The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Tink]

[MENTION=9370]Jon[/MENTION]-berzerk...

Something curious to me is when Zimmerman is describing to police the initial face to face confrontation with Trayvon. He tells the police that when Trayvon asked him "Do you got a problem?" that his first instinct was to reach for his phone, but watch how he shows the police he was reaching for his phone...it appears to me that he although he tells the cop he is going for his phone, that his hand is being cupped as if he was actually going for his gun....then GZ says that he forgot what pocket his phone was in.

Whats curious to me is that while GZ is chasing someone who appears to be suspicious and then is suddenly approached by that person is it possible that he panicked and reached for the gun or appeared to reach for a gun and then Trayvon charged him? Because that kind of changes a few things. GZ tells the cop that he was punched just after he was reaching for his "phone".

Just trying to see all sides to this...if trayvon doubles back on someone he knows is following him and then asks the follower if theres is a problem and then the follower immediately reaches for his pocket or holster, then maybe trayvon rushed him because he didnt know what GZ was grabbing for.

See the link below...at about the 1:16 mark he begins to describe the point I am referring to.

Also, testa, Santa Fe, animallover and tink....would be interested in your take also on this. Is Mr Z telling the cops that he was reaching for his phone when he was actually reaching for his gun?

To me this a big obstacle that GZ will have to overcome and a good prosecutor is going to really question him on this...like "how did Trayvon know what you were reaching for"? And "why are you reaching for a phone when the police are on their way"...if you are being approached by a suspicious person and you are fearful enough to reach for a phone is it possible that you were reaching for your gun out of fear?

Something just doesnt sit right with me with this explanation...its like he is telling the cop he is reaching for his phone because he knows he cant say he was reaching for a gun that early in the conflict because self defense is not going to fly....it would be trayvon acting in self defense if he was reaching for a gun. As it turns out GZs holster was exactly where he says he was reaching for his phone.

George Zimmerman's Police Interview after Trayvon Martin Shooting - YouTube

I agree very much with you on this. And also why reach for his phone with out first explaining "I'm part of neighborhood watch and we've had a lot of break ins so I just wanted to check out anyone walking around in the neighborhood?" If someone is following me around and I have no idea why and I stop to ask them why and instead of answering me they reach for something I'd try to defend myself too.

 

[testarosa]

Zimmerman's jury Sequestration is now in the news. Zimmerman jurors to be sequestered up to a month

And well they should be.

Don't want Spike Stupid Lee or some other celebrity getting a hold of a wrong address and Tweeting it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

And by the way, why the FUCK do jury trials in Florida consist of only 6 jurors?

It's the Way It Is.

M1 gets 12 jurors.

I just did some digging. I found a web site that bitched about it (a lawyer, I believe).

He said that the State of Florida did away with the need for a Grand Jury. We've seen THAT. So the screening function performed by a body OTHER THAN the prosecutors themselves is now dispensed with.

Not a good start.

Then, instead of having to prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt to each of 12 jurors, the State can get by with having to only prove it to 6.

Not a good thing if you are the one accused -- especially if you are (gasp) actually not guilty.

 

[testarosa]

[MENTION=9370]Jon[/MENTION]-berzerk...

Something curious to me is when Zimmerman is describing to police the initial face to face confrontation with Trayvon. He tells the police that when Trayvon asked him "Do you got a problem?" that his first instinct was to reach for his phone, but watch how he shows the police he was reaching for his phone...it appears to me that he although he tells the cop he is going for his phone, that his hand is being cupped as if he was actually going for his gun....then GZ says that he forgot what pocket his phone was in.

Whats curious to me is that while GZ is chasing someone who appears to be suspicious and then is suddenly approached by that person is it possible that he panicked and reached for the gun or appeared to reach for a gun and then Trayvon charged him? Because that kind of changes a few things. GZ tells the cop that he was punched just after he was reaching for his "phone".

Just trying to see all sides to this...if trayvon doubles back on someone he knows is following him and then asks the follower if theres is a problem and then the follower immediately reaches for his pocket or holster, then maybe trayvon rushed him because he didnt know what GZ was grabbing for.

See the link below...at about the 1:16 mark he begins to describe the point I am referring to.

Also, testa, Santa Fe, animallover and tink....would be interested in your take also on this. Is Mr Z telling the cops that he was reaching for his phone when he was actually reaching for his gun?

To me this a big obstacle that GZ will have to overcome and a good prosecutor is going to really question him on this...like "how did Trayvon know what you were reaching for"? And "why are you reaching for a phone when the police are on their way"...if you are being approached by a suspicious person and you are fearful enough to reach for a phone is it possible that you were reaching for your gun out of fear?

Something just doesnt sit right with me with this explanation...its like he is telling the cop he is reaching for his phone because he knows he cant say he was reaching for a gun that early in the conflict because self defense is not going to fly....it would be trayvon acting in self defense if he was reaching for a gun. As it turns out GZs holster was exactly where he says he was reaching for his phone.

George Zimmerman's Police Interview after Trayvon Martin Shooting - YouTube

I agree very much with you on this. And also why reach for his phone with out first explaining "I'm part of neighborhood watch and we've had a lot of break ins so I just wanted to check out anyone walking around in the neighborhood?" If someone is following me around and I have no idea why and I stop to ask them why and instead of answering me they reach for something I'd try to defend myself too.

That was an awesome point - you're right, that's exactly what he did.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Zimmerman's jury Sequestration is now in the news. Zimmerman jurors to be sequestered up to a month

And well they should be.

Don't want Spike Stupid Lee or some other celebrity getting a hold of a wrong address and Tweeting it.

Oh snap! I almost forgot that incident.

 

[WorldWatcher]

He is also ASSuming that Trayvon wasn't "doing anything" to Zimmerman, which is clearly NOT what Zimmerman does say-- and does not appear to even be a marginally rational view based on what we have seen so far.

What have we seen from that night, other than Zimmerman's statement, that someone with a marginally rational view would use to base Martin's actions (or lack of) from that night.

The only thing that I've heard about, other than Zimmerman's story, is the video of Martin making his purchases at the 7-11 (and that seemed normal). So what other information is available on Martin's actions from that night? Video, audio, witness to the events prior to the confrontation?



>>>>

I am not sure what your post even means. Editing seems to be a lost art.

Anyway, what ELSE we "know" is largely found in the realm of the physical.

For example, I have seen the evidence of the injuries to Zimmerman's nose. Haven't you? I have seen evidence of the injuries to the back of Zimmerman's noggin. Haven't you? I have yet to see any evidence of injuries to Trayvon OTHER THAN, of course, the tragic bullet wound. Have you?

I thought you were talking about evidence on who started the altercation.

The fact that one occurred is not in doubt.


>>>>

 

[Tink]

[MENTION=9370]Jon[/MENTION]-berzerk...

Something curious to me is when Zimmerman is describing to police the initial face to face confrontation with Trayvon. He tells the police that when Trayvon asked him "Do you got a problem?" that his first instinct was to reach for his phone, but watch how he shows the police he was reaching for his phone...it appears to me that he although he tells the cop he is going for his phone, that his hand is being cupped as if he was actually going for his gun....then GZ says that he forgot what pocket his phone was in.

Whats curious to me is that while GZ is chasing someone who appears to be suspicious and then is suddenly approached by that person is it possible that he panicked and reached for the gun or appeared to reach for a gun and then Trayvon charged him? Because that kind of changes a few things. GZ tells the cop that he was punched just after he was reaching for his "phone".

Just trying to see all sides to this...if trayvon doubles back on someone he knows is following him and then asks the follower if theres is a problem and then the follower immediately reaches for his pocket or holster, then maybe trayvon rushed him because he didnt know what GZ was grabbing for.

See the link below...at about the 1:16 mark he begins to describe the point I am referring to.

Also, testa, Santa Fe, animallover and tink....would be interested in your take also on this. Is Mr Z telling the cops that he was reaching for his phone when he was actually reaching for his gun?

George Zimmerman's Police Interview after Trayvon Martin Shooting - YouTube

thanks for the link

i checked it a couple of times

it does look like he could be going for the gun

but it also looks like he could be reaching for a phone

do notice that is hand travels to his pocket

not his hip

however i will look at it a couple of more times

after work

But why reach for anything at all with out first just answering him? The whole thing could have been avoided yet again.

 

[king.solomon]

This entire case has been mishandled.

1. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue against police dispatch advice.

2. Zimmerman was wrong to not be in any uniform or otherwise identify himself as a concerned citizen.

3. Zimmerman was wrong to not have his neighborhood watch registered with police.

4. Zimmerman was wrong to initiate any contact with a possible suspect as he was already a known overzealous citizen with numerous false calls to police.

5. Zimmerman was wrong to not immediately stand down and cease and desist any antagonizing when he realized TM was a minor, and here was an adult with a pistol who police has advised to leave TM alone.

6. TM should have just complied.... some say. But why? If you are a teen, at night, doing nothing criminal, and a grown man with a gun is following you that you cannot see any signs of law enforcement I.D..... why wouldn't he freak out, swing, or fight for his life against a stranger with a gun following him in the night? And that's taking GZ's story as true that TM fought him!

7. Zimmerman was wrong to have to resort to deadly force as a man against a teen who he pursued.

8. The entire police department failed by needing TWO MONTHS and countless protests to even arrest Zimmerman.

9. Even if Zimmerman didn't really want to kill TM, he should be held RESPONSIBLE for the whole fiasco, and charged with manslaughter.

10. By charging murder, they leave opportunity for doubt, and should he walk, only God will be able to keep TM's father from vengeance.

11. Therefore, to right these wrongs, they should give him GUILTY.

In my opinion.

Peace

 

[testarosa]

And by the way, why the FUCK do jury trials in Florida consist of only 6 jurors?

It's the Way It Is.

M1 gets 12 jurors.

I just did some digging. I found a web site that bitched about it (a lawyer, I believe).

He said that the State of Florida did away with the need for a Grand Jury. We've seen THAT. So the screening function performed by a body OTHER THAN the prosecutors themselves is now dispensed with.

Not a good start.

Then, instead of having to prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt to each of 12 jurors, the State can get by with having to only prove it to 6.

Not a good thing if you are the one accused -- especially if you are (gasp) actually not guilty.

Due process was screwed with a lot in this case, this is a political case as I've said since the beginning.

1. The governor appointed a special prosecutor districts away:
Under the glare of protests and the national media spotlight, the Sanford police chief and the Brevard-Seminole County prosecutor both stepped aside Thursday in the case of a neighborhood watch volunteer who fatally shot an unarmed black teenager.

Gov. Rick Scott appointed Angela B. Corey, state attorney for the Jacksonville area, as special prosecutor to head the state investigation of the Feb. 26 slaying of Trayvon Martin, 17, of South Florida. Scott also announced that a task force headed by Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll will study Florida's "stand your ground'' law.
Gov. Rick Scott appoints special prosecutor for Trayvon Martin case | Tampa Bay Times

2. She was supposed to call a grand jury on April 10th but decided not to and brought her own charges (overcharged from manslaughter to M2 - IMO - to "keep the peace" and calm down the rioting)
The special prosecutor has decided not to take the case to the grand jury. AP story is here. What does that mean? Not much. The grand jury was once considered a key protection, and for federal cases it is enshrined in the Fifth Amendment, but the institution is largely obsolete and most states have made it optional.
Martin/Zimmerman, Grand Juries, Media - Crime and Consequences Blog

3. Meanwhile, an unfounded and spotlighted federal investigation was going on to determine if this was a hate crime, which it so obviously wasn't.

4. And let's not forget POTUS shooting his mouth off on national tv and interfering with Z's right to a fair trial.
The first motion for mistrial should be on his back.

I can go up to 10, but I get worn out with it by #4 nowadays. ;-)

 

[Tink]

Another thought I have is wasn't GZ a security guard, with training and didn't he also out weigh TM? Why couldn't he subdue him and hold him down?

 

[WorldWatcher]

He is also ASSuming that Trayvon wasn't "doing anything" to Zimmerman, which is clearly NOT what Zimmerman does say-- and does not appear to even be a marginally rational view based on what we have seen so far.

What have we seen from that night, other than Zimmerman's statement, that someone with a marginally rational view would use to base Martin's actions (or lack of) from that night.

The only thing that I've heard about, other than Zimmerman's story, is the video of Martin making his purchases at the 7-11 (and that seemed normal). So what other information is available on Martin's actions from that night? Video, audio, witness to the events prior to the confrontation?



>>>>

Hey world...a couple of things...

1) the neighbors 911 call as the incident was taking place
2) The police interrogation of george, which I am starting to believe is in Trayvons favor
3) His girlfriends account of her conversation with Trayvon while he believed he was being followed.

1) The neighbor calls are after the incident started, so really don't lend any insight as to who started it.

2) Sitting for hours of police interviews without an attorney present was a big mistake.

3) While Witness #8 will surely testify, the extent of the testimony is unknown (as I understand it) at this point. She will definitely be able to testify that she was on the phone. She will definitely be able to testify about the other male voice and what she heard him say (that is not hearsay), if Zimmerman disagrees he's available to take the stand and provide contrary testimony. However there are questions about whether she will be able to testify as to what Martin told her, that would normally be hearsay. However there are exemptions to the hearsay rules so I expect the defense to have a motion to exclude her testimony about what Martin said and of course the prosecution will argue that it should be allowed (probably under a dying statement exception since Martin is dead). We'll have to see how that plays out.



>>>>

 

[testarosa]

Zimmerman's jury Sequestration is now in the news. Zimmerman jurors to be sequestered up to a month

And well they should be.

Don't want Spike Stupid Lee or some other celebrity getting a hold of a wrong address and Tweeting it.

