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.
cough--just last night they explained that there were only peaceful demonstrations --well-intentioned diverse groups of young people.

beyond disgraceful.

the final nail in the coffin for me--Nancy Grace was yatttering on and on --some sort of review of the proceedings. She came out with---'They said an impartial jury couldn't be struck---we were able to seat such a jury as was done in the Casey Anthony and OJ trials...'

Unless she has completely lost her mind --I need no further convincing that she lacks any shred of integrity.

There are precisely ZERO demonstrations.

Other than the 1 guy with the SYG sign written in crayon.

She was referencing gatherings of people from last year--that propelled this case forward.

The media has been bringing that up and playing the riots from last year because there's nothing going on.

Stirring up the shit.
 
These media outlets are heavily invested in a guilty verdict. Their lies have caused rioting mobs who have beaten people in Trayvons name, caused property damage & defamation of GZ, police, whites, Hispanics, & neighborhood watch people.

They are the subject of many lawsuits & a guilty verdict will most certainly cause them to lose.

During a pause in the interminable session last night, Nancy Grace on HLN had a guest on to discuss the proceedings. The guest was explaining why the day had gone so well for Zimmerman and Nancy became visibly irate, raised her voice, shouted the guest down, and basically refused to allow the guest to comment. Nancy Grace wants a guilty verdict and makes that abundantly clear.

THAT is our objective media these days.

What would have to happen to get her off the air? I fantasize about that. I think she has been around about a decade. That is more than enough.

People stop watching her, ratings go down. Bye bye Grapes.
 
201200001586.jpg


Emanuel Burgess thug thief

sw50sw8sw578.gif
 
If his defense stands up to cross examination then not guilty slam dunk.
I do not fault the defense for not putting him up.
This is not about ME but the jury. It may hurt him as there may be jurors that need to hear his side of this subject to cross.
I believe he does not need to testify but have spoken with many jurors that wanted to hear the defendant say his side live.

As a layman, I understand that the accused seldom takes the stand in a murder trial unless the Defense is in serious dog doo-doo

Yea, but in this case there's an additional reason. If Z testifies among the train wreck of the explanations he's already given, the jury will see first hand how peculiar his character is.

"Train wreck" That's good. The only train wreck here is the prosecution's case. Zimmerman has been pretty consistent.
 
I've been forced to listen to the trial on HLN via XM.

After listening to testimony then the commentary for three hours, I am convinced that they are watching a trial in a totally different courtroom.

Oh poor baby. No really. Are you back amongst the land of Reality now?

Nope, stuck with HLN for the remainder of the trial. :(

Better than nothin'...I'm learning to focus solely on testimony and tune out the commentary.

Plus I still have y'all for reality checks. :thup:

If I self identify any symptoms of HLN induced psychosis, I will cut the feed immediately.
 
Judge Mope is no longer hiding the fact that she is a member of the prosecution team.

I was wondering when one of you would make that claim. Sore loser before losing. Bad form.


Don't be silly.

You must be dishonest to pretend that she hasn't erred on the side of the prosecution on a consistent basis.

Has she made some rational rulings favorable to the defense, too?

Sure.
 
Bernie strikes with only question to Mr. Zimmerman on how many time he listens to the tape.

Defense outsmarted him by not playing tape, so no repeated cussing.
 
Last edited:
How is it a mischaracterization? I listened to zimmermans 911 call. He clearly states Martin ran away. The police also tell him he doesn't need to follow him. So if he isn't following him, how does the altercation ever happen?

So it is ok to harass someone into an altercation and then shoot him?

Because Martin doubled back and confronted him. Or did you miss that part?

Well from what I have seen the shooting happened around a corner away from Zimmermans car. So certainly he did follow him. Is there evidence Martin doubled back?

Well, Zimmerman said he lost of sight of him. Others testified Martin said he ran away from him. So I leave it up to you to figure out how Martin encountered Zimmerman, who was on his way back to his car.
 
As a layman, I understand that the accused seldom takes the stand in a murder trial unless the Defense is in serious dog doo-doo

Yea, but in this case there's an additional reason. If Z testifies among the train wreck of the explanations he's already given, the jury will see first hand how peculiar his character is.

"Train wreck" That's good. The only train wreck here is the prosecution's case. Zimmerman has been pretty consistent.

Liars always are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top