was "walking away" as you claim? What makes you assume this?
To ILIH,
Whether Zimmerman had injuries that were not severe (in your opinion) is NOT relevant. The only relevant legal question is what was Zimmerman fearing or thinking at the time....not what already occurred. Most self defense cases have the person who fired the shot with no injury at all, but protected themselves from getting injured by shooting his attacker.
"""Where is the evidence Martin was "walking away" as you claim? What makes you assume this?""""
.
At 2:17, Zimmerman’s voice wobbles and he starts breathing heavily into the phone, indicating that he has started running.

At 2:22, without any prompting other than the aforementioned noises and breathing, the dispatcher asks “Are you following him?” to which Zimmerman responds,“Yeah.”

At 2:26, the dispatcher says,“Okay, we don’t need you to do that,”
.
Can't follow someone walking toward you. They would have to be walking away.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#108855 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>It is truly irrelevant whether it was front to back or at an angle. Matters not one bit in this case. What does matter is if George had fear of "either" bodily harm (which he clearly received) or fear of death. That is what matters in this particular case.
And why would you think Martin's DNA would have any business being on the gun? I cannot imagine any reason why anyone would expect it to there, unless of course they fought for the gun, which does not seem to be the case. There is no logical reason for his DNA to be there. Martin's hands were busy remember, smashing George's head into the ground. Simple. What don't you get about that?
There are instances where 2 people are easily within reach of each other when one gets shot. The eyes and hands unfortunately (in this case) are NOT faster than the speed of a bullet. If it were easy as pie to knock a gun out of someone's hand before the shot went off, a whole lot less people would be injured or dead. It's wishful thinking to think Martin ever even saw the gun at all.
Interesting.
Zimmerman says Trayvon went for his gun. Which by Zimmermans own account, was in a holster on his back, and he was on the ground.

Wanna think about that for a second?
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108856 Jul 8, 2013
ILIH, I posted no autopsy report. Get your facts straight please.
You're saying an autopsy report can tell who approached whom BEFORE they were on the ground and the shot fired? Is that what you are saying? I do not think that is possible.
Were YOU there? How do you KNOW who approached whom? And finally, it is absolutely irrelevant to this case. Period.
It may be interesting and debatable as to whomever approached whom or whomever threw the first jab in the gut but honestly, that is not what this case is about.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108857 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>It is truly irrelevant whether it was front to back or at an angle. Matters not one bit in this case. What does matter is if George had fear of "either" bodily harm (which he clearly received) or fear of death. That is what matters in this particular case.
And why would you think Martin's DNA would have any business being on the gun? I cannot imagine any reason why anyone would expect it to there, unless of course they fought for the gun, which does not seem to be the case. There is no logical reason for his DNA to be there. Martin's hands were busy remember, smashing George's head into the ground. Simple. What don't you get about that?
There are instances where 2 people are easily within reach of each other when one gets shot. The eyes and hands unfortunately (in this case) are NOT faster than the speed of a bullet. If it were easy as pie to knock a gun out of someone's hand before the shot went off, a whole lot less people would be injured or dead. It's wishful thinking to think Martin ever even saw the gun at all.
Then why didn't you say it didn't matter when Jay said some doctor on FalseNews said it was a shot from the side. Go back and read your post and tell me why it matter then but doesn't matter now.

And it DOES matter..... It two people are fighting, how difficult is it to get andhot dead center of the chest. Guns on his right hip and he maneuvers the gun to martins chest? Why not shoot him in the side where no blocking can happen??

Your story is full of holes.

Plus Zimmerman should have had LOTS of blood on him if he was under Martin and shot him in the chest. Not any blood on him from a shot to the heart.

You know the heart..... That pumps blood.... Zimmerman would have blood all over his chest blots of blood.

