Zimmerman Opinions

[ugotme]

I think your past posts speak for themselves no need to engage me.

When this case is over all the gun bunnies will be able to patrol their gated communities and hound and follow those not quite like them into provoking them to finally attack so they can say in the end I feared for my life so I had to put a cap in him.

Gun bunnies rejoice after all this is really what our founding fathers wanted all alone.

I am glad you clarified your position later on.
I have had a carry permit since approx. 1975. I have never pulled my gun nor wanted to. To a certain point you are correct.

However, it seems in your first few posts you were classifying anyone with a gun as a "gun bunny" (your term). The gun owners who are law abiding and who would turn the other way to avoid a fight GREATLY outnumber those who would not. To most of us, having a gun (and carry permit) doesn't make you macho. Personally, I enjoy the shooting sports but also want one for defense.

As the saying goes - Better to have one and not need it than to need it and not have one.

[gocubsgo]

At least the 12 YO is TM. The picture you're talking about is a rapper, not TM.

Oh no! This was not a Rapper..it was TM and it was on his Facebook page until it "disappeared"...no doubt by the prosecution. No, it was him

[ljones190]

Why do people care so much about Zimmerman being proven guilty or not guilty? I do not understand the attraction to this tragic event.

[Monkei]

So, when a "hoodlum" (your terminology not mine) that you are following( not illegal as far as I know) jumps you and starts bouncing your head off of the sidewalk like a basketball what should someone do? Ask him to stop?

If a "hoodlum" doesn't want to risk death when assaulting someone, he might want to chose an unarmed victim.

You don't follow the hoodlum. That's the first thing. The rest is mute because it would not have happened.

[AJ32162]

You don't follow the hoodlum. That's the first thing. The rest is mute because it would not have happened.

Or...If you are a hoodlum, you don't assault a man who has a gun. As you said, the rest is mute because it would not have happened.

[mickey100]

Interesting testimony from the medical examiner today. Rao said the injuries to the back of Zimmerman's head were NOT consistent with being repeatedly slammed onto concrete. She said his head MAY have hit concrete once or twice, and his injuries could have been caused by one blow to the face, not multiple blows. She also said his injuries were small and insignificant and required only bandaids.

Also, the latent print analyst said no useable fingerprint was recovered from Zimm's gun which could contradict his claim that Martin grabbed his gun.

Serino, a detective with the Sanford Dept. said there WAS evidence that Zimm was still following Martin after the non-emergency operator told him not to. And Serino said red flags were raised for him when Zimmerman didn’t know the names of the streets in his neighborhood, because there are only three.

Serino said also there was no evidence that Martin was committing a crime that evening, and no evidence that he was armed.

The next move is to determine admissiblity of evidence - Zimm was interested in the criminal justice field having completed course work pursuing a criminal justice degree, and having had his application to become a police officer rejected. Prosecutors argued the evidence is relevant because it shows Zimm wanted to catch the bad guys and it may show he knew what to say when law enforcement arrived on the scene.

[janmcn]

Interesting testimony from the medical examiner today. Rao said the injuries to the back of Zimmerman's head were NOT consistent with being repeatedly slammed onto concrete. She said his head MAY have hit concrete once or twice, and his injuries could have been caused by one blow to the face, not multiple blows. She also said his injuries were small and insignificant and required only bandaids.

Also, the latent print analyst said no useable fingerprint was recovered from Zimm's gun which could contradict his claim that Martin grabbed his gun.

Serino, a detective with the Sanford Dept. said there WAS evidence that Zimm was still following Martin after the non-emergency operator told him not to. And Serino said red flags were raised for him when Zimmerman didn’t know the names of the streets in his neighborhood, because there are only three.

Serino said also there was no evidence that Martin was committing a crime that evening, and no evidence that he was armed.

The next move is to determine admissiblity of evidence - Zimm was interested in the criminal justice field having completed course work pursuing a criminal justice degree, and having had his application to become a police officer rejected. Prosecutors argued the evidence is relevant because it shows Zimm wanted to catch the bad guys and it may show he knew what to say when law enforcement arrived on the scene.

Good wrap up of today's events. Detective Serino also said Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant. It's also been reported that there was no blood on the pavement, and none of Trayvon Martin's DNA was on Zimmerman.

Yesterday, Zimmerman was quoted as saying Trayvon Martin was trying to choke him or smother him. How can someone scream for help, when another person has his hands around your neck or mouth and nose?

Serino, after hearing Zimmerman's story, wanted to arrest him soon after the shooting, but the Seminole County prosecutor said no. It wasn't until a few weeks later, after several protests, that Gov Scott appointed Duval County Prosecutor Angela Corey to look at the case. She took it to the Grand Jury and got Zimmerman charged with second degree murder.

[Monkei]

Or...If you are a hoodlum, you don't assault a man who has a gun. As you said, the rest is mute because it would not have happened.

Correct either way. But in both cases the result is the same

[mickey100]

Good wrap up of today's events. Detective Serino also said Zimmerman's injuries were insignificant. It's also been reported that there was no blood on the pavement, and none of Trayvon Martin's DNA was on Zimmerman.

Yesterday, Zimmerman was quoted as saying Trayvon Martin was trying to choke him or smother him. How can someone scream for help, when another person has his hands around your neck or mouth and nose?

