The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Avatar4321]

Remember when all you Zimmerman supporters were SWEARING on the stand-your-ground law?

Turns out that the defense determined that that shat wouldn't fly, so they went another route.

Now you folks are swearing about Trayvon being the attacker, although NOBODY IN COURT, or in the media has said or even asserted this.

Yet you think you're winning.

When you boil it down to the actual FACTS of the case, Zimmerman is in big, big trouble.

He's TOAST!!!

One doesnt need to use stand your ground when normal self defense defense works.

Have you been listening to the witnesses? All of them who were actually there have said they saw Trayvon on top being the aggressor.

Do you understand the law at all?

 

[testarosa]

So why does Trayvon have his snacks in his pockets?

side note-every time I see a testarosa post I am reminded I need a pedicure

Oh no! Do my toes look bad?

This testimony is coming back around when the Actual Defense presents it's case not the Prosecution's Defense.

Remember what 'Tude DD said on the stand.

No, mine do!

We'll fix em gurl!

youz needs tah be havin some court nails.

 

[MarcATL]

"HE'S TOAST!!!" You said. How did you come to that conclusion? Your opinion of Zimmerman? Because you hold inherent biases due to yourself being black? What is it?

My bad if I had to specify that that's my opinion based on the facts.

I'll concede that one though...I can see how that can be seen as me stating it as fact, but it's just my opinion based on the facts.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yeah, I grow on ya...like a fungus...

You're ok in my book, 25...appreciate the offer.

I don't think reaching for ones pocket is a threatening gesture.

99 times out of 100, it's going to be a phone.

You can't assault people for reaching for a phone.

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

Let's explore this logically.

If Martin doesn't know the gun is there...and he never sees it...it's like it really isn't there.

So, let's make it disappear.

Zimmerman has no gun.

He reaches for his cell phone and Martin attacks him.

Was he negligent?

No.

Did Martin assault Zimmerman?

Yes.

Who is in the wrong?

Martin, he is the first to engage in an illegal act.

Gun there/gun not there...if Martin never saw it...for all intents and purposes it wasn't there.

And Martin would have never seen it had he not attacked Zimmerman.

That's the way I see it.

Well at least you finally admit you are basing your view on your imagination.

 

[Missourian]

How long before Angela Corey is on trial for the first degree murder of Bernie de la Rosa's career?

 

[MarcATL]

please, provide MY QUOTES where I have been "building the case"

If you won't, you will be caught lying and called liar by me ever since. Or you can apologize ( highly unlikely)

Though I simply think you are too dumb to understand that this case is a case in a criminal justice system, not in a media circus... if you can grasp the difference...

I don't the ink I meant you're personal quotes, I meant folks who are GZ supporters in general.

I'll be more specific going forward.

 

[Ava]

Yeah, I grow on ya...like a fungus...

You're ok in my book, 25...appreciate the offer.

I don't think reaching for ones pocket is a threatening gesture.

99 times out of 100, it's going to be a phone.

You can't assault people for reaching for a phone.

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

Let's explore this logically.

If Martin doesn't know the gun is there...and he never sees it...it's like it really isn't there.

So, let's make it disappear.

Zimmerman has no gun.

He reaches for his cell phone and Martin attacks him.

Was he negligent?

No.

Did Martin assault Zimmerman?

Yes.

Who is in the wrong?

Martin, he is the first to engage in an illegal act.

Gun there/gun not there...if Martin never saw it...for all intents and purposes it wasn't there.

And Martin would have never seen it had he not attacked Zimmerman.

That's the way I see it.

Good points. Also had Zimmerman not been trolling Martin, nothing would have happened. Z. should have listened to the police and stopped "the hunt" but just because he didn't doesn't make him a cold-blooded murderer. A fight ensued and someone died. Happens all the time in Chicago, and Detroit and Oakland and bars....

 

[The Rabbi]

Your opinion is dead to me. Your heavy bias clouds your judgment.

Your BiaS is so thick, I can smell your Depends!

