George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #11 Tues. July 9

[missmazzy]

So they took the one guys testimony that most favors the defense to create the animation. Which of course the defense would do.

What would really be interesting is to see an animation of each of the witnesses testimony.

Correct. I assume the prosecution could do the same thing in their rebuttal case.

 

[DIBSY]

So they took the one guys testimony that most favors the defense to create the animation. Which of course the defense would do.

What would really be interesting is to see an animation of each of the witnesses testimony.

Yes indeed. Albeit the state is on a very limited budget, from all reports...all over Florida..
but GZ has the very distinctive advantage of having collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from the public to pay for all sorts of gizmos. Lucky person charged with murder. Unfair to victim, IMO.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

This is a thin line you have backed on to. It sounds like you will fit the evidence to your best advantage to me but that is your choice, not mine. IMO

No. I take the evidence all the evidence and apply it to fact and reason not emotion. I don't let emotion in..

I am taking the states witnesses, The information they gave and applying it to map of complex and time involved and testimony of their witnesses.

It fits no other way. If TM was home, during call with Rj and then he hangs up and she calls him back and he says he sees him again. and the fight occurs where GZ told Police he is and near where he was parked, It means that GZ did not in fact continue looking for TM or he would have found him at his dad's gfs house. TM HAD to have gone back to where he last saw GZ looking for him.

It is the only thing that fits as per STATES case. Not even defense case yet..

OMO

 

[missmazzy]

I can't help but chuckle at the 911 call when the caller is yelling at her husband..."get in here now"! Having said that, I never cease to jump when I hear that gunshot.

 

[greycoupon]

Not sure if that was prosecutor (or defense, I usually just listen to the audio) standing right next to the guy while they watched the video but he looks like he needs more coffee. Lots of blinking. IMO.

Judge sounded a bit annoyed at how long this is taking.

 

[Mollyandme]

This is a thin line you have backed on to. It sounds like you will fit the evidence to your best advantage to me but that is your choice, not mine. IMO

IMO this is not about anyone having an "advantage" it is about letting the evidence unfold in a fair trial. It could also be argued that those who are pro prosecution are fitting the evidence as it would help their opinions/beliefs as well. I am new here but I thought we are to respectfully disagree with one another. Thanks.

 

[DIBSY]

JMO, but this guy's testimony will only prove that the crime scene investigation was shoddy to say the least.

Could be and / or this animation is shoddy .... from what has been seen thus far this morning.IMO

 

[cityslick]

IMO, your scenario is only equivalent had the 40 pounds bigger woman (and martial arts trainer) *FOLLOWED* the 12 years younger kid into the dark alley, muttering "!@#$% kid..!", and then later exited the alley, with the kid lie dying of a gunshot wound to the heart, her hair in disarray, suffering a few bruises, claiming self-defense to the police.

IMO, those details are important and telling.


Thank you for delineating the self-defense premise:

1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself

IMO, if there's no evidence of potentially "great bodily harm" to GZ, GZ's self-defense/his own personal account will fail to convince the jurors. He definitely suffered from minor, superficial wounds as testified by medical examiner and TM had zero, absolutely no DNA of GZ on his hands or body. The kind of flesh and blood DNA as a result of 25 times of pummeling will not be all washed away by rain, IMO. Therefore, in the absence of evidence and with only the inconsistent testimony of GZ, it is not at all convincing that deadly force was justified as per the self-defense law. IMHO.

My scenario is equivalent to what the current evidence shows (IMO). Lets say the woman was an adult in my scenario and the person dead was 17. Would you jump to the auto assumption the woman shot the guy in cold blood, when her face had injuries, when her dress was in disarray and showed evidence that she was on the floor?

You said 'reasonably believe'. You make GZ's argument for him. He had someone on top of him, his hands in his face, yelling for help (all IMO). He reasonably believed if nothing happened he would of been seriously injured/killed. How are you the arbitrary judge on how much one must be in fear before they take matters into their own hands?

