The difference is the time frame in which they did that "something". It had been seven years for GZ, completely without incident. The teenager had been in trouble three times in 7 months.
Spin it anyway you want but it doesn't make sense.
The difference is the time frame in which they did that "something". It had been seven years for GZ, completely without incident. The teenager had been in trouble three times in 7 months.
BBM Nope, haven't seen medical reports stating his injuries. I've bled worse from shaving my legs.
MOO
I'm playing catch up reading all the pages since this afternnoon. Not sure if anyone has already pointed this out, but this is what was really said at the bond hearing.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But before you committed this crime on February 26th, you were arrested -- I'm sorry, not arrested. You were questioned that day, right, February 26th?
ZIMMERMAN: That evening into the 27th.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then the following morning. Is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the following evening, too. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ok. Would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times?
ZIMMERMAN: I remember giving three statements, yes sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"? O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.
JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"?
JUDGE LESTER: I'm going to grant his motion at this time.
O'MARA: Thank you, your honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Would you agree you changed your story as it went along?
ZIMMERMAN: Absolutely not.
BBM
Actually, de la Rionda asked GZ if it would be fair to say that he gave 4 or 5 statements to which GZ said he only remembered 3. So I guess the de la Rionda isn't sure how many statements there actually were. Also notice that de la Rionda said that there were inconsistancies in some of the statements. Lastly, de la Rionda asked if GZ would agree that his story changed as it went along.
I think so. The friends of your niece and nephew haven't profiled anyone, tracked them down, and shot them, I assume. GZ did that. And it all stems from his blatant disrespect of other races and ethnicities. It doesn't mean that everyone that has that disrespect is a murderer, but I wouldn't be friends with anyone with the same attitude as GZ. And when an attitude turns into action and murder, then the state of mind of the person needs to be examined. From what I've seen so far, this is more and more racist profiling and less and less self defense. If he's posting like that on the internet, then how is he talking to people day to day? I find that how people post reflects a lot of how they are in real life.
Respecting other races and ethnicities is what society needs more of, not people with racist attitudes like GZ.
BBM: "pre-meditation" is first degree murder. GZ wasn't charged with that.
The issue for 2nd degree (and IANAL so I'm probably not expressing this perfectly) is whether the defendant demonstrated a depraved indifference for the life of the deceased. Or whether the situation at the time mitigated his fatal action sufficiently to reduce the finding to manslaughter or even acquittal.
de la Rionda was throwing a lot out there to see what would stick - like contacting the parents, which didn't happen, but he knew people would wonder and talk about it.
BBM Nope, haven't seen medical reports stating his injuries. I've bled worse from shaving my legs.
MOO
I certainly agree with your last sentence.
But with regard to GZ, we're assuming that his social media posts show a connection to the killing of TM, but we don't actually have any proof of that.
On the contrary, none of my niece and nephews nasty-mouthed friends have hurt anybody. At least not yet.
So maybe, just maybe, there's no link between something GZ posted in 2005 and what he did in 2012.
So do we have to take the conversation we were having about GZ's MS page downstairs now? We were having no problem having a civilized conversation on race/nationalities? I also wish people would look at the origin of a conversation before they quote my posts and claim TOS violation. I was replying to someone else's comment and my comment was not at all out of line, IMO.
I don't think he took it for money, but with that Paypal account swelling to over $200,000 and now gun supporters pledging more for GZ's defense, I think the greed bug has now bitten O'Mara. He is definitely seeing dollar bills, y'all. A lot of them. Now the money is totally under his control and any further donations go to him, for GZ's defense, of course. I'm not saying he's the worst defense attorney out there, but I do think money has started to affect him with this case. Defense attorneys are also human and can be affected by things like money. But that remains to be seen, and I could very well be wrong. Jose Baez has really colored defense attorneys in high profile cases for me. I really do hope I am wrong here.
Oh, so because the PICTURE of the cut on the back of his head isn't BLOODY enough, you have determined that it wasn't from being attacked? So here we have GZ, driving around at night with a BLEEDING HEAD, when he sees TM? Really?!? REALLY?!?
I was on another board when it was postulated that the injuries were not sufficient to warrant killing someone. I asked the following, EXACTLY was level of injury DOES warrant a lethal response? I mean keep in mind, when this is happening, and someone is banging your head against the ground, at WHAT point, EXACTLY, do you make the mental step from, "Hey, this guy is only going to HURT me" to "Hey, this guy is going to KILL me, I need to defend myself..."
Now this is IMPORTANT< because you may need to make this decision someday, and you will have this SAME group judging YOUR thoughts and actions.
Just a warning... When I clicked this link, my computer went on a crazy loop-t-loop. I never could read #2.
But, from everything I've read, Mexican is not a race.
Aw come on. It was obvious and "the man" ain't so slick that it wasn't obvious.
Curious, if GZ was planning on killing TM, why did he call the police first? This has EVERYTHING to do with race, I agree with that. But it is not on the part GZ. It is on the part of the race baiters, ie Sharpton and Jackson.
Consider that we will NOT truly be free and equal until blacks as well as white as well as latinos are permitted to be thugs and take their due punishment without the respective communities rising up to defend them, even when their actions are wrong.
GZ was WALKING through his neighborhood. It was legal for TM to do it, and it was legal for GZ to do it. It is PERFECTLY LEGAL to follow someone through a PUBLIC area. NO law was broken until someone get HIT, and all the evidence comes back to TM doing the hitting.
I don't believe TM was involved in anything violent. I also believe it was twice as I only saw an incident in October and one in February. If you have a link for the third I'd be interested in looking at it. jmo
I do not believe Trayvon attacked George. I believe George followed and confronted Trayvon and I believe Trayvon was defending himself from a paranoid, overzealous man with a gun. One who did not identify himself. I personally wish Trayvon would have slammed his head so hard against the cement that it would have knocked George unconscious. At least he'd be alive! His parents could then hire him an attorney as I know he would have been arrested even though he was TRULY defending himself.
MOO
No, it doesn't.
Curious, if GZ was planning on killing TM, why did he call the police first? This has EVERYTHING to do with race, I agree with that. But it is not on the part GZ. It is on the part of the race baiters, ie Sharpton and Jackson.
Consider that we will NOT truly be free and equal until blacks as well as white as well as latinos are permitted to be thugs and take their due punishment without the respective communities rising up to defend them, even when their actions are wrong.
GZ was WALKING through his neighborhood. It was legal for TM to do it, and it was legal for GZ to do it. It is PERFECTLY LEGAL to follow someone through a PUBLIC area. NO law was broken until someone get HIT, and all the evidence comes back to TM doing the hitting.