GZ Case - Defense Perspective

[Phoenixfla]

I am not Chris_Texas, but from reading this:
In my opinion, the only tragedy there is that he didn't manage to finish the job before Zimmerman gunned him down. In my opinion.

I'd say it is the opinion of the poster that it is a tragedy that TM didn't kill GZ before GZ killed him.
That's just how I'm reading it.
I may be wrong.


Taking this line of thought, if TM's "job to finish" was to kill GZ, there is not doubt that this is a self defense case.
Pure and simple.

JMO

Thanks. That is how I understood it also, but I thought surely Chris_Texas did not mean that TM should have killed GZ. I wanted to give Chris_Texas the benefit of the doubt and ask they further explain.

 

[whiteangora]

I'm not sure if he was defending himself or was just annoyed by GZ keeping an eye on him. Regardless, if TM threw the first punch, then he is the one who escalated the situation into violence. Not GZ. GZ was not breaking any laws at that point.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

Just because Trayvon showed no signs of being beaten does not mean he had not been
intimadated or provoked by GZ via other means. It's possible that GZ grabbed and detained

TM and began interrogating him and threatening him, saying the Police were on the way and​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]that TM had better "fess up" for whatever GZ's twisted imagination thought the kid was doing
or had done. I see no reason why Trayvon would strike out unless he felt it was his only choice.
I think GZ pretty much scared the carp out of Trayvon. IMO[/FONT]

 

[iluvmua]

We have Trayvon's g/f story, and she doesn't say anything about a gun.
According to the g/f, Trayvon was conversing with Zimmerman and there was no mention of a gun. Nothing in that story to suggest Trayvon knew Zimmerman was armed.

I also don't believe her story, This came from Crump and she waited I believe three weeks before she told anyone and Crump was the first one she told.

IMO, If she is called to testify, the defense is going to rip her story to pieces and rightly so, because IMO, it's all B.S. from Crump.

 

[suzihawk]

ITA, Chris. Further, I believe GZ exposed or brandished his gun and grabbed hold of Trayvon in an effort to detain him and Trayvon was fighting for his very life. Perhaps he got the wounds on his hands from wrestling with the gun. But even if he pummeled GZ, he was justified as he was standing HIS ground out of fear for his life from this stranger who pursued and confronted him with a weapon.

Any evidence to reach that conclusion? Because if you have evidence that GZ had the gun out before the physical confrontation, I would have to reconsider my whole stance at this time.

It's my opinion as indicated above.

 

[jjenny]

Whether g/f story is accurate or not, right now I don't think it actually contradicts the defense. She says Trayvon asked Zimmerman why Zimmerman was following Trayvon. That does not contradict defense claim that Trayvon eventually approached Zimmerman. She also says the call stopped because she assumes Trayvon was pushed, but she can't actually say which one pushed which one, since she didn't see it. As far as I can tell, this story is not inconsistent with Zimmerman's (minus some variations on what was actually said).

 

[wowitsdark]

If a person has a gun pointed in their direction or stuck in their chest in an effort to detain them, that person has the right to defend themselves by any means available. I think that's exactly what happened in this case. :moo:

What makes you believe GZ chose to brandish his gun prior to a physical altercation? He had a permit to carry the gun, and I believe training as to when it was appropriate - and inappropriate - to utilize it. Prior to the TM event, I am not aware that he ever removed his gun during a visual or verbal exchange with anyone.

Just speaking for myself, if someone firmly held and pointed a gun towards me or in my chest, my response would be to run away, rather than to initiate physical contact. The gun is going to win.

 

[iluvmua]

Whether g/f story is accurate or not, right now I don't think it actually contradicts the defense. She says Trayvon asked Zimmerman why Zimmerman was following Trayvon. That does not contradict defense claim that Trayvon eventually approached Zimmerman. She also says the call stopped because she assumes Trayvon was pushed, but she can't actually say which one pushed which one, since she didn't see it. As far as I can tell, this story is not inconsistent with Zimmerman's (minus some variations on what was actually said).

I think the Prosecution will try and use it to discredit the defense though.

 

[Phoenixfla]

It's my opinion as indicated above.

I understand, but do you have anything to back up your belief? Wouldn't TM's GF mention anything about the gun from her very detailed description of the phone call with TM?

I'm all for differing opinions, but I tend to "believe" the ones that have evidence to back them up.

 

[jjenny]

I think the Prosecution will try and use it to discredit the defense though.

And I think defense can use it to its advantage, since it doesn't really contradict Zimmerman's story, and at no time does the g/f story suggests Trayvon knew Zimmerman was armed.

 

[suzihawk]

What makes you believe GZ chose to brandish his gun prior to a physical altercation? He had a permit to carry the gun, and I believe training as to when it was appropriate - and inappropriate - to utilize it. Prior to the TM event, I am not aware that he ever removed his gun during a visual or verbal exchange with anyone.

