The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[25Caliber]

Thanks WW. That's why I put imo bc I was going on what I remember in photos. Thanks though for the information.

You were partially right...I think TM was much taller than George, he just weighed less.

Im on the fence and trying to put myself in the position of both parties.

For Trayvon, I kind of look at it like this:

I put my brother in Trayvons position.

So one day my brother decides to walk to my dads fiance house...on the way there he stops at the 7-11 and buys a drink and some skittles. It starts to rain, so my brother pulls his hoodie up to protect his head from the rain...he begins walking home. Stops for a second at a nearby neighbors house and sees another neighbor driving slowly by and checking him out, so my brother proceeds to walk in the direction of dads fiances house.

As my brother is walking he notices that this strange man is continuing to follow him and is on the telephone communicating with someone...My brother walks by followers truck and gets a bad vibe as the person is continuing to stare at him. So my brother begins to walk briskly or run in the direction of house so as to kind of lose the person who is still following in his truck.

As my brother goes behind the complex he begins to get irritated at this fellow and wants to know why he is following him, so instead of going straight to the house, he decides to cut back through and see if this person had gotten out of the truck and is still following him and....why?...what did I do? As my brother comes around the building he sees the same guy standing there looking around. My brother approaches him now and asks if there is a problem? When he does the person quickly goes to reach for something in his pocket or on his right hip...so my brother lunges at him and hits him before he can get whatever he is reaching for. As the person is punched my brother jumps on him...in this act the follower keeps going for that pocket or right hip, so a struggle continues to ensue...my brother is winning the fight and the person, finally is able to grab what he was reaching for...A GUN...BANG! My brother is dead.

And now Im pissed at the person following him and eventually pulling a gun.

When that person would later be caught on a 911 tape saying "these assholes always get away"...this would infuriate me....get away from what? what did he do...what crime did you witness? Why are you following my brother packing a gun? Why are you following and reporting him like you witnessed a crime? There was no crime and now my brother is dead because you followed him to the point of being approached when you couldnt defend yourself, you went for your gun and shot him dead.

There you go...no race involved in my rationale...just normal questions. Keep race out of it...no need for it...it will divide some of those that can actually understand the position tray was in. Bring race into it and some are more likely to defend against the race card rather than the actual facts of the case, which I believe are in Trays favor to this point. Lets see what the evidence shows.

Nice scenario.

But if your "brother" approached the guy who had been irritating him (by just following him) and then proceeded to commence a physical altercation, his overreaction to the provocation would not put the one HE attacked in any worse legal position.

Lots of folks seem to imagine that IF Trayvon felt irritated or even somehow "threatened" by the fact that Zimmerman had followed him over the course of some wandering on that property, that the physical altercation was thus "initiated" by Zimmerman's conduct. But that's horse-hockey. That's NOT the way it works.

And WHY would your "bother" be inquiring about why his follow-er was packing a gun? Who said that the gun was EVER displayed or even known to your "brother" prior to the physical altercation?

Indeed, if I knew some guy had a fucking gun, I doubt I would choose to "approach" him for any reason no matter how irritated I was at having been "followed."

Thanks for your reply. Im simply trying to put myself (brother in this case) in trays spot.

I will also put myself in GZs spot...I have done this ad nausea throughout this thread...just going to the other side for a little. Its not a perfect world...if someone is being followed...it is reasonable to assume that that person would be irritated and concerned should the following continue. GZ reaching for his pocket could be considered initiation. Tray didnt know it was a gun, or a knife or club or what it was...he just saw this person that was following him reach for something when approached. tray may have lunged because of that...we dont know...hes not here to defend himself...the jurors have to use this reasoning and the attorneys have to present it.

Where in my post does it suggest that my brother is inquiring about someone packing a gun? Its clear in my post that my brother didnt know what GZ was reaching for. Not sure what you are referring to with your comment.

I never said he was inquiring about him packing a gun...I dont think tray new for sure GZ was packin untill they were on the ground. I said he was irritated as to why this person is following him...in hindsight it would have been better to go straight home...but I can understand someone wanting to know why they are being followed.

If someone was following me... I may ask them as to why they are following me...I dont think that is unreasonable at all and in fact, quite human to do so.

