Verdict Watch Thread Saturday July 13

[ncgramma]

Is it just me or does it sound like GZ is answering the judge with Yes, SIR? I swear I just heard that. Also, the other day, when she was asking him questions. It sounded like he addressed her as sir.

Thanks!

I caught that the other day. Then he said it again and I realized he was saying, "Yes, 'ur' honor."

 

[Phoebeb]

So is Nancy Grace live now? Are we on delay watching her?

 

[WillenFan21]

Nancy Grace "They want to work through the night. We expect a verdict TONIGHT"

 

[RANCH]

Yes, I am thinking and hoping they are coming down the home stretch. Not sure if there are holdouts - to me it would be like women to be checking and double checking their decision before it's final.

IMO

Being a man I'm not going to stereotype what women would tend to do. I see the jury asking for a clarification about manslaughter as there being some dissension in the jury and not a means to validate what they think is true.

But that's just me. MOO.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

Did the WESH deliberation timer die? It's been stuck on 11 hours, 58 mins for ages.

 

[missmazzy]

Alright, I have my evening supplies. I'm hunkering down in front of the TV with my wine and my pizza until that jury says uncle. Tell mom I love her.

LOL! My parrot and I are having dry Frosted Flakes (her favorite). Cats are sleeping, hubby is somewhere in the house. Life is Good.

 

[Just K]

His dad was never a judge.

jmo

But he was a Magistrate...they tend to issue warrants and stuff at least in fairfax County, VA.

 

[?noanswer]

this is quite true, there are many scenarios i can imagine that end up with martin being back where the fight started, he might have gone back to confront zimmerman, he might have become disoriented and was unsure which way to go, he might have thought he dropped something and gone back to retrieve it.

i have no idea, neither does anyone else on this earth. even zimmerman doesnt claim to know that, all he claims is that martin did end up back there and came at him.

You're correct, nobody knows. Reading between the lines from RJ's testimony, I think he most likely went back and if the truth be known RJ might have encouraged it.

JMO

 

[Just Sailing Thru]

I was offended too. But you never know. I think the "charms" of Jose Baez won over the CA jury. I don't think the looks of John Guy will affect this smaller jury. IMO

EEww IMHO Jose was never " charming" or dreamy to me..Mr Guy not bad looking but not "dreamy".I agree with a past poster who stated Juan Martinez was " dreamy" cuz of his personality and presence...JMO To me West nor MOM " dreamy" but I do like West again jmo

 

[Donnareit]

True, but if someone is shot by a known person who admits to the shooting, there is the expectation that he/she has to explain their actions. GZ did that in this case without taking the stand, but his explanations were in there. Legally they don't have to explain themselves, but they'll generally lose if they don't explain how the person ended up shot by their hand.

So the question of credibility comes up: We know who shot the person and caused death; we just need to make sure it was really for an excusable reason. Self-defense really is a bit different than straight murder charges. Explanations are more expected, because we know who shot someone. The why matters terribly.

Most of the best evidence the defense has in this case (imho) relies on believing GZ. It's similar to the Jodi Arias defense that way.

IMO what these two cases have in common is that in order to find the defendant not guilty, you have to make a perp out of the victim. Apparently, if there are no other witnesses, that is not such a difficult thing to do. Very sad that the victim's family then has to be subjected to such torment as all liars are capable of inflicting.
:tears:

 

[ncgramma]

Can they legally do that?

JMO

Sure. They could reach a verdict tonight, decide to sleep on it, and then announce it to the court tomorrow.

 

[pinkfly]

wftv just did another mic check

 

[ziggy]

I think people will use anything in this case as an excuse for their belief. If the women vote guilty, they will be considered emotional and it's a compromise. If they vote not-guilty they will be seen different. It's disgusting to me. These JURORS have dedicated 3 weeks of their lives, being stuck in a hotel room, away from their families, and no matter how they vote, their sex will be used by the media and others. It's disgraceful.

Just like people referring to other people who think GZ is guilty as "emotional". This is what has been wrong with this case from the beginning...profiling!!!! :furious: JMO

Except that profiling is used in jury selection, it's used in many ways. I am guilty of fearing teen guys at night regardless of their race - mr. zig's son is a white, puny kid and he's deceptively strong, add anger and the fact that pot makes him MORE of a jerk instead of mellow and he's dangerous imo. In that regard it's a survival instinct for me - teens boys especially in a group I would see as more dangerous. I don't park next to vans in parking lots.

I think profiling has a bad rap from political correctness. People do have certain fears depending more upon their experiences than their lack of these days. It is only profiling if you have no race neutral reason - and here, the perpetrators of the recent crime, unfortunately, fit TM's description. It is UNFATHOMABLY TRAGIC AND I HATE THAT TM DIED. I have a nephew who is mixed and is tall and lanky like that and 19 years old and lives in Florida! I love him and would hate for anyone to think he was a bad guy because he's a typical teen.

Because I am a woman, I take more precautions when I go out at night or even in the daytime. Is it fair I have to feel like prey? No. Should we live in a world where women can be safe when they go out alone? YES. It's reality. Profiling is not fair, but it's not against the law for a private citizen.

 

[yolorado]

But the shooter didn't walk home to his family. He was beaten up. And who said TM was in a pine box? And yes, as a parent I would be devastated. I would want the truth. I believe they got the truth. I believe GZ defended himself. Sad and tragic but true anyway. I feel so sad for all the parents.