Serino, after hearing Zimmerman's story, wanted to arrest him soon after the shooting, but the Seminole County prosecutor said no. It wasn't until a few weeks later, after several protests, that Gov Scott appointed Duval County Prosecutor Angela to look at the case. She took it to the Grand Jury and got Zimmerman charged with second degree murder.

It makes you wonder how good (or bad) the initial investigation was, and what, if any, critical evidence was missed. Just sounds very sloppy to me.

[gomoho]

I agree it was a sloppy investigation, probably done by not the best police force on the planet. So we have to listen to what everyone says and hope that justice comes from the truth and not which attorney pulls the best trick out of their hat.

[CMANN]

You do know this is NOT a Stand Your Ground case, don't you?

in my humble opinion I think that this case should have been a stand your ground case. If it had not been for the race baiters there would have been no trial. That's what stand your ground was designed to do. Zimmerman has been financially destroyed and he and his family are in constant fear of their lives. It should never have gone this far.

Just my opinion.

[mickey100]

I agree it was a sloppy investigation, probably done by not the best police force on the planet. So we have to listen to what everyone says and hope that justice comes from the truth and not which attorney pulls the best trick out of their hat.

Yes, hopefully the jury can overlook courtroom theatrics and focus on the evidence presented, and let the trail of evidence lead them to a logical conclusion.

[John_W]

in my humble opinion I think that this case should have been a stand your ground case. If it had not been for the race baiters there would have been no trial. That's what stand your ground was designed to do. Zimmerman has been financially destroyed and he and his family are in constant fear of their lives. It should never have gone this far.

Just my opinion.

If Zimmerman had been black, I don't believe we would of even seen charges. In fact, had they both been white I don't believe there would of been any charges either. It's like you said, if not for the outsiders, this case would of never been brought. It's showing by what the prosecution is putting on. It seems most witnesses are being turned into defense witnesses. Last night on CNN one of the experts, defense attorney Mark Garigos, said he though the prosecutors were so bad that they looked like they were throwing the case.


/

[DougB]

Geragos should know. With the exception of Susan McDougal, I don't think he ever won a case.

[mickey100]

... Last night on CNN one of the experts, defense attorney Mark Garigos, said he though the prosecutors were so bad that they looked like they were throwing the case.


/


And fellow analyst Jeffrey Toobin called Geragos' throw-the-case comment "absurd."

[Bucco]

If Zimmerman had been black, I don't believe we would of even seen charges. In fact, had they both been white I don't believe there would of been any charges either. It's like you said, if not for the outsiders, this case would of never been brought. It's showing by what the prosecution is putting on. It seems most witnesses are being turned into defense witnesses. Last night on CNN one of the experts, defense attorney Mark Garigos, said he though the prosecutors were so bad that they looked like they were throwing the case.


/

Have not watched the trial or discussions thereof...HOWEVER...

I agree with your early premise. This case is 100 percent POLITICAL. The participants and their skin color made it that way.

This does not get beyond the 6:00 news if not for the intervention of those who use these sad cases to make political points. Once over, no matter the outcome, they will create more tension and wait for the next situation that can be used to stir certain folks to action (posting, doing whatever the TV host or editorial writer tells them to do)

Why do supposed "thinkers" not check facts on how this case made it this far, and then make a decision on their own, NOT about innocence or guilt but on how they are being used.

[Quixote]

.... I agree with your early premise. This case is 100 percent POLITICAL. The participants and their skin color made it that way....

This may be true, or it may not be true, or it may be partially true. But we cannot forget that someone ended up DEAD!!!

I have deliberately not commented on this thread because all our speculations, personal views, opinions mean nothing in light of the legalities that must be followed in the courtroom. And there is a lot that no one will ever know that insider know--and have known for a long time....

[Madelaine Amee]

I caught some of it this afternoon. Interesting stuff - forensics, DNA, gun shot residue .................

It depends on whether your jury are educated enough to understand what the forensic evidence really means, and how much they believe the State's experts.

[BobnBev]

gun bunnies of the world---unite!!!

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

This may be true, or it may not be true, or it may be partially true. But we cannot forget that someone ended up DEAD!!!

I have deliberately not commented on this thread because all our speculations, personal views, opinions mean nothing in light of the legalities that must be followed in the courtroom. And there is a lot that no one will ever know that insider know--and have known for a long time....

I think that the point is that people get killed every day. Many of them by violence at the hand of another. Why is this case all over the national news? Why is it being broadcast live every day when none of the thousands of other cases are not?

[gomoho]

I think that the point is that people get killed every day. Many of them by violence at the hand of another. Why is this case all over the national news? Why is it being broadcast live every day when none of the thousands of other cases are not?

Simple - Al Sharpton and race. Pitiful.

[buggyone]

Simple - Al Sharpton and race. Pitiful.

Not just Al Sharpton but others also decided it was time to show that it was not right for a shooting of an unarmed teen be swept under the rug. Florida's governor appointed a special prosecutor who had Zimmerman arrested and charged with 2nd degree murder.

I disagree with the "pitiful".

