The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[25Caliber]

Please stop saying TM did nothing wrong. He did. The testimony from the prosecution's star witness, Rachel Jeantel, was that TM had been at his "Daddy's house" but then went back to confront the "niggah". Also according to her, having been on the phone with him at the time, TM approached GZ and asked him "What you followin' me for?" GZ then purportedly said "What you doin' around here?" Then Rachel heard "wet grass sounds" and the call was dropped.

Shortly thereafter, John Good the neighbor sees 2 people rolling around fighting on the grass, then on the paved walkway, always with GZ on the bottom being beaten. A cop arrives almost immediately after the gunshot and finds TM dead and GZ with a broken nose, bleeding cuts to the back of his head, and the back of his jacket wet and grass stained.

Conclusion: TM had made it safely home but decided to go looking for trouble. It was his right to do so. Bad decision, but nothing illegal. So TM went up to GZ, spoke to him, and shortly thereafter winds up dead. All evidence so far points to the fact that he accosted GZ and injured him. TM was still actively beating GZ when GZ became convinced he could be seriously injured or killed. He had a lawful weapon and used it to protect himself from someone who had broken his nose and was continuing to beat him.

The wrong began with TM breaking GZ's nose and went from there. Please stop saying TM did nothing wrong because that is false.

Please stop saying GZ did nothing wrong. He did. Your post is heavy on Trayvon and zero on GZ. See my sig. You are generalizing and leaving out relevant tweener stuff. Such as why was he clocked in the first place? And why did Tray wait till then to do it, if hes this wicked kid, then why didnt he do it before when he had the chance. Reason is because he eventually ran away and was then followed on foot where the truck couldnt go. Lets be fair here.

 

[SantaFeWay]

Never said GZ did nothing wrong. I said TM did something wrong and illegal FIRST.

 

[Defiant1]

I am too fat happy tan saltwatered and birthday partied to be posting. It's all downhill from here.

Tan? You had sun today?

 

[SantaFeWay]

TM was the provocateur in this horrible incident. Again, IMHO.

 

[The Rabbi]

His words...try to catch up...I didnt even read the rest of your psycho babble.

Since you have me on ignore you shouldn't have read any of them. I'll wait to see you produce evidence of Zimmerman frantically grabbing for something. Without looking I know you are making it up, shading it, interpreting it etc. Because that's what stupid people do. They cannot remember exactly and instead substitute their own words for what they cannot remember.

 

[25Caliber]

Here is a question Zimmerman defenders...

Why didnt Zimmerman identify himself when asked by Martin?

Even if Martin didnt speficially say...dear sir, may I have your moniker....why didnt Zimmerman identify himself? It may have saved martins life.

I'm not a Zimmerman supporter, per se, and I'm sure I don't know why he didn't identify himself. Do you know why TM didn't go into the condo where he was staying and bring Chad the Skittles he bought for him when he had the chance instead of going back to ask GZ a question? You realize TM was at his destination without having a hair harmed, don't you? You know he WENT LOOKING for Zimmerman when he could have been warm, dry, and safe at his father's fiancee's house because he had lost GZ in the dark, don't you know that? You sound as much a TM supporter as I sound a GZ supporter so maybe you can answer those questions?

Sorry. I don't mean to sound belligerent but this exercise of "What ifs" is pure crap. It's sadly too late for that. Two lives and all those around them are changed forever. It's all a tragedy. The question now is was GZ in reasonable fear for his life? Or did he have a depraved mind and murder a young man? That's really what the issue is in this trial. Everything else is interesting, but it's unanswerable. We have to go where the evidence leads us to go and not dwell on the what ifs. IMHO

We dont know he was at his destination...Officer Serino doesnt seem to think so at all...in fact he called it impossible and unlikely given the time stamps of the two phone calls. Dont take what Dee dee says literally...that is the only way you could come to that assumption.

Do you believe this also?

She testified that Martin described the man following him as "a creepy-ass cracker" and he thought he had evaded him. But she said a short time later Martin let out a profanity.

Martin said Zimmerman was behind him and she heard Martin ask: "What are you following me for?"

She then heard what sounded like Martin's phone earpiece drop into the grass and she heard him say, "Get off! Get off!" The phone then went dead, she said.

If you wanna go deep...take the timestamp of this call and the sequence of events here coupled with GZs account and phone call...and you will see that Trayvon didnt go back to his condo door 120 yards (two and a half football fields round trip in the dark and rain talking on the phone) from the incident. You try having a conversation on the phone in an all out sprint in the dark and rain for 2 and a half football fields.

