What evidence does the prosecution have?

[Sun48shine]

Do you realize that your quote is the losing side giving its argument about why the decision was wrong?

What quote are you referring to?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

What do the guns laws in states other than Florida have to do with "What evidence does the prosecution have?"

 

[AJ Noiter]

JMO
The larger the surface area, the more difficult to grasp.

Pick up a tennis ball? easy.
Pick up a watermelon? not easy.

The whole head bang, diapers, spoon fed by the bro scenario isn't in the least credible to me....I saw Z...he looked fine, nice clean clothes, walked normally-he appeared fine and dandy less than a hour after Travon was shot dead.

With a single hand? Sure. With two hands? I don't think it'd be any more difficult unless you bring weight in as a factor, and I don't think the weight of a human head would be much of a factor for a young man with one or two hands.

 

[LynnM]

Those who are in support of finding GZ guilty REFUSE to accept that it was not the WALKING that got TM shot, it was the ATTACKING that got him shot. GZ was not standing his ground or defending himself from a WALKER, he was defending himself from an ATTACKER.

It is your opinion that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. It is my opinion that Trayvon was defending himself against a man who was attempting to unlawfully restrain him and that Zimmerman committed second degree murder when he shot him.

Your evidence is that Zimmerman has injuries. My corresponding evidence is that Trayvon is dead of a wound from a bullet fired by Zimmerman's gun.

 

[gxm]

It is your opinion that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. It is my opinion that Trayvon was defending himself against a man who was attempting to unlawfully restrain him and that Zimmerman committed second degree murder when he shot him.

Your evidence is that Zimmerman has injuries. My corresponding evidence is that Trayvon is dead of a wound from a bullet fired by Zimmerman's gun.

IMO, in that scenario, the state would need a witness to the "unlawfully restraining" part. The defense appears to already have a witness to the TM beating up GZ part.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

 

[Concerned Papa]

I just wanted to point out that if Mr. Martin knew he had a weapon he (Mr. Martin) certainly didn't tell his girlfriend about it, or she hasn't stated as much anyway. That's why I find it incredibly hard to believe that Mr. Zimmerman had his weapon out at any time prior to the conflict.

The only thing I'll point out is, IF I remember her statement correctly, the encounter she talked about, "Why are you following me", etc. began seconds (45+/-?) before the shot was fired. In fact, I believe she said the call terminated abruptly after the encounter began.

My only point is, in that initial few moments, it's not unreasonable to think maybe he just hadn't seen this small gun in his hand yet.

If I'm remembering what she said incorrectly, let me know, but don't ask for a link til I get home tonight, lol.

 

[Karmady]

What quote are you referring to?

The words inside the quotation marks in your post to which I was responding????

 

[Sun48shine]

The words inside the quotation marks in your post to which I was responding????

That's not my quote. It comes from an article that was posted.

 

[Karmady]

That's not my quote. It comes from an article that was posted.

Clearly. And my question was whether you realized that the quote is from the side that lost the argument?

 

[Gin]

With a single hand? Sure. With two hands? I don't think it'd be any more difficult unless you bring weight in as a factor, and I don't think the weight of a human head would be much of a factor for a young man with one or two hands.

JMO/IMO
So now our armed patrolman was slammed into concrete with two hands? And the former bouncer, in this scenario, lies back and plays dead? I know this is kinda the story his bro tells. Evidence?? I go to the tape from the police station. He looks just fine. You'd never guess in a million years he'd just killed a teen. His face looks fine. He's wearing nice clean clothes...saunters in like he'd just been picked up for "forgetting" a dozen parking tickets.

Something about his "self defense" story just doesn't ring true. He probably hates that police tape. :wink:

 

[LambChop]

Go ahead and slam a ball or melon into the ground and look at your hands. I bet they don't have any injury. You would push someone's head into the ground using the palm of your hand, not the back.

I think that the main thing going against GZ in regards to the screams is the relatively short period of time between the last scream and the sound of the gun. It seems to be too short of a time to go from total desperation to gaining the upper hand with the gun.

I can easily believe that the screams were either GZ's or TM's. I don't believe the voice expert who stated they consulted with a linguistics expert before coming up with the final score. I believe there are voice recordings for TM out there that will ultimately be used. If the screams are GZ's, it only partially helps him as you could imagine a person intent on killing someone might scream for help to make it look in self defense. It is totally damning evidence if it is TM.

People have control over their heads....mellons don't. In any case GZ could move his head around and TM would not want to get near his face if GZ said is true because GZ could have bitten him. Not so say putting his hand, arms and wrists near GZ's head TM could have gotten bitten and yet no marks on TM that the director could see. Hanging onto someone's ears while they are twisting their head around would not work either. Unless there was hair to hold onto I doubt it ever happened. Most people agree GZ had two small cuts to the head and not injuries from having his head bashed numerous times on the sidewalk.

Obviously if the doctor believed GZ, he would have ordered a brain scan to insure there were no serious injuries. So we shall see. jmo

 

[vlpate]

My state of Maryland is not on there. Maryland is very strict on people using guns as self defense. We had a case a few years ago where a man caught someone trying to steal his tires. He shot them, but he ended up in jail.

Baltimore Maryland, where apparently only criminals carry guns, has the 2nd highest crime rate (top ten), in the US for 2012, Florida cities didn't make the list.