[NJblue]

Can anyone explain the importance of the fact that the gun George Zimmerman had had a bullet in the chamber? Both attorney analysts on WESH 2 news said it was significant. To me it is a complete non-issue. If Zimmerman chose to walk around with a bullet in the chamber, why does this suddenly add to a murder charge? As was pointed out, the police would typically also have a bullet in the chamber. Clearly, he had been carrying it in that way for as long as he owned it so it wasn't as if he was on a "hunting" expedition. If he did have to take time to chamber a bullet and if indeed his life was at risk, he would never had been able to do so and he would now be dead. To me, they are grasping at straws if that's all they have.

[Patty55]

Simple - Al Sharpton and race. Pitiful.

Let's not forget that the family hired a public relations expert early on.

[Bucco]

Let's not forget that the family hired a public relations expert early on.

This is almost like a rerun of Sharpton and the Brawley case in the 80's. This is about HIM and those who will be swayed by his politics.

Early on is an understatement. First press conference was held TEN days after the tragic death. A call was made prior to that for media coverage by activists. In less than THIRTY days after the incident, Sharpton was calling for unrest and the POTUS was discussing the case publicly.

By the way, the Brawley fiasco by Sharpton made him a "name"....the case was thrown out of court, and it set back race relations a ton.

In late June he was setting it all up for violence in case he does not get HIS JUSTICE.

YEP...it is pitiful.

[gomoho]

Can anyone explain the importance of the fact that the gun George Zimmerman had had a bullet in the chamber? Both attorney analysts on WESH 2 news said it was significant. To me it is a complete non-issue. If Zimmerman chose to walk around with a bullet in the chamber, why does this suddenly add to a murder charge? As was pointed out, the police would typically also have a bullet in the chamber. Clearly, he had been carrying it in that way for as long as he owned it so it wasn't as if he was on a "hunting" expedition. If he did have to take time to chamber a bullet and if indeed his life was at risk, he would never had been able to do so and he would now be dead. To me, they are grasping at straws if that's all they have.

NJBlue and I assuming that is for New Jersey - welcome to the south.

[janmcn]

Simple - Al Sharpton and race. Pitiful.



If your unarmed son was shot and killed and no one would investigate, who would you call? On the one hand, investigators said there was not enough evidence to make an arrest, but on the other hand they refused to be out looking for evidence.

How many people lost their jobs because of their handling of this case? The former Seminole County Prosecutor, who refused to press charges, is gone, the Seminole County Sheriff, who oversaw the investigation, is gone, Chief Detective Chris Serino is now a patrol officer.

The demonstations, that resulted in charges being filed, were peaceful. I attended almost all of them, plus a memorial service in Clearwater and another one in St Petersburg. There was nothing but love at these gatherings. All we wanted was justice for Trayvon, and soon we will have it, regardless of what the jury decides.

[graciegirl]

If your unarmed son was shot and killed and no one would investigate, who would you call? On the one hand, investigators said there was not enough evidence to make an arrest, but on the other hand they refused to be out looking for evidence.

How many people lost their jobs because of their handling of this case? The former Seminole County Prosecutor, who refused to press charges, is gone, the Seminole County Sheriff, who oversaw the investigation, is gone, Chief Detective Chris Serino is now a patrol officer.

The demonstations, that resulted in charges being filed, were peaceful. I attended almost all of them, plus a memorial service in Clearwater and another one in St Petersburg. There was nothing but love at these gatherings. All we wanted was justice for Trayvon, and soon we will have it, regardless of what the jury decides.


Jan. That last sentence sounds kinda scary. Do you mean that people will seek George Zimmerman out and kill him if the jury finds him innocent of second degree murder?

[DougB]

I see nothing scary in the last sentence. I believe jan was implying a trial and a decision by a jury as to guilty or not guilty will be justice.

[graciegirl]

I see nothing scary in the last sentence. I believe jan was implying a trial and a decision by a jury as to guilty or not guilty will be justice.


Sorry Jan and Doug. I misunderstood.

[Bucco]

Sorry Jan and Doug. I misunderstood.

Mr Sharpton has already questioned whether an all white jury can bring a fair decision, so I suppose you can do the logic. AND he has said that MORE than twice....what, oh what might he be up to.

See his past for clues....

PS..Mr Crump, the Martin family atty (and considered the top race atty) expressed concern to Sharpton that a verdict against Zimmerman could create riots. Go figure. Why would two men who have careers deeply immersed in racial provocation, be discussing unrest BEFORE the trial even began ?

[Patty55]

This is almost like a rerun of Sharpton and the Brawley case in the 80's. This is about HIM and those who will be swayed by his politics.

Early on is an understatement. First press conference was held TEN days after the tragic death. A call was made prior to that for media coverage by activists. In less than THIRTY days after the incident, Sharpton was calling for unrest and the POTUS was discussing the case publicly.

By the way, the Brawley fiasco by Sharpton made him a "name"....the case was thrown out of court, and it set back race relations a ton.

In late June he was setting it all up for violence in case he does not get HIS JUSTICE.

YEP...it is pitiful.

For those that don't remember Sharpton's past .....

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/03/booming/revisiting-the-tawana-brawley-rape-scandal.html?_r=0


It's like deja vu all over again.

[Patty55]

The EMT's, the Family Clinic nurse, and the Chief Pathologist all say that Zimmerman's wounds were 'insignificant". The swelling on the nose went away completely by the next morning and the two scratches on the head were taken care of with a band-aid.



