The Zimmerman Trial

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by WonderBoi

 

There is no 100 percent proof, but there is enough evidence to make the assumption and create enough doubt to let Zimmerman go free.

The evidence is that there is no damage to Zimmerman's knuckles or hands indicating he did not throw any punches. If he didn't throw any punches he didn't throw a first punch. Martin however DID have damage to his knuckles indicating he did throw punches and likely the first one. Also the fact that we KNOW Martin confronted Zimmerman first based on Rachel and Zimmerman's testimony. So if the prosecutions key witness says Martin confronted first then that supports Zimmerman's story.

Again, it was TM that had no abrasions on his hands...

reply to post by ButterCookie


There is some incorrect information in your post. First the 911 operator didn't give the advice that he didn't need to follow until Zimmerman was already out of the car (so Zimmerman didn't decide against the advice at all).

Also Martin didn't call Zimmerman a "creepy a** cracker" to Zimmerman, he said it to the girl he was on the phone with.

Martin and Zimmerman didn't have any significant exchange of words. Martin approached, said "do you have a problem" and before Zimmerman had any real chance to answer this beyond "no," Martin was saying you do now and attacking.

Originally posted by j.r.c.b.

Originally posted by WonderBoi

Originally posted by marbles87
Moral of the story. Why the hell did TM hit GZ for any reason. It seems so stupid that someone lost their life over this it's like they couldn't just say "hi" to each other. GZ just wanted people to stop breaking in to houses and TM probably just wanted to go home and smoke weed and drink his drink. Both are idiots to me but neither are really HARD criminals. Even if TM didn't die it would still be a wash if they tried to get GZ with attempted murder.

How do you KNOW TM hit GZ, in the first place? Is it because the same guy that shot TM, said so??? What did you expect GZ to say? Did you expect him to say he initiated the fight?

The other 1/2 of the equation is unable to speak, regarding this matter. Therefore, we're only getting PART of the story!

TMs hands were clean. No abrasions......zimmerman is a lier.....

Wrong. Autopsy report showed Trayvon's knuckles were bruised, indicating that he was throwing punches.

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

I am watching her now, and I agree with you. She makes me extremely angry when she does that.

I also agree with you about the skiing accident.

I see people die very often in my line of work that have done nothing more than bang their head on a cabinet door.

What qualifies as a life threatening head injury simply cannot be determined by looking at the back of someones' head. The defense will certainly slaughter this entire line of reasoning when they present their case.

The totality of things being, there is simply no bearing on the matter, severity, or even any injury at all is not necessary when you are in fear for your life. George stated he felt that he was in fear for his life, when someone goes for your gun, it becomes a life or death matter, regardless of whether or not you have been injured.

When people die because they hit their head on a cabinet door, it is not unfeaseable they can die from hitting it on the ground, cement, someones' fist, or snow.

edit on 2-7-2013 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

wow, I saw her show the first night Frank Otaafe (or however you spell his name, Zimmerman's friend) was on and she is absolutely dreadful...

reply to post by j.r.c.b.


He said what he needed to say. He couldn't go on t.v. with a trial pending and say "yes I made a mistake" or "I should have done things differently" even if he really did have regrets about the night because that would hurt his case.

We know he was traumatized by the events and undoubtedly had remorse, but you have to set that aside if it could be used to paint you as guilty.

No common sense from the Trayvon side of the argument for the 100th time in this thread.

reply to post by j.r.c.b.


LOL. No, it was not Zimmerman that said that, the Medical Examiner said there was bruising and damage to Martin's knuckles.

Originally posted by j.r.c.b.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by WonderBoi

 

There is no 100 percent proof, but there is enough evidence to make the assumption and create enough doubt to let Zimmerman go free.

The evidence is that there is no damage to Zimmerman's knuckles or hands indicating he did not throw any punches. If he didn't throw any punches he didn't throw a first punch. Martin however DID have damage to his knuckles indicating he did throw punches and likely the first one. Also the fact that we KNOW Martin confronted Zimmerman first based on Rachel and Zimmerman's testimony. So if the prosecutions key witness says Martin confronted first then that supports Zimmerman's story.

Again, it was TM that had no abrasions on his hands...

Sorry, but you are absolutely 100 percent wrong. Zimmerman's hands were clean, he had no damage or blood on them. Martin's hands however were bruised and he had at least one damaged knuckle.

People say GZ was told not to follow a person.

Wasn't the wording 'We don't need you to do that'?

That wasn't a command to not follow even if he could be ordered to not do it.

Here's one of many many articles......www.washingtonpost.com...