We are confined by history and space. We can't get in a time machine to see either what actually did happen or to change the choices made by the principals in order to see what different outcomes might have resulted. When there's a fight, both parties risk harm. George could have died if Trayvon had gotten the gun or pounded Zimmerman longer. Maybe, they'd both be alive if alternate paths had been traveled. I believe this is just a horrible, horrible, tragic sequence of events. George was protecting his neighborhood. Trayvon was being a 17 year old getting snacks and walking in his neighborhood. They didn't know each other. Neither party understood what they other was up to. They both felt threatened. A fight ensued. The rest is an awful tragedy which destroyed lives and families. I think it highly likely that both Zimmerman and Martin were acting in self defense. If the letter of FL law is followed, I think Zimmerman would walk, but a 17 year old will still be dead. I'm glad I'm not on the jury.

 

[lisasalinger]

IMO, Trayvon's father never knew he left the house. He was supposed to be staying with his father's girlfriend's son while his father and the girlfriend went out to eat. His father had ordered pizza for him and the girlfriend's son. After his father left, he decided to go to the store. A lot of us are asking why the father didn't check on Trayvon when he and his girlfriend came in. I think he thought Travon never left the house that night. He didn't find out until the next morning. JMO

One of the earlier posters, can't remember who now, posted the phone records as well as listed out calls made that night from both Chad and Tracy's phones.

Looks like Chad called Trayvon 8 times, from what I can remember, from 7pm thru after 12am or about that time. Tracy called Trayvon once and it was really late, I believe it was after 12:30am. He knew he was out somewhere.

IMO

 

[Lovelymountains]

If GZ had grabbed him physically of course it would be reasonable to protect himself and fight him back. We don't know what happened. HOWEVER, even if he did fight GZ from grabbing him, he can't use excessive force once the threat is over so continuing down the walkway grappling, mounting, punching banging head etc. would have been over the top. If GZ had pulled out his gun, jmo, but I think it is DOUBTFUL anyone would attack someone who is holding a gun. They would have had the "what's your problem" conversation. TM would have been shot prior to getting control over GZ.

Have any of you ever been in a fight? That might be a problem for me if this were my jury. You can't really understand the dynamics of what it feels like to take a hit when you aren't used to it. A punch in the face is very stunning. A punch from a man anywhere in the head or torso is stunning if you are not accustomed to taking hits or blows.

Also, the positions and body weight distributions change in a grappling situation. I watch a lot of MMA UFC and used to do martial arts. It's possible to be pinning someone down with your legs with their face exposed and the next second he's got a hand free, and then when you try to regain control, weight shifts and it changes the whole scenario. All the things talked about were possible...TM pinning GZ, TM sliding down or GZ sliding up, GZ suddenly being able to free an arm and reach for a gun especially if TM is reaching his right hand across toward the left.

Also, when you learn to fight, you start with jabs with your non-dominant hand, followed by a punch with the dominant hand - the 1,2 punch. Jabs can be as effective as hits. People who fight use both hands. Street fighters and trained fighters. If you are holding a cell phone in your right hand, you might punch a guy with the left.

The point is, with so many possibilities, there is reasonable doubt.
In MY OPINION ONLY

I have to say, No, I've never been in a fight. I've never climbed Mt. Everest, either, but I can tell you how it's done.

 

[twall]

So is Nancy Grace live now? Are we on delay watching her?

She is live but the courtroom scenes she is showing are not but she is acting like they are! :floorlaugh:

 

[ncgramma]

Yes. Exactly. They did not prove either of those to me. They proved to me with their own witnesses that GZ had a reason to be terrified and shot to protect himself. They did not prove to me he wanted anyone dead, or was reckless with his weapon. Certainly not that he was a mean minded vigilante.

The more evidence I poured over, the pictures, I don't see any of it beyond a reasonable doubt. All I can see is doubt.

I think what sold it to me was that the shot occurred AFTER Good went back into his house without helping.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I know this is your opinion. But others, including me, have looked at the same evidence and do not agree with you. It's not based on emotion, it's based on facts. You just see it different, which is ok. We are all entitled to our opinions and to see the facts as we see it. Obviously, it's not as clear cut as you would like to believe with the jury.

I do not believe Trayvon "beat" GZ. I do not believe GZ shot to "protect himself". It's ok to agree to disagree. But please, stop saying I, and others, are emotional and irrational because we do not see the facts the way you see them.

Thank you. JMO, MOO and not an emotional one.

The fact is that she said he said he was AT his daddy's house.. There is no way around that fact.
GZ was not injured before he ran into Tm and then he is bloodied and bruised and cut. That was at the hands of TM as even the Prosecutor admitted in court.

To make scenarios that are different than the the facts state them to be, Is fiction.

If there is any doubt or it is not clear in the facts then it has to go to GZ an acquittal.

 

[cityslick]

What is described above shows both breaking the law. The one not wearing a seatbelt is not only breaking the law but also behaving in a manner that is putting themselves in danger. Since both broke the law I would expect my child that was not wearing the seatbelt to be given a ticket for that and I would expect the other driver to be charged with the proper charges for driving while drunk, underage and causing harm to someone else by hitting them with a car.

Now, as far as Zimmerman goes he was behaving in a manner that not only put himself in danger but also everyone around him including Trayvon. I would expect for Zimmerman to follow the instructions that were given to the neighborhood watch volunteers. However, he did not. Now he must face the punishment for not following those instructions and killing a teenager.

MOO

You think he should go to jail for not following NW rules as if they were laws? Pretty sure they don't work like that.