When you are being beaten you don't know the extent of your injuries or how long it will last. It's not like they beat you, hand you a mirror and you think it insignificant. When you are in that position the only thing you can focus on is to make it stop.

[NJblue]

When you are being beaten you don't know the extent of your injuries or how long it will last. It's not like they beat you, hand you a mirror and you think it insignificant. When you are in that position the only thing you can focus on is to make it stop.
I don't know how many times I have hit my head against something and it hurt like hell - yet the hit wasn't even hard enough to break the scalp at all. So, I imagine that these hits felt like they could be lethal. Plus, the cries for help had been going on for approximately 45 seconds which would normally signal to someone who is hitting you that you are effectively beaten - yet the beating was actually escalating to the banging of the head against the pavement. In light of the duration of the beating and the escalation I can easily see where Zimmerman could be in fear that the blows would continue until he died or suffered severe injury.

It's so easy to sit in your living room and with the benefit of hindsight second guess Zimmerman's actions - especially if so doing bolsters your world view of "gun bunnies".

[Mallory]

This exercise is just a trial (sic) run for the civil action that will come next. Can you say Morgan & Morgan?

[Patty55]

This exercise is just a trial (sic) run for the civil action that will come next. Can you say Morgan & Morgan?

The family already settled out of court, plus let's not forget the "charities".

[Mallory]

The family already settled out of court, plus let's not forget the "charities".

Patty - You are correct that the family has settled with the homeowners association but my understanding is that they will go after George Zimmerman with whom they have not settled.

[Mathguy]

George Zimmerman was clearly a threat to Travon Martin, as Zimmerman took on a role of law enforcement without having the legal qualifications to do so. Whatever happened in any scuffle between, it is certain the cause was Zimmerman's playing police officer.

[mickey100]

George Zimmerman was clearly a threat to Travon Martin, as Zimmerman took on a role of law enforcement without having the legal qualifications to do so. Whatever happened in any scuffle between, it is certain the cause was Zimmerman's playing police officer.

The testimony so far does seem to support your statements. And we still don't have a handle on the scuffle - who had who on the ground, etc. Zimmerman claims one thing, witnesses don't agree on what they saw. We don't yet know who was calling for help. From his statements, Zimmerman displayed ill will toward Martin when he referred to "expletive punks". According to the detective in the case, it appeared he continued to follow Martin after being told to stop, and was overly eager to catch a "bad guy". He was a police wannabe. He was versed in the Stand your Ground law, and knew what to say to police to justify his actions. IMHO, being in a scuffle with someone, where you sustain injuries that don't require medical followup and require only a bandaid, does not give you the right to shoot someone with a gun. They found no evidence that Martin tried to take the gun away from Zimmerman. Bottom line - we haven't seen all the testimony yet - I dont' see this as an open and shut case one way or the other.

[Madelaine Amee]

George Zimmerman was clearly a threat to Travon Martin, as Zimmerman took on a role of law enforcement without having the legal qualifications to do so. Whatever happened in any scuffle between, it is certain the cause was Zimmerman's playing police officer.

:agree:

If he was going to roam around in the dark looking for the bogey man sooner or later this was going to happen.

Also, am I the only one who thinks Zimmerman looks creepy? If he was following me I would be very very nervous. On the other hand, if Martin had been following me I would have been equally nervous.

I have to say this, at the risk of being attacked, if you are the mother of a young man who is not lily white (which is a major strike against him in this country) would you let your young man out of your home dressed like a thug in a "B" movie? I raised two white sons and they had to pass inspection before they went to school - "No you cannot wear jeans with holes in them to school."

Has anyone on this site read the various accounts of how Chris Rock, Martin Luther King Jr., Colin Powell etc. etc. etc. were raised? Chris Rock has one of the funniest pieces about his Mother sending him to school every day dressed in a white shirt and dark pants. First impressions do count and your life may depend upon it.

[gomoho]

I wonder if the jury is hearing this evidence with the same glaring differences folks on here see. How will they ever come to a decision if so???
Posts are already on facebook about the riots to come if Zimmerman is acquitted so prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

George Zimmerman was clearly a threat to Travon Martin, as Zimmerman took on a role of law enforcement without having the legal qualifications to do so. Whatever happened in any scuffle between, it is certain the cause was Zimmerman's playing police officer.

In what way did Zimmerman "take on a role of law enforcement"? He saw someone that he thought looked suspicious. He called the police and followed him. when the police told him to break off his pursuit, he did. Sound to me like he was taking on the role of a community watch person.

I don't see where Zimmerman was "playing police officer". It seems to me that he was doing exactly what community watch is supposed to do. The scuffle started when Martin, who was supposedly in fear of his life, followed his pursuer back to his vehicle and then proceeded to attack him.

[mickey100]

In what way did Zimmerman "take on a role of law enforcement"? He saw someone that he thought looked suspicious. He called the police and followed him. when the police told him to break off his pursuit, he did. Sound to me like he was taking on the role of a community watch person.

I don't see where Zimmerman was "playing police officer". It seems to me that he was doing exactly what community watch is supposed to do. The scuffle started when Martin, who was supposedly in fear of his life, followed his pursuer back to his vehicle and then proceeded to attack him.

You are making a lot of assumptions that have not been backed up by facts. The lead detective said it appeared Zimm did NOT stop following Martin when told. The evidence has not shown Martin followed Zimm back to his vehicle - that is just Zimm's version of events. We don't know who attacked who. Zimmerman clearly said "these a...holes always get away". That seems pretty clear he was profiling Martin as a criminal. He followed Martin with a semiautomatic pistol tucked in his belt in a ready-to-fire position. When confronted by police after the murder, Zimm spoke "in written police jargon" and talks about "justifiable use of force" and says he "`unholstered my firearm,' not `I pulled my gun.'" Sure sounds like a police wannabe to me.

[NJblue]

You are making a lot of assumptions that have not been backed up by facts. The lead detective said it appeared Zimm did NOT stop following Martin when told. The evidence has not shown Martin followed Zimm back to his vehicle - that is just Zimm's version of events. We don't know who attacked who. Zimmerman clearly said "these a...holes always get away". That seems pretty clear he was profiling Martin as a criminal. He followed Martin with a semiautomatic pistol tucked in his belt in a ready-to-fire position. When confronted by police after the murder, Zimm spoke "in written police jargon" and talks about "justifiable use of force" and says he "`unholstered my firearm,' not `I pulled my gun.'" Sure sounds like a police wannabe to me.

There is no proof that Zimmerman was still following Martin, but even if there were, that is not against the law and given the type of questions being asked by dispatch, it would be understandable if he tried to keep an eye on where Martin was going. This is especially understandable if your community has been hit by a series of crimes and you have taken a leadership role in trying put a stop to it.

There is no crime in using an expletive, nor is there a crime in thinking that someone who is walking between houses on a dark, rainy night is up to no good.

There is no crime in having a loaded pistol in a firing position, nor does it in any way indicate the state of mind of Zimmerman, since it was clearly in that mode while he was on his way to Target.

There is no crime in using "police jargon" when describing a police event. One tends to talk in the jargon one knows and one which the audience is pressumed to use. A doctor, when talking to another doctor will likely use medical terminology. A lawyer will use lawyer talk, etc. Zimmerman had some course in criminal justice and at one time perhaps wanted to be a cop. Since when is having aspirations to help society the basis for guilt?

These are all straws that the prosecution is throwing out that those who want to presume Zimmerman guilty can grasp while ignoring the real facts of the case. I find it a shame that our legal system is so bad that a person may spend the rest of his life in prison because of this kind of thinking.

[NJblue]

The testimony so far does seem to support your statements. And we still don't have a handle on the scuffle - who had who on the ground, etc. Zimmerman claims one thing, witnesses don't agree on what they saw. We don't yet know who was calling for help. From his statements, Zimmerman displayed ill will toward Martin when he referred to "expletive punks". According to the detective in the case, it appeared he continued to follow Martin after being told to stop, and was overly eager to catch a "bad guy". He was a police wannabe. He was versed in the Stand your Ground law, and knew what to say to police to justify his actions. IMHO, being in a scuffle with someone, where you sustain injuries that don't require medical followup and require only a bandaid, does not give you the right to shoot someone with a gun. They found no evidence that Martin tried to take the gun away from Zimmerman. Bottom line - we haven't seen all the testimony yet - I dont' see this as an open and shut case one way or the other.

So, if you were on the jury and the testimony was done, I pressume you would vote not guilty, correct?

[dillywho]

Maybe I didn't read all the posts close enough, but I do not remember anyone saying anything about GZ's statement that he was reaching for his cell phone in his pocket and that's when TM hit him. How did TM know it was his cell phone and that had "forgotten" which pocket it was in? How did he know who this guy was that had been following him around in his vehicle and on foot...GZ never bothered to identify himself, even when he says TM asked him if he had a problem. GZ only said, "No, I don't have a problem". Given the company this kid apparently kept in Miami, that could well have been perceived as a threat to him. Does he not then have the right for self defense? GZ never told him the police were on their way. In fact, GZ had only called the NEN, not 911.

I have watched all the police interviews posted on line and during the trial. His story has just too many holes in it. Even the officer doing the interview told him that getting out and following someone is not fear. At one point, he told the investigator that he "forgot" he even had his gun with him. This was after saying that he always carried it except on his regular job. The one thing that might well convict him is his own mouth for talking before obtaining counsel. He has told so many lies that have been played for the jury that seems to me would cost him any credibility. People that have nothing to hide don't tell blatant lies. Not minor discrepancies...outright lies.

Many have criticized TM for not going straight back to his dad's. At 17, did you always go straight home? Phone records have already shown that he was on the phone up until the time of the fight. Kids talk for eons on their phones and there was a young kid back at the house. Could be that he didn't want him to be listening to his conversation. Could be that he was enjoying just being away from him for a little bit. Could be a lot of things. It was only 7 p.m., hardly the middle of the night. TM was just marking time until he could get back to Miami and his friends and way of life, regardless of what that way was. Why on earth would he risk getting into trouble in the big berg of Sanford? Surely, he was a little smarter than that.

I don't think this rises to the level of Murder 2, but I definitely think he should be found guilty of a lesser charge or charges. GZ apparently does not take well to instructions. He did not follow protocol of NW by observing and reporting. He did not need to look for an address...there was one right in front of him. Why did he tell the NEN operator to just have the police call him when they got there instead of being where he had already told them he would be and he would let them know where he was at that time? That says he had every intention of looking for this kid, not just "walking in the same direction". I think that just because he had received some kudos from some of his neighbors, he wanted to really be viewed as their hero and savior. What made this night any different than the other calls he had made about suspicious activity? He just called and reported per protocol.

If he gets off, I can only wonder how long it will be before he's in trouble again. He already thinks he's above the law and has all the answers. I wonder, too, how this would be playing out had TM lived?

Too many questions, not enough answers, and only one side of a story to hear.

BTW, I have watched every minute of the trial. Sometimes had to tape, but otherwise watched. Had to be home anyway.

[mickey100]

Maybe I didn't read all the posts close enough, but I do not remember anyone saying anything about GZ's statement that he was reaching for his cell phone in his pocket and that's when TM hit him. How did TM know it was his cell phone and that had "forgotten" which pocket it was in? How did he know who this guy was that had been following him around in his vehicle and on foot...GZ never bothered to identify himself, even when he says TM asked him if he had a problem. GZ only said, "No, I don't have a problem". Given the company this kid apparently kept in Miami, that could well have been perceived as a threat to him. Does he not then have the right for self defense? GZ never told him the police were on their way. In fact, GZ had only called the NEN, not 911.

I have watched all the police interviews posted on line and during the trial. His story has just too many holes in it. Even the officer doing the interview told him that getting out and following someone is not fear. At one point, he told the investigator that he "forgot" he even had his gun with him. This was after saying that he always carried it except on his regular job. The one thing that might well convict him is his own mouth for talking before obtaining counsel. He has told so many lies that have been played for the jury that seems to me would cost him any credibility. People that have nothing to hide don't tell blatant lies. Not minor discrepancies...outright lies.

Many have criticized TM for not going straight back to his dad's. At 17, did you always go straight home? Phone records have already shown that he was on the phone up until the time of the fight. Kids talk for eons on their phones and there was a young kid back at the house. Could be that he didn't want him to be listening to his conversation. Could be that he was enjoying just being away from him for a little bit. Could be a lot of things. It was only 7 p.m., hardly the middle of the night. TM was just marking time until he could get back to Miami and his friends and way of life, regardless of what that way was. Why on earth would he risk getting into trouble in the big berg of Sanford? Surely, he was a little smarter than that.

I don't think this rises to the level of Murder 2, but I definitely think he should be found guilty of a lesser charge or charges. GZ apparently does not take well to instructions. He did not follow protocol of NW by observing and reporting. He did not need to look for an address...there was one right in front of him. Why did he tell the NEN operator to just have the police call him when they got there instead of being where he had already told them he would be and he would let them know where he was at that time? That says he had every intention of looking for this kid, not just "walking in the same direction". I think that just because he had received some kudos from some of his neighbors, he wanted to really be viewed as their hero and savior. What made this night any different than the other calls he had made about suspicious activity? He just called and reported per protocol.

If he gets off, I can only wonder how long it will be before he's in trouble again. He already thinks he's above the law and has all the answers. I wonder, too, how this would be playing out had TM lived?

Too many questions, not enough answers, and only one side of a story to hear.

Excellent post. As you said, too many questions, not enough answers, and only one side of the story to hear.

[dillywho]

The testimony so far does seem to support your statements. And we still don't have a handle on the scuffle - who had who on the ground, etc. Zimmerman claims one thing, witnesses don't agree on what they saw. We don't yet know who was calling for help. From his statements, Zimmerman displayed ill will toward Martin when he referred to "expletive punks". According to the detective in the case, it appeared he continued to follow Martin after being told to stop, and was overly eager to catch a "bad guy". He was a police wannabe. He was versed in the Stand your Ground law, and knew what to say to police to justify his actions. IMHO, being in a scuffle with someone, where you sustain injuries that don't require medical followup and require only a bandaid, does not give you the right to shoot someone with a gun. They found no evidence that Martin tried to take the gun away from Zimmerman. Bottom line - we haven't seen all the testimony yet - I dont' see this as an open and shut case one way or the other.

Did you notice in the Hannity replay, he said he had never heard of SYG? He said that he hadn't and then Hannity asked him about self defense. Nope. Both lies. I would have to look at it again, but I think this is where he says that it was just "God's will".

[Patty55]

You are making a lot of assumptions that have not been backed up by facts. The lead detective said it appeared Zimm did NOT stop following Martin when told. The evidence has not shown Martin followed Zimm back to his vehicle - that is just Zimm's version of events. We don't know who attacked who. Zimmerman clearly said "these a...holes always get away". That seems pretty clear he was profiling Martin as a criminal. He followed Martin with a semiautomatic pistol tucked in his belt in a ready-to-fire position. When confronted by police after the murder, Zimm spoke "in written police jargon" and talks about "justifiable use of force" and says he "`unholstered my firearm,' not `I pulled my gun.'" Sure sounds like a police wannabe to me.

Maybe GZ profiled TM as a criminal because, HELLOOO, he was. He assaulted an unarmed bus driver, he had been suspended from school for truancy and drugs. He was found with burglary tools and jewelry (that he was holding for a friend).

[graciegirl]

What I see are opinions again lined up along political lines.