Just a quick glance at this page shows NINE shootings in one day (17th), and FIVE shootings on the 22nd, in Baltimore. I'm not sure I would be singing the praises of Maryland's CWP laws. JMO

As this relates to what the prosecution has, GZ had every right to carry his weapon in Florida and to stand his ground and/or defend himself. The fact that he was carrying his gun, will not be part of the prosecutions case. Just because Neighborhood watch has a "rule" that volunteers are not to carry a gun, it's still just a rule, not a law. JMO.
.

 

[Sun48shine]

Clearly. And my question was whether you realized that the quote is from the side that lost the argument?

Maybe I am not clear on who lost an argument. I just came on this thread today. Was there some type of bet going on? I don't take sides.

 

[Phoenixfla]

But our law makers insist that people in Maryland should not use guns outside of their homes, no matter what the circumstance is.

are you saying that the lawmakers say you should not, or that it is the law that you can not?

 

[Karmady]

Maybe I am not clear on who lost an argument. I just came on this thread today. Was there some type of bet going on? I don't take sides.

The losing side was the side that argued that Md's gun law (the one that you brought up) is constitutional. The article AJN posted to you showed that the USDC just recently found that Md's gun law is UNconstitutional. It wasn't clear to me from your posts about Md's gun law that you were aware of that ruling since you went on to quote the losing side as evidence that Md's law remains constitutional.

Neither here, nor there to this case. Just making sure we're all on the same page.

I don't know what it has to do with bets and taking sides. I was referring to the losing side of the Court case. Nothing to do with anyone or anything here. I think we can all agree that court cases are won and lost.

 

[Phoenixfla]

We can't in Calif. either. You cannot shoot a person on your property unless they are in your home.

I can't even imagine carrying a loaded gun at all times unless you are LE or trained Security. I think it's ridiculous! JMO

I think your confusing not having a SYG law with not being able to use a gun outside of the home in self defense. Two different things.

In your state, you may not have the right to use a gun if you have an option to retreat, but I assure you that you can use a gun to defend your life, outside of your home, anywhere you lawfully can carry a gun.

 

[LambChop]

The only thing I'll point out is, IF I remember her statement correctly, the encounter she talked about, "Why are you following me", etc. began seconds (45+/-?) before the shot was fired. In fact, I believe she said the call terminated abruptly after the encounter began.

My only point is, in that initial few moments, it's not unreasonable to think maybe he just hadn't seen this small gun in his hand yet.

If I'm remembering what she said incorrectly, let me know, but don't ask for a link til I get home tonight, lol.

Well, it was dark and the gun was black. So the encounter witnessed hearing the scuffle before the line went dead. A witness who claims she saw two people run past her door towards the place where TM was found. I doubt if GZ was running towards TM condo when in his statement he said he was headed towards his car. One grabs the other and in this case GZ was the only one with a motive to keep TM from getting away. They fall, John sees the struggle and hears GZ yell for help, there is screaming and seconds later the shot was fired. All of this in 45 seconds.

I think GZ fell trying to stop TM from running home and injured himself in the fall. I think either TM fell on top or was able to get on top of him and then saw the gun and started the screaming.

Somewhere in the DA's office is a board with times on it, all the 911 information, the witness statements, GZ's statements and I can just visualize them as they pieced second by second together as they were able to gather their information.

Up to the point TM was on the phone there is just no way this young man was planning on attacking GZ. In those 45 seconds it was way more beneficial to GZ to have TM stay right where he was than to let TM take off running. It's possible what the gf heard was TM starting to run away from GZ and the call disconnected. jmo

 

[Sun48shine]

Baltimore Maryland, where apparently only criminals carry guns, has the 2nd highest crime rate (top ten), in the US for 2012, Florida cities didn't make the list.

Just a quick glance at this page shows NINE shootings in one day (17th), and FIVE shootings on the 22nd, in Baltimore. I'm not sure I would be singing the praises of Maryland's CWP laws. JMO

As this relates to what the prosecution has, GZ had every right to carry his weapon in Florida and to stand his ground and/or defend himself. The fact that he was carrying his gun, will not be part of the prosecutions case. Just because Neighborhood watch has a "rule" that volunteers are not to carry a gun, it's still just a rule, not a law. JMO.
.

I am not praising Maryland's CWP laws. I am just mentioning the laws.

Just a note: August 8, 2012 will be the next court date for GZ since the defense needs more time for the case. The prosecution must feel they have a strong case against GZ.

 

[Phoenixfla]

It is your opinion that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. It is my opinion that Trayvon was defending himself against a man who was attempting to unlawfully restrain him and that Zimmerman committed second degree murder when he shot him.

Your evidence is that Zimmerman has injuries. My corresponding evidence is that Trayvon is dead of a wound from a bullet fired by Zimmerman's gun.

This is not evidence of who initially attacked who though. GZ does not deny that he fired the bullet that killed TM.

 

[Sun48shine]

The losing side was the side that argued that Md's gun law (the one that you brought up) is constitutional. The article AJN posted to you showed that the USDC just recently found that Md's gun law is UNconstitutional. It wasn't clear to me from your posts about Md's gun law that you were aware of that ruling since you went on to quote the losing side as evidence that Md's law remains constitutional.

Neither here, nor there to this case. Just making sure we're all on the same page.

I don't know what it has to do with bets and taking sides. I was referring to the losing side of the Court case. Nothing to do with anyone or anything here. I think we can all agree that court cases are won and lost.

Okay, thanks. At first I thought there was a bet going on this thread. Thank you for the clarification.