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ButterCookie

 

There is some incorrect information in your post. First the 911 operator didn't give the advice that he didn't need to follow until Zimmerman was already out of the car (so Zimmerman didn't decide against the advice at all).

Also Martin didn't call Zimmerman a "creepy a** cracker" to Zimmerman, he said it to the girl he was on the phone with.

Martin and Zimmerman didn't have any significant exchange of words. Martin approached, said "do you have a problem" and before Zimmerman had any real chance to answer this beyond "no," Martin was saying you do now and attacking.

My point was that it while its been said that race was involved, it was Trayvon who made a racial slur,not Zimmerman.

reply to post by ButterCookie


I agree. I was just clearing it up to keep information straight.
Martin did say it, and seems to be the only one that was bringing race into it that night, he just didn't say it to Zimmerman.

TM HAD A MILD scratch on his arm, no nuckle scrapes....I'll just keep following the actual police reports & REAL documents that are being released......from the courts & pd......

reply to post by j.r.c.b.


One of many many articles that says what? What is the importance or relevance?

As has been stated many times in this thread if Zimmerman's past is relevant so is Trayvon Martin's. I have read into both of their pasts and I will say that Martin's past hurts the prosecution more than Zimmerman's past hurts the defense.

The judge in this case has already shown bias in favor of the prosecution. The defense called it out today.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by ButterCookie

 

I agree. I was just clearing it up to keep information straight.
Martin did say it, and seems to be the only one that was bringing race into it that night, he just didn't say it to Zimmerman.

Agreed

Also, another important factor is that is being ignored by the left is that there had been break-ins in the neighborhood. While Trayvon was on school suspension for selling marijuana at school, he was also in trouble for vandalizing the school. When the school officials searched his locker for the spray paint, they found a backpack with 'burglary tools and women's jewelry' in it.

This is just some of the criminal information that the local police conveniently left out of the media.

From the testimony

Seat Noffke testified that he was trained to give general commands instead of direct orders to people.

When Zimmerman said he was following Martin, Noffke told him, "Okay we don't need you to do that."

Noffke told the prosecutor he's liable for any direct orders he gives someone.

Link

reply to post by j.r.c.b.


You are absolutely incorrect. He had damage to his knuckles. Read and tell me if you still deny it:

source 1 - wftv channel 9

source 2 - new york daily news

source 3 - daily mail

Now you know. You will still deny it though considering you could have googled it yourself which leads me to believe you are embracing ignorance to maintain an agenda.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow



Thanks for providing those links for those who remain in denial about who attacked who....in fact, Zimmerman never threw one blow toward Martin.


And what is the accurate story on whether or not Trayvon reached for Zimmerman's gun?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by j.r.c.b.

 

One of many many articles that says what? What is the importance or relevance?

As has been stated many times in this thread if Zimmerman's past is relevant so is Trayvon Martin's. I have read into both of their pasts and I will say that Martin's past hurts the prosecution more than Zimmerman's past hurts the defense.

The judge in this case has already shown bias in favor of the prosecution. The defense called it out today.

How has the judge showed bias in favor of the Prosecution? I've noticed she usually sustains a lot of their objections while overruling the defense's, but I always saw it as fair.

[QUOTE]TM HAD A MILD scratch on his arm, no nuckle scrapes....I'll just keep following the actual police reports & REAL documents that are being released......from the courts & pd...... [/QUOTE]

I don't know how true this is, but I've read that Martin could have had more bruising that just didn't appear because he died.

Do you guys think that the threats made by the public and Trayvon Martin supporters will sneak into the thoughts of the jury? I mean as a juror you will know how volatile the public is, so if you are part of the reason Zimmerman goes free will you be in danger? It's good that they are sequestered (though they could still find out), because the hundreds (if not thousands of people) threatening to murder Zimmerman and/or random white people if Zimmerman goes free could definitely intimidate the jury that lets him walk.

I was listening to the radio today and they were saying there is some animosity between then state and Seminole County. The story is that the county knew there wasn’t enough evidence to convict George and there was sufficient evidence to back up George’s statement of self-defense.

This thing only went to trial because of the media and politics (you know it I know it). It is a huge waste of taxpayer money and when George wins then files against the state it is going to be even more. In the past week or so there has been a lot of house cleaning going on by the state because of this case. Demotions and so forth Serno had even said he was being pressured to bring charges by people who didn’t know jack squat about the case other than the race of who was involved.

I am sorry but that isn’t how the system is supposed to work. Regardless of what anyone thinks it is the job of the detectives to prosecute cases they can win even if they think he is guilty they knew there isn’t enough evidence to support that. So let’s have fun watching the dog and pony show because that is all this is.