GZ Case - Defense Perspective

[gxm]

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?

Apologies! I didn't mean to imply you can't speak your opinion. I was wondering if there was some new evidence that supports the opinion that GZ started the fight.

 

[BiancaS]

It's a bit premature to think the charges might be dismissed, IMO. This is one piece of information surreptiously leaked to the press to support Zimmrman's cause. :moo:

Nothing has changed. The 2nd Degree Murder Charges were filed after they were aware of his "injuries," pictures were reportedly part of the case file. We have not seen the evidence yet, apparently it is sufficient for the current charges.

 

[BiancaS]

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:

"Why are you following me" is not what I would consider provoking in any way. I am sure there is plenty of evidence that contradict's Zimmerman's story(ies) as 2nd Degree Murder Charges were filed against him.

The attorney's website seems to suggest (to me, anyway) that they leaked the medical information, we are pretty sure the picture of the "injury" was also from them, based on the timing, day of the hearing. There is a reason that they are leaking these at specific times ---- oooh, look, shiny!!!!. Same thing used to happen with that other Florida case, whenever something was about to come out they would send out distractions.

To me, that suggests that they don't want us to pay attention to the rest of the evidence.

All MOO, of course.

 

[cityslick]

"Why are you following me" is not what I would consider provoking in any way. I am sure there is plenty of evidence that contradict's Zimmerman's story(ies) as 2nd Degree Murder Charges were filed against him.

The attorney's website seems to suggest (to me, anyway) that they leaked the medical information, we are pretty sure the picture of the "injury" was also from them, based on the timing, day of the hearing. There is a reason that they are leaking these at specific times ---- oooh, look, shiny!!!!. Same thing used to happen with that other Florida case, whenever something was about to come out they would send out distractions.

To me, that suggests that they don't want us to pay attention to the rest of the evidence.

All MOO, of course.

'What are you doing here' isn't provoking either IMO

 

[BiancaS]

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.

There are phone records to prove the time they were talking. My understanding is the parents tried to contact the SPD and were ignored. Others have made similar claims. We will find out more, hopefully soon.

MOO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

"Why are you following me" is not what I would consider provoking in any way. I am sure there is plenty of evidence that contradict's Zimmerman's story(ies) as 2nd Degree Murder Charges were filed against him.

The attorney's website seems to suggest (to me, anyway) that they leaked the medical information, we are pretty sure the picture of the "injury" was also from them, based on the timing, day of the hearing. There is a reason that they are leaking these at specific times ---- oooh, look, shiny!!!!. Same thing used to happen with that other Florida case, whenever something was about to come out they would send out distractions.

To me, that suggests that they don't want us to pay attention to the rest of the evidence.

All MOO, of course.

BBM
I'm not that easily distracted. JMO.

 

[gxm]

"Why are you following me" is not what I would consider provoking in any way. I am sure there is plenty of evidence that contradict's Zimmerman's story(ies) as 2nd Degree Murder Charges were filed against him.

The attorney's website seems to suggest (to me, anyway) that they leaked the medical information, we are pretty sure the picture of the "injury" was also from them, based on the timing, day of the hearing. There is a reason that they are leaking these at specific times ---- oooh, look, shiny!!!!. Same thing used to happen with that other Florida case, whenever something was about to come out they would send out distractions.

To me, that suggests that they don't want us to pay attention to the rest of the evidence.

All MOO, of course.

I disagree. IMO, "Why are you following me?" is accusatory. Whereas, "Are you following me?" would be a less aggressive way to open a conversation. IMO, this leads me to believe that TM was annoyed, possibly angered, that GZ was keeping an eye on him. Regardless, TM was the first to initiate any verbal exchange and I believe it is quite plausible that he also threw the first punch.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

 

[Maxim]

From the Defense Perspective:
They will want to know everything about TM. When he got to Sanford, where he was/what he was doing Friday night, when he got to the gated community, all the information they can gather about the second participant will be important.

We don't know very much about TM, at this point; but, by the time a good Defense is finished, they should know quite a bit.