That is one thing I find disappointing as we age. We are ALL so biased and we do not seem to evaluate most things with an open mind like when we were younger.

[mickey100]

There is no proof that Zimmerman was still following Martin, but even if there were, that is not against the law and given the type of questions being asked by dispatch, it would be understandable if he tried to keep an eye on where Martin was going. This is especially understandable if your community has been hit by a series of crimes and you have taken a leadership role in trying put a stop to it.

There is no crime in using an expletive, nor is there a crime in thinking that someone who is walking between houses on a dark, rainy night is up to no good.

There is no crime in having a loaded pistol in a firing position, nor does it in any way indicate the state of mind of Zimmerman, since it was clearly in that mode while he was on his way to Target.

There is no crime in using "police jargon" when describing a police event. One tends to talk in the jargon one knows and one which the audience is pressumed to use. A doctor, when talking to another doctor will likely use medical terminology. A lawyer will use lawyer talk, etc. Zimmerman had some course in criminal justice and at one time perhaps wanted to be a cop. Since when is having aspirations to help society the basis for guilt?

.

None of those events are individually "crimes" but they obviously show his state of mind and begin to show a pattern. They become circumstantial evidence which can be of great value, for instance, in highlighting inconsistencies between Zimm's behavior and his allegations, thereby "filling in the blanks" of a crime scenario. It will be up to the jury to weigh all this evidence and decide if it is conclusive. Unfortunately, most criminal cases aren't black and white as far as DNA evidence and "smoking guns". Circumstantial evidence is often key. Look at the Scott Peterson trial. There was never any physical evidence they could tie to him, but the jury found him guilty based on his extramarital affairs and his demeanor.

[dillywho]

Maybe GZ profiled TM as a criminal because, HELLOOO, he was. He assaulted an unarmed bus driver, he had been suspended from school for truancy and drugs. He was found with burglary tools and jewelry (that he was holding for a friend).

You forget that GZ's background was not exactly stellar, either. He could have had school suspensions in his past. Dunno. He had been in trouble with the police, but had worked through it.

TM did not have that chance. GZ had actually been charged; TM had not.

[Patty55]

You forget that GZ's background was not exactly stellar, either. He could have had school suspensions in his past. Dunno. He had been in trouble with the police, but had worked through it.

TM did not have that chance. GZ had actually been charged; TM had not.

You forget that TM was only 17, quite a resume for a 17 year old. The only reason we even know about these activities is from his (and his friends) bragging on facebook and twitter. There may be more out there, but as a YO they won't be revealed.

Did you know that Ms Fulton's cousin was killed during the commission of a crime under Stand Your Ground in 2009? Did you know the button on TM's hoodie was in support of that cousin? It seems to me that should have been a wake up call to improve your parenting skills-y'think.

[Bucco]

What I see are opinions again lined up along political lines.

That is one thing I find disappointing as we age. We are ALL so biased and we do not seem to evaluate most things with an open mind like when we were younger.

I find it totally amazing and scary how correct you are.

These folks have been pulled into this by outside political influences.....minds were made up before any trial, and WILL NOT be changed no matter the evidence. These folks are stretching things so badly, it is scary.

THIS IS 100 PERCENT POLITICAL...period and end of that story.

All this discussion of evidence or lack there of is just an excuse to exercise your typing skills.

NOBODY seems to remember the genesis of this case at all. NOBODY cares about the main players and their history in these type of cases.

People are on here flapping about as if the evidence of lack thereoff really meant anything. Only thing that counts is your political view.....and that is it.

Alan Dershowitz, and most other legal scholars felt no charges were should have been leveled, and that by itself MEANS NOTHING. But the only reason this is even in trial is because of the 30 days after the tragic incident had everyone up to the White House commenting on it as a result of the immediate attempt to get the media involved. If you read the history of this incident, THAT is what you find.

Oh yeah....this is 100% political including the threats of riots should they allow the terrible Zimmerman to go free (NOT any comment intended to promote guilt or innocence because I do not care...JUSTICE is all I ever care about).

This is a total fiasco rooted in things we all are aware of but never want to talk about. Sharpton has done the EXACT SAME THING in his past......along with all the major players involved with DISASTEROUS RESULTS. BUT we go along, I suppose because our inside political machine tells us we need to.

Still waiting for one of the soft hearted folks on here grieving about the young man to start a thread about the 19 firefighters killed in Arizona. THAT however has no political implications thus it does not get anyone's time.

[DougB]

Anybody think someone needs a mirror?

[mickey100]

Anybody think someone needs a mirror?

Good one. :bowdown:

[Bucco]

Anybody think someone needs a mirror?

Assuming that was aimed at my post, I accept that. I have NEVER posted one word relative to innocence or guilt.

Do I feel this is political...BIG TIME. Do I feel those who post on here totally unaware of ANY FACTS.......and NOT SPEAKING OF FACTS TO DETERMINE INNOCENCE OR GUILT....facts about how this tragic event got here, and how it is being USED.

I can look at myself in the mirror for sure. I listened the days following the event to the police, and READ the law involved. We are a country of laws still I think.

Do I have political bias.....you betcha, but NOT on the innocence or guilt of anyone in this case. I was not there, and cannot read minds as some her obviously can.

My political bias would lead me to say things about the trial..I HAVE NOT.

