Shellie Zimmerman ~ *Doubtful of his Innocence*

Yes. there is usually a middle if there are two people making thier cases. Martin was dead and only Zimmerman was alive to establish one end of the events. The prosecution, had to cobble together a defense based on witnesses...of which...did not witness who approached who...did not see Zimmerman's head being slammed....and did not see the shooting

And since people insist on stating my position inaccuratly...let me tell it.

This is how I think it happened.

Martin was walking home. Zimmerman suspected Martin of being "up to no good". Zimmerman followed Martin after calling the cops. One confronted the other. Martin got the better of Zimmerman when a fight started. Zimmerman shot Martin.

None of this is disputed by either side, but with Martin dead, we'll never know for sure who appraoched who, who threw the first punch, and how much danger Zimmerman was in.

 

lets all appease the blacks and let them do what they want and not hold them to any standard. Otherwise, it's our fault if they get mad.

 

Yes... 1 men's watch and 12 pieces of women's jewelry. What are the odds ?

 

onus is on the state to prove guilt.... not Zimmerman to prove innocence. That's the issue none of the pro-trayvoners can grasp

 

And did you walk under the back awnings of other people's home in the process? I certainly hope not else someone may have called the cops on you.

 

There are NO bloody awnings.

 

His actions were prefectly reasonable with the circumstances and the talk between him and the NEN dispatcher, for what your statement presents Martin should have done the wise and smart thing and not gone to the store.

But yes the running off and reappearing is key to the occurrences that night and prove that Martin was not so scared, that he instigated the second contact and that had he not and instead simply gone inside the apartment and watched the basketball he would be alive today. HE choose a different course which brought about his demise.

 

Roof extensions whatever you want to call them, if you put your hoody on and go walking tonight I suggest you NOT walk up the back of other people's homes else someone might call the police on you. Wouldn't you if you saw someone doing that and your neighborhood had been plagued with breakins?

 

"Are you in your right mind?"

"Are you nuts?"

 

There are NO roof extensions.. Its so childish to invent awnings and roof extensions.

 

Hold on there...I don't recal stating that my instincts are not born of a familiarity of the case. I recorded the trial and watched it from beggining to end.

You're just restating Zimmerman's account of the events. I'm not interested in whether or not he's guilty as far as the courts, because they've found him innocent. I've tried to fit his account into something that sounds like something that happens in real life. Although abstract, and I've found that Zimmerman supporters DO NOT like this type of thinking. Furthermore, they are often angered by my acceptance of the innocent verdict, without acceptance of the truthfullness of Zimmerman's tesitmony

I wasn't going for tenable. The jury has made their decision. Zimmerman's story has an odor to me, but I wasn't there. I think I'm kind of intellectually repulsed by anyone who thinks they know for sure what happened. Therefore, IMO arguing for the innocence or guilt of Zimmerman allows many opinions to remain vaild, even after the verdict

 

Read my posts carefully.

- - - Updated - - -

You're overthinking this.......it's simple. If I were Zimmerman that night, and armed, I would have stayed in the car till the cops got there, for sure....and Martin would be alive, and I wouldn't have spent all that time incarcerated or on trial for my life.

All to prevent a burglary?......

 

I would have stayed in the car no matter what color a suspected burglar was...nor would I walk into what was effectively a dark alley looking for which way they went after the cops were already on their way.

- - - Updated - - -

Read the post again, you're not understanding my position

 

Equivocation– the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).

 

so you agree with the not guilty verdict?

yes or no

 

what you would have done is inconsequential.... Zimmerman did nothing illegal by following. Zimmerman did nothing illegal even if he did not comply to a 911 operator's suggestion (911 is not a cop btw, just to be clear). Zimmerman did nothing illegal by confronting Trayvon.....


Trayvon may not have liked being thought of as a thug, could have been 100% innocent and may not have been casing the neighborhood (as I suspect he was), that still doesn't give him the right to escalate a legal situation into an illegal one by assaulting Zimmerman.

 

The jury ruled that Zimmerman was not guilty of murder 2 or manslaughter, they did not use the words innocent.

IMO Zimmerman could have avoided killing Martin if he would have acted like more like I would have that night. IMO Zimmerman acted like a dangerous version of Barney Fife

 

Although I disagree with the oversimplification of the actual event, I do appreciate the consistency. It is common amongst Martinites(not saying that you are)to claim that Zimmerman was foolish in following Martin, and at the same time claiming that Martin was an innocent child! LOL. My goodness, it is only dangerous to follow Martin to the extent that Martin is dangerous. If Martin isn't dangerous then it isn't dangerous to follow Martin(it is assumed that all human actions have some inherent risk, including following innocent people, thus my claim isn't absolute).

Respectfully,

 

I mean seriously, he was out on bail the whole time, lol.

 

Zimmermans story by nature shouldn't be accurate. You have Zimmerman retelling a story about 2 persons, their actions, their locations, a phone call, his own statements and his own perceptions across the span of some several minutes and the relationship of all those things. It is typical of someone confusing times and relationships of locations as to time. They can also reverse the order of events. They can add detail that didn't actually happen but reflect their mindset at the time. etc.
One thing to consider is that Zimmerman did not know who witnessed the various aspects of the event from start to finish. Zimmerman's story has no damning inconsistencies. If you listen to the tone and timing of his words their is no perceptible malice or ill intent other than frustration of suspects getting away before PD can arrive. And as I say, its a pretty dang big deal to consider the body and builds of these two persons. It much more difficult to accuse Zimmerman of a wrong doing if he couldnt run down or catch Martin in a place that had no dead ends.
Again, the more you know about the particulars of the event the more reasonable Zimmermans actions become.

Respectfully,

 

What about the 12 pieces of women's jewelry? The police response that I saw said that the PD still had the jewelry. Stealing a $4 watch is still stealing.

Respectfully,

 

I stand corrected. When people watch 8 year olds or 13 year olds punch each other in the face persistently over the course of several minutes while adults cheer on for more vicious strikes, the children don't actually go unconscious(rarely).

 

Golden Gloves is fought on points NOT punches in the face.

 

2nd story overhangs, back patios, I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU CALL THEM, the COVERED BACK PORCH, it doesn't matter stop being childish and address the issue.







Are you going to go walking tonight an walk through other peoples back patios and between the privacy fences? I'd advise you not do so else someone might call the police on you, would you?

 

Trayvon wasn't on anyone's covered porch. Quit making things up and embarrassing yourself. Its pathetic.