The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

What are your Initial Thoughts on the Guilt or Innocence of George Zimmerman?


  • Total voters
    84
Status
Not open for further replies.
LMAO! You are killing me! They don't have time to go apply for those jobs. They are too busy trying to show that I don't have a JD. No doubt they are all up on the finer points of the law such as those that involve Conflicts of Law. ;)

Should we broach the rule against perpetuities? :eusa_whistle:

Yeah,' that life in being plus' would blow their minds all over the place. Of course, I think when it comes to future interests the 'unborn widow' would do just as well! :evil:

@Legeleagle Off topic, but just for you Eagle. Back in the 1960s when the feds bought up all the land between the Tennessee and Cumberland rivers to make a 'recreation area' and wildlife preserve, they contracted with the landowners that the Land Between the Lakes would 'never' be commercially developed. LOL. 50 years later that land is well on its way to being commercially developed! It's difficult to explain to the children of those landowners exactly what happened. Well, it's not Whiteacre, nor is it Blackacre. It's not even Inbetweenacre, It's Fedacre! And you best not speed while you are driving through it unless you REALLY want to go to federal court and pay about $500 + in fines.
 
Last edited:
Zimmerman followed to observe, not to confront or attack. Martin was aggressive Zimmerman was, shall I say, actively passive?
How was Trayvon supposed to know the guy in the black and red jacket with the dome cut was just observing? Would you want some guy following you to observe you walking to your house like that? Some guy that is ignoring your requests to stop following? How do we know Zimmerman did not make the first punch or grab Trayvon's phone?

We don't, but that doesn't allow you to assume Zimmerman initiated the assault. Again! Being followed passively does not justify assault.

One can assume that since it was dark, Zimmerman could not locate Martin. However, Zimmerman was using a flashlight that would make it easy to locate him. Zimmerman had no reason to attack Martin. Police were on route.

TM's friend said she heard Zimmerman start the confrontation. Zimmerman said he was following him and Zimmerman wasn't going to let these(this) assholes get away.
 
How was Trayvon supposed to know the guy in the black and red jacket with the dome cut was just observing? Would you want some guy following you to observe you walking to your house like that? Some guy that is ignoring your requests to stop following? How do we know Zimmerman did not make the first punch or grab Trayvon's phone?

We don't, but that doesn't allow you to assume Zimmerman initiated the assault. Again! Being followed passively does not justify assault.

One can assume that since it was dark, Zimmerman could not locate Martin. However, Zimmerman was using a flashlight that would make it easy to locate him. Zimmerman had no reason to attack Martin. Police were on route.

TM's friend said she heard Zimmerman start the confrontation. Zimmerman said he was following him and Zimmerman wasn't going to let these(this) assholes get away.

TM's friend has been caught lying 3 times. There's no reason to believe ANYTHING she says.
 
You crazy ass cracka

Fixed it again.

I believe you left off the "H" Proper spelling is "crackah"

grumpy-witness-gfvifdnvc-112497256323.png

I have to say......if I had that roll of shit growing on my chineck. I'd take a knife and cut it off myself.
It looks as if her head wasn't circumcised.
 
:eusa_eh:

"Making up?" There is only one living witness who knows exactly what happened, and he has a vested interest in making it appear a certain way. You know, liking not being in prison and all.

Why do you take his statements as absolute fact?

Why don't you? Do you assume that because his story indicates self defense he has to be lying?

Not automatically, but I see that he has a vested interest in lying; in claiming the attack was more brutal and unprovoked than it was.

My position is not that enigmatic. He sought out a confrontation. I don't think he set out to kill or even hurt someone, but that's what happened. It stemmed from a God complex, from a guy who thought he was Wyatt Earp because he had a gun. He acted recklessly, confronted someone who was doing nothing wrong and who didn't want to be confronted, and got his ass whooped.

Had he not had a gun, the story probably would have ended there. He's all healed up now and he'd be getting on with his life, probably with the wisdom not to fuck with someone just because you don't like the way they look (meaning that he "looked suspicious," not black).

I think that Martin threw the first shot, but I think he did so because he feared he was about to be attacked. I don't think that was irrational on his part. A stranger is following you and now you ask him what the deal is and he reaches into his pocket. If this happens to me and I'm unarmed, I'm thinking this might be my only shot (like I said earlier).

