George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence

I am not sure if this is the correct forum. Spank me if you will mods

This is so rich. I contributed to a post regarding this subject over the weekend.

I think he is guilty. I believe that there has been a lot of info released to the public that is disinfo. Trying to taint the jury pool. I think those last shots of Zman with his face bloodied are photoshopped.

Check this:

Attorneys for George Zimmerman apologized Sunday for mischaracterizing evidence they said boosted their theory that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor in his fatal meeting with their client last year.

George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence

This

apologizes

They did it in on purpose. As far as guilty or not, I will let they jury have the last word on that one.

Peace

Your link is broken here it is.
George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence

Personally I think he should be charged with manslaughter instead of murder.

reply to post by buster2010


Thank you. I hope it is fixed.??

Prosecutors are going to have a field day with this. I hope Zimmerman gets a good stretch in the can. Let's see how tough this punk is when he's surrounded by a cell full of bigger guys...

I bet he walks as a free man.

After the trial we will know until then it is all speculation.

reply to post by jam321


Hey jam. A question: You say "They did it on purpose"... What do you think they did on purpose?

As for as the OP, I agree. They are doing whatever they can to use what happened before that night (TM's past) against Zimmerman. I think they need to concentrate on exactly what happened that night to find out whether he's guilty or not.

reply to post by buster2010


Why do you think they should charge manslaughter? More likely to get a conviction? Or you think it was not premeditated? Because murder doesn't have to be premeditated. Just curious.

It's NBC news as a source. They've 'selectively edited' previously on this case so I'm not sure i believe them. If other sources also join in, then I'll believe that there actually was an apology issued. Until then ... I don't see them apologizing. That would hinder their case a whole bunch and I doubt that's going to happen this close to the trial. They are obviously in a position to need all the ammo ... contrived or not ... that they can get.

(that's not a slam on the OP ... that's a slam at NBCs history of 'selective reporting')

I'd look for apologizes during the sentencing phase of this ...
And yes, I do think there will be one.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Why do you think they should charge manslaughter?

You didn't ask me but I'll respond with why I think it'll be manslaughter. Manslaughter is used a lot during accidents .. when someone dies by neglect or stupidity but not by malice or pre-meditation. Zimmermans stupid actions obviously contributed GREATLY to the event so I think that if there is a conviction, it'll be manslaughter.

Of course that's based on the information that's in the MSM.
I could easily change my mind on that when the actual facts (instead of MSM spin)
are released in the trial.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Thanks. That makes sense. I was wondering if buster thought they'd get a conviction if they charged manslaughter instead.

LA Times

O'Mara described his mischaracterization in court as unintentional and said he was unhappy about it.

"We have been committed to disputing misinformation in every aspect of this case, not causing it," the statement said.

That video is among evidence O'Mara's office notified prosecutors two weeks ago that it may use at Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, scheduled to begin June 10 in Sanford, Fla.

The defense much feel pretty desperate if they're trying to use something TM's FRIEND'S (supposedly) did as evidence... I don't know if an "apology" is in there or not.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by jam321

 

Hey jam.

A question: You say "They did it on purpose"... What do you think they did on purpose?

As for as the OP, I agree. They are doing whatever they can to use what happened before that night (TM's past) against Zimmerman. I think they need to concentrate on exactly what happened that night to find out whether he's guilty or not.

reply to post by buster2010

 

Why do you think they should charge manslaughter? More likely to get a conviction? Or you think it was not premeditated? Because murder doesn't have to be premeditated. Just curious.

I don't think he confronted the kid with the intention to kill him. He may have just pulled to gun to get the kid to back off and unintentionally fired his weapon.

Originally posted by Sankari
Prosecutors are going to have a field day with this. I hope Zimmerman gets a good stretch in the can. Let's see how tough this punk is when he's surrounded by a cell full of bigger guys...

Wishing rape upon someone in the name of 'justice'?

What's wrong with you? That's sick.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint

Wishing rape upon someone in the name of 'justice'?

What's wrong with you? That's sick.

Who said anything about rape? There are many things that happen in prison besides rape. Not everyone who goes to prison gets raped. What is sick, is how you immediately assumed rape from the statement you quoted.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Why do you think they should charge manslaughter? More likely to get a conviction? Or you think it was not premeditated? Because murder doesn't have to be premeditated. Just curious.

I have always thought manslaughter was the more appropriate charge in this case, and if the Jury is able to convicted on a lesser charge, I believe it will be manslaughter.

The idea behind this charge can be summed up with this question....

Did the actions of George Zimmerman put into motion the chain of events that led to the death of Trayvon Martin?

If you answer yes to that question, then he is guilty of manslaughter.

Under a manslaughter charge, questions like 'Did Trayvon attack Zimmerman?' are actually irrelevant and it changes the question to, 'Did George Zimmerman's actions create the situation that led to him being attacked by Trayvon Martin?'

Originally posted by MrWendal
I have always thought manslaughter was the more appropriate charge in this case,

I totally agree.

Under a manslaughter charge, questions like 'Did Trayvon attack Zimmerman?' are actually irrelevant and it changes the question to, 'Did George Zimmerman's actions create the situation that led to him being attacked by Trayvon Martin?'

I don't know. I think it might still matter. Maybe. (who the heck knows ... )

Zimmerman could get manslaughter for causing the whole situation.

But if Martin jumped Zimmerman, then Zimmerman shouldn't get murder.
If Martin hadn't jumped ZImmerman (if he did), then Zimmerman wouldn't have shot.

Unless Zimmerman jumped Martin ... then Zimmerman should get MURDER charges.

IMHO

UGH .... I hope everything gets cleared up with the trial and with the facts instead of media spin.
It's hard to keep up with all this speculation and MSM 'information' etc etc

Originally posted by FlyersFan


Zimmerman could get manslaughter for causing the whole situation.

But if Martin jumped Zimmerman, then Zimmerman shouldn't get murder.

If Martin hadn't jumped ZImmerman (if he did), then Zimmerman wouldn't have shot.

For the sake of argument let us say that we knew for a fact that Martin jumped Zimmerman. I am not saying it happened or did not happen, this is a hypothetical for the purpose of discussion.

Under the manslaughter charge that I discuss in my previous post, the point becomes irrelevant. Again, we come back to the question I pose in my previous post, did the actions of George Zimmerman put into motion the chain of events that lead to the death of Trayvon Martin? Zimmerman being jumped in just another link in the chain of events. Had Zimmerman not been following Martin- Marin would not have jumped him.


Unless Zimmerman jumped Martin ... then Zimmerman should get MURDER charges.

IMHO

UGH .... I hope everything gets cleared up with the trial and with the facts instead of media spin.
It's hard to keep up with all this speculation and MSM 'information' etc etc

I dont think neither one jumped the other. I think it was as simple as they two having a confrontation that became physical.

I do believe Treyvon knew he was being followed, which is already know. Treyvon didn't strike me as the " I'm being followed, I need to walk faster if not run away" type.

I say again as I've said from the beginning. Zimmerman and Treyvon started fighting and I believe Zimmerman began losing the fight. He went to his firearm at that point.

My question to ats is who do you side with in regards to having to protect himself from the other?

Was Zimmerman protecting himself from Treyvon or wad Treyvon protecting himself from Zimmerman?

Sadly, some of you have boiled it down to that.

And, have given total disregard to what brought that man and that boy together in the first place.

Smh.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by MrWendal
I have always thought manslaughter was the more appropriate charge in this case,

I totally agree.

Under a manslaughter charge, questions like 'Did Trayvon attack Zimmerman?' are actually irrelevant and it changes the question to, 'Did George Zimmerman's actions create the situation that led to him being attacked by Trayvon Martin?'

I don't know. I think it might still matter. Maybe. (who the heck knows ... )

Zimmerman could get manslaughter for causing the whole situation.

Essentially the distincition between Manslaughter and 2nd Degree Murder is the "lawfullness" of the contibuting act.

Niether 2nd Degree murder OR Manslaughter require "premeditation" or "intent".

Manslaughter..

The unjustifiable, inexcusable, and intentional killing of a human being without deliberation, premeditation, and malice. The unlawful killing of a human being without any deliberation, which may be involuntary, in the commission of a lawful act without due caution and circumspection.

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

2nd Degree Murder

second degree murder n. a non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility. Second degree murder is different from First Degree Murder which is a premeditated, intentional killing, or results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery.

legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Otherwise ...if George Zimmerman was driving drunk while speeding and steering with his feet and struck and killed someone...Manslaughter.

If Zimmerman "assaulted" Trayvon and the scuffle resulted in Trayvon dead...2nd degree murder.

At least as far as I can tell...that is the difference.

Also..
Zimmerman offered multiple and DIFFERENT accounts of the encounter/confrontation.
One where Trayvon jumps out of the bushes...another where he appears out of nowhere or "the darkness"
Trayvon ran from Zimmerman the whole time and was finally just 1 minute from his front door...why turn around and attack?
There is missing time. Zimmerman re-enacted what he claims happened...They have the 9-11 call from Zimmerman right before the fight and they have the 9-11 call when the fight broke out and you can hear someone calling for help in the background.

A couple minutes missing. According to the clock Trayvon should have been through his front door before the fight broke out....and Zimmerman should have been back in his car already.

I think Zimmerman was tired of, as he put it, "these $$shole punks getting away"...I think Zimmerman caught Trayvon right before Trayvon got home and took him back to his car and when they got back to the car and Trayvon thought Zimmerman was abducting him...going to put him in the car...Maybe Zimmerman flashed the gun, told him to get in the car? Trayvon fought back. Zimmerman admitted he never told Trayvon he was neighborhood watch or that he was worried about break-ins etc. Trayvon had no idea why this guy was chasing him.

I think that is why the prosecution is going for 2nd degree murder...Zimmerman's story is full of holes. He has contradicted himself multiple times and there is time missing. Something else happened.


edit to add

The altercation began, he said, when Martin suddenly appeared while Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle.

He described Martin at different points in the interviews as appearing "out of nowhere," "from the darkness," and as "jump[ing] out of the bushes."

reply to post by Indigo5


The whole story of Zimmerman being ambushed is just silly.

Check out this video of Trayvon Marin's Father walking around the area. Where are these bushes big enough to hide Trayvon? Where is anything that could hide Trayvon allowing him to get the jump on and surprise Zimmerman? I can't seem to find it.

reply to post by MrWendal


Yes they are big enough to hide a person.

I am not arguing anything just stating a fact. This all happened close to my home and I know the area it happened.

Just clarifying

reply to post by Grimpachi


Then you should have no problem pointing out the bush in the video. Please show me the hiding spot.