Martin was slamming Zimmermans head against the ground. I would have shot him. I don't understand why this instance receives so much attention, and by those who haven't a clue of the basic tenants of self-defense.
We don't know, if TM ever slammed GZ's head, at all. GZ's head wounds are not consistent with smashing. Neither is the blood flow. GZ's head wounds are linear, uniformly deep scratches, which bled, according to the flow of gravity, only. Your smashing theory isn't borne out, by circumstances. However, we do know GZ is a liar. We do know GZ approached TM and started a confrontation, while TM's gf was on the phone, with TM. We do know GZ shot TM, so as to not get any GSR on GZ's red jacket. Go ahead and claim GZ was underneath Martin, when this happened, and we'll know you are completely irrational. We do know GZ was witnessed choking out TM, while sitting on TM's back. We do know GZ resisted and prevented calling paramedics. We do know that establishes murder 1 intent. We do know GZ is a tweaker, with ADHD, supported by other irrational tweakers.
What does the preponderance of the evidence say? What is your reasonable doubt he was not? And your degree in forensic sciences was award from where? 45% of his head was covered in blood, what expertise do you have to say it was not consistent with contusions and lacerations from being beaten against concrete? And your training it this is from where and have you offered your expert testimony to the prosecution? So what is your evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and believe me your conjecture is all about doubt, that the injuries did not occur as Zimmerman stated. We know otherwise. They had lost sight of each other, it was Martin who saw Zimmerman while he was all the way back at the apartment and returned to the intersection of the sidewalks where he confronted Zimmerman as Dee Dee said in her statement. , while TM's gf was on the phone, with TM. Yes while, as we know Martin was assaulting him. Completely within the evidence. Know we don't the preponderance of the evidence says otherwise and the statement that does is full of doubt. He had just been cold-cocked breaking his nose then having his head beaten into concrete while he feared for his life and then had shot a guy and was probably in shock and the person he was talking was probably in a state of shock so the statements and actions immediately following are of little concern. Zimmerman knew the police were already on the way, people on the scene were already talking to 911. Give us the evidence for premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt.
And using the discovery evidence prove it and how the injuries did happen, beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you believe George's version of events... he got to the T 2 minutes before Trayvon.. George has made a mess of his changing narratives.
GZ's scratches are a gross fabrication. Nobody needs to be a professional, to see that or how GZ is a tweaker, and his supporters are tweakers. GZ was witnessed, sitting on Martin's back, with his hands on Martin's throat. Even if the gun crime was not fatal, the assault on Martin AFTER the shooting describes murder 1 intent. O'Mara has to jam tweakers on the jury, since GZ won't take a plea deal. There's nowhere, for the charge to go, for a plea bargain.
This is what I think happened. But who am I? You got it, nobody. This could've happened. It will take the trial and the attornies to present how it all happened and then convince the jury. Frankly, I hope Zimmy didn't "start" it and that Martin really was a punk kid who "jumped" the neighborhood watch guy who was clearly was just getting back in his truck. If true we are rid of one more bad kid. Yup, Zimmy might well be the aggressor, but we'll have to see. I don't think people have a problem with shooting someone who is beating them up. It seems like the biggest problem comes from someone (the one with the gun) who starts a fight, is now losing the fight, then when the guy beating you up doesn't stop, it DOESN'T give you the right to now kill him. There is a VERY fine line there.
Yes and walked past it and was talking to the dispatcher while trying to decide on where to meet the police. All the while Martin had run back to the apartment, was standing outside it talking to Dee Dee where he could simply have gone inside, sat down and watched TV and be alive today. You cannot dispute those facts.
Excuse me when did that stop you spouting your forensic nonsense? Try again, you are convicting him on this board, well use the evidence that will be presented, prove it and how the injuries did happen, beyond a reasonable doubt.
You know if all you have left are specious statements spiced up by your throwing the race card I'll put you on ignore. Either we can have a civil discussion like adults or you can act like a juvenile on your own. That Martin had a "right" to be somewhere is of no bearing. He did not have a "right" to engage in an assault on someone.
You are correct that under Florida law when he physically attacked Zimmerman it became an aggravated battery but for the sake of discussion here assault, a : a violent physical or verbal attack, suffices so people understand what we are talking about. So we can agree to the stipulation that in common terms it was an assault and you no longer need to point out the legal definition if someone is charge with the offense.
I know the law and the preponderance of the evidence is Zimmerman was the one assaulted and the person who engaged in that assault was Martin.
Nobody can get assault charges, against TM, based on: 1. GZ approached and failed to identify himself or defuse the situation 2. MAYBE TM was on top of GZ, at one point GZ shot TM, as an excessive use of force, which may have been manslaughter, at that time, but when GZ turned TM over, sat on him, and had his hands, on TM's neck, per witnesses AND GZ's ADMISSION, GZ had developed and demonstrated murder 1 intent, which made certain TM died, at the scene. This prevented any witness to the actual shooting, from availability. As soon as TM witnessed GZ's weapon, GZ was in an area, where TM's reports and testimony could harm him, for being a tweaker, trying to get out a handgun, to injure, when GZ knew SPD was on the way. Murder 1 happened. Charging murder 2 just lets O'Mara play around, while all the tweakers drop off the wall, for GZ.
what is with this 'tweakers' crap?....and who excactly saw GZ sitting on his back?and why would he have his hands on the back of his neck?