Just speaking for myself, if someone firmly held and pointed a gun towards me or in my chest, my response would be to run away, rather than to initiate physical contact. The gun is going to win.

It always does! It certainly did in this case against an unarmed teenager, didn't it?

What good would running do? No one could possibly know what they would do in Trayvon's position at that precise moment in time . Having said that, I might think that this stranger that had been following me would shoot me in the back if I attempted to run.

Zimmerman isn't exactly known for following directions. All the training in the world isn't going to stop a bully who was on a hell bent mission to capture himself an a$$hole punk like the ones that had always gotten away before.

IMO, as always.

 

[suzihawk]

I understand, but do you have anything to back up your belief? Wouldn't TM's GF mention anything about the gun from her very detailed description of the phone call with TM?

I'm all for differing opinions, but I tend to "believe" the ones that have evidence to back them up.

As I recall, the phone call was abruptly disconnected at some point after Trayvon told her someone was following him. That may have been when GZ grabbed him while simulataneously reaching for or exposing his gun.

We're all patiently waiting for for the evidence which will be presented at trial. Until then, we're free to speculate on the various bits and pieces that are currently being strategically leaked to the press. Everyone doesn't interpret them in the same manner, obviously.

:moo:

 

[Maxim]

If a person has a gun pointed in their direction or stuck in their chest in an effort to detain them, that person has the right to defend themselves by any means available. I think that's exactly what happened in this case. :moo:

I don't believe TM was defending himself from the gun by hitting GZ If the gun had been out already it's unlikely GZ would have any injuries. It's more likely TM would have been shot if he came at GZ.

The sequence of events seems to be GZ injuries, gun, struggle for gun, gunshot.

 

[Just K]

I'm not sure if he was defending himself or was just annoyed by GZ keeping an eye on him. Regardless, if TM threw the first punch, then he is the one who escalated the situation into violence. Not GZ. GZ was not breaking any laws at that point.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

Not if GZ grabbed him and TM elbowed or punched GZ in an effort to get away from the skulking stranger.

 

[Just K]

I said from the beginning that the state needs to prove how GZ attacked TM. Not followed TM or asked TM a question, but physically attacked TM. Because past precedent in similar cases has favored the defendant if they are attacked or the confrontation is started by the victim.

Or detained TM either by intimidation or threat...as in showing the gun. Both of which are illegal detainment. If GZ, or a helper trapped or grabbed TM, that is abduction in some states.

 

[Just K]

GZ didn't have to pull the gun before the "scuffle." All he had to do was lift his jacket and expose it while uttering some intimidating remark. That may have occurred after grabbing TM and the phone going dead.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

From the defense's perspective O'Mara need not worry about claims that GZ brandished his gun before the physical contact was made. Unless some unknown witness comes forward and testifies that they saw the whole incident happen. And if this witness suddenly emerges at this late date, their testimony will be suspect. JMO.

 

[Phoenixfla]

Not if GZ grabbed him and TM elbowed or punched GZ in an effort to get away from the skulking stranger.

If he was trying to get away, how did he end up on top of GZ? Once he elbowed or punched GZ, why stay there?

 

[Phoenixfla]

GZ didn't have to pull the gun before the "scuffle." All he had to do was lift his jacket and expose it while uttering some intimidating remark. That may have occurred after grabbing TM and the phone going dead.

Wait...IF GZ grabbed TM, he is guilty to me weather he showed the gun or not. BUT I have yet to see anything that indicates that he grabbed him.

One thing I think is being missed in the case is that the SA has to prove BEYONE A REASONABLE DOUBT, not a PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.

If there is no evidence who started the physical confrontation, how is the jury going to get past reasonable doubt?

 

[gxm]

Not if GZ grabbed him and TM elbowed or punched GZ in an effort to get away from the skulking stranger.

To the best of our knowledge, there is not evidence to contradict GZ's story. Even the gf's story backs him up with TM being the first to initiate verbal contact. Then there's the one witness who said that GZ was on the ground being beaten. AFAIK, all witness reports corroborate GZ's story so far.

Did the doc dump include a witness statement that said GZ grabbed TM?

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

 

[suzihawk]

To the best of our knowledge, there is not evidence to contradict GZ's story. Even the gf's story backs him up with TM being the first to initiate verbal contact. Then there's the one witness who said that GZ was on the ground being beaten. AFAIK, all witness reports corroborate GZ's story so far.

Did the doc dump include a witness statement that said GZ grabbed TM?

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

What doc dump?

We're ALL just speculating and exercising our right to express our various opinions on the LEAKED information and evidence we have thus far. That's still allowed on this forum, isn't it?