Quote from Vertigo

Ok, just to clear it up, his name is not Travis, not Tyrone, it's Trayvon.

Sorry, these kinds of things bug me. Carry on.

I know he's Trayvon, but, someone said his actual name was Travis.

Anyway, guys I just found this.

"Another suspension in October 2011 was for graffiti, when Martin was observed by a security camera in a restricted area of the school marking up a door with "W.T.F." When he was later searched by a Miami-Dade School Police Department officer, looking for the graffiti marker, the officer found a dozen pieces of women's jewelry and a watch in his backpack, which Martin said a friend had given to him. A screwdriver was also found, which was described by the school police investigator as a burglary tool. The jewelry was impounded and given to the police. However, no evidence ever surfaced that the jewelry was stolen."

Sources:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/v-fullstory/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20258728/trayvon-martins-mother-police-demonizing-slain-son

Just something to add. You guys decide what you think, even if it's that this doesn't matter. This post does not support either side of the argument. I'm just adding something I thought should be added.

Yet you provide no evidence or real reasoning to your speculations which you conjured up after the event, and I'm guessing far away from its location. You are basing all your thoughts on the assumption that Zimmerman started the fight, and you base that assumption on nothing.

No, I have based my assumptions on logical reason in which I have explained in earlier posts that you've ignored.

Are you really claiming you are more capable of analyzing the audio then the experts that did for this particular case?

No, but I think it is safe to say that those 911 recordings were real and they were the actually 911 calls by people from that night. There was someone screaming for help that night. This fact in undeniable. The only thing in question is who's voice it was screaming for help and I don't see anything wrong in trying argue that.

The confusion is that you're trying to argue "Should Zimmerman be guilty" in a courtroom like way. I'm trying to argue "Should Zimmerman be guilty" as in fact. He's either two things, innocent or guilty. While in a courtroom I agree that he was not guilty because of the lack of definitive evidence in court, but that lack of evidence doesn't mean he's innocent in reality. And I'm trying to argue this through the little evidence that we have and of the arguments of both the prosecution and the defense attorney.

Quote from Preserve

The confusion is that you're trying to argue "Should Zimmerman be guilty" in a courtroom like way. I'm trying to argue "Should Zimmerman be guilty" as in fact.

That's why it keeps going around in circles, hence:

Quote from Gunnii

circlejerk