 

[LambChop]

'What are you doing here' isn't provoking either IMO

Wouldn't it have made sense to answer TM's question. Most criminals don't ask that question. All he had to say was he was Neighborhood Watch and does he live there. TM would have said yes and that would have been the end. GZ would have had to call LE back and cancel the call. The very fact he ignored TM's question that TM was within his rights to ask indicates GZ was still treating TM as a suspect in GZ's mind. How could TM possibly know what GZ was thinking? I think this will be hard for GZ to explain. jmo

 

[beach]

Breaking News!

Steven Powell found GUILTY on 14 counts!

 

[cityslick]

Wouldn't it have made sense to answer TM's question. Most criminals don't ask that question. All he had to say was he was Neighborhood Watch and does he live there. TM would have said yes and that would have been the end. GZ would have had to call LE back and cancel the call. The very fact he ignored TM's question that TM was within his rights to ask indicates GZ was still treating TM as a suspect in GZ's mind. How could TM possibly know what GZ was thinking? I think this will be hard for GZ to explain. jmo

I don't know exactly what each other said and didn't say because I have not heard the full context of the phone conversation between the GF and TM. How do we know other things weren't said before the altercation that the GF either didn't hear or hasn't come out yet? You are basing the entire altercation and confrontation on a few statements made by someone who would of only heard anything through a phone.

 

[LambChop]

I disagree. IMO, "Why are you following me?" is accusatory. Whereas, "Are you following me?" would be a less aggressive way to open a conversation. IMO, this leads me to believe that TM was annoyed, possibly angered, that GZ was keeping an eye on him. Regardless, TM was the first to initiate any verbal exchange and I believe it is quite plausible that he also threw the first punch.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

I believe TM was aggravated. I would be too. It's raining, dark I'm trying to walk home and this guy is following me in his car. Stops twice to park, once at the clubhouse and once at the cut through staring at me the whole time. Then he gets out of the car and comes after me on foot. Unless you are Crocodile Dundee you are going to be concerned about confronting this man and for a young 17 year old probably scared. I believe the difference in time was TM hiding out of sight hoping GZ would think he lost TM. When TM thought GZ had made it back to his truck he may have recontinued his walk home only to be confronted by GZ. GZ did confront TM because GZ was the only one in pursuit. TM did not follow GZ to the spot where GZ found TM. jmo

 

[Maxim]

Wouldn't it have made sense to answer TM's question. Most criminals don't ask that question. All he had to say was he was Neighborhood Watch and does he live there. TM would have said yes and that would have been the end. GZ would have had to call LE back and cancel the call. The very fact he ignored TM's question that TM was within his rights to ask indicates GZ was still treating TM as a suspect in GZ's mind. How could TM possibly know what GZ was thinking? I think this will be hard for GZ to explain. jmo

BBM

Defense could say he answered a question with a question. "Why are you here?" was the answer to the question--he wanted to know why TM was there.

 

[LambChop]

I don't know exactly what each other said and didn't say because I have not heard the full context of the phone conversation between the GF and TM. How do we know other things weren't said before the altercation that the GF either didn't hear or hasn't come out yet? You are basing the entire altercation and confrontation on a few statements made by someone who would of only heard anything through a phone.

Which is about as reliable as GZ statement......oh, wait. Maybe her statement is more reliable because she didn't shoot anyone. We already heard some of the other things GZ had to say about TM on that 911. GZ had already prejudged TM big time. It is clear, by what we know now, that GZ has some serious control issues. FT said it all when he said, "GZ was probably mad as he!! and wasn't going to take it anymore."

To me I see an uphill battle for defense. jmo

 

[LambChop]

BBM

Defense could say he answered a question with a question. "Why are you here?" was the answer to the question--he wanted to know why TM was there.

You know, my husband was LE and one of the things he hated, hated was when someone would answer a question with a question. It's absolutely disrespectful. Decline to answer the question if you must but when you are doing something the other person feels is wrong and they ask you "why" they deserve an answer.

How else was TM suppose to know why GZ was following him. GZ's return question had implications that TM had no business being where he was and then GZ doesn't let TM know who he is as if GZ is some type of authority. GZ had no uniform, no badge, no reason to stop or detain anyone. No one gave GZ that authority. While it is not against the law to follow someone or ask a question of someone you meet, at this point on a rainy dark night, GZ had no authority to detain TM, no authority to ask him questions. No one gave him that authority, no one. At the very least he owned TM an explanation TM's question, why are you following me???? "Because I'm with Neighborhood Watch, we've had some breakins and I'm checking to make sure you live here." He owed that to him the minute he stated to pursue.

