George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin General discussion #5

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't agree with that. Your not within your rights to turn around and attack someone who is following you. You can turn around and ask what they are doing, or within your rights to continue to flee from the person or contact 911, but you can't just turn around and jump on the person and start hitting them... that makes you the aggressor.

No one except GZ has said Trayvon did this. No one knows for a fact how the confrontation transpired. That's why the jury is hearing this case.

The second question is whether, if the above assumption is true, the use of deadly force (shooting in the heart) was warranted. And I don't mean warranted in our opinions. I mean legally warranted.
 
I have an honest and sincere question, if it's been addressed before, please excuse me. I haven't been able to read so many pages of remarks as are generated by this case. I'd like to ask anyone who knows or has an opinion about the term used by TM, *creepy-***-cracker.* Why isn't that phrase or description considered to be a racial slur or extremely derogatory in nature when referring to white people? I just don't get it?
 
I don't think he was looking for trouble, if he was, was he looking for trouble on any of his other 911 calls?

I don't think so

JMO

By definition... Neighborhood watch participants are looking for trouble. He pursued a kid who was by all accounts ... younger, bigger, faster, and stronger than he. He kept on because he knew this was a fight... in spite of those facts... He couldn't lose.
 
Not if you are on the move and the AGGRESSOR is PURSUING YOU. Obviously, his wording was unfortunate but it conveyed FEAR. TM was in FEAR.

You still just can't physically assault someone who is following you. The proper response is to A. continue to flee B. call 911 or what I would have done C. turned around and asked what he wanted.
 
It's not required. It's up to the judge to charge it. See the opinion from the DCA I posted yesterday reversing Judge Nelson on that very issue.

I did actually read that earlier but can't find it now so I will defer to your statement.
 
I completely agree with the comments about the judge being "snippy" to the defense. With the state, she comes across as sunshine and lollipops. With the defense, her voice drips with disdain.

Did you hear her try to help Bernie with his objections with John Good. He objected on hearsay and improper "bolstering." Judge overruled hearsay then said improper bolstering was not the correct objection and let him try again. He still got it wrong, though, so she had to allow the question. I think if she could have told him the proper objection she would have lol.
 
No one except GZ has said Trayvon did this. No one knows for a fact how the confrontation transpired. That's why the jury is hearing this case.

The second question is whether, if the above assumption is true, the use of deadly force (shooting in the heart) was warranted. And I don't mean warranted in our opinions. I mean legally warranted.

Exceedingly well said, Boodles!! Aiming to kill will be just one of many factors which shall convict him, imv.

:seeya:
 
I see now why Rachel Jeantel was the Prosecution's star witness. Because the State's other witnesses are actually testifying factually, which is exposing the non-case against GZ.

The facts of this case have never changed.

John Good stated that TM was on top of GZ in a "ground and pound" position, "raining down blows MMA-style" upon GZ. He also stated to investigators that GZ, the victim on the bottom -- not TM -- was the one crying out for help.

And Good is the Prosecution's witness!?!?

Couple that with the photographic evidence of GZ's wounds incurred during his pummeling at the hands of TM, and it's clear that this case should have never been pursued.

The police called this correctly from the get-go. They knew the facts within days of TM's assault on GZ and TM's subsequent death, and this is why GZ was not initially charged.

Now GZ has not only been overcharged, but wrongfully charged.

The State of Florida has no case.

They'd have been better off charging and trying the proverbial ham sandwich.

Right about now, the Special Prosecutor, Angela Corey, looks like a buffoon, a political pawn, an axe-grinder, or a combination thereof.
 
Evidenciary testimony demonstrates he never had a chance to do that since as soon as he asked GZ why he was following him, GZ asked him what he was doing there and Then TM's phone went dead after his headphones dropped to the ground.
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/0...y-determine-george-zimmerman-trial-day-4-fate

If he was so afraid he should have called 911 and not confront GZ. The timeline shows he had plenty of time to call, he could have ended the call with Diamond and called 911. JMO
 
The testimony from the last witness does not match the injuries on Trayvon Martin. Period. There is NO WAY you beat someone "MMA Style" and you have ZERO wounds on your hands, especially your dominate hand, especially IF Trayvon was on top like this witness said.
 
I have an honest and sincere question, if it's been addressed before, please excuse me. I haven't been able to read so many pages of remarks as are generated by this case. I'd like to ask anyone who knows or has an opinion about the term used by TM, *creepy-***-cracker.* Why isn't that phrase or description considered to be a racial slur or extremely derogatory in nature when referring to white people? I just don't get it?
Maybe because that's what I call my brother-in-law. :floorlaugh:
 
Evidenciary testimony demonstrates he never had a chance to do that since as soon as he asked GZ why he was following him, GZ asked him what he was doing there and Then TM's phone went dead after his headphones dropped to the ground.
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/0...y-determine-george-zimmerman-trial-day-4-fate

And I am of the opinion that at that point, GZ grabbed TM and forced him back toward GZ's vehicle (So this one wouldn't "Always get away") but at some point TM attempted to escape and it resulted in his death. There is no witness to any event between the time GZ asked what he was doing there and the time the altercation occured, some distance from where TM stated he was in one of his last statements on the cell phone.
 
And George helped her.

Snipped from the link~

A group of young men had just broken into Bertalan's town house as she and her infant cowered in a locked bedroom. The intruders took a $600 camera and a laptop. After police had come and gone, the doorbell rang, and there was Zimmerman: 5 feet 9, in a shirt and tie, his body a little doughy, his demeanor gentle.

He introduced himself and gave her phone numbers at which she could call him anytime. He gave her a heavy-duty lock to bolster the sliding-glass door that the men had forced open. He told her she could stay with his wife down the street if she ever felt scared again.

"That first impression was really sweet," Bertalan, 21, said this week. "It really does break my heart how they're portraying him as a coldblooded murderer."


http://articles.latimes.com/2012/mar/28/nation/la-na-zimmerman-profile-20120329

Wow, thanks for posting that. When I first heard about the case, my knee jerk reaction was to automatically think that it was murder, but as the evidence has come in, I no longer think it was cut and dry.

I think this case was bought on for purely political reasons. And now shows that it was self-defense with this last witness.

Even Trayvon's family lawyer is now walking back the "race" issue. And why did LE interview Diamond in from of Trayvon's mother. I don't doubt, that the lady knows more than she is telling. But, from the pressure she is under I can understand why she won't reveal all she knows. She would be crucified.
 
Did you hear her try to help Bernie with his objections with John Good. He objected on hearsay and improper "bolstering." Judge overruled hearsay then said improper bolstering was not the correct objection and let him try again. He still got it wrong, though, so she had to allow the question. I think if she could have told him the proper objection she would have lol.

To be fair, the judge helped out the defense yesterday with questions they could ask when the prosecutor objected. It has been both ways.

People are so divided over this case, it's either one side or the other, to the extreme. Doesn't shock me they will blame the judge too if they are on GZ's "side". I believe she is doing a good job. No nonsense.
 
And IMO, if the jury goes by what the evidence suggests and by Fl Law, George will be found not guilty on all charges.

lucky for him, if he does get found guilty, he will be appealing and most certainly win his appeal and the guilty verdict will be overturned and all charges dropped.


JMO

I just hope he can win a lawsuit and get on with his life. He actually deserves a payday from all of this, unlike some parties.imo
 
I have. I find it hard to believe GZ hadn't (likely on several occasions) while skulking around at night (with a gun in his pocket) LOOKING FOR TROUBLE ... thought the scenario through. He was in pursuit... It had to have occurred to him that if he kept up his pursuit... there could be an altercation.

Yet he kept his distance in all the other 9-11 calls.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
3,521
Total visitors
3,589

Forum statistics

Threads
602,767
Messages
18,146,695
Members
231,530
Latest member
Painauchocolat2024
Back
Top