Keep trying..... It won't work no matter how you spin it.
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108858 Jul 8, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida...
Guess you missed it?
Where is the evidence he was doing anything wrong to be confronted?? There is NONE!! ZERO!
The autopsy report I posted that made you look foolish says that Zimmerman approached Martin.
(Page 12)
Everything you say is falling apart.
Nothing I say is falling apart. This is a murder trial. One in which if judged according to law, the only thing that matters is whether Zimmermann feared bodily harm Or death. And whether or not the prosecution can PROVE he did NOT have fear of bodily harm or death.
We actually have a right to defend ourselves if someone means us bodily harm or death.

And frankly, I have not stated whether I think Zimmerman is guilty of a crime or not. I have merely stated what he is being tried for. And what it will take to convict him of murder.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108859 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>It is truly irrelevant whether it was front to back or at an angle. Matters not one bit in this case. What does matter is if George had fear of "either" bodily harm (which he clearly received) or fear of death. That is what matters in this particular case.
And why would you think Martin's DNA would have any business being on the gun? I cannot imagine any reason why anyone would expect it to there, unless of course they fought for the gun, which does not seem to be the case. There is no logical reason for his DNA to be there. Martin's hands were busy remember, smashing George's head into the ground. Simple. What don't you get about that?
There are instances where 2 people are easily within reach of each other when one gets shot. The eyes and hands unfortunately (in this case) are NOT faster than the speed of a bullet. If it were easy as pie to knock a gun out of someone's hand before the shot went off, a whole lot less people would be injured or dead. It's wishful thinking to think Martin ever even saw the gun at all.
http://abcnews.go.com/m/story...

THAT'S why Martins DNA would be on the gun. Another lie.

You don't know ANYTHING about this trial whatsoever!!

LMAO

educate yourself about what's going in here by our VERY uninformed.
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108860 Jul 8, 2013
Jay wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree. There have been other comments which I did not mention and that is, that Martin had Zimmerman's head in both hands slamming it on the ground. If it was on cement it would have been worse - perhaps - but the witness said they were on the grass. It is also possible that Zimmerman's weapon was under the shoulder type, or more like under the arm. I have not heard either way, have you?
Dr. Baden said it was close range, as I said, within inches.
OMG, I did not know they fought on the ground. That certainly makes the head injuries make more sense. I was thinking as much attention as the prosecution put on the head injuries it surely must have been concrete. LOL.

Seems any normal person would get it that a head being banged into the ground (dirt/grass) would not be that severely cut. I'd think it would be plenty sore though. Hmmm, the prosecution was really reaching and stretching here then as they did with most other things.

Thanks for the info, I haven't had time to tune in today. I need to catch up I guess. Haha!
Uncle Tab

United States

#108861 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
ILIH, I posted no autopsy report. Get your facts straight please.
You're saying an autopsy report can tell who approached whom BEFORE they were on the ground and the shot fired? Is that what you are saying? I do not think that is possible.
Were YOU there? How do you KNOW who approached whom? And finally, it is absolutely irrelevant to this case. Period.
It may be interesting and debatable as to whomever approached whom or whomever threw the first jab in the gut but honestly, that is not what this case is about.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/1...

Wrong again.

Page 13 2nd paragraph dates Zimmerman approached Martin.

You lose again.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108862 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>OMG, I did not know they fought on the ground. That certainly makes the head injuries make more sense. I was thinking as much attention as the prosecution put on the head injuries it surely must have been concrete. LOL.
Seems any normal person would get it that a head being banged into the ground (dirt/grass) would not be that severely cut. I'd think it would be plenty sore though. Hmmm, the prosecution was really reaching and stretching here then as they did with most other things.
Thanks for the info, I haven't had time to tune in today. I need to catch up I guess. Haha!
Had more blood on his head than he had on his clothes.

Guess he was standing far enough away from him to not getting any blood from a gunshotntonthe heart.

If he was far enough away from him to not get blood on him from anchest shot.... How did he fear for his life?

Again..... Your boat is sinking quick.

You don't know a thing about this case..... Not a clue!

LOL
Uncle Tab

United States

#108863 Jul 8, 2013
Anyone else notice how all republicans are ignoring how this doctor FalseNews had on lied??

