George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin Discussion Thread #10 Mon. July 8

[ScarlettScarpetta]

But- that wasn't an order, he had no obligation to keep watching, right? Works both ways.
She clarified that she did not want him to follow. In a crystal clear fashion-so, that he would continue on same path as Trayvon is a decision GZ made in oppostiion to the advice he was given.
IMHO.

The point is that yes he has a choice but the command was " LET ME KNOW IF HE DOES SOMETHING ELSE. "
A direct statement..

And it was a male not a female. Have you listened to the call..

When he later says after asking if he was following him, " Okay we don't need you to do that.. " That is a choice..

It is two different things by the male operator...

OMO

 

[Horace Finklestein]

So...he cursed and he had a round in the chamber. What are we supposed to conclude from this? That means he was out to murder someone? Unbelievable imo.

 

[claudicici]

From the online free dictionary: "The state of being exasperated; frustrated annoyance." BBM

This is what I get from the online free dictionary:
ex·as·per·ate (g-zsp-rt)
tr.v. ex·as·per·at·ed, ex·as·per·at·ing, ex·as·per·ates
1. To make very angry or impatient; annoy greatly.
2. To increase the gravity or intensity of: "

 

[claudicici]

The point is that yes he has a choice but the command was " LET ME KNOW IF HE DOES SOMETHING ELSE. "
A direct statement..

And it was a male not a female. Have you listened to the call..

When he later says after asking if he was following him, " Okay we don't need you to do that.. " That is a choice..

It is two different things by the male operator...

OMO

.....and then he told him "he ran" ...and that should have been it.

 

[?noanswer]

Another statement GZ made in his 2nd or 3rd interview: GZ said it wasn't his voice in the background when Serino was playing the 911 take with the screaming. GZ claimed he was yelling for help but when asked if it was him in the background, he said no. He also said "that doesn't sound like me"

(playing a witness 911 call and questioning at the same time)
"Serino: You’re that voice in the background?
Zimmerman: No, sir.
Serino: That’s you. Are you hearing yourself?
Zimmerman: Um, it doesn’t sound like me.
Serino: It’s you.
(listening to the 911 call)
Serino: OK, right there. He smothered you, correct?
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: At what point did he smother you?
Zimmerman: After…
Serino: Was it right before you shot him?
Zimmerman: Right…yes, sir.
Serino: OK. Immediately behind the shot?
Zimmerman: (sigh) I don’t remember.
Serino: OK.
(plays 911 call again)
Serino: I need you to give me an approximate time of when he starts to smother you.
Zimmerman: I don’t know when. It’s hard to…
Serino: That’s you, yelling for help.
Zimmerman: (unintelligible)
Serino: Help me, help me.
Serino: That’s when you shot him. (clears his throat) Can you recall (coughs) excuse me…at what point the suffocation happened? Prior to, prior to you shooting him, he was on you, correct?
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: OK. And you were able to reach into your holster.
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: OK. You shot him at point blank range. He was on top of you, right?
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: OK. And in the middle of all that yelling, nobody came out to help you. And I can’t, I can’t pinpoint where you were smothered. That’s the problem I’m having. And nobody’s saying they saw him smothering you. People are saying they saw you, saw him on top of you, but they didn’t see about the smothering part. So…
Singleton: And when we’re listening to the screaming, doesn’t sound like there’s a hesitation in the screaming. It sounds like it’s continuous, and if someone’s being hurt (imitates scream being muffled) It’s gonna stop. But we don’t hear the, we don’t hear it stop."

When I hear my voice on my answering machine, it does not sound like I think it should. I really hate the way I sound on the recording. I have recorded it, but it still sounds the same.

JMO

 

[DIBSY]

IMO I hear anger and spite in that irony not exasperation

sorry,I had the meaning of exasperation wrong,just looked it up exasperation does mean irritation and anger ?

Six of one, half a dozen of another...exasperation can be laced with angry irritation....or not. :moo:

I was just struck again by Z's casually calling himself just " George" on the NEN call. I can't believe he was trying to protect his identity...since that line can pick up info....and the operator asked for his last name....
Talk about self-possessed, just like his constant use of police jargon...
He lives in a world where HE is the authority....and all who challenge him are in The Wrong...IMO..like the woman he threw::moo:

He had a temper and he became a liability,” the man said. “One time this woman was acting a little out of control. She was drunk. George lost his cool and totally overreacted,” he said. “It was weird, because he was such a cool guy, but he got all nuts. He picked her up and threw her. It was pure rage. She twisted her ankle. Everyone was flipping out.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...-ex-co-worker-article-1.1053223#ixzz2YSmhFAdr

George Zimmerman should have N E V E R E V E R been issued a fire arm permit...with his history of violence, even on a police officer. IMO

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...-violence-fighting-with-a-police-officer?lite

Sounds like a Vigilante theme running through the D's witnesses.IMO:seeya:

 

[NancyGracesBangs]

When I refer to someone as an *******, it means I do not like them and I am judging them negatively. If I shot someone I had just called an *******, I would expect my words to be evidence in the case.

and that is your perception and I have no issue with how you feel about when you use that term.

However, there are plenty of people who throw that word around very casually and it does not reflect this deep, simmering depraved thinking. IMO

 

[katiewonders]

One site that does a daily analysis is legalinsurrection.com (run by a law professor at Cornell). JustOneMinute is not legal per se but many lawyers and legal professionals post there... (it is a political conservative site)....there is another one my dh belongs to but it is members only (must have bar number) Legal Chat or Legal Forum Chat something like that....

