Is Zimmerman Guilty?

Go back and read the autopsy report again because the mark was NOT on Trayvon's knuckle but on the inside of his left ring finger so you're wrong.Trayvon never touched Zimmerman and he lied about the punching, smothering and pinching his nose because none of George's DNA was found on Trayvon hands or under his fingernails.

Trayvon did try to run home but George cut him off. That's what George was doing for the missing 2 and a half minutes. Furthermore you need to look at the clothing Trayvon was wearing.

The shirt under his hoodie has George's bloodstain on it and what looks like a thumbprint. The two holes in Trayvon's hoodie and shirt are about three inches from the entrance wound in Trayvon's chest which means that George was holding Trayvon's hoodie and pulling on his shirt when he shot him. Basically restraining Trayvon and preventing him from retreating.

Also the bullet traveled through Trayvon's chest in a straight line-neither right or left or up or down which means that both Trayvon and George were standing when he shot Trayvon and Trayvon was not on top of George.

Murder 2!!

 

And you know this how?

Were you there?

Will the defense call you as a witness?

 

Right but that means the State's case has to be exceptionally weak and since O'Mara has been attempting to delay the trial at every turn I don't believe the State is playing games with George.

Furthermore it's going to look really bad to the jury if the defendant doesn't take the witness stand in a self-defense case because he's basically admitted to shooting Trayvon and people like Scott Peterson and Drew Peterson have been convicted of murder even though neither one of them confessed to the shooting so the State is half-way home and that means that George is literally on the defensive.

If Jodi Arias' lawyer thought she should take the stand I can't imagine what O'Mara must think that George will have to do the same.

 

With such an affirmative statement you should have no problem presenting the evidence he was not acting in self-defense then.

Let's see it.................

Assume??? Excuse me??? This isn't about assuming things. This is about a 17 year old getting killed and someone facing prison. We deal with the facts and the evidence you don't get to assume and make things up.

 

Nah; I have no idea one way or the other, since I am not a material witness, to anything other than the absurd and obviously racially- biased assertions in this thread.

That, and neither an assumption of guilt or innocence on the part of Zimmerman, is what my ridicule was targeted at.

Sorry you didn't pick up on that. I would have thought it obvious.

 

You do make a point of being as obscure as possible.

 

No. As ironic as possible, draped in sarcasm.

 

Again, you are taking ONLY Zimmerman's words, totally ignoring the words heard by his girl friend over the phone. According to witness 8, Martin asked "What are you following me for?" And these are NOT fighting words, and deserved a civil answer.

Zimmerman's injuries do not fit the "savage beating" that he pretends he received. And the witness who first stated that the guy on the bottom was being hit "MMA style" as since changed his story and said he was only referring to the POSITION of the two bodies.

And, once again, the fact that there was no physical damage done to Trayvon proves only one thing: Zimmerman did NOT TRY to defend himself. . .which means that he really didn't feel the need to. . .but he ONLY REACHED OUT FOR HIS GUN and shot. . .without even giving a warning.

And that is in my opinion unforgivable.

 

What 8?, you scared to say DeeDee?,,,LOL Sorry I refuse to pay attention to a hear-say witness who happens to be a close friend of Travon. Might as well ask his Mother

The position was Travon on top and according to that witness they may have been punch's or hitting I believe. same thing a beating. The jury will decide on the fractured nose, black eye, bruises and such. Travon would not stop when the witness called out, even when he told them he was dialing 911. He also said zimmerman was trying to get up, but Travon would not let him.

.
The Witness said several times zimmerman tried to get up, but couldn't. He also said they were BOTH struggling.

Where you been?, have not seen you for a few days? missed ya...

 

No valid option in the poll.

No. He's not guilty because it's not a crime to walk down the street. It IS a crime to attack someone you feel is following you...as Trayvon did. But Trayvon's crime received instant punishment, so there's no issues here.

Stating that Zimmerman "exercised poor judgement" is a racist statement implying that white men living in a neighborhood should not walk behind black teenagers because the black teenagers are all expected to be violently irrational like Trayvon was.

 

Hearsay and what was Zimmerman's uncivil answer? What reason did Zimmerman give to Martin for him to assault him? Even an uncivil answer is not reason to physically assault someone.

He doesn't pretend anything about it was what it was and it is perfectly reasonable that someone who had just had their nose broken, is being smothered and having the head bashed against a concrete sidewalk to fear serious bodily harm if the beating continues.

Please explain what it is not reasonable?

He told investigators on at least two occasions that it was a beating going on and that it was Zimmerman on the bottom. We know from the injuries who was receiving the beating and who was giving it.

A lack of injuries, which is not true one finger had an abrasion on it, proves nothing.

Pure conjecture and yes he did defend himself when he shot the guy who was beating him and would not stop and he was in imminent danger of serious bodily harm.

You are not require to give a warning, you are not require to have received serious bodily harm. You only have to have a reasonable fear that you are in imminent danger of serious bodily harm and certain Zimmerman had that reasonable fear. Why would you want him to go to jail for that?