 

[NancyGracesBangs]

Yeah, the attorney for the prosecution looks like he is swaying on his feet a bit, lol, he just took one of those loooonnnng eye blinks. Poor guy

 

[Just K]

MPO, the defense should be limited to the same budet as the public prosecution. IMO, of course.

 

[missmazzy]

No wonder so many people moved away from that community after TM was shot and killed....many of the witnesses who lived there at the time said they moved away. Break ins in communities are one thing, but shooting the resident's guests to death is quite another! IMO

IIRC, many of the witnesses received death threats. I would move too.

 

[cityslick]

So they took the one guys testimony that most favors the defense to create the animation. Which of course the defense would do.

What would really be interesting is to see an animation of each of the witnesses testimony.

No other witnesses saw anything. Only JG. The only other witness who saw anything was 'shadows'.

 

[popsicle]

I doubt they tested for DXM but they should have. I read TM twitter. WOW. Wonder if the Lean comments were subsequently scrubbed. JMO

jmo I would think they still could.

 

[Perthgirl62]

I actually think that RJ's testimony goes for the defense. She said that TM was on or at Dad's GF's house.. MS GREEN(E)

Then after the phone cuts off and comes back, He is breathing heavy, like he was running. Well if he was still at his DAD's GF house at that point. Then that would have meant GZ traveled to him and found him.. but that is not what the evidence shows.

They ended up in a fight near the T where GZ said he was waiting for police. Up in the same place he said he was on the calls and in the vicinity of his truck. That shows me that TM is the one that traveled. He is also the one that speaks first according to RJ. " WHAT ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME FOR?"
Is what he says. That is confrontational.

So to me her testimony shows in fact that where the fight occurred and where GZ's truck is that TM is the one that went after GZ not the other way around.
I believe that her testimony along with the o ther states witnesses all show that GZ was indeed under attack and reacted to save his life and protect his person. His right under the law in FL.
OMO

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't GZ say he would meet the police at the mailboxes near the clubhouse.

The crime scene appears to be half way between TMs dads girlfriends and the mailboxes. How do we know that when GZ was running (911 call) that he wasn't running to dads girlfriends in pursuit of TM with gun in hand and when TM saw the gun he took off in opposite direction??? IMO

 

[magnolia]

No. I take the evidence all the evidence and apply it to fact and reason not emotion. I don't let emotion in..

I am taking the states witnesses, The information they gave and applying it to map of complex and time involved and testimony of their witnesses.

It fits no other way. If TM was home, during call with Rj and then he hangs up and she calls him back and he says he sees him again. and the fight occurs where GZ told Police he is and near where he was parked, It means that GZ did not in fact continue looking for TM or he would have found him at his dad's gfs house. TM HAD to have gone back to where he last saw GZ looking for him.

It is the only thing that fits as per STATES case. Not even defense case yet..

OMO

BBM--I hope the Jury does the same.

 

[Just K]

From this mornings hearing: They have yet to be able to get the projection technology to work. If there is that much trouble with the simple technology then it would seem that the courtroom's technical ability does not provide an equal platform for this Mr. Shoemaker's high tech products. JMO, of course.

(Meaning, IMO, if they can't get it to play in the courtroom then how do they expect the jury to get it to replay if they want to do so, themselves.)

 

[missmazzy]

MPO, the defense should be limited to the same budet as the public prosecution. IMO, of course.

That would have been great in the JA trial.

 

[popsicle]

I can't help but chuckle at the 911 call when the caller is yelling at her husband..."get in here now"! Having said that, I never cease to jump when I hear that gunshot.

And when the husband was on the stand.. jmo

 

[?noanswer]

MPO, the defense should be limited to the same budet as the public prosecution. IMO, of course.

Lots of time, the state has to pay the defense's cost also. But people that have money to pay for their own defense can afford to do things like this. I remember the Phil Spector case. They had a presentation also.

JMO

 

[Chester_from_THM]

No other witnesses saw anything. Only JG. The only other witness who saw anything was 'shadows'.

??

I saw the woman from Columbia testifying, can't remember her name. Am I forgetting? I thought she saw GZ on top? Or at least saw the red/white colors on top.

IMO and perhaps faulty memory.