So you honestly think the judge is showing NO bias in her rulings? What about her tone of voice and her facial expressions (countenance)???? (IMO)

Nope, I don't think this judge is showing any bias. I think - just my opinion - that during any trial a judge can become annoyed with any - and/or all - attorneys. We are seeing her annoyance with the attorney. Maybe you're just noticing it more with the defense? I don't know.

IMO, attorneys advocating for opposing sides will try to push the envelope in any way to influence the jury to see things their way. That's why trials need a referee! :floorlaugh: IMO


Editing to add: This judge's patience really surprised me when O'Mara addressed the jury directly. She just told him that only she will speak to the jury. I'm not a judge, not even a lawyer (just a groupie), but I think I would have held him in contempt. He's an experienced atty., he should know better. This judge showed no bias when he made that mistake. IMO

 

[Sonya610]

No, TM is not on trial but IMO he has been treated as if he were the defendant all along. For example, TM's school suspensions and throwing a punch at a bus driver are not allowed as evidence. This would be the case if TM were the defendant.

Why are the classes GZ took relevant?

Since the defense is claiming SELF DEFENSE and not claiming their client didn't shoot him i think Martin's past is very very relevant as it speaks to whether he is likely to have initiated the attack.

If this was NOT a self-defense argument then Martin's past would be irrelevant.

IMO.

 

[DIBSY]

This is what I get from the online free dictionary:
ex·as·per·ate (g-zsp-rt)
tr.v. ex·as·per·at·ed, ex·as·per·at·ing, ex·as·per·ates
1. To make very angry or impatient; annoy greatly.
2. To increase the gravity or intensity of: "

Fits perfectly with the escalation then pursued by a vigilant GZ. IMO

 

[LC446]

I just arrived so I'll go back and look but this guy Osterman's testimony is odd. What makes him an expert in these things he's testifying about? The fact that he is/was an air marshal? Is he is a firearms instructor? Is he a law enforcement instructor? Or is all this simply his opinion?

 

[PaperDoll]

When I hear my voice on my answering machine, it does not sound like I think it should. I really hate the way I sound on the recording. I have recorded it, but it still sounds the same.

JMO

I understand but he could have said "yes, I hear myself..that is me screaming" sorry, I'm being technical here because if I were on the jury I would want to know things :blushing:

 

[claudicici]

Did TM use "creepy *advertiser censored* cracker" (per Rachel Jentiel's testimony) as a term of endearment?

no,would you be endeared if someone was following you?

 

[Overuled]

When I refer to someone as an *******, it means I do not like them and I am judging them negatively. If I shot someone I had just called an *******, I would expect my words to be evidence in the case.

I can judge a person negatively when they walk across my flower beds by telling my neighbor that who ever did it is an *advertiser censored***hole. BUT that doesn't mean I hate them- it means that the person who trampled down my beautiful flowers is aweful for doing it-

Plus if if I didn't see WHO it was and they got away it would make more sense why I would be upset. This happenes all the time.
Something like- AND THEY ALWAYS GET AWAY WITH IT. moo

 

[JudyBolton]

Nope, I don't think this judge is showing any bias. I think - just my opinion - that during any trial a judge can become annoyed with any - and/or all - attorneys. We are seeing her annoyance with the attorney. Maybe you're just noticing it more with the defense? IMO

OK - well we will have to agree to disagree about the judge. I assure you that my feelings about the defense has no bearing on what I am noticing....others who are pro-prosecution have commented on her as well. IMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

This is what I get from the online free dictionary:
ex·as·per·ate (g-zsp-rt)
tr.v. ex·as·per·at·ed, ex·as·per·at·ing, ex·as·per·ates
1. To make very angry or impatient; annoy greatly.
2. To increase the gravity or intensity of: "

You can not pick the part you want only..

It says to make very angry OR impatient or annoy greatly..

And that is not what GZ says.. that is another posters opinion and does not go to GZ's absolute intention.

Just someone's feeling of it. and when I am exasperated I am neither angry or impatient.. I am usually just tired and weary of it. OMO

 

[Wolfpack Fan]

IMO, the prosecution must be asking the questions the right way and the defense the wrong way. When the prosecutor objects, I yell out "Sustained!" When the defense objects, I yell out "Overruled!" This works over 90% of the time.

 

[katiewonders]

When I hear my voice on my answering machine, it does not sound like I think it should. I really hate the way I sound on the recording. I have recorded it, but it still sounds the same.

JMO

An interesting fact: that's because you hear your own voice as it resonates within your head when you speak. You don't hear it that way on a recording.

 

[Candy_Pickletoes]

Well, I was trying to avoid this trial like that plague but my love for the justice system overwhelmed me and I've just now started watching opening statements. Perhaps I can catch up, though probably not. The verdict will probably come down before I can reach day 3! LOL

Have a good one all!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Nope, I don't think this judge is showing any bias. I think - just my opinion - that during any trial a judge can become annoyed with any - and/or all - attorneys. We are seeing her annoyance with the attorney. Maybe you're just noticing it more with the defense? I don't know.

IMO, attorneys advocating for opposing sides will try to push the envelope in any way to influence the jury to see things their way. That's why trials need a referee! :floorlaugh: IMO


Editing to add: This judge's patience really surprised me when O'Mara addressed the jury directly. She just told him that only she will speak to the jury. I'm not a judge, not even a lawyer (just a groupie), but I think I would have held him in contempt. He's an experienced atty., he should know better. This judge showed no bias when he made that mistake. IMO

She absolutely is showing bias. It is especially obvious when West is up.. OMO