The fact that he was losing a fight is not relevant. Who is ultimately responsible for that fight, is.

What in the evidence shows that Martin would have stopped beating Zimmerman if he hadn't been shot?
 
Zimmerman followed to observe, not to confront or attack. Martin was aggressive Zimmerman was, shall I say, actively passive?
How was Trayvon supposed to know the guy in the black and red jacket with the dome cut was just observing? Would you want some guy following you to observe you walking to your house like that? Some guy that is ignoring your requests to stop following? How do we know Zimmerman did not make the first punch or grab Trayvon's phone?

Where did you hear that Martin requested him to stop following?


Some guy that is ignoring your requests to stop following?


Making shit up. See Drug DD testimony.
 
Why don't you? Do you assume that because his story indicates self defense he has to be lying?

Not automatically, but I see that he has a vested interest in lying; in claiming the attack was more brutal and unprovoked than it was.

My position is not that enigmatic. He sought out a confrontation. I don't think he set out to kill or even hurt someone, but that's what happened. It stemmed from a God complex, from a guy who thought he was Wyatt Earp because he had a gun. He acted recklessly, confronted someone who was doing nothing wrong and who didn't want to be confronted, and got his ass whooped.

Had he not had a gun, the story probably would have ended there. He's all healed up now and he'd be getting on with his life, probably with the wisdom not to fuck with someone just because you don't like the way they look (meaning that he "looked suspicious," not black).

I think that Martin threw the first shot, but I think he did so because he feared he was about to be attacked. I don't think that was irrational on his part. A stranger is following you and now you ask him what the deal is and he reaches into his pocket. If this happens to me and I'm unarmed, I'm thinking this might be my only shot (like I said earlier).

The fact that he was losing a fight is not relevant. Who is ultimately responsible for that fight, is.

What in the evidence shows that Martin would have stopped beating Zimmerman if he hadn't been shot?

All of his prior victims, all the restraining orders? Oh that's right there were no prior victims or restraining orders on TM. What about Zimmerman?
 
And if Zimmerman's testimony is believed that 'he thought he was near death' at the time he shot Martin, how do we on a message board determine when the proper point of 'near death' might be? That seems to be important to some here--that Zimmerman was not near enough to death to shoot. How does one determne if they are near enough to pull the trigger?

When you have 'reasonable fear.' Reasonable fear doesn't require that you be 'near death', nor does it require that you have a life threatening injury.
 
Did Zimmerman quote the law that stated how he could defend himself with deadly force immediately after shooting martin? It kind of seems like he was well prepped for that.
 
Not automatically, but I see that he has a vested interest in lying; in claiming the attack was more brutal and unprovoked than it was.

My position is not that enigmatic. He sought out a confrontation. I don't think he set out to kill or even hurt someone, but that's what happened. It stemmed from a God complex, from a guy who thought he was Wyatt Earp because he had a gun. He acted recklessly, confronted someone who was doing nothing wrong and who didn't want to be confronted, and got his ass whooped.

Had he not had a gun, the story probably would have ended there. He's all healed up now and he'd be getting on with his life, probably with the wisdom not to fuck with someone just because you don't like the way they look (meaning that he "looked suspicious," not black).

I think that Martin threw the first shot, but I think he did so because he feared he was about to be attacked. I don't think that was irrational on his part. A stranger is following you and now you ask him what the deal is and he reaches into his pocket. If this happens to me and I'm unarmed, I'm thinking this might be my only shot (like I said earlier).

The fact that he was losing a fight is not relevant. Who is ultimately responsible for that fight, is.

What in the evidence shows that Martin would have stopped beating Zimmerman if he hadn't been shot?

All of his prior victims, all the restraining orders? Oh that's right there were no prior victims or restraining orders on TM. What about Zimmerman?

So there is nothing to show that Martin was going to stop.

Ok.
 
We don't, but that doesn't allow you to assume Zimmerman initiated the assault. Again! Being followed passively does not justify assault.

One can assume that since it was dark, Zimmerman could not locate Martin. However, Zimmerman was using a flashlight that would make it easy to locate him. Zimmerman had no reason to attack Martin. Police were on route.

TM's friend said she heard Zimmerman start the confrontation. Zimmerman said he was following him and Zimmerman wasn't going to let these(this) assholes get away.

TM's friend has been caught lying 3 times. There's no reason to believe ANYTHING she says.

