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.
Dee Dee testified there could have been 200 texts that day. There were more than just her and Trayvon, several of them had been chatting all day. The judge said there isn't any name attached to the texts indicating who wrote which text. As an example, she said it could have been some other kid in the house using his phone.

The phone company records give time & location each text was sent. That can be used to insure the phone was with TM & not at another location with someone else. If multiple people were around TM at the time, put them on the stand to testify as to who sent those text.

So the judge and jury have to figure all that out for the Defense team? They just weren't ready. Too busy with all of their depositions at night, etc..

Now, I was up very late working and I just can't get pulled into this today. Go ahead and post your own opinion and don't worry about what I think about it.
 
Dee Dee testified there could have been 200 texts that day. There were more than just her and Trayvon, several of them had been chatting all day. The judge said there isn't any name attached to the texts indicating who wrote which text. As an example, she said it could have been some other kid in the house using his phone.

The phone company records give time & location each text was sent. That can be used to insure the phone was with TM & not at another location with someone else. If multiple people were around TM at the time, put them on the stand to testify as to who sent those text.

The judge is paranoid and does not understand any of it. Better to rule against what you have no idea about.
 

It's more important to know important things like how to apply for food stamps and text your buddies.

It's more important that I went out and bb gunned a chicken hawk in the butt that was harassing my chickens and am feeling much better about life now.

shooting birds while intoxicated ? That sounds like way more fun than watching this trial.
 
I still think he'll be aquitted

The jury doesn't know what we know, both the good and the bad. If they were truthful at void dire

I do too, we're back where we were yesterday before the hearing.

I'm just trashed about the truth not coming out and the sting of incorrect judgment.

That was for the jury to decide. That's what they're for.

I've come to expect incompetence and miscarriages of justice. Jaded

I still believe in truth justice and the American way.

Well I did until yesterday, it'll take me a while to recover from this.
 
The jury has got to be sitting there thinking "THIS is what we left early for yesterday?".

If you're ever called to be a juror, note that those large periods where you're sitting in the jury room is when you're missing all the good stuff.

I've been on a jury. The two times we were sent back for something to be decided, the following testimony was, "exciting" I guess is the word.

This guy is boring as hell. The jury has to be wondering what the issue was with this, since they have no idea about the animation and text issues.
 
The jury has got to be sitting there thinking "THIS is what we left early for yesterday?".

If you're ever called to be a juror, note that those large periods where you're sitting in the jury room is when you're missing all the good stuff.

I've been on a jury. The two times we were sent back for something to be decided, the following testimony was, "exciting" I guess is the word.

This guy is boring as hell. The jury has to be wondering what the issue was with this, since they have no idea about the animation and text issues.

Mr Stamina might give the jury (and us) a little hint as to where he is going with the questioning.
 
I don't get the judge's ruling about excluding the animation at all.

Why would any judge build in such a solid appeals argument (in the unlikely event of a conviction)?

I am less concerned with the exclusion of texts showing that TM may have been fond of fighting. Again, I doubt GZ was AWARE of TM's proclivities, so it may very well be a whole lot on the irrelevant side.

But the animation ruling is absurd.
 
If you're ever called to be a juror, note that those large periods where you're sitting in the jury room is when you're missing all the good stuff.

I've been on a jury. The two times we were sent back for something to be decided, the following testimony was, "exciting" I guess is the word.

This guy is boring as hell. The jury has to be wondering what the issue was with this, since they have no idea about the animation and text issues.

Mr Stamina might give the jury (and us) a little hint as to where he is going with the questioning.

Mr. Stamina can do whatever he wants, thank you! He always has a point.
 
I don't get the judge's ruling about excluding the animation at all.

Why would any judge build in such a solid appeals argument (in the unlikely event of a conviction)?

I am less concerned with the exclusion of texts showing that TM may have been fond of fighting. Again, I doubt GZ was AWARE of TM's proclivities, so it may very well be a whole lot on the irrelevant side.

But the animation ruling is absurd.

We're trying to cheer up about injustice here.

And get off page 666
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top