To me, it makes more sense that he ran away or walked briskly (gzs words) went right (GZs words) and cut in between buildings (GZ couldnt see him) and was talking on the phone with Rachel...so near home but the length of the building away still....then while talking he came back into the courtyard and saw GZ walking down the path and approached him. What was said and what happened at that point is all screwed up when you bump the witnesses accounts, DDs account and GZs account...the one neighbor saying the left to right thing...dd with the get off thing...GZ with the do you have a problem thing...it all conflicts.

 

[Defiant1]

Here is a question Zimmerman defenders...

Why didnt Zimmerman identify himself when asked by Martin?

Even if Martin didnt speficially say...dear sir, may I have your moniker....why didnt Zimmerman identify himself? It may have saved martins life.

When I took my CCW class I don't remember the instructor telling us I would have to give someone my name before I shoot them.

 

[25Caliber]

Never said GZ did nothing wrong. I said TM did something wrong and illegal FIRST.

And GZ was negligent far before that...the creep following in the dark was finally approached by the irritated followee...shocker!

 

[The Rabbi]

regarding "who the real racists are"? just watch MSNBC from 5-11pm.

Rush is going to be on MSNBC?

Nope, but they gave this guy a show:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/articles/outragedagainsharptonrecord.html

Is he still claiming that Tawana Brawley is telling the truth?

Doubtless he holds by this opinion:

Some opinions remained fixed. Legal scholar Patricia J. Williams wrote in 1991 that the teenager "has been the victim of some unspeakable crime. No matter how she got there. No matter who did it to her and even if she did it to herself.

 

[SantaFeWay]

I speak French, you know. ;-)

DD is not the only one who said that. Obviously. GZ said it also. So the stories match. Typically when the prosecution's star witness confirms the sworn statements of the defendant I tend to believe it to be relevant and likely true.

 

[wavingrl]

Here is a question Zimmerman defenders...

Why didnt Zimmerman identify himself when asked by Martin?

Even if Martin didnt speficially say...dear sir, may I have your moniker....why didnt Zimmerman identify himself? It may have saved martins life.

I'm not a Zimmerman supporter, per se, and I'm sure I don't know why he didn't identify himself. Do you know why TM didn't go into the condo where he was staying and bring Chad the Skittles he bought for him when he had the chance instead of going back to ask GZ a question? You realize TM was at his destination without having a hair harmed, don't you? You know he WENT LOOKING for Zimmerman when he could have been warm, dry, and safe at his father's fiancee's house because he had lost GZ in the dark, don't you know that? You sound as much a TM supporter as I sound a GZ supporter so maybe you can answer those questions?

Sorry. I don't mean to sound belligerent but this exercise of "What ifs" is pure crap. It's sadly too late for that. Two lives and all those around them are changed forever. It's all a tragedy. The question now is was GZ in reasonable fear for his life? Or did he have a depraved mind and murder a young man? That's really what the issue is in this trial. Everything else is interesting, but it's unanswerable. We have to go where the evidence leads us to go and not dwell on the what ifs. IMHO

tough questions. They think another week of the trial. Then endless analyses. That is our system.

What will be next? James Holmes in CO or something else?

With all the rain--the weeds are growing well in my backyard. I should stick to pulling weeds--clearly I don't have the mind to analyze legal matters.

 

[25Caliber]

Here is a question Zimmerman defenders...

Why didnt Zimmerman identify himself when asked by Martin?

Even if Martin didnt speficially say...dear sir, may I have your moniker....why didnt Zimmerman identify himself? It may have saved martins life.

When I took my CCW class I don't remember the instructor telling us I would have to give someone my name before I shoot them.

His point is that the concerned citizen acting in the best interest of his community had an opportunity to identify himself to defuse a situation that had escalated because GZ was following in the dark. Serino said the same thing. When you are the one following in the dark you have an added responsibility imo to make it clear who you are...like if I was being followed I would appreciate the guy rolling down his window and saying something like...hey, sorry bro not trying to scare ya...im just looking for my cat...whew...okay.

Ask what happens to undercover cops who follow in the dark and dont identify themselves when spooked or approach. Have you ever heard this? Police!!....freeze!! You identify yourself to separate yourself as concerned citizen from stalking creep...if you dont bad things can happen.

Did they tell you in your class it was okay to follow people in the dark and rain carrying a weapon...and when the person runs to a place your truck cant go exit your vehicle and chase on foot? Did they tell you that? Again, lets be fair here.