Oh snap! I almost forgot that incident.

I've got a million of 'em. There were so many of those things that happened, I have to fish around in my bag and do eenie, meenie, minee, moe to get out the next 10 fucked up things surrounded this "case".

 

[dilloduck]

Another thought I have is wasn't GZ a security guard, with training and didn't he also out weigh TM? Why couldn't he subdue him and hold him down?

People have gotta understand that fat does not mean strong.

 

[testarosa]

Another thought I have is wasn't GZ a security guard, with training and didn't he also out weigh TM? Why couldn't he subdue him and hold him down?

This has got to be my new signature file. LOL

People have gotta understand that fat does not mean strong.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

This entire case has been mishandled.

1. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue against police dispatch advice.

He didn't pursue. He followed. He was not "wrong" to do so. His behavior was perfectly legal.

2. Zimmerman was wrong to not be in any uniform or otherwise identify himself as a concerned citizen.

Obviously false and quite stupid. He had no reason to be in uniform and no obligation to BE in uniform. And his clothing is entirely irrelevant to the discussion.

3. Zimmerman was wrong to not have his neighborhood watch registered with police.

Nope. Entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Anybody may follow another person under those circumstances. Perfectly lawful.

4. Zimmerman was wrong to initiate any contact with a possible suspect as he was already a known overzealous citizen with numerous false calls to police.

Doubly stupid and false. There is no basis to claim that Zimmerman "initiated"" contact. And it is not established that he was overzealous or that he had made false calls to the police. Making shit up makes you look even weaker, Prince.Sully.

5. Zimmerman was wrong to not immediately stand down and cease and desist any antagonizing when he realized TM was a minor, and here was an adult with a pistol who police has advised to leave TM alone.

False. Your premise is packed with the utterly unsupported supposition that Zimmerman engaged in ANY antagonizing. The rest is just your usual hot air.

6. TM should have just complied.... some say. But why? If you are a teen, at night, doing nothing criminal, and a grown man with a gun is following you that you cannot see any signs of law enforcement I.D..... why wouldn't he freak out, swing, or fight for his life against a stranger with a gun following him in the night? And that's taking GZ's story as true that TM fought him!

"Complied" with what?

7. Zimmerman was wrong to have to resort to deadly force as a man against a teen who he pursued.

At least doubly false and fallacious. He wasn't "wrong" to resort to the use of the weapon if it was reasonable under the circumstances (i.e., if he reasonably felt it necessary to defend himself against serious injury or death). That's actually the big QUESTION, not a premise, you dolt. And there is still that whole matter of your misuse of the English language. "Pursuit" is a real word with real meaning -- except to dolts like you. Following somebody is not the same thing as pursuing him.

8. The entire police department failed by needing TWO MONTHS and countless protests to even arrest Zimmerman.

Unless they were wrong to EVER arrest him. You presuppose guilt. I don't. They should not have; so waiting was perfectly rational, reasonable, lawful and fair. I know that kind of thing irritates you.

9. Even if Zimmerman didn't really want to kill TM, he should be held RESPONSIBLE for the whole fiasco, and charged with manslaughter.

Really? Why's that? Because it turned out tragically? That's the new legal standard? Thankfully, YOUR silly notions don't control.

10. By charging murder, they leave opportunity for doubt, and should he walk, only God will be able to keep TM's father from vengeance.

Oh nozies. They leave an opportunity for doubt? An innocent guy might not get convicted? The horror! You really are an idiot.

11. Therefore, to right these wrongs, they should give him GUILTY.

What wrongs? You haven't identified any wrongs. And juries should only convict a person of a crime IF a crime has been committed, by the way. You imbecile.

In my opinion.

Peace

Your opinion is like your asshole. It stinks too.

Peace has a lot to do with justice, so we keep getting told. You might want to give some thought to actual justice, not your vigilante notions.

 

[Tink]

Another thought I have is wasn't GZ a security guard, with training and didn't he also out weigh TM? Why couldn't he subdue him and hold him down?

People have gotta understand that fat does not mean strong.

He wasn't really fat at the time though. He has since gained a lot of fat but at the time he seemed pretty fit.

 

[testarosa]

Rut-Roh Puerto Rican guy on the witness stand with poor English not getting what they're putting down.

West: "do you not agree this is an important matter we're talking about?"
PRG: "no." "I pray every night and God knows everything, I know nothing and it makes my head hurt"

Here we go with the race thing again. LOL

 

[testarosa]

<sidebar>

 

[Tink]

The amount of idiots that exist in this world really makes me sad.

 

[testarosa]

<recess>
Gotta figure out what to do with the guy that's not getting it.