George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #12 Wed July 10

[cityslick]

TM is not alive to say he sent those messages, someone can say they received them and received responses from them but they cannot say unequivocally that TM sent them IMO

The state has every opportunity to put witnesses on to say that TM didn't them texts. It would be on the state to prove TM didn't sent them since the auto assumption is the owner of the device did.

Maybe even the judge thinks this is going to be an aquittal so she's not worried about throwing appeals out the window.

 

[William N]

And then he said... " There is video.. "

And GZ said...
" THANK GOD"

He was not lying. Even Serino said he found his account credible.

Absolutely. How often has someone accused of murder said "THANK GOD" when told there is a video of what happened?

 

[Donnareit]

All this testimony about GZ being passive and non confrontational makes me wonder if the state can now bring up that he actually has a violent past?

IMO

Good question. I guess we'll see.

 

[defense101]

Travis was not alive either.. I don't think her ruling will stand the COA

I believe the prosecution brought that evidence in, not the defense.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

No it does not fear may start when you have a male following you in a truck and then on foot, and please fear was on TM's part that night not GZ'z he had the upper hand he knew the police were coming and he had a gun IMO

that does not work. When RJ tells him to run he says. No. HE is not afraid. He is irritated if anything. And calls him an expletive.


HE knew police are coming is right. HE is not going to do anything that when they arrive can be construed as aggressive. For all he knows they are there!


IT just does not fit. Not with the witness testimony and facts in the case.

 

[cityslick]

No it does not fear may start when you have a male following you in a truck and then on foot, and please fear was on TM's part that night not GZ'z he had the upper hand he knew the police were coming and he had a gun IMO

Where is the evidence that TM was in 'fear'? Because he ran while GZ was still in his car? Show me the testimony of RJ, his 'friend' that says at any time that TM was scared, that she was scared for TM, etc.

 

[katiewonders]

Anything significant in the testimony I missed? Is this witness done testifying?

To be honest, I watched but I wasn't paying much attention, it went on and on. The highlight was the defense was able to show with the prosecution's doll that GZ would have had access to his gun as he wiggled out from under TM. Evidently, Bill Schaffer (wftv commentator) said the camera panned to the prosecutor and he was in his partner's face and unhappy about what the defense was able to do with the doll.

Earlier before trial started the judge ruled against the defense that their animation, as well as, TM's texts were not coming in.

I don't know if this witness if finished -- I think I dozed off. :seeya:

 

[Mahouston69]

Why is it always an assumption that GZ 'confronted' TM. Where is the evidence of that? RJ? That's what the state is pinning all their case on? One witness who has credibility issues already?

Everyone on the other side blanket statement's that GZ was the instigator without any proof of the matter. Getting out of a car is not instigating anything.

He wasn't following him home to watch the game with him.
He had police on the way, he was and had been tailing TM across the division to 'stop' and 'apprehend' what he deemed a criminal. There is no evidence he intended to chat with him. He could have done that by the clubhouse.

By stopping, waiting, following, trailing, he meant to 'confront' in my mind and he did. He had to have stated he did to Serino or Serino believed he did to tell the ME investigator that for it to be stated he did in the autopsy report of the incident that lead to homocide.

If not ...why did he all that?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

In my opinion, the fight started when GZ caught up to TM and tried to hold him in place until LE arrived.

IMO, TM yelled "get off" as rachel testified, and hit GZ when GZ wouldn't let go.

IMO, GZ already had the gun out, playing cop, ordering TM to "wait here" or "come with me" as he grabbed him.

Imo, once TM, who was understandably afraid for his life and doing ANYTHING to get away from the creep with he gun who was trying to hold him....GZ, hyped on adrenaline and a power trip, felt justified in killing TM.

IMO, the only aggressor was GZ...

IMO, any hits thrown by TM were in self-defense and in an attempt to get away, and TOTALLY justified.

Imo, GZ never followed TM so he could kill him...I think he wanted to make sure no more punks got away.

IMO, in reality...GZ is a bully and a and took his "playing cop" way too far and needs to pay the appropriate penalty.

TM was already by his dad's house and must have gone back to confront GZ, if you believe RJ's testimony, and why would TM be straddling GZ if he was trying to escape? He would have simply run. No way GZ could catch TM if he wanted to run away, adrenaline or not imo.

 

[m00c0w]

I believe the prosecution brought that evidence in, not the defense.

Rules of evidence apply to both sides.

 

[Donnareit]

Absolutely. How often has someone accused of murder said "THANK GOD" when told there is a video of what happened?

Maybe someone who knows where all the security cameras are, and which are working. :dunno:
Also someone who hasn't been charged with anything, and thinks they just shot a bad guy. :dunno:
:twocents::moo:

 

[cityslick]

I agree...I hate a bully with a gun too.

