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

[miimaa]

I thought his father wasn't home? Imo.

He wasn't. When TM did not return home that evening, the father assumed he was with a cousin.

 

[gauntlet]

Just for clarification, the defense doesn't have to prove anything, just show reasonable doubt. Plenty of that here.

Yes I realise that. I meant to add that I knew that. They haven't shown reasonable doubt to me.

 

[m00c0w]

A 15yr. old (along with 3 others) was arrested just yesterday here in Osceola County for a rash of 14 shootings that happened within a weeks time (I believe week before last) that resulted in 2 deaths, one a 17yr. old walking to a bus stop, that is very near my home, to go to work. The boy (according to WKMG/Local 6), when asked why he shot the young man, said "for fun". The young man's fathers apparently purchased the gun for the 15yr. old because he was having "problems with some individuals".

Sigh...

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/bo...unty/-/1637132/20903078/-/tgi8m1/-/index.html

And before anyone goes onto an anti-gun rant about this, the gun was provided through an illegal straw purchase. It was already illegally obtained, and possessed by someone that could not legally possess it.

 

[Donnareit]

IIRC there's a nurse on the jury. I've posted below my thoughts on GZ's head injuries, or lack there of. I can only hope the nurse feels the same way as I do. I was listening to the yelling last night on the tap and there's no real change in the volume/tone etc no is there any sounds of 'impact' ie ow, ouch etc as TM 'apparently' hit GZ.. If your head was being hit against the pavement or you were being beat and taking impact, I don't believe for a second all someone would or could shout is help.

The defense has not shown this self-defense to me by any stretch of the imagination. I would at this stage go for manslaughter...

Me too. IMO Manslaughter fits. Does anyone know if it can be considered by the jury?

 

[cityslick]

They have the evidence that GZ left his vehicle and pursued TM

Him leaving his vehicle isn't against the law. They do not (or at least not showed) evidence that proves GZ 'pursued' TM.

 

[Zuri]

I realize now that I am applying perhaps a double standard. I have not even considered the pasts of TM or GZ because in my mind, they are moot. TM was 17 and so young. One will never know if he could have reached his full potential. Having had 3 children who surpassed 17, I have to admit it was a tough year for one of them. She is not the person she was then when she was making extremely poor choices, much to the chagrin and heartbreak of my husband and me.

I expected GZ to know better. I expected him to act with the knowledge, maturity and reasoning of an adult. I expected him to not have to use deadly force to defend himself when he had the power of words. I expected him to not put himself in harms way. I expected MORE from GZ that is perhaps unreasonable. That is why I have such a hard time wrapping my head around what happened.

This case is far harder than the Arias trial. I don't see a cold blooded killer when I look at GZ. What I do see, is a man who perhaps used poor judgement, and whose life will be forever changed. JMV, IMO

 

[kimlynn]

IMO GZ is quoting TM as making two of the corniest things out there in Grade B movies -"You're gonna die tonight Motha******" and "you got me" - no 17year old hip young kid would ever say stuff like that.

Just high drama for effect and not real at all. As a Canadian and anti-gun person I find this case horrendous but when I read/heard those GZ say those two things I actually laughed out loud.

And "homey" do people really say that anymore? LOL

IMO

 

[Donnareit]

A 15yr. old (along with 3 others) was arrested just yesterday here in Osceola County for a rash of 14 shootings that happened within a weeks time (I believe week before last) that resulted in 2 deaths, one a 17yr. old walking to a bus stop, that is very near my home, to go to work. The boy (according to WKMG/Local 6), when asked why he shot the young man, said "for fun". The young man's fathers apparently purchased the gun for the 15yr. old because he was having "problems with some individuals".

Sigh...

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/bo...unty/-/1637132/20903078/-/tgi8m1/-/index.html

I double that sigh. :sigh: :sigh:

 

[Mahouston69]

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.

Did you read page 13 of the autopsy report? Some of you would like to add words that are not there.

I believe GZ told Serino in those five hours after that he confronted TM but just to ask him why he was there.

Serino believing GZ said this and it was true did not lie on the stand. He did not elaborate about which statements he believed just that he did. It's not perjury.

the ME investigator wrote Serino as POC, point of contact and what that person reported happened. So if you disbelieve the exact wording of the report in evidence you don't believe Serino or GZ . IMO

 

[Doop]

Me too. IMO Manslaughter fits. Does anyone know if it can be considered by the jury?

yes, I believe aggravated manslaughter is a lesser included in florida.

 

[cinsbythesea]

You know, I have to say - that if the jury is as split as we are on this board- it's going to make for some long contentious deliberations. I cannot really recall a time in all my years on Websleuths that we have been so divided. Running high on emotion yes - but for the most part, in my experience, the vast majority of us have been on the same "side." Definitely not so in this case. And I can barely even look in the mirror at myself on this one- suddenly I am liking defense attorneys, annoyed with prosecutors--who am I?! I think everyone will breathe a sigh of relief once this case is concluded - hopefully with the just verdict and without incident following whatever that just verdict is. IMO.

 

[sorrell skye]

Very true. And many people have refused to look beyond the cloying media portrayal and look at who TM really was imo.