GZ replies to him..."there is no problem"....huh? apparently there was...why is he following him and why is he making an emergency 911 call with the cops already enroute. Why didnt GZ try to defuse the situation and explain why he was following him? He said there wasnt a problem and tray knew that was bs...do you always follow people you dont have a problem with? It appears to me that GZs response to tray was out of fear and panic...huh? theres no problem here? Weak! IMO. Yeah, there was!!...now man up and explain it...dont cower and say there isnt a problem...its a lie.

 

[testarosa]

For all you who were wondering who Evidence Hider (Bernster) and Used Car Salesman aka a$$hole is - a$$hole is the one up on this expert, his a$$ just showed and it will again the next time he opens his mouth. Here it comes, his mouth is opening.

 

[25Caliber]

Paula are you sick? I just noticed your sig file.

Sorry!

Yeah I have been having severe dizzy spells and nauseous really bad. Thanks for asking. I'm staying in bed today and hope it passes.

Get well, AL. Hey if you are just relaxing...check out the Tiger game tonight...I will be easy to spot...just behind visitors dugout...Ill be the one in the Tiger hat...lol.

 

[25Caliber]

You know...this guy on skype is way smarter than I...he is using words Ive never heard before...if I were a juror I would have to discredit all of his testimony...LOL.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

You know...this guy on skype is way smarter than I...he is using words Ive never heard before...if I were a juror I would have to discredit all of his testimony...LOL.

OMG, I just glanced at the screen to see if they were showing him yet, and the first thing that entered my mind was that he resembles Einstein in appearance.

 

[testarosa]

The other two defense experts were equally as Einsteiny. Dr. Frenchie had a British accent, I'd have let him fly the plane knowing he wasn't a pilot. lol

 

[testarosa]

And then there was the pros expert who was kicked back in his bedroom chuckling about his $3k per day fee and plugging his software and website. He was a joke and a half.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

Why doesn't this 'expert' come out and say he doesn't know who is yelling on the recording? He just said that the same person's voice will produce a different result on the spectrogram in regards to device used to record, direction of microphone/phone, etc.


This is a joke; a complete waste of money!

 

[testarosa]

Why doesn't this 'expert' come out and say he doesn't know who is yelling on the recording? He just said that the same person's voice will produce a different result on the spectrogram in regards to device used to record, direction of microphone/phone, etc.


This is a joke; a complete waste of money!

They've got to put it in their genius, sciencey way.

The US Government Classified guy (other defense expert) flat laughed his head off and said in a word RIDICULOUS! that you could say who it was without putting the subject under extreme duress to reproduce it and proceeded to blow away the prosecution's ga-fawing witness.


Okay. That I understand.

Just watch a sec of this (Dr. Reich and a$$hole) [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlnkSNoXZUE]Pt. 1 - Zimmerman v. Martin - Mr. "I Hear Trayvon" Reich - Frye Hearing - Prosecution Audio Expert - YouTube[/ame]

And this is ga-fawing junk science buy-my-software guy:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3b096fQLi4]Pt. 2 - Zimmerman v. Martin - Frye Hearing - State's Expert Tom Owen on How To Skew Results - YouTube[/ame]

 

[IlarMeilyr]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical. And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

 

[testarosa]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical. And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

Who are you "you guys" ing? Are you you guysing me?

 

[testarosa]

Will someone rep or neg me? I've been stuck on 9... 9....TEN!

It's icky to be stuck on a 9.

Pretty please?

 

[animallover]

Will someone rep or neg me? I've been stuck on 9... 9....TEN!

It's icky to be stuck on a 9.

Pretty please?

I did earlier, so I will try but it may not let me. Lmao

 

[25Caliber]

Thanks WW. That's why I put imo bc I was going on what I remember in photos. Thanks though for the information.

...........

Im on the fence and trying to put myself in the position of both parties. ...............

Jurors are not supposed to do that. It takes them out of a position of objectivity.

Jurors are instructed to use reasoning and common sense. I dont see how seeing both sides takes them out of a position of objectivity...quite the opposite, IMO.

 

[25Caliber]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical. And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

Not pretending at all...im using GZs own words and basing the scenario off of that. What I described above is a scenario based on GZs explanation to the detectives during interrogation and at the scene of the crime the next day.

