George Zimmerman's attorneys apologize for mischaracterizing evidence

Originally posted by Indigo5
Not sure if the trial will disclose the full truth, but lets hope so.

I really hope so as well. And I hope the jury is well protected and that they feel no intimidation because of the very high profile nature of this trial.

He is on trial for 2nd degree murder, not manslaughter BTW.

I read somewhere that the jury could acquit, come in with 2nd degree murder, come in with manslaughter. That could be wrong ... (god knows that there has been a lot of misinformation in the press about it all) ... but that's what I read.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by ratpunk

 

Originally posted by ratpunk
I am tired of hearing about people believing this kid was some sweet and innocent kid. He was a pot head. Caused fights at school. And now we have pics on his cell holding a handgun... Sounds like an outstanding kid.

Trayvon Martin is NOT on trial, however. So any of this, whether it's true of false, is irrelevant.

George Zimmerman is on trial. The state of Florida is putting him on trial for murder. The victim's life is irrelevant.

reply to post by ratpunk

 

Originally posted by ratpunk
I see so a person who has a pattern of drug use and violent behavior involved in a case means nothing?

Trayvon Martin is NOT involved in the case. It's The state of Florida vs George Zimmerman.

In fact it shows this kid was a criminal. And is violent on drugs. Making him the prime candidate to attack and violently hurt someone when he has no regard for himself or people around him.

This is the message Zimmerman's scumball lawyer is trying to pass on to the media. Congratulations. You have been manipulated, just as O'mara hopes the jury pool will be.

Shrug. And one could say that you have been manipulated by the 5 year old photos of a sweet looking 12 year old and the 911 tapes doctored by NBC to make GZ appear more racist and the invention of the term "white hispanic."

If TM had a violent history, it is admissable and important as it would be part of GZ's self defense arguement. If TM had a history of attacking people that disrespected him and fighting, it certainly would be relevent.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
No it isn't. The defense position is that Zimmerman is NOT guilty of murder.

... because he's the victim of Martin attacking him. So they are saying he's a victim.
See what I'm saying?

No. Martin IS the victim of the alleged murder. There is no question about that.

I would think that an alleged murder would mean an alleged victim of murder.

They cannot find him to be the victim in the case against him.

Oh ... I'm not talking about the jury finding him to be a victim and declaring it legally. If they find Zimmerman not guilty, then they would have bought into his story that he's the victim. that's what I mean.

When and if George Zimmerman sues someone for victimizing HIM, then he'll be the victim of the alleged crime.

Then he'll be an alleged victim. Unless he can prove it. Then he'll be a victim.
See what I'm saying?

Originally posted by NavyDoc

If TM had a violent history, it is admissable and important as it would be part of GZ's self defense arguement. If TM had a history of attacking people that disrespected him and fighting, it certainly would be relevent.

I think what happened THAT DAY is what the judge will find relevant.

If for any reason past histories are included, I don't think it will work to Zimmerman's advantage.

While much of what the defense attorney's have leaked is heresay...so and so thinks Trayvons a thug...or Trayvon got suspended from school...or Trayvon smoked pot...mixed with stuff like this which was outright WRONG...not a video of Trayvon fighting, but two other people...

Zimmerman has a documented legal history...Charged with assaulting an officer, restraining order for domestic violence...takes medication for hyperactivity etc.

At the end of the day what would make it into court would not do ZImmerman any favors.

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

She heard voices from people who sounded as if they were running and getting closer to her, she said. One was calling, "help," but she was not sure who it was.
.

edit on 4-6-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

i would rather wait for zimmerman has his day in court and all the evidence is heard by a jury of his peers before i form an opinion of this case, but i have to admit i am leaning pro-trayvon. my question to this highlighted witness testimony is if george zimmerman has a gun why would he scream "help" while being chased? all he had to do was turn around and point his gun at trayvon and held him at gun point til police arrived. this piece of testimony would lead me to believe that zimmerman may have already flashed his gun and it was him chasing trayvon and trayvon is the one yelling "help".

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by NavyDoc

If TM had a violent history, it is admissable and important as it would be part of GZ's self defense arguement. If TM had a history of attacking people that disrespected him and fighting, it certainly would be relevent.

I think what happened THAT DAY is what the judge will find relevant.

If for any reason past histories are included, I don't think it will work to Zimmerman's advantage.

While much of what the defense attorney's have leaked is heresay...so and so thinks Trayvons a thug...or Trayvon got suspended from school...or Trayvon smoked pot...mixed with stuff like this which was outright WRONG...not a video of Trayvon fighting, but two other people...

Zimmerman has a documented legal history...Charged with assaulting an officer, restraining order for domestic violence...takes medication for hyperactivity etc.

At the end of the day what would make it into court would not do ZImmerman any favors.

Perhaps, perhaps not. The crux of hte entire defense is whether or not TM initiated a physical assault. As flyerfans has stated above. If TM initiated the physical assault, GZ acted in self defense...if not, then GZ acted in a criminal manner.

The "reasonable doubt" standard is what applies in a criminal trial. The defense does not have to prove that GZ is innocent absolutely, just present enough doubt in the juror's minds that the state did not make a case for the charge given. Given what we know so far, absent the emotion and media hype and political grandstanding and agendas, IMHO there is enough reasonable doubt not to convict GZ.

reply to post by conspiracy nut


More to the point...it looks like three seperate witnesses describing a chase between the two men ending immediately in the fight.

Zimmerman claims he was jumped by Trayvon beside his truck.

It doesn't appear it happened that way.

It appears he ran Trayvon down and tackled him.