Unfortunately, after Judge Nelson's ruling this morning, the jury won't be provided with information that might have given them another facet (and potentially a more complete portrayal) of how TM allegedly presented himself (in the text messages/photos that were on his phone, behind several layers of password protection).

 

[cityslick]

If you hold the view that it was TM screaming that could point to his potentially being shown a weapon or having one held on him.
Of course we have no evidence as George is the only real witness due to the darkness of the area.
IMO

The evidence proves that TM was on top of GZ so logic dictates that guy on the bottom getting hit is the guy yelling for help (JG's testimony also reinforced this).

I can't say for 100% certain who is screaming, neither can you and that is a problem for the state, not the defense.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

IMO, But wouldn't TM words to GZ be, "why are you following me?" That is not assault IMO. There is nothing threatening about that. Correct me if I am wrong about what TM said to GZ.

The point is that TM was home. He told her the guy was not around anymore. He was safe. Then when she talks to him again, he is breathing heavy and "runs" into GZ who is still in the area of his truck, Up at that end of the T. TM's dads house is at the complete other end 70 yards away. HE was home safe.

According to this state witness TM see GZ again, and says " What are you following me for."

To get to where GZ was he had to be the one that went looking for him. There is just no way around that.


I came into this trial hoping the state had a clear case and I could firmly vote for conviction. But it is not there. When this case was first playing in the media, I was firmly swayed by the rumor and innuendo and wanted GZ to hang. I did not like MOM and then I stopped following it because I was so upset.. I decided to wait for trial.

AS a rule I am always on the STATE's side. This is the only case other than that WM3 that has me not believing their case even though I am following their witnesses and evidence ready to be convinced.

I don't believe that GZ is any hero. But I do believe he was in fear for his life and by law he did what he could to save himself. I have not seen anything at all that points to anything else.

And I am trying.. Believe me, I am.

 

[SassyMom]

Very true. And many people have refused to look beyond the cloying media portrayal and look at who TM really was imo.

What some people think is mud slinging against TM is more, IMO, an attempt to understand what kind of person TM was, and what might have motivated him in this altercation that sadly resulted in his untimely death. Sanitizing his prior behaviors and history does nothing to illuminate his personality and motivations, and in effect deletes relevant information that could shed light on the event.

According to media, TM was essentially a little boy, with candy in his pocket, skipping through the subdivision on his way home to watch a sporting event. PERIOD. Well reality is quite a bit different, if you look at his tweets, FB, photos in his cell phone, etc. The first image does not square with the second image, IMO. To even pretend to be a indicates a lack of innocence in the sense we use that word to describe a small child.

This elucidation has NOTHING to do with diminishing the loss of his life, or that he died deservedly because he was a . It is an attempt to understand his desire and ability to confront perceived threats and actions he may have taken based on prior behaviors. As I've said previously, it is entirely unnecessary to beatify TM or villify GZ to prosecute or defend this case. IMO

 

[gxm]

Bolded by me

Translation " Trayvon told me the man following him is at the back of his Dad's house"

Then why would he say he "sees" him after he already saw him at the back of Brandy's condo? Also, that would put the confrontation down two units from where it actually occurred. How would GZ get back to the other end of the street without meeting TM in the middle? IMO, your interpretation of what RJ said is too broad. JMO. OMO. MOO.

 

[sorrell skye]

Exactly. From a trial strategy standpoint, this case is backwards. Usually you have the prosecution saying "this is what happened." Then the defense challenges that by saying, "no, maybe this is what happened, or perhaps this," offering different plausible explanations for the purpose of creating reasonable doubt. But the opposite is happening here. The defense is saying "this is what happened." And the prosecution is instead offering different possibilities. Very strange.

TY for your professional input!

As I've watched this trial, I've felt as if I'm in topsy-turvy land. :scared:

 

[Leilei]

What's wrong with prescription drug use? I don't think abuse has been alleged, and he showed no signs of it on the night he defended himself from TM or the police would have tested him (no probable cause). imo.

I did not say abuse. But, he was prescribed Adderall, was he not? Adderall's side effects can be pretty bad in terms of restlessness, mood swings, etc...

http://www.rxlist.com/adderall-side-effects-drug-center.htm

My point was that GZ's alleged negative past was not brought in, either, at least not in front of the jury.

IMO

 

[costalpilot]

Not intending to be snarky or personally attacking when I say this:

Perhaps your nationality and lack of familiarity with the urban cultures in the United States lead to your opinion. I grew up in Atlanta, and went to schools in which I was in the vast minority as a white male. I have no trouble at all believing that these things may have been said - especially the first phrase.

its common phraseology, not only on the street but in the culture as well...as in RAP MUSIC

 

[nnglas]

Ok fair, but take that out and what do you have left? How has the state proven that GZ was the aggressor if no one knows who threw the first punch? Even RJ's testimony is not entirely clear on how the altercation is started.

I get your meaning. You are right no proof of who is the aggressor. However I have always understood it that when using an affirmative defense (self defense) that the burden shifts to the defendant. We know he shot and killed TM now he has to prove he was justified. Like when someone says guilty by reason of insanity. We know they did the crime, so they have to prove they are insane.

Of course FL law may be different. My legal knowledge is from NC. But in that scenario I don't think GZ has proved self defense. I think he is guilty of manslaughter. IMO the case was overcharged, however I don't believe he should just walk away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk