The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[JimBowie1958]

.....<snip>....

I have done work for the innocence project for almost 20 years.
Uh, hate to inform you of this but every one of those cases involves THE DEFENDANTS and not ONE of them involves the prosecution using DNA to help a defendant in a criminal case.

Respectfully, this case IS NOT a who done it and no one's identity is at issue in this case.
Everyone that you posted above, EVERY ONE involves freeing someone based ON A WRONG IDENTITY.
Hate to break it to you this late in the game but Zimmerman IS NOT DENYING he is the man that shot and killed Trayvon Martin.
So how does your post above with all those names on it have anything to do with it and have anything to do with the guilt of innocence in this case which involves NOT a who done it and an issue of identity but self defense?

I think the prosecution has brought in DNA testing in an attempt to prove certain things could not have happened as Zimmerman claims them to have...like trying to prove that Trayvon never touched the gun.

On that issue, I think that the jury will remember that Zimmerman said he thought that Trayvon was reaching for the gun. He didn't say that he ever touched it.

Lack of DNA doesn't prove someone didn't touch something anyway.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

All it takes to learn a language is exposure to it in childhood, it has nothing to do with being a savant. This is why it is possible for people with IQs much lower than average to speak any language at all. If it actually took a minimum level of intelligence there would be quite a few people who wouldn't be able to speak any language at all. I grew up in a border city where almost everyone spoke multiple languages. People in Europe consider it to be the norm, you should get around more.

If stupidity were a virtue you would be Prince Charles! We were talking about people with IQs of 60 speaking multiple languages. Then you digress into border cities and people in Europe ( normal people I gather) considering multi lingual skills being the norm. Ha ha. That is a long way from supporting your lie that you know people with IQs of 60 speaking multiple languages! But judging by your posts I can believe that most of your friends have such low IQs but I doubt if they are multi lingual as you suggest!
BTW I spent 39 months in Germany and I never met an idiot like YOU!

Yes, if they are around people who speak different languages when they are a child they can pick up all of them. Did you not follow the logic?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'd like to add one more thing to my last statement! The scene I just described is consistent with the screams heard from Martin when he first saw the gun. The poor kid was yelling for help ... scared out of his wits by a strange man with a gun... fighting for his life...

Zimmerman tracked Martin down, shot him in cold blood, then proceeded to hold him over his body so a witness could see Martin beating the crap out of him, and then fire into the air with a different gun which he proceeded to hide from the police.

This is why sane people think you are dumber than dog shit.

listen you ignorant asshole! Here is what I REALLY SAID:

"Ya know Sallow, you might be on to something here! A coward like Zimmerman wouldn't run after a "dangerous suspect" without having his gun drawn now would he? I'll bet he cornered Martin and was in close proximity to him when Martin, thinking he was being robbed, grabbed for the gun with one hand while knocking GZ to the ground with the other.
Martin,realizing he had no escape, jumped on GZ to try and get the weapon just like Jphn Wayne or ROY ROGERS WOULD HAVE DONE! But this wasn't a movie, it was the real world... and a innocent black teen became a statistic!"

I then added this:"I'd like to add one more thing to my last statement! The scene I just described is consistent with the screams heard from Martin when he first saw the gun. The poor kid was yelling for help ... scared out of his wits by a strange man with a gun... fighting for his life...

Where in that frigging narrative can you even begin to conclude that I said GZ was holding him over his body and firing second guns? Where do you come up with that kind of idiotic bullshit? Are you CRAZY or just so racist you won't even entertain logic at all.

What's the matter, don't like people that can see through your BS?

 

[syrenn]

Well, that is a deposition! She should not have to read a deposition in court. ANd on the question of equating cursive literacy with intelligence, the old timers had better test their own children... cursive writing is no longer taught in many parts of the country!

Depositions are printed, no one ever said she couldn't read printing. The point here is that she testified that she wrote that letter, and then couldn't read it. Feel free to ignore that in your effort to blame Zimmerman for everything.

No, depositions are not always printed. I have taken many from witnesses so I know! First the person writes their statement in their own words. The person's initials are placed at the beginning and at the end of the statement. After that it is signed and dated. Then, if nothing more than for the sake of clarity, the investigator can make a typed copy of the original statement, have it initialed and signed the same way, and attach both documents together after copies are made!

Zimmerman IS to blame for everything! If he had left that kid alone Martin would still be alive and GZ wouldn't have his fat ass on the line for murder!

lol...

it will suck to be you when he is acquitted.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

if you are siting on top of someone and you punch them in the face.... their head will hit the ground. Same with a bitch slap.

so nothing would be under martins fingernails now would it? You get dna under the victims nails since it is a defensive move.

That's not what Zimmerman stated.

He said Martin grabbed his head and slammed it into the ground.

The evidence does not back that up.

Umm, when I grab something I do it with my palms toward the object I am grabbing, not my fingernails.

The very definition of grabbing something implies closing your hand around it, therefore your fingertips/fingernails would come into contact with whatever you are grabbing!

 

[JQPublic1]

Zimmerman tracked Martin down, shot him in cold blood, then proceeded to hold him over his body so a witness could see Martin beating the crap out of him, and then fire into the air with a different gun which he proceeded to hide from the police.

This is why sane people think you are dumber than dog shit.

listen you ignorant asshole! Here is what I REALLY SAID:

"Ya know Sallow, you might be on to something here! A coward like Zimmerman wouldn't run after a "dangerous suspect" without having his gun drawn now would he? I'll bet he cornered Martin and was in close proximity to him when Martin, thinking he was being robbed, grabbed for the gun with one hand while knocking GZ to the ground with the other.
Martin,realizing he had no escape, jumped on GZ to try and get the weapon just like Jphn Wayne or ROY ROGERS WOULD HAVE DONE! But this wasn't a movie, it was the real world... and a innocent black teen became a statistic!"

I then added this:"I'd like to add one more thing to my last statement! The scene I just described is consistent with the screams heard from Martin when he first saw the gun. The poor kid was yelling for help ... scared out of his wits by a strange man with a gun... fighting for his life...

Where in that frigging narrative can you even begin to conclude that I said GZ was holding him over his body and firing second guns? Where do you come up with that kind of idiotic bullshit? Are you CRAZY or just so racist you won't even entertain logic at all.

What's the matter, don't like people that can see through your BS?

I would accept your clairvoyance if you weren't so selective on whose BS you can see through...Why can't you see through Zimmerman's Bullshit? His is flowing copiously and without any sign of abatement, yet you ignore it!

 

[RKMBrown]

And some wait until its too late to play the morality card...the time for testas post was days perhaps weeks ago...things got ugly because they were permitted to get ugly when the super rep powers were allowed to troll, bully and go on profanity tirades against opinions they disagreed with. The name calling was pathetic. Some sit and watch and then act outraged when its responded to.

I have been with you and testa for awhile and neither one of you would put up with or have put up with the same actions being done to yourself. You are both guilty of running and hiding when it is done to someone else. I have personally witnessed this.

I nor anyone else has to get your permission to defend themselves against such attacks....especially when they were ignored initially to no avail.

25, I felt you over-reacted and that over-the-top language was offensive to me. You need to know when to move on. It's not important. And if it is, then maybe this posting stuff is getting to you and causing you real anger issues. I am not going to support you when I feel you do not have a point worth supporting.

As for myself, yes we have been posting together awhile. Let's not go into other over-reactions I observed earlier on and let go of and interacted with you afterwards. It was over and that was that, and you were making thoughtful posts.

I've never asked anyone to come to my aid when I've been attacked on a forum. Here or there. And I won't. It's just not that big a deal to me. I'm on here for fun, to interact and share ideas. If I feel attacked, then I take a break and come back another day. Or move to another thread. Done that before when I got frustrated for a little while. It's just not that important.

And, for the record, I don't owe you anything when you're acting the fool. Gratuitious insults against any poster deserves my comment, but not those that are redundant and petty as yours have been lately.

Let. It. Go. And play nicely. If you've noticed the same as I have, you don't have any supporters when you go off the rails. I'll be there for you when you are being unfairly attacked but I really think you blew this latest stuff out of proportion.

So when things did cool off and ernie came in today with two back to back profanity laden posts with threats of more to come and that i hadnt seen nothin yet!...where were you? Hiding under your desk hoping I didnt see it?

You are very selective in who you defend and it usually decided on where the numbers are. i didn't mind playing it by myself...it was when you and others cheered the trolls with your thank button that disturbed me.

If you think responding to it is blowing it out of proportion, then I cant help you...you simply arent paying attention or are turning a blind eye because it isnt you being attacked...this time.

 

[Gracie]

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I see this thread is still full of people flexing their digital bravado.

Too bad

 

[syrenn]

That's not what Zimmerman stated.

He said Martin grabbed his head and slammed it into the ground.

The evidence does not back that up.

Umm, when I grab something I do it with my palms toward the object I am grabbing, not my fingernails.

The very definition of grabbing something implies closing your hand around it, therefore your fingertips/fingernails would come into contact with whatever you are grabbing!

grab your wrist.

The pads of your fingers make contact.... The fingernails dont have to make contact or pick up cells when "grabbing". Zimmermans head and face did not show signs of fingernails scratching him.

 

[25Caliber]

Zimmerman turned and began returning to his vehicle when so advised. There is ZERO evidence to support your wild claim that Martin saw a weapon and so attacked Zimmerman. In fact the evidence presented indicates he made no exclamation, no claim of a gun , nothing to his girlfriend who said she was on the phone with him.

You keep fabricating from whole cloth the whole " Martin saw a gun" claim. Add that you keep fabricating that Zimmerman tried to pull it before the fight.
Not in evidence did not happen. Yet your entire story DEPENDS on that series of events. Again absent any shred of evidence your supposed story was true.

She did STATE he was home. That means he CHOSE to return to where Zimmerman was headed back to his car. He chose to confront Zimmerman and then by the actual evidence chose to attack him. Martin was on top, Zimmerman was calling for help, Zimmerman had a near broken nose and lacerations to his head. Martin had no mark on him as testified by the ME and the Mortuary. His knuckles were bruised though.

That series of events IS actual evidence. Presented and told to the Jury. No claim that Zimmerman went for his gun forcing martin to attack him. Hell the known evidence contradicts that series of events.

If you want to engage in respectable discussion, I am willing to do so. If all you want to do is engage in personal attacks im not interested. I have a retort to your above post, but I am not going to give you the same attention that I would [MENTION=31215]Oldstyle[/MENTION] who is respectful with his disagreements and at least gives the courtesy of listening.

You are hearing the other side...the other side that does not hate GZ. It could be interesting if you would allow it, but for some reason you have something personal against me.

A quick one to note: He did not stop and go back to his truck...not immediately...what he did do is proceed up the path to now look for an address to give the police a better location, then he headed back down the path towards his truck after he hung up with police (these are his words--not mine...see reenactment video). Trayvon has no way of knowing that he is looking for an address...tray was not privy to the 911 call...to him its just GZ continuing to follow him after he had actually ran away.

This is supported by the 911 call...the reenactment video and the timestamp of the phone call and when he hung up with 911. In this case, it is your assumption that is not supported by the evidence...you are going by what you have heard....look at the tapes yourself...I did. I was getting tired of going by what i heard, so I went through it all myself and kept the links to support my opinion.

So answer me this, 25...

If Zimmerman has indeed lost sight of Martin and is headed back to his SUV? Why does Martin choose to call out to the man he's supposedly afraid of from the safety of the darkness? Why doesn't Martin simply let Zimmerman continue to walk back to his truck? He doesn't have to do or say anything if he's REALLY afraid. Could it be that Martin now has gotten a better look at the man who was in the SUV and has decided that he's not a big imposing guy but a skinny little guy? Could it be that Martin decided at that point that he's not going to take any shit from someone who looks as wimpy as George Zimmerman did? That Martin decided to step from the shadows with his "You got a problem?" challenge?

Excellent points...I agree with your above post 100% and have said the same thing...you have it pegged pretty well. Its speculation, but it is logical reasoning based on what we know. GZ was in retreat and trayvon called him out...in hindsight he should not have....I wish the poor kid would have just went home.

i also do not believe that Trayvon was scared of GZ. That does not make logical sense. I think that he had sized GZ up and that GZ looked like someone he could take if he needed to. GZ is not an intimidating looking person. I dont believe tray was scared of him.

I believe that Trayvon was IRRITATED with him for following him in the dark and rain (as i would be if someone was following me in the dark) and that when he ran up the path towards the homestretch of the condo he became MORE irritated that GZ was now following him on foot. Even though GZ may have been looking for an address...Trayvon did not know that. So a person who has become increasingly irritated at this person continuing to follow him was now going to say something to him. He did by saying "Do you have a problem" and the rest is history.

I personally think that if you are going to exercise your right to follow in the dark and rain, then you have some moral responsibility to at least identify yourself when the situation escalates. Does he have to? No. Is it illegal not to? No. IMO...At some point you have to distinguish yourself to the followee from being a concerned citizen and just some creep following a teenager. I believe this responsibility is increased when you are carrying a concealed weapon...I believe you have the moral responsibility to defuse a situation that has clearly escalated. I can honestly say that I would have and I have in other situations when teens were suspiciously walking around the neighborhood at night.

I also believe that based on the evidence presented so far and how its been presented by the prosecution that a not guilty verdict is imminent. I just dont think the prosecution has put on a good case. I think they overcharged at M2 because of political and national protest pressure. As a result, their burden of proof is too great for the case they were prepared to make. Manslaughter by Culpable Negligence (Involuntary Manslaughter) would have been the more appropriate charge, IMO. The prosecution has went from not even arresting the guy to charging him with M2? Big mistake and against the advice of their own lead investigator on the case (Chris Serino), who suggested Invol Manslaughter instead. He has coincidentally been demoted in the time since although im not completely sure why.

IMO, the prosecution has passed the buck and pressure to 6 female jurors. They thought the pressure would be off of them for at least arresting and charging him and on the jurors to convict...like the jurors will ultimately be blamed if he gets off...not the prosecution. That is weak and disgraceful, imo.

 

[RKMBrown]

Got the between trial days blues.

 

[Gracie]

Got the between trial days blues.

Only 2 more days, dear. Take the weekend off to recharge your batteries.

 

[JQPublic1]

llol...

it will suck to be you when he is acquitted.

No, it won't... I have come to expect the worst and most unjust of outcomes when it comes to justice for Black people in this country. I just hope the prosecutors reach down and dig into Zimmerman's mind. did he have his gun drawn as would be expected when chasing a dangerous suspect through darkened areas? Why hasn't that question been brought up?

 

[Staidhup]

At least he has a jury, otherwise some on this site would have him hanging from a tree. Bottom line I didn't know there were so many forensic experts and lawyers on this site. In fact there are a considerable number that have all the answers and opinions on such a vast array of subjects one cannot help but to wonder were the facts begin and bull shit ends.

 

[syrenn]

llol...

it will suck to be you when he is acquitted.

No, it won't... I have come to expect the worst and most unjust of outcomes when it comes to justice for Black people in this country. I just hope the prosecutors reach down and dig into Zimmerman's mind. did he have his gun drawn as would be expected when chasing a dangerous suspect through darkened areas? Why hasn't that question been brought up?

yes, it will suck to be you.

 

[JQPublic1]

Umm, when I grab something I do it with my palms toward the object I am grabbing, not my fingernails.

The very definition of grabbing something implies closing your hand around it, therefore your fingertips/fingernails would come into contact with whatever you are grabbing!

grab your wrist.

The pads of your fingers make contact.... The fingernails dont have to make contact or pick up cells when "grabbing". Zimmermans head and face did not show signs of fingernails scratching him.

Did you see the alleged pictures of GZ's injuries? Surely, if Martin was banging GZ's head against the ground there would have been blood on Martin's hands. Perhaps there was none of GZ's blood under the fingernails or anywhere else on Martin because he never grabbed GZ's head at all!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Respectful? You mean by pointing out your repeated claim Martin attacked Zimmerman because he saw a weapon, is made up from whole cloth? Zero evidence. Zero claim even by the prosecution.

You base your entire case on a fabricated condition that simply did not happen. And after being called on it continue to make the same claim over and over. And I am disrespectful for calling you on the fabrication?

The evidence and testimony are clear, Martin attacked Zimmerman, nearly broke his nose and then proceeded to beat his head into the ground. Eye witness testimony places Martin on top and Zimmerman calling for help.

So explain why, if Zimmerman's intent was to go for his gun and then shoot Martin, why was he calling for help? Why was he relieved when told there was eye witness to the event?

Just admit you fabricated the whole Zimmerman went for his gun episode.

I fail to see how even involuntary manslaughter gets proven when the eyewitness testimony backs every thing Zimmerman said and the supposed star witness for the prosecution INSISTS Martin made it home AND THEN CHOSE TO GO BACK.

 

[25Caliber]

Respectful? You mean by pointing out your repeated claim Martin attacked Zimmerman because he saw a weapon, is made up from whole cloth? Zero evidence. Zero claim even by the prosecution.

You base your entire case on a fabricated condition that simply did not happen. And after being called on it continue to make the same claim over and over. And I am disrespectful for calling you on the fabrication?

The evidence and testimony are clear, Martin attacked Zimmerman, nearly broke his nose and then proceeded to beat his head into the ground. Eye witness testimony places Martin on top and Zimmerman calling for help.

So explain why, if Zimmerman's intent was to go for his gun and then shoot Martin, why was he calling for help? Why was he relieved when told there was eye witness to the event?

Just admit you fabricated the whole Zimmerman went for his gun episode.

I fail to see how even involuntary manslaughter gets proven when the eyewitness testimony backs every thing Zimmerman said and the supposed star witness for the prosecution INSISTS Martin made it home AND THEN CHOSE TO GO BACK.

Untrue...blatantly untrue. I never said that Trayvon attacked George because he SAW a weapon...not once. It's irresponsible on your part to suggest I did. You're a Marine, where is your honor?

If you have honor you will simply provide a post by me confirming your accusation in your post above (in bold). If you cannot prove that and are "making it up" or are mistaken then you owe me an apology.

I have proved a number of your assumptions incorrect due to the evidence in the case. Most recently in my last post to you. My guess is you are not deep in the trial, have probably done very little research on your own and instead have established an opinion based on some hidden bias and are now lazily regurgitating everything you hear as long as it fits your narrative. This is uninteresting to me.

As for the rest of your post...you are repeatedly asking questions that have already been replied to or posted to at length. I took the time to do it and now you are asking me again. Im not going to keep repeating myself to you...go back and read what i wrote and stop asking the same question.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Respectful? You mean by pointing out your repeated claim Martin attacked Zimmerman because he saw a weapon, is made up from whole cloth? Zero evidence. Zero claim even by the prosecution.

You base your entire case on a fabricated condition that simply did not happen. And after being called on it continue to make the same claim over and over. And I am disrespectful for calling you on the fabrication?

The evidence and testimony are clear, Martin attacked Zimmerman, nearly broke his nose and then proceeded to beat his head into the ground. Eye witness testimony places Martin on top and Zimmerman calling for help.

So explain why, if Zimmerman's intent was to go for his gun and then shoot Martin, why was he calling for help? Why was he relieved when told there was eye witness to the event?

Just admit you fabricated the whole Zimmerman went for his gun episode.

I fail to see how even involuntary manslaughter gets proven when the eyewitness testimony backs every thing Zimmerman said and the supposed star witness for the prosecution INSISTS Martin made it home AND THEN CHOSE TO GO BACK.

Untrue...I never said that he attacked him because he SAW a weapon...not once. Its irresponsible on your part to suggest I did. You're a Marine, where is your honor?

I have proved a number of your assumptions incorrect due to the evidence in the case. Most recently in my last post to you. My guess is you are not deep in the trial, have probably done very little research on your own and instead have established an opinion based on some hidden bias and are now lazily regurgitating everything you hear as long as it fits your narrative. This is uninteresting to me.

You never wrote Martin saw the gun when Zimmerman reached for his phone? You never wrote that since Zimmerman's phone wasn't in the pocket that he was probably reaching for his gun? You never wrote that Zimmerman fumbling around in his pocket exposed the gun and made Martin attack him?

I remind you that while this thread is long I am retired I can spend a couple hours quoting you.