Meanwhile you fabricate that Zimmerman reached for his weapon( or was that his phone) before the fight ever started. I say fabricated because NO ONE has said that happened. Not Zimmerman and not a single witness. Then after creating from whole cloth an event that never happened you go on to explain how this justified Martin attacking Zimmerman.

Stay out of the individual scuffles...its good advice. GZ said he reached and that he was punched immediately after...he says phone...but no phone there...gun was though...open your mind and dont take all of his words so literally...thats too easy. It was to his benefit to say he was reaching for a phone and not a gun at that moment...and he knew that as soon as it happened.

I gave you the police tape...did you watch it? Youre a marine and you buy that...what do you do in war when the enemy goes reaching that way...do you wait to see if hes gonna pull out a phone? Or maybe hes reaching for a Tootsie pop, so you can be friends....lol.

Think a little deeper...youre a marine...as is my brother and he aint buying the "phone" reach either...and hes a Z supporter. Im neither as of yet...but I have made cases for each side based on drawing my own conclusions...not taking everything Mr Z says literally in every circumstance.

It doesn't matter. Have you not figured this out yet?

 

[25Caliber]

I just asked a marine on the other Z thread what he would do in war if the enemy went reaching upon confrontation...I asked him if he would wait for the person to pull out a phone?

Valid question I think.

 

[Ernie S.]

Hey M...I like you...if you are ever in the area...drinks are on me...the first couple of rounds anyway...

I dont believe that the holster or gun was visible.

It is the reaching that I am concerned with and the hindsight information that a gun was there.

Trayvon didnt know a gun was there until he was on the ground...but hes from Miami...remember...reaching for your right side could be a considerable threat.

I would love to see GZ answer my question in front of jury...I dont think the jury would buy...or at least I would do my damndest to make sure they didnt buy that GZ was reaching for a phone that wasnt there.

Yeah, I grow on ya...like a fungus...

You're ok in my book, 25...appreciate the offer.

I don't think reaching for ones pocket is a threatening gesture.

99 times out of 100, it's going to be a phone.

You can't assault people for reaching for a phone.

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

I keep hearing that the phone wasn't "there" Where was his phone?

 

[TemplarKormac]

"HE'S TOAST!!!" You said. How did you come to that conclusion? Your opinion of Zimmerman? Because you hold inherent biases due to yourself being black? What is it?

My bad if I had to specify that that's my opinion based on the facts.

I'll concede that one though...I can see how that can be seen as me stating it as fact, but it's just my opinion based on the facts.

Haha, nice try Marc. Did it take you over an hour and a half to come up with that response? Your facts are far from the facts the rest of us have seen being laid out. You continue to derive your facts based on your opinion. Selective memory application as it were.

BUSTED.

 

[RKMBrown]

FYI on the "height" issue. Puleze this fight was on the ground, height is not an advantage in a wrestling match. Ever see a supper tall wrestler? If GZ was not defending himself it was probably because he was cowering and emotionally incapable of defending himself. Another nail in the coffin for involuntary manslaughter.

 

[MarcATL]

of course it is "possible"

is it possible he did not feel threatened?

It's been established that Trayvon felt threatened.

He described a creepy man following him, his friend suggested he run away, he pondered it and chose to continue walking and not running.

Being in situations where I was followed before, or felt like I was followed, in the moment you're thinking if you try to run, for sure you're in soup, because that will excite the follower. I didn't, nor would I, run either. I would do exactly as he did, and continue walking, of course with more pep in my step.

Zimmerman was the aggressor.

how many times do i need to remind you that your opinion is not fact?

Trayvon knew the stranger was following him, he described him as creepy, he discussed running away from him with his friend on the phone. Those three facts combined would be seen as a plausible and reasonable threat from Trayvon's perspective.

Let's see how the jury sees it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

please, provide MY QUOTES where I have been "building the case"

If you won't, you will be caught lying and called liar by me ever since. Or you can apologize ( highly unlikely)

Though I simply think you are too dumb to understand that this case is a case in a criminal justice system, not in a media circus... if you can grasp the difference...

I don't the ink I meant you're personal quotes, I meant folks who are GZ supporters in general.

I'll be more specific going forward.