Nothing they can do but ignore FACTS!

Fair and balanced my ass!
Enigma

Bolivar, MO

#108864 Jul 8, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why didn't you say it didn't matter when Jay said some doctor on FalseNews said it was a shot from the side. Go back and read your post and tell me why it matter then but doesn't matter now.
And it DOES matter..... It two people are fighting, how difficult is it to get andhot dead center of the chest. Guns on his right hip and he maneuvers the gun to martins chest? Why not shoot him in the side where no blocking can happen??
Your story is full of holes.
Plus Zimmerman should have had LOTS of blood on him if he was under Martin and shot him in the chest. Not any blood on him from a shot to the heart.
You know the heart..... That pumps blood.... Zimmerman would have blood all over his chest blots of blood.
Keep trying..... It won't work no matter how you spin it.
I don't have to go back and look. If I recall correctly, what I said was, that was how I'd imagined it may have happened, that being that it might have been at some sort of angle. I did find that report interesting and I don't believe medical professionals going around making stuff up.Either way, it still doesn't matter to me where he shot him at or at what angle. I have fought enough on the ground myself to know that usually there is movement while a fight or tussle is ongoing. And I would not find it odd or strange if George somehow did shoot him straight into his chest. I do not know where he drew his gun from either, which really doesn't matter to me. I know strange, odd, or even miraculous things can happen.
And I wasn't there so I cannot know. I don't know how fast they were separated immediately after the shot. No one does except George. I don't know if they were perfectly evenly one on top of the other or if they were thrashing around with one off center or not.
And I have no way of knowing whether George is being deceptive or truthful. I will not impart my imaginings on what may or may not have occurred.
Personally UT, I do not have a dog in this fight. I think it was tragic and sad that a life was lost.

My main foci has been on what this case is about, And it is about self defense and whether or not George felt fear for bodily injury or imminent death. That's what it is about. That's what it has come down to. Just that. And whether or not the prosecution can prove he was NOT in fear for harm or death.
Uncle Tab

United States

#108865 Jul 8, 2013
Enigma wrote:
<quoted text>I don't have to go back and look. If I recall correctly, what I said was, that was how I'd imagined it may have happened, that being that it might have been at some sort of angle. I did find that report interesting and I don't believe medical professionals going around making stuff up.Either way, it still doesn't matter to me where he shot him at or at what angle. I have fought enough on the ground myself to know that usually there is movement while a fight or tussle is ongoing. And I would not find it odd or strange if George somehow did shoot him straight into his chest. I do not know where he drew his gun from either, which really doesn't matter to me. I know strange, odd, or even miraculous things can happen.
And I wasn't there so I cannot know. I don't know how fast they were separated immediately after the shot. No one does except George. I don't know if they were perfectly evenly one on top of the other or if they were thrashing around with one off center or not.
And I have no way of knowing whether George is being deceptive or truthful. I will not impart my imaginings on what may or may not have occurred.
Personally UT, I do not have a dog in this fight. I think it was tragic and sad that a life was lost.
My main foci has been on what this case is about, And it is about self defense and whether or not George felt fear for bodily injury or imminent death. That's what it is about. That's what it has come down to. Just that. And whether or not the prosecution can prove he was NOT in fear for harm or death.
I'm very happy you aren't on the jury then. You obviously don't understand the simple things.

I'm guessing the Casey Anthony and OJ trial had jurors such as yourself.

Especially if what's in an autopsy report doesn't matter to you.

Explains alot.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 2 min History Professor 149,500
Drugs 2 hr Flatlick 14
What's best place to get front end alignment? (Mar '13) 3 hr Stanly 22
Angie mills Clark 5 hr What 2
There's a lot of "Little Caesars" type women in... 6 hr Jack 2
Larry mills 6 hr Nasty man 3
all dads 6 hr Rumpleforskin 7
Wreck!! 12 hr Looker 6
Who hung them self in town? Thu Justin 9

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages