George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #6

[Chelly]

Side bar.
I've never seen a trial with so few side bars.
Great attys and judge!
IMO, of course.

 

[JeannaT]

On cross, Serino admitting that there were no clear inconsistencies in GZ's interviews. JMO. OMO. MOO.

I really think MOM should stop questioning him at this point. I think he's about to say he has a "cops hunch" or something like that that GZ wasn't telling the truth. His statements are so hesitant when agreeing that he doesn't have any inconsistencies - IMHO, he doesn't believe GZ based on his experience and his "hunch". If I were MOM I'd back off right now.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I believe no one has the right except law enforcement, home owners and the military, to end someone's life with a bullet. The stakes are too high to allow these semi-trained people to walk in public and in a seconds decide or panic to end someone's life.
Police are trained. This Joker didn't even know the name of the streets or attempt to follow instructions. We can't continue on this path.
If you think of the big picture here, there should be no doubts as to something is wrong and GZ is guilty.

IN YOUR OPINION.

I believe that everyone has a right to defend their own person. IMO

 

[Sonya610]

Florida Law protects TM's actions to defend himself and stand his ground from an unidentified stalker with a weapon. The mere act of stalking him at night in the rain would lead a reasonable 17 year old in today's society in FLORIDA that he could be in danger.

If Martin were so afraid of the 'stalker' why didn't Martin call 911 and report it???? If Martin thought the "stalker" could be dangerous and armed common sense says there is NO WAY a sensible person would run over initiate an attack in public, in my opinion.

We know he had a phone and he was apparently talking on it the whole time.

 

[Chelly]

On cross, Serino admitting that there were no clear inconsistencies in GZ's interviews. JMO. OMO. MOO.

Correct!
No inconsistencies in GZ's interviews. He stuck with same story.
The discrepancies will show up comparing his statements with the non-emergency call he made.

 

[ncgramma]

Detective Chris Cerino: "At this point [TM] has to be hiding from you."

************

Dispatch had asked GZ something to the effect of "Can you tell us where he is now?" or "Can you tell us where he's heading?" That is why, I believe, George got out of his car - he was trying to find that out.

************

The fact that Zimmerman says he wants to meet right then with a police officer pretty much negates him wanting to confront Trayvon. :twocents:

That's how I look at it too.

 

[Jane Jetson]

Yep....better to not get involved in the current society we have created. Might get sued. Or accused of being a want-to-be-cop and psychotic crazy person. Just hope it's not your house being robbed or you being attacked....so much easier to just not get involved. Because you will be taking a chance if you do.


I am still amazed with all the public outcry that Goodman the witness that saw most of the incident, still came out of the darkness and told what he saw.

Like I previously said about Zimmerman, poor judgement does not equal evil or malicious intent, but now I am sure he will have second thoughts of ever attempting community involvement again....as will many others. Just hide.

Imo, GZ felt that, as the one who actually started the neighborhood watch, he had a duty to do as the dispatcher asked, which was to tell him where TM was heading. So George put himself in harm's way.

George's wife had seen a crime committed in the neighborhood, according to GZ, so that probably increased his concern and courage in ascertaining the whereabouts of this person who was:

1. Standing in the rain
2. Looking into people's homes
3. Standing in their yards
4. Giving him the stink-eye

I personally will continue to call non-emergency when I see a person whom I don't recognize, who is acting a what I consider a weird manner (although I'd never be brave enough to get out there and gather info such as was requested by the dispatcher). If you don't do that, imo, you're not doing your civic duty and being a good neighbor. If you want others to watch out for you, so you'd better watch out for your friends and neighbors!

:moo:

 

[mikeysmommom]

I am really wondering how this got prosecuted...(the following is a strong opinion, bear in mind I like you guys, so don't freak out on me...LOL).

I believe that GZ felt in fear for his life. I believe GZ shot and killed TM because GZ thought it was either TM or himself. I believe that this case is politically motivated, and that the old "let a jury decide" was a way to brush off the negative publicity by a lot of high-handed, arrogant folk who think that any inter-racial killing is racially motivated.

I believe that GZ should not have been prosecuted, and that this case has very little evidence to support murder 2, or any murder. Under state law, GZ did what he was allowed to do.

If there is an issue with the law, then Floridians need to change it. But it's not up to us to make that determination; and I can only pray that the jury doesn't nullify the law and find GZ guilty.

*This is will be my only post on the subject, but I'll keep reading and listening to yours. I may come and comment about the proceedings, though*

Best-
Herding Cats

All of this is MOO, JMO, OMO, and all that jazz.

I feel the same way!

 

[Chelly]

This is interesting. They are discussing a matter in open court out of presence of jury

 

[gxm]

IN YOUR OPINION.

I believe that everyone has a right to defend their own person.

IMO, self defense is a truly fundamental right. However, I really don't like the idea of armed civilians. It's a catch 22. JMO. OMO. MOO.

 

[ncgramma]

What I don't understand is how many people here are able to reconcile that the victim in this situation somehow deserved their fate. I understand this to be a victim friendly forum, and I just can't seem to see how GZ is in any way a victim of anything at this point. He killed someone! The State has every right to prosecute IMO. If he can somehow convince the jury he feared for his life, then he will be found innocent. When the victim cannot speak the State has to speak for them. TM had no weapons, other than his fists. He wasn't breaking any laws such that immediate intervention on the part of Mr. Zimmerman was required. He ended up dead. He IS the victim.

The facts of this case need to come out. If the State's case is weak, then GZ will walk away a free man. So be it. But to keep portraying GZ as a victim before all the evidence has come out seems biased to me.

To me it's no different than the JA trial at this point. We have a victim who is dead, a defendant that has admitted to killing them, and a "self defense" theory. Everyone agreed that it was up to the defense to "prove" their self defense case in the JA trial, why is this case any different? MOO, JMHO and I respect everyone else's too.

BBM -- My very dear PrincessSezMe, no one here thinks TM deserved this fate. But many do feel that charging GZ with murder 2 and/or manslaughter was wrong too.

 

[Overuled]

What I don't understand is how many people here are able to reconcile that the victim in this situation somehow deserved their fate. I understand this to be a victim friendly forum, and I just can't seem to see how GZ is in any way a victim of anything at this point. He killed someone! The State has every right to prosecute IMO. If he can somehow convince the jury he feared for his life, then he will be found innocent. When the victim cannot speak the State has to speak for them. TM had no weapons, other than his fists. He wasn't breaking any laws such that immediate intervention on the part of Mr. Zimmerman was required. He ended up dead. He IS the victim.

The facts of this case need to come out. If the State's case is weak, then GZ will walk away a free man. So be it. But to keep portraying GZ as a victim before all the evidence has come out seems biased to me.

To me it's no different than the JA trial at this point. We have a victim who is dead, a defendant that has admitted to killing them, and a "self defense" theory. Everyone agreed that it was up to the defense to "prove" their self defense case in the JA trial, why is this case any different? MOO, JMHO and I respect everyone else's too.

JA was a pathalogical liar and a psycho who planned the trip to Mesa and it was proven that she did stalk and set out to kill of TA.

Gz by all accounts was a protector of the neighboorhood and was being held down and his head beat in according to eye/ear witnesses and stood his ground according to the trial so far. Big difference.

Wait till its over and we hear both sides. MOO

Still waiting for justice for Travis.

 

[NotMyselfNEMore]

This is absolutely my own opinion based on what I'm observing in this trial (and is probably totally an "Arias trial watcher reaction"), but does make anyone else inwardly cringe when the the defense attorney uses the term "spidey sense"? I know it's just an illustrative phase, but it gives me pause when it's used.

 

[sickofitAll]

I believe no one has the right except law enforcement, home owners and the military, to end someone's life with a bullet. The stakes are too high to allow these semi-trained people to walk in public and in a seconds decide or panic to end someone's life.
Police are trained. This Joker didn't even know the name of the streets or attempt to follow instructions. We can't continue on this path.
If you think of the big picture here, there should be no doubts as to something is wrong and GZ is guilty.

That pesky second amendment...All power to the state...

 

[stmarysmead]

CNN has now "accidentally" showed George Zimmerman’s Social Security number and other personal information live over the air, including address, date of birth, and phone number. Tweets by those threatingZimmerman and celebrating the possession of that information were almost instaneous.
The media bias in this case has been dangerous and unfair to the extreme. Not only IMO has it generated hatred BEFORE trial...it has generated a backlash as well...and neither bodes well for EITHER "side" of this case.


To review...the Associated Press originally reported that Zimmerman was "white."That falsehood was seized immediately by the MSM in general heightening the racial aspect of the case. They then had to backtrack and invent the new designation "white Hispanic."

The media also dug upphotographs of Zimmerman from a 2005 arrest to use...rather than current photos, and then chose to broadcast photographs of Martin as a pre-teen, not the 17-year-old he was at the time of the killing or the Facebook Photo that TM chose for himself. This child of 12 was NOT who GZ saw that night and yet today...that photo is still on the Daily News website. Do really want this done in reporting cases? Really? Maybe we should have had only adorable pictures of a 12 year old GZ too,

NBC News manipulated tape of Zimmerman's 911 call to make it seem that Zimmerman had targeted Martin because he was black, rather than responding to 911 dispatcher questions.

CNN also manipulated audio of Zimmerman purportedly calling Martin a racial slur during the call -- an allegation that ended up being completely false. What an outrage! Inventing a slur! This started making this whole prosecution look like a bogus witch-hunt when the Media lies andcheats.


Both ABC News and NBC News also alleged that Zimmerman's injuries did not exist, releasing badly-pixellated photographs from the night of the incident. WHY tamper? I guess when the truth isn't enough...this is what the media does...lie toits readers and viewers!

This was done in the Duke Lacrosse Hoax too. That false accuser now sits in jail on a murder charge...but the media built a fantasy about her too.

IMO, this MEdia Bias is not only sick...it creates "sides"...like this was some sporting event...not about the death of a young man and the life of another.

This serves NO sense of justice and it could be used against anybody...anytime.

 

[PrettyWoman86]

What I don't understand is how many people here are able to reconcile that the victim in this situation somehow deserved their fate. I understand this to be a victim friendly forum, and I just can't seem to see how GZ is in any way a victim of anything at this point. He killed someone! The State has every right to prosecute IMO. If he can somehow convince the jury he feared for his life, then he will be found innocent. When the victim cannot speak the State has to speak for them. TM had no weapons, other than his fists. He wasn't breaking any laws such that immediate intervention on the part of Mr. Zimmerman was required. He ended up dead. He IS the victim.

The facts of this case need to come out. If the State's case is weak, then GZ will walk away a free man. So be it. But to keep portraying GZ as a victim before all the evidence has come out seems biased to me.

To me it's no different than the JA trial at this point. We have a victim who is dead, a defendant that has admitted to killing them, and a "self defense" theory. Everyone agreed that it was up to the defense to "prove" their self defense case in the JA trial, why is this case any different? MOO, JMHO and I respect everyone else's too.

This is something that I keep asking myself, I always understood this to be a victim friendly story. It seems as though some are taking GZ's side without looking at the situation from other perspectives. Maybe there is some truth in GZ's statement. IMO, if I were a 17 year old kid and I thought someone was following me, I would also try to go in different directions to avoid them, not only to avoid them but to prove to myself that they were following me (I'll explain this in a second), maybe it is a fear of my own from reading crime forums, crime blogs, crime stories, etc. that if someone who I thought was following me approached me, I would be scared. I would fight for my life, at some point there was an altercation between the two but lets put ourselves in the shoes of the deceased victim, you would fight for your life. Knowing you only had skittles and an Arizona iced tea, you would look for objects around you to fight, you would scream and you would try to overpower the perpetrator. So let's say TM did see the gun, maybe he did reach for it, because he thought it was either him or GZ and he was right because only one of them are alive today.

If GZ was the only one screaming for his life that night, why didn't he realize that was him screaming on tape?

About a month and a half ago, while on my lunch break, I took a walk. I frequently look behind and around me, not because I am a suspicious looking person but because I would like to be aware of my surroundings. I noticed a man going in the exact same direction as me and staring at me and it seemed as if he was trying to catch up to me, I usually walk slowly. I crossed the street, to check my theory (is this person following me?), he crossed the street. I turned the corner, he turned the corner, finally I ducked into the entrance of a store after turning the corner quickly, as I am looking out, who do I see? The person who I assumed was following me. To this day I do not know if he was following me, nor do I want to find out. Needless to say I was scared and my adrenaline was pumping and this was during the daytime, I can't imagine how frightened I would be if it was dark out with no one else around.

 

[Chelly]

Jury coming back in. Judge says she will poll jury to see how late they want to stay.

 

[PaperDoll]

I am really wondering how this got prosecuted...(the following is a strong opinion, bear in mind I like you guys, so don't freak out on me...LOL).

I believe that GZ felt in fear for his life. I believe GZ shot and killed TM because GZ thought it was either TM or himself. I believe that this case is politically motivated, and that the old "let a jury decide" was a way to brush off the negative publicity by a lot of high-handed, arrogant folk who think that any inter-racial killing is racially motivated.

I believe that GZ should not have been prosecuted, and that this case has very little evidence to support murder 2, or any murder. Under state law, GZ did what he was allowed to do.

If there is an issue with the law, then Floridians need to change it. But it's not up to us to make that determination; and I can only pray that the jury doesn't nullify the law and find GZ guilty.

*This is will be my only post on the subject, but I'll keep reading and listening to yours. I may come and comment about the proceedings, though*

Best-
Herding Cats

All of this is MOO, JMO, OMO, and all that jazz.

So a person who kills someone and claims it's self defense shouldn't be looked into? Just take the person's word it's self defense?

 

[Nymeria]

I love that this judge asks the jury what THEY want to do (stay till 6, take a break, etc.). I hope JSS is watching this.

 

[Just Sailing Thru]

I just have the ongoing wish..That Juan questioned Rachael Jeantel..I don't care which side...Just question her. I suspect that more info would have come out