George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #14 Friday July 12

[PaintingAnemone]

Hard to believe some of these concepts being brought up.
TM, go to 7-11 and buy your things but don't wear a hoodie and when you return home you better run as fast as you can because there will be a man with a gun checking you out in his SUV and he might even get out of his SUV follow you. IMO

Oh, and don't question the person that's tracking you down in the dark, because he might start a fight, shoot you to death, and then lie about it afterward. Also, IMO.

 

[Moonie]

What was the time lapse between the end of the conversation with NEN and the gunshot? Thanks

From the timeline I looked at it was:

NEN Call = 19:09:34-19:13:43

TM & RJ call = 19:12:06-19:15:44

Lauer 911 call = 19:16:11-19:18:40

Gunshot = 19:16:55

 

[Foxfire]

Agreed. The two closings are actually quite similar in style, but suddenly some people are all ears because it's what they want to hear.

Apples & oranges, imo... No skip to my Lou theatrics...by MOM, as we witnessed yesterday..imo..

 

[Love Never Fails]

Nobody will ever tell LE what happened after this without talking to their attorney.
Nobody will ever give statements to LE even if they are innocent.
Nobody will want to be a NW participant.
Nobody will want to help anybody in their own neighborhood.

This case will have so many negative impacts on innocent peeps trying to help others.


IMO

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Some will, however, get training in the use of a firearm and buy one.

 

[especiallyheather]

Gee. maybe when he's asked about it as a press conference? Then he gave all appropriate disclaimers and said it needed to be investigated to find out what really happened. It's amazing to me that people have a problem with that.

IMO

He could have, no he SHOULD HAVE said "no comment", yet he didn't.

IMHO

 

[PaperDoll]

Again it matters not.

His injuries are not part of the requirements for it to be self defense.

He only has to have fear of great bodily harm or death. IT does not actually have to happen.

THE LAW is what matters.

So I can simply shoot someone and claim self defense just because I feel threatened? Does this mean I can shoot my neighbor across the street because I don't like the way they look at me, I feel threatened over that? I know I'm over playing this but I'm trying to make a point.

 

[Overuled]

IF TM was "afraid," as we are told, why didn't he run home? IMO TM doubled back and attacked GZ.

Didn't tm mention to Rachel that he was behind his Dads gf place? He could have went inside if he was fearful. moo

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Well said. No one can truly know what one will do unless they are in that situation. I'm sorry for what happened to you. Goes to show be it a 12, 17, 27, 45, or 79yr old, etc if someone wants to harm you they can.

And also that a 12,17,27,45.. Can harm anyone also.

 

[Mahouston69]

IF TM was "afraid," as we are told, why didn't he run home? IMO TM doubled back and attacked GZ.

You can be fearful, then feel safer once you think you are safe.
Continue walking and talking.
It's not against the law to walk home.

 

[lisasalinger]

Wonder what caused TM to say "get off, get off" as reported by RJ? IMO

I wonder what caused her to all of a sudden testify to that one and a half years later?

IMO

 

[ShadyLady]

The defense was absolutely superb in that case and the prosecution team was flawed, made many mistakes. I was sick all summer and watched it gavel to gavel and called it an acquittal.

Which is why in this case i am going to say acquittal too, i think the pros were outlawyered even though i think GZ is guilty as sin.

Evidence that GZ is guilty??

 

[micki68]

I have avoided this trial because there is so much controversy surrounding it. I don't think TM or GZ was afraid. Fear would have kept GZ in the car and fear would have made TM go home.

 

[JusticeJunkie]

I'm going to ask again, cause I'm just an impatient old lady! LOL!

Does anyone know the possible/probable sentences for 2nd Degree Murder vs Manslaughter? Are they the same? Each have a gun enhancement, and what is that in terms of additional years? Will the jury be aware of the possible sentences?

Thank You! IMO!

The jury will not be advised of the sentencing. Both sentences would have geo in prison the rest of his life.

IMO

 

[FrayedKnot]

How so? Maybe he didn't want the creepy guy following him home. Maybe he was lost since it was dark and all the buildings look the same. Sure, maybe he even turned around to ask GZ why he was following him.

Exactly. GZ is/was not a cop. TM was under no obligation to submit to him and in fact, I'd be maybe skeeved out and maybe irritated that some guy who is NOT a police officer is tailing me and harassing me.

OTOH, if the non-cop is waving his gun around, why would anyone attack him? Not blaming the victim, just wondering about his critical thinking there......

 

[sacrablue]

This is the worst closing argument I have ever seen....why do they call it argument? IMO

 

[PaintingAnemone]

Apples & oranges, imo... No skip to my Lou theatrics...by MOM, as we witnessed yesterday..imo..

Like I said, people tend to have a more favorable opinion when they're in agreement with what's being said. IMO

 

[logicalgirl]

Why? Wives don't have to testify. We know that as a point of law. She was not there. She has nothing to add to the event.

Non issue.

You forgot to add that GZ's wife has been charged with perjury and her trial will be after GZ;s is completed.

Wouldn't add much credibility to the GZ's profile because it would also open the door for the State to present the bail lying evidence. The defense couldn't risk it.

IMO

 

[Maryann123]

I get what you're saying and I agree that this is how our system does and should work.

But what I am reading in a few of these posts is that nobody saw TM lay a hand on GZ. So saying that GZ shot TM because he was being beaten isn't a fact, but the defendant's testimony. That isn't any more factual than Jodi Arias claiming self-defense. I mean, yes, it could have happened in GZ's case, but we really don't know. Only GZ says so. KWIM?

What really worries me is how easy it would be to just shoot someone, then give yourself a few superficial cuts and scrapes to support a self-defense claim (Darlie Routier sp?). Luckily, it doesn't always work.

I honestly don't know WHAT to think of this case or what to believe. But I do know if GZ had listened to the police, none of this would have happened. MOO

When did GZ have time to beat himself up? How can we forget a neighbor was on the scene immediately, and there were others looking out windows and doors. Wouldn't someone have seen GZ acting like a crazy man throwing himself on the sidewalk, punching himself in the face, etc? They can see two people fighting, but not GZ acting like his having seizures?

 

[Isabelle]

I am not sure that is true. There is no way GZ got the upper hand on TM. No rips in the sweatshirt, No injuries on TM, No scrapes, His Arizona is still firmly in his pocket along with the skittles. HE was unmussed.

What we do not hear at all, is TM saying.. " GUN!"

Why should we believe part of RJ's testimony but not another? GZ should be found innocent because RJ said TM was at his dad's, but GZ cannot be suspected as possibly being at fault when RJ says she heard TM say "get off, get off"? That is being selective and is not really considering the evidence. IMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

So I can simply shoot someone and claim self defense just because I feel threatened? Does this mean I can shoot my neighbor across the street because I don't like the way the look at me, I feel threatened over that? I know I'm over playing this but I'm trying to make a point.

If you have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily injury, YES! that is the law. If you are under attack and you have the fear of great bodily injury or death yes, You get to defend your person. Aren't you glad? Do you want to be prosecuted because someone attempts to harm you and you kill them to save yourself?

No. you can not shoot your neighbor because they annoy you. That is not the same thing.
You need to understand the law to apply it to the case. If you don't, The sad part is your thoughts are only opinion based in emotion.