 

White or White Hispanics should be prohibited from following young African American men in their neighborhoods, because it is racial profiling which is indeed racist.

Zimmerman is guilty of racism, and negligent homicide after the fact.

 

I have explained everything I believe, based on the forensic and on common sense.

I am tired of repeating the same things, as you guys are totally ignoring anything that doesn't fit in your agenda. The ONLY thing you have is Zimmerman contradictory statements.

all the evidences will be presented at trial, whether or not you listen to reason.

So, I am happy to wait until trial. . . .but I believe that you are fooling yourself if you think that GZ will get off in April with the SYG hearing!

That will be the first indication of how very deluded you guys are.

And, yes, even those of you who are working on this false propaganda campaign initiated by the defense.

 

Great post, with all the accusations of racism thrown at everybody about this thing, we forget that Zimmerman has been more or less described as a ''typical'' racist white guy more times then I can name. Also why is it when it was thought Zimmerman brought in color people were in a rage, but when others describe Zimmerman as ''white'' nobody says a word,,,and it's the same people...

This entire thing has been about race, and anybody that cant see that are the very ones that have been promoting just that.

 

That's spot on f;lounder and something that the Trayvonsistas just can't understand with their inventions of laws.

 

I think Zimmermans attorney will bang this point home. Travons intent was to harm, and KEEP harming, that witness makes this perfectly clear and will state that in court. What were his words?,,''HEY stop that''!!,,''I'm calling 911'', but did Travon heed his words? NO!, he kept fighting, and who was in control? Travon was....Why didn't he stop? WHY?
So, how the heck will the prosecution get around that? Simple,,,they cant. One other thing, what kind of man keeps hitting a man that's down?

 

There are no major contradictions in his statements to police investigators. The fact remains that you have NO evidence to refute his claim of self-defense and YOU are the one ignoring the evidence choosing to use made up speculation and supposition rather than the actual forensic evidence.

You made the claim Zimmerman gave an uncivil answer, well what was it and what is the evidence that supports it? And SO WHAT even if true. Giving someone an "uncivil answer" does not grant them license to assault you and threaten you with serious bodily harm does it. The evidence and witness statements are at hand, they have been presented and there is nothing in it to refute his claims or convict him beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Yes I agree and as forensic investigator Michael Knox points out in his book when dealing with such fights police consider the person on top the controlling person, even a light weight smaller person will have a distinct advantage in a fight if they can get on top and pin the person they are fighting. Just watch the MMA type fights or amateur wrestling. Once you have an opponent pinned YOU are in control of the situation.

Martin instigated the confrontation and was in control of it during the assault.

 

Nobody will ever know if he's guilty or not. Half the story died with the kid. You people have nothing but speculation.

 

ROFL stop what? Defending himself..............you are asserting he had a duty to stop defending himself?

According to Zimmerman and Witness 6 Martin was not distracted.

The gun was more to the side and easily accessible and in fact Martin appeared to be going for it to Zimmerman.

And there you go again, "should have's" and "probably" are NOT EVIDENCE. They are speculations, they are suppositions, they are conjecture, none of which are EVIDENCE.

More utter supposition, there is no reason to assume Zimmerman would have scratches of any kind. He might have, he might not have. Lack of them proves NOTHING.

His statement of events is believable and his actions according to them quite reasonable.

- - - Updated - - -

We have plenty of evidence. But the fact remains the burden of proof is on the prosecution and those asserting he is guilty of murder to prove it was not self-defense. And all they have is made up nonsense and smears.

 

Look how easy this would have ended if not for Travon's anger and wanting to punish George, had he stopped and gotten off he never would have been shot, Travon controlled his own destiny at that point. It's a sad sad thing,, had only he let up.

I see this thing in two parts, one part the following the other the fight. Sure in ones opinion the following may have been wrong, but it's an opinion and it's NOT assault. The fight however IS assault and the continuation leading to the shooting. Huge difference....violence begets violence,,following begets,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,following?

 

Yes there are two distinct parts to the event. The first part where Zimmerman sees Martin, observes him, calls the NEN to report the suspicious person. This includes Martin walking around Zimmerman's truck and acting menacing by his actions and then running off. Then Zimmerman exits his truck to see if he can observe where Martin runs off. Zimmerman avoid confrontation and did not seek it.

Then there is the pause where Zimmerman is talking the the NEN dispatcher trying to meet up with the soon to be arriving at any moment police. Martin is on the phone telling the girl friend that he is running/walking back to the apartment and tells her he is "right by" it for several minutes.

Then Martin walks back towards the T junction see Zimmerman walking back towards his truck and confronts him. Then the assault takes place.

The ONLY thing that matters is the assault, all that is before it is of no consequence. Martin had no legal reason to assault Zimmerman, to beat him and to continue to do so even after a bystander yelled for it to stop and that he was calling the police. Zimmerman certainly had a reason to believe he was in danger of imminent serious bodily harm if Martin was not stopped.