Zimmerman Trial ~ (Monday July 1st)

fair enough - but i'm not one of them.
if Zimmy was black and Martin was white i would still be desiring at least involuntary manslaughter

- - - Updated - - -

lol - yes, i know this is the proverbial slippery slope the right warned about, but i am willing to have faith that Americans will limit marriage to two consenting adults.

 

You're high ... or simply not normal ... Zimmy had absolutely no cognizance of even knowing when he was lying ... either in the police interview nor the walkthrough ... quite rare to see this kind of socio-psychopath in action ...

 

or was TM attempting to keep Zimmerman from raising his firearm in the first place. Zimmerman reached with his right hand from the beginning to the area of his fire arm though he says he was looking for his cell phone.

 

No, that would be extremely unsafe. The safety on a PF9 is the trigger and the booger-picker that does or does not pull it.

 

Why? What evidence brought out in the trial leads you there?

- - - Updated - - -

With every lick the prosecution takes square on the chin, the Trayvon groupies get more delusional .

 

I don't see how that could be when Zimmerman admitted he pulled the trigger voluntarily.

 

That is not clear. Jeantel only used relative terms to describe his progress toward his father’s home and locations.

That is a relative term; not an accepted unit of measure. We have no way of gaining any particular insight into the exact distance.

The “evidence” only supports that Martin attempted to escape Zimmerman. Jeantel’s recount of her extremely limited knowledge of the incident is testimony, and her claims remain in question. No facts of the case can be verified between the time Zimmerman ended the call with the dispatcher and witnesses arrived. The only thing that Jeantel can support is Zimmerman’s own admission that Martin attempted to evade him and he continued to follow.

I’m not sure what statement you are responding to here, but here is an applicable statement:

The evidence only supports that Zimmerman was following him, after Martin had attempted to evade him, and that Martin had a reasonable expectation someone intended to inflict bodily harm or commit some other malicious act. There is a gap between the phone call with the dispatcher, and eyewitness accounts. This is when the encounter took place, and not even Jeantel can offer a clear and conclusive account of the incident, at that point.

Furthermore, in Zimmerman’s statements to the male officer, he said Martin spoke to him. Zimmerman then said that he started trying to get his cell phone out and reached into his jacket. The report also indicates that Zimmerman had a flashlight in his hands, and that it didn’t work. If Zimmerman, who had been following enough to cause him to run away, started reaching into his pockets or jacket (as he said he did) it would give Martin a reasonable expectation he was about to be attacked and could thereby respond.

Yeah, that’s how the law works, and everyone knows that proving anything beyond a reasonable doubt in this case is going to be difficult. However, there is evidence that Zimmerman provoked Martin by following him under these extraordinary circumstances, knowingly increasing the likelihood of encounter, while carrying a deadly weapon. The facts remain that a chain of consecutive action by Zimmerman created conditions that would reasonably alarm Martin, and then, escalated those conditions thereby increasing the chance of confrontation. Zimmerman was reckless and irresponsible, and by his own account he began

My analysis, is that even if Martin approached his follower, Zimmerman provoked an altercation with behavior consistent with a person intending to cause harm or injury. In that theory, both Martin and Zimmerman would have provoked a fight and would be equally responsible. Alternatively, only Zimmerman's actions were perceived as a provocation. Regardless of the perspective, there is nothing that clears Zimmerman of provocation when he willfully escalated the situation and increased the likelihood of confrontation knowing that help was on the way, and having in his possession, a deadly weapon.

Furthermore, and to reiterate, Zimmerman's own account indicates that he began making movements to retrieve his cell phone, and such actions would have given Martin the reasonable expectation a weapon is about to be drawn on him.

 

He pulled it under duress.

- - - Updated - - -

PURE D-LUSION!!!!!!!

 

So you think the majority of Americans are just as bigoted and filled with hate as you are........I hope you are wrong for the sake of my polygamists friends who just want to enter into loving relationships between consenting adults........hopefully you will become more progressive minded in the future......for now just keep dragging your knuckles along the ground.......and keep hating.

 

So if she had said something more to the effect that - he was right by his father's house and thus didn't need to run any more, would you consider that a much more convincing testimony concerning TM's location?

 

Understood. Some bigots draw the line at two heterosexual people marrying. Other bigots draw the line at two people marrying. Bigots will be bigots.

 

It appears that, by Zimmerman's own account, he was attempting to retrieve a cell phone from his pocket when Martin attacked him. That means, that even if Martin was the first to strike a blow, he did so under conditions that reasonably would have given him the expectation a weapon was about to be drawn on him.

 

"Brevity is the soul of wit".

You therefore have not displayed the wit. But where you have continuously claimed neutrality, you instead pile excrement to the top of the page. Virtually every paragraph is themed on biased presumptive BS. But because it is so long-winded, I pity anyone wanting to respond to such a load of crap.

The truth will set you free. The trial is kicking your assumptions to the curb daily.

 

this trial so far is at least an effort to explain the truth and facts to trayvon supporters that george is innocent. so many myths have been busted that were created by the media and loons that are upset because a black teen violent punk got capped.

 

that has crossed my mind

 

oh great another newbie....lolz!

 

If Zimmerman gets acquited...look at the bright side......anytime you want to get away with murder, just pick a fight with them when nobody is looking, and then say you thought you were gonna die.

 

I don't believe that Jeantel is intellectually capable of making accurate speculations about an event she heard, only over the phone, with a person obviously using several relative and slang terms. I don't consider any part of her testimony that is not corroborated by the other evidence to be of any value in establishing the facts. That means, if you can't check out what she said in relation to another piece of evidence, it is crap.

 

Boy........about 1/2 of you are going to have major crow to eat either way this turns out.

 

More selective nonsense. George also gave statements that Martin said "Well you got a problem now !!!" before he punched him in the face. That is not self-defense by M. You cannot cherry pick the truth of any one entity without corroboration.

M attacked Z. Even the lead Investigator believes that. Z acted in self-defense.

 

that was my first thought also, but found I was wrong when I did a little digging. Just my opinion but if I were in the jury it would be close call on this one but still tilted toward acquittal

Florida state laws also establish involuntary manslaughter if the prosecutor shows that the defendant used excessive force during self-defense or the defense of another person. The prosecution and defense can look at the facts and circumstances of the killing to determine whether the defendant reasonably believed that self-defense was necessary; if not necessary, the state might proceed with an involuntary manslaughter charge. - See more at: http://statelaws.findlaw.com/florid...y-manslaughter-laws.html#sthash.xs62naZm.dpuf

 

Then you are a fool of the law. If he did not act in self defense it is murder. If he did he is immune from any lesser charge or civil action.

 

I think that GZ needs to inform the prosecutors that he has already paid for his defense attorneys.......and, although he appreciates everything that Bernie and the bois have done for him........they are not his legal team and he will not be paying them for their efforts on his behalf....

 

difference is, i don't think polygamy is immoral or disgusting. it's just, by definition, not marriage.

this guy below is in a committed relationship with several women who is he married to through FAITH - and I have no problems if he refers to them as his wives, but a state should only only support marriage between two consenting adults.