I say the same thing about Zimmerman. :doubt:
 
n e g g e d !!!

Had Martin just punched Zimmerman in the nose that would have been the end of it. It was the ground and pound that got him shot.

There was no "ground and pound" the witness(John Good) said he didn't see anyone getting hit. Do you guys listen to the testimony?

He said he didn't actually see the punches land, but he did see Martin raining down blows "MMA style" Are you assuming Martin was punching the sidewalk? Or pulling his punched before they landed? Put down the pipe. flush the rest of the herb. You might just recover some of your intellect given enough therapy.
 
And if Zimmerman's testimony is believed that 'he thought he was near death' at the time he shot Martin, how do we on a message board determine when the proper point of 'near death' might be? That seems to be important to some here--that Zimmerman was not near enough to death to shoot. How does one determne if they are near enough to pull the trigger?

GZ told the police that Martin saw his gun and went for it. Unless Martin takes the stand, the jury won't hear that.
 
Had Martin just punched Zimmerman in the nose that would have been the end of it. It was the ground and pound that got him shot.

There was no "ground and pound" the witness(John Good) said he didn't see anyone getting hit. Do you guys listen to the testimony?

He said he didn't actually see the punches land, but he did see Martin raining down blows "MMA style" Are you assuming Martin was punching the sidewalk? Or pulling his punched before they landed? Put down the pipe. flush the rest of the herb. You might just recover some of your intellect given enough therapy.

M O'M read his original statement back and then the one from that night. That is where "ground and pound" came from.

John Good was trying to not speculate at all on the stand. However, as he said, he did use common sense and rational thinking in giving his initial statement(s).


>>>"GROUND AND POUND." Even though he was called Friday by the prosecution, John Good, a former neighbor of Zimmerman, gave testimony that seemed to bolster the defense contention that Martin was on top of Zimmerman in the fight. Good said he saw Martin straddling Zimmerman in manner similar to a mixed-martial art maneuver known as "ground and pound."
 
And if Zimmerman's testimony is believed that 'he thought he was near death' at the time he shot Martin, how do we on a message board determine when the proper point of 'near death' might be? That seems to be important to some here--that Zimmerman was not near enough to death to shoot. How does one determne if they are near enough to pull the trigger?

I'm bemused by the notion some people have that Zimmerman's injuries were not extensive enough to make him fear for his life. They seem to think that Zimmerman should have allowed Martin to continue to slam his head against the ground until his injuries were more pronounced.

Here's the deal, folks. When someone gets into a physical confrontation with you and throws a sucker punch that puts you down on your back on the ground...that's the end of most such confrontations. If that person continues to strike you while you are on the ground then you're in a world of trouble. This isn't someone who is content with making a point with the punch that knocked you down...this is someone who wants to cause you serious injury. This is someone you need to be very afraid of.

I'm not bemused at all. If Zimmerman is convicted, then that will be the death blow to the right of Americans to defend their own lives. This is not a prima facie case of anything. It isn't even a landmark case. It is a less than routine case because there was no case, but one that is happening because of political pressure. I have to wonder how close Obama is following it. I also have to wonder if any of his advisors reminded his that he is Zimmerman's president too. And conversely, if some black thug broke into my home and assaulted me whose side would Obama take.

This case has all the earmarks of your garden variety all American cluster fuck. It is just difficult and somewhat nerve racking that there is no telling who will be the ultimate fuckee.
 
Last edited:
He rolled Martin on to his belly and was trying to restrain him.

Go get your facts straight.

He did not roll Martin as far as I know. Zimmerman did restrain him until he observed that it wasn't necessary, but LEO's rolled him to his back for CPR

If I am wrong, point me in the right direction.

You're right, except Zimmerman said he had to restrain Martin, but Martin was incapacitated after he was shot through the heart. Zimmerman was still in his wannabe cop mode.

He was just getting the shit kicked out of him and had no idea how badly Martin was hit. It makes perfect sense until he ascertained no further threat.
 
Only in states that require you to retreat. And even then you are not always required to retreat.



Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm pretty sure if someone is beating your head into the concrete that you are not required to retreat.

Martin had a knife?

This gets better and better.

Martin had the concrete. Sorry you are too dimwitted to get the point.

And the guy you keep relying on for the blow by blow, says Martin was not slamming his head into it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top