You just need to be more quiet going forward.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yeah, I grow on ya...like a fungus...

You're ok in my book, 25...appreciate the offer.

I don't think reaching for ones pocket is a threatening gesture.

99 times out of 100, it's going to be a phone.

You can't assault people for reaching for a phone.

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

I keep hearing that the phone wasn't "there" Where was his phone?

I thought it was in his left hand.. didn't he have to pick it up after the fight? Stuff is all running together now

 

[MarcATL]

So you can't answer how Trayvon went less than 100 yards in 4 minutes from a creepy ass cracka who was stalking him ?

Trayvon was staying another 300 yards further down the same sidewalk he died trying to bash Zim's head into.

What's interesting, and actually funny to me is, that how you people can use the calculation of the position of the car at a certain time to assert that Trayvon IN FACT doubled-back to attack Trayvon. Yet, even though you have the testimony, that has never wavered, from Jeantel, that states that Trayvon was very concerned about the "creepy" man that was following him, and on top of that had an exchange with her on how to deal with it, whether to run away or what.

Clearly he wasn't comfortable. Which means he felt threatened.

But you don't like those details, so you discard it.

But you accept the made up scenario of him doubling-back and attacking Zimmerman, because you like that. Although NO WHERE IN COURT has that been asserted, much-less established.

Too funny.

Jeantel also said that Martin made it by his home. So how did Martin get back to the T?

What does "by his home?" mean? "By his home" could mean the entire community as far as you know. It's already been established that the average white person doesn't understand her vernacular nor her culture. So you're not really saying much there.

 

[ScienceRocks]

His facts are based on his hatred of "whites". I got news for you MarcAtl, Zimmerman is a HISPANIC!

 

[MarcATL]

please, provide MY QUOTES where I have been "building the case"

If you won't, you will be caught lying and called liar by me ever since. Or you can apologize ( highly unlikely)

Though I simply think you are too dumb to understand that this case is a case in a criminal justice system, not in a media circus... if you can grasp the difference...

I don't the ink I meant you're personal quotes, I meant folks who are GZ supporters in general.

I'll be more specific going forward.

You just need to be more quiet going forward.

Hahahaha!!! That was funny.

And I do like a good joke. You get a thank you from me.

 

[25Caliber]

Yeah, I grow on ya...like a fungus...

You're ok in my book, 25...appreciate the offer.

I don't think reaching for ones pocket is a threatening gesture.

99 times out of 100, it's going to be a phone.

You can't assault people for reaching for a phone.

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

I keep hearing that the phone wasn't "there" Where was his phone?

According to GZ it wasnt where he was reaching. Lets say it was his phone as he says and he couldnt find it...imagine how that looks reaching for something that isnt there...looks worse to the one standing across from you...like what is he frantically reaching for, but cant find?

Of course during the struggle a thought may have went thru Trayvons mind of "oh, thats what you were reaching for"!

We dont know what Trayvon was thinking...hes dead...but from GZs own words we can establish some assumption.

Like for example...GZ says he wasnt following, he was looking for an apt number...that may be true...but to the followee, you appear to still be following him...lol.

 

[Missourian]

Gotcha...fair enough. But (I hate buts...lol) if he doesnt know he was reaching for a gun, then he doesnt know he is reaching for a phone either. However, we do know that a gun was there and a phone wasnt.

Let's explore this logically.

If Martin doesn't know the gun is there...and he never sees it...it's like it really isn't there.

So, let's make it disappear.

Zimmerman has no gun.

He reaches for his cell phone and Martin attacks him.

Was he negligent?

No.

Did Martin assault Zimmerman?

Yes.

Who is in the wrong?

Martin, he is the first to engage in an illegal act.

Gun there/gun not there...if Martin never saw it...for all intents and purposes it wasn't there.

And Martin would have never seen it had he not attacked Zimmerman.

That's the way I see it.

Well at least you finally admit you are basing your view on your imagination.

Feel free to explain your point.

If Martin never saw the gun, and didn't know or suspect it was there...then from his point of view it wasn't there.

Nothing imaginary about that...it's a variation of Schrodinger Cat.

Look it up, you'll learn something.