 

[25Caliber]

I speak French, you know. ;-)

DD is not the only one who said that. Obviously. GZ said it also. So the stories match. Typically when the prosecution's star witness confirms the sworn statements of the defendant I tend to believe it to be relevant and likely true.

Said what? which statement? destination? GZ never said he went all the way back to his destination. Im not sure what confirmation you are referring too.

And the star witness didnt confirm a lot of it...especially what words were said...trayvon telling him to get off...etc. GZ didnt mention that...according to GZ only two phrases were spoken...different than Dee dees statements.

 

[SantaFeWay]

If TM felt he was being followed by a creep he should have gone inside and called the police. He was already home. Was TM negligent in going back to confront the creepy follower?

This is not a question of "What if", it is a question of "What is". IF is in the realm of the unprovable. IS is proven fact.

 

[25Caliber]

His words...try to catch up...I didnt even read the rest of your psycho babble.

Since you have me on ignore you shouldn't have read any of them. I'll wait to see you produce evidence of Zimmerman frantically grabbing for something. Without looking I know you are making it up, shading it, interpreting it etc. Because that's what stupid people do. They cannot remember exactly and instead substitute their own words for what they cannot remember.

blah blah...get off my leg...desperate for attention...nobody playing your bitter game? Wonder why, lunatic! Anger issues...seek help.

 

[pioneerpete]

Zimmerman Trial | Exclusive Analysis | Prosecution Witnesses

I really suggest reading this for anyone remotely interested in this case. It is a blog post by the guy who literally wrote the book on self defense. His blog also has every piece of relative evidence. Appears to be a great lawyer and gives great analysis of each witness and day of court through an attorney's eyes.

 

[RKMBrown]

TM was the provocateur in this horrible incident. Again, IMHO.

I suppose if you are willing to believe everything the killer said.

 

[25Caliber]

If TM felt he was being followed by a creep he should have gone inside and called the police. He was already home. Was TM negligent in going back to confront the creepy follower?

This is not a question of "What if", it is a question of "What is". IF is in the realm of the unprovable. IS is proven fact.

Again, we have no way of knowing if he was home...GZ didnt say so...the cops dont believe so.

I agree and have said so...if he had went home he would be alive...If GZ had not followed he would be alive. Of course he could have been dealing with the same situation walking home from the store the next day too.

He was followed...he was irritated...i would be too. If the person doesnt identify himself when i ask him what the problem is and instead he goes reaching for his pockets, then im probably not going to just stand there in the dark waiting to see what he pulls out of his pockets. When GZ was approached...he lied and said no problem when it was very obvious to Tray that there was a problem...why not take the time right there to identify and defuse the situation.

According to GZs own words he was rushed while reaching for his pockets in the dark. People react differently. But if trayvon were here, and he said that I thought this strange man following me in the dark was reaching for a weapon, so I hit him....then later it is discovered that no phone was there but a gun was...it could appear to a jury that trayvons suspicion was correct. There was a gun there as it turns out.

 

[SantaFeWay]

GZ has given many sworn statements to police, including a videotaped re-enactment. Each time he said he lost sight and position of TM. DD testified TM told her he (TM) was at his "Daddy's house" but he was going back to find the "niggah", meaning GZ. These statements are confirmatory. Both state that TM and GZ had lost sight and position of each other. GZ did not know that TM had gotten to his "father's" condo, just that he had lost him. TM confirmed GZ had lost him and that he was in the back of his "Daddy's house" while he was on the phone with DD. Fact, fact, truth that TM was either at his destination or that he was safely close to his destination without being seen by GZ.

Therefore, TM went back to GZ for some reason. I do not think it was to have a discussion about why he was being followed. Call me stupid but that's just my hunch. Facts are confirmed by both GZ and DD that TM spoke first and GZ's nose was broken somehow, etc, etc, etc. Fight, head wounds, shot, death.

Have no idea where GZ's destination is. His truck? No, no one said GZ went back to his truck. Or to his "destination".

Again, whatever was or was not said cannot be proven to my satisfaction if it was only stated by one person.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I bet Republicans think Trayvon Martin's mother is a liar when she said it was her son crying for help. That she knows his voice.

That just hate that kid. It's Obama by proxy.

Lying would imply that she knows it is Zimmerman. I have trouble identifying anyone when they are screaming over a phone that is inside a house and they are outside in the rain, I doubt she has super hearing.