You say assuming...I say its common sense. Trayvon approached GZ because he was continuing to follow him...rational assumption...if not, then why didnt Tray approach GZ when he passed him in the truck? He approached when he continued to be followed...you can gather that from GZs own explanation.

Dont know why you keep repeating GZs injuries...we are all very aware of them...and yes those are facts...no one is disputing those...at least not me. There was a struggle...trayvon was besting GZ...GZ sustained significant injuries...thats all understood.

Do you believe based on GZs explanation that he was really reaching for a phone in the wrong pocket? Im having trouble with that...especially when the gun is holstered in the same spot he was reaching.

And I agree with you...I believe the defense has a very strong case for self defense...I also believe the prosecution can make some strong arguments to the contrary. Hopefully we will see the trial actually take place soon...lol.

 

[testarosa]

DH in back row. Come on 7 pm. It's dinnertime!

 

[Snookie]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical. And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

No marks on TM.

That proves that Z did not even try to subdue him without using his gun.

 

[testarosa]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical. And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

No marks on TM.

That proves that Z did not even try to subdue him without using his gun.

Are we going back here again? ;-) It's possible that could have happened because he was l-o-s-i-n-g.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You guys are STILL pretending that you know what happened at the moments when Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman face to face.

And the truth is: none of us know that.

You are no better than the rest of us Liability. The above statement assumes that Trayvon physically confronted Zimmerman. It could be very well be that Zimmerman physically confronted Trayvon face-to-face.

We do know that Zimmerman ended up with a busted nose. The implication is that Trayvon busted it for him.

True, however all that indicates is that Zimmerman got his nose busted. It does not indicate who started it.

We also know that until the gun got fired, Zimmerman had not caused any apparent injuries to Trayvon.

True, however all that indicates is that Zimmerman didn't cause injuries. It does not indicate who started it.

We know about the location of the respective grass stains, so we do have some physical evidence suggesting that Trayvon was on top of the prone, flat on his back, Zimmerman. And then we have the marks and the bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head.

True, however all that indicates is that Zimmerman was on the bottom during a struggle. It does not indicate who started it.

We can spin and slice and dice this any which way. But we simply cannot get around those facts.

None of those facts indicate who started the altercation.

Thus it does appear that when the two guys came together, it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical.

What evidence do you have (besides Zimmerman's story, the man charged with the crime and who has been known to lie to the court) that it was not Zimmerman who was engaging in the physical?

And it also looks like Zi8mmerman was losing, perhaps getting his ass kicked.

Agreed.

Do I know what happened? Nope.

Agreed, yet in this post you assume it was Martin that started the physical.

But do I have some rational basis to believe that Trayvon was the physical aggressor? Yes. I do.

Great.

Without using Zimmerman's story, please provide the rational basis supported by 3rd party evidence, physical or forensic evidence that provides a rational basis for assuming Trayvon was the physical aggressor.

And thus I have precious little reason to doubt Zimmerman's account to the effect that he was having his head pounded on the sidewalk. That being the case, if the jury agrees with that assessment, it looks a whole lot to me like the legal defense of justification is VERY much in play. And it appears like a strong defense. Maybe even the clear winner.

Of course it is play, no doubt about it. I don't claim to be a lawyer, but my understanding is that the prosecution will make a case that a crime was committed and Zimmerman was the party that committed that crime. Then Zimmerman will make an affirmative defense that it was self-defense and therefore warrants immunity. The burden will then shift back to the prosecution to prove that under Florida Statutes Zimmerman does not qualify for such immunity. Now if they have a witness that had a well lighted and unobstructed view of the shot being fired while Martin is on top - then they don't have much of a rebuttal to the self-defense claim.

On the other hand **if** none of the witnesses actually observed the shot being fired, the prosecution can make a case that Zimmerman was the initial aggressor and that lack of GSR, lack of blood on his jacket, and the biomechanics of the bullet trajectory indicated that either Martin was attempting to break contact or Zimmerman had pushed him off to the side. At that point instead of attempting to end hostilities or escape he decided to pull his weapon and fire it into Martin's chest with foll arm extension (which explains the lack of GSR and blood) - he had given up his self-defense immunity.


*****************************

Fundamentally I agree though, we don't know at this point what information the jury will have in making it's decision and the reasonable person makes no assumptions.


>>>>

 

[testarosa]

CRAP, this was supposed to be over at 7. I don't have a life until August.