IMO, he wanted to find TM and hold physically or at gunpoint or both hold, TM in place to wait for LE.

IMO, TM justifiably did everything he could to try to get away, resulting in GZ shooting him.

This is what divides this case. Because folks want to believe this, even though there is no evidence to support it.

 

[Just Sailing Thru]

I have to differ with you- The judge last night stated that if there was evidence within the text message where the receiver of tm messages mentioned or refered to tm with his name then it could be proved.

Something like-- hey Trey whats up man- or something to that effect, BUT I believe the defense could possibly find some case law that would help change the judges mind. imo

IMO the judge's logic may have set prosecuting child pornograhers and predators back..What if, instead of a computer a child predator sends his disgust via his I phone??? Not allwed in cause " we don't know who sent it"...Think that is what bothers me about her logic...again JMO

 

[Lovelymountains]

There are no FACTS that prove that. According to STATES witnesses TM confronts GZ not the other way around. Their own case is pulled apart by state testimony.

We know by RJ's testimony (If one believes her, and I do) that TM was "In back of" the house where he was visiting. Furthermore, RJ says she heard TM ask GZ why he was following him and GZ respond by asking why TM was there. She does not say she heard who threw the first punch. IMO TM had every right to ask why he was being followed. According to RJ this exchange took place "Behind" the house where TM was staying. That belies the theory that TM "Doubled back," to anywhere. She claims to have heard TM say, "Get off, get off." TM would not be telling himself to "Get off."

It's quite clear to me. IMO

 

[gxm]

I don't recall RJ saying TM decided to go back and confront GZ. As I recall, she said that TM said GZ was behind him and TM asked him why he was being followed. I believe she also said that that exchange took place in back of the condo wherre TM was staying. I don't know where to find her testimony, but that is what I recall and is IMO.

Well, you can't have it both ways. Either TM made it home, to the back of Brandy's condo (two units down from where the fatal confrontation occurred), as RJ testified. Or he didn't and RJ is lying and we all know what RJ thinks about lying, sir. This certainly highlights the problem with "ear" witnesses, but either you believe RJ or you don't. JMO. OMO. MOO.

 

[Horace Finklestein]

So it turns out GZ was right about the drug use and TM did have a violent past and was comfortable with violence, yet that's somehow not coming in...even with all the evidence pointing to TM assaulting GZ? Is this judge serious? Imo

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

He wasn't following him home to watch the game with him.
He had police on the way, he was and had been tailing TM across the division to 'stop' and 'apprehend' what he deemed a criminal. There is no evidence he intended to chat with him. He could have done that by the clubhouse.

By stopping, waiting, following, trailing, he meant to 'confront' in my mind and he did. He had to have stated he did to Serino or Serino believed he did to tell the ME investigator that for it to be stated he did in the autopsy report of the incident that lead to homocide.

If not ...why did he all that?

BBM, facts not in evidence. HE had no intention of apprehending him. He did not approach TM. There is no evidence at all of that.. The evidence actually supports the fact that TM approached GZ after being free and clear and home.

 

[marlap]

No the evidence shows that TM was home. In the back of his daddys house then the phone hangs up. Then when she calls him back he is breathing heavy. TM says.. " WHAT ARE YOU FOLLOWING ME FOR. "

Then the fight ensues.

Facts in evidence.

She said she thought it was just a fight.. AS if it was common for TM.

I still think GZ was trying to hold him to wait for LE wherever he caught up to him.

I just strongly feel that TM had the right to try to get away any way he felt necessary.

IMO, previous fights TM may have been in are irrelevant to this case. I totally accept anyone who has a different view. That is just mine.

 

[cityslick]

He wasn't following him home to watch the game with him.
He had police on the way, he was and had been tailing TM across the division to 'stop' and 'apprehend' what he deemed a criminal. There is no evidence he intended to chat with him. He could have done that by the clubhouse.

By stopping, waiting, following, trailing, he meant to 'confront' in my mind and he did. He had to have stated he did to Serino or Serino believed he did to tell the ME investigator that for it to be stated he did in the autopsy report of the incident that lead to homocide.

If not ...why did he all that?

We already covered what the word confront meant in the autopsy report yesterday.

Do you have a link where Det. Serino testified that he believed GZ confronted TM? Did the state even bother asking him? Keep in mind this is the same witness who stated he had no reason to believe GZ was lying.

I don't think if you side with the state you want to hang on the words of Serino IMO.

 

[m00c0w]

So it turns out GZ was right about the drug use and TM did have a violent past and was comfortable with violence, yet that's somehow not coming in...even with all the evidence pointing to TM assaulting GZ? Is this judge serious? Imo

Can sanctions be brought against the judge later? I'd be worried about her improperly influencing trials down the road, or perhaps already others that weren't as high profile.