I really believe GZ did not want TM to be anyone other than who he thought he should be and he was going to be the one to detain him, hold him for LE and be able to say "I stopped another one from getting away."

This man has no common sense. None. jmo

 

[Chris_Texas]

That is not the law though. It's also up for debate as to how much GZ 'pursued' TM.

What's not the law?

If, as so many seem to be claiming, Mr Zimmerman had the right to defend himself and "stand his ground" then Trayvon had that right as well. Two critical differences here however. The first is that Trayvon attempted to flee, he tried to avoid the conflict. Zimmerman did not. The second is that some do not believe that Trayvon had ANY rights here at all, including the right to be left alone.

The words 'stand your ground' have an absolute meaning in the english language. They mean, literally, to remain where you are. This, obviously, is something Zimmerman did not do. He advanced. His ground was somewhere a hundred yards behind him. He made the choice to leave it.

As I said, the sad part in all this is that Trayvon was unsuccessful in his efforts at self defense. Unfortunately he didn't have a gun or knife with which to defend himself from the advancing armed menace. He only had his hands, and that wasn't enough.

My question would be this... had Trayvon succeeded in defending himself, had he succeeded in 'standing his ground,' if he somehow pulled off the miracle and killed Zimmerman, would those defending Zimmerman and "stand your ground' today be as adamant in their support for Trayvon? The answer appears to be no.

 

[Elley Mae]

Which is about as reliable as GZ statement......oh, wait. Maybe her statement is more reliable because she didn't shoot anyone. We already heard some of the other things GZ had to say about TM on that 911. GZ had already prejudged TM big time. It is clear, by what we know now, that GZ has some serious control issues. FT said it all when he said, "GZ was probably mad as he!! and wasn't going to take it anymore."

To me I see an uphill battle for defense. jmo

bbm I personally do not agree with this and do not want to be a "we". :fence:

 

[AJ Noiter]

You know, my husband was LE and one of the things he hated, hated was when someone would answer a question with a question. It's absolutely disrespectful. Decline to answer the question if you must but when you are doing something the other person feels is wrong and they ask you "why" they deserve an answer.

But they are not entitled an answer. Just as Mr. Martin did not have to, nor did he, answer Mr. Zimmerman.

How else was TM suppose to know why GZ was following him. GZ's return question had implications that TM had no business being where he was and then GZ doesn't let TM know who he is as if GZ is some type of authority. GZ had no uniform, no badge, no reason to stop or detain anyone. No one gave GZ that authority. While it is not against the law to follow someone or ask a question of someone you meet, at this point on a rainy dark night, GZ had no authority to detain TM, no authority to ask him questions. No one gave him that authority, no one. At the very least he owned TM an explanation TM's question, why are you following me???? "Because I'm with Neighborhood Watch, we've had some breakins and I'm checking to make sure you live here." He owed that to him the minute he stated to pursue.

As far as I'm aware there's still no evidence pointing in the direction that "Mr. Zimmerman tried to detain Mr. Martin" which is odd because you'd expect some kind of verbiage to indicate that in the PCA if there is evidence of it. Mr. Martin wasn't a resident in the gated community, Mr. Zimmerman was.. who owed who an explanation, if anyone?

I really believe GZ did not want TM to be anyone other than who he thought he should be and he was going to be the one to detain him, hold him for LE and be able to say "I stopped another one from getting away."

This man has no common sense. None. jmo

He has no "common sense" yet he's put together a VERY elaborate story to cover everything that may be asked. He even convinced Mr. Martin to bruise his own knuckles.

 

[Chris_Texas]

Finish what job?

His job of defending himself.

The same folks who grant Zimmerman the right to chase kids around at night, with a gun, and then kill them when they stand their ground and defend themselves, seem to have a real problem granting those same rights to his victim.

If it's okay and legal for the armed and aggressive Zimmerman to kill Trayvon, then it certainly would be totally acceptable for the fleeing and unarmed Trayvon to kill George.

 

[Chris_Texas]

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

Yes. However, Trayvon was the only person defending themself. He was the one who attempted to flee. George, in muy opinion, negated any claim to self-defense the minute he decided to chase around a frightened kid.