If someone can contest my feelings that this is a political journey and can only have disastrous results, lets hear it

[janmcn]

You forget that TM was only 17, quite a resume for a 17 year old. The only reason we even know about these activities is from his (and his friends) bragging on facebook and twitter. There may be more out there, but as a YO they won't be revealed.

Did you know that Ms Fulton's cousin was killed during the commission of a crime under Stand Your Ground in 2009? Did you know the button on TM's hoodie was in support of that cousin? It seems to me that should have been a wake up call to improve your parenting skills-y'think.


I fail to see how wearing a button on your sweatshirt in support of a dead relative is suspect. Could you explain in more detail?

Also, I'm having trouble finding Trayvon Martin's juvenile record. Could you direct me to a link?

[KyWoman]

I agree that opinions seem to be divided along political lines. I do think that the media has tried to portray Travon as an innocent 17 year old just out to neighborhood 7-11 to buy his iced tea and skittles. Google iced tea, skittles and huffing. Our innocent little guy may have been up to no good after all.

I realize that having huffing ingredients on a person is not a crime and certainly no reason for the end he met. But, I am tired of the media showing old pictures of him and portraying him as this poor innocent out for a walk in the park!

[Patty55]

I fail to see how wearing a button on your sweatshirt in support of a dead relative is suspect. Could you explain in more detail?

Also, I'm having trouble finding Trayvon Martin's juvenile record. Could you direct me to a link?

He wasn't wearing just a button supporting a dead relative, he was supporting a button supporting a relative who was killed committing a crime. Hardly a good role model.

You won't find his YO record, because YO records are not public. You will find references to his behavior in his text messages, tweets and emails. Most of this is in the discovery.

Here is a link to some of the discovery.
State v. Zimmerman (2012-CF001083-A) - . (http://www.flcourts18.org/page.php?129)

[manaboutown]

I fail to see how wearing a button on your sweatshirt in support of a dead relative is suspect. Could you explain in more detail?

Also, I'm having trouble finding Trayvon Martin's juvenile record. Could you direct me to a link?

Here is a link regarding Martin's backpack having 12 pieces of women's jewelry, a watch and a screwdriver (burglary tool). It explains why he was not further investigated, arrested or otherwise dealt with at the time.

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool… | The Last Refuge (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/05/01/m-dspd-cover-up-the-curious-case-of-trayvon-martins-backpack-with-stolen-jewelry-and-burglary-tool/)

On the bus driver assault: http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-martin-s-ten-day-suspension

[dillywho]

I find it totally amazing and scary how correct you are.

These folks have been pulled into this by outside political influences.....minds were made up before any trial, and WILL NOT be changed no matter the evidence. These folks are stretching things so badly, it is scary.

THIS IS 100 PERCENT POLITICAL...period and end of that story.

All this discussion of evidence or lack there of is just an excuse to exercise your typing skills.

NOBODY seems to remember the genesis of this case at all. NOBODY cares about the main players and their history in these type of cases.

People are on here flapping about as if the evidence of lack thereoff really meant anything. Only thing that counts is your political view.....and that is it.

Alan Dershowitz, and most other legal scholars felt no charges were should have been leveled, and that by itself MEANS NOTHING. But the only reason this is even in trial is because of the 30 days after the tragic incident had everyone up to the White House commenting on it as a result of the immediate attempt to get the media involved. If you read the history of this incident, THAT is what you find.

Oh yeah....this is 100% political including the threats of riots should they allow the terrible Zimmerman to go free (NOT any comment intended to promote guilt or innocence because I do not care...JUSTICE is all I ever care about).

This is a total fiasco rooted in things we all are aware of but never want to talk about. Sharpton has done the EXACT SAME THING in his past......along with all the major players involved with DISASTEROUS RESULTS. BUT we go along, I suppose because our inside political machine tells us we need to.

Still waiting for one of the soft hearted folks on here grieving about the young man to start a thread about the 19 firefighters killed in Arizona. THAT however has no political implications thus it does not get anyone's time.

Sorry, but I do not see that the trial itself is political. The fact that it came to trial, perhaps. Political motivation or not, it is in trial and that is a fact.

I have only posted my personal opinions and observations, not the political or media hype. I just think that GZ had no right to appoint himself judge, jury, and executioner that night.

Getting out of his car and then not following the advice of the dispatcher was not his big mistake. He could have met them at his car, as he originally said he would, and then taken them up the path indicating where he last saw him. Not adhering to NW protocol was his big mistake. Technically, everyone is a member of NW whether they patrol or have a title. They are to be observant and call the authorities to report anything they have a concern about. Call law enforcement and report.. That is what is posted on the sign and what was emphasized in the meetings when their NW was established. The were never instructed to take matters into their own hands. Our CW follow the same guidelines. They have no legal authority just as GZ did not.

I have heard him on the tapes and his interview tell lie after lie. So have the jurors. I still say that will carry a great deal of weight with these jurors.

As for the riots, there are idiots in all walks of life. Remember all the demonstrations outside the Anthony house all hours of the day and night which included bringing young children with them? Talk about bad parenting!

[janmcn]

He wasn't wearing just a button supporting a dead relative, he was supporting a button supporting a relative who was killed committing a crime. Hardly a good role model.

You won't find his YO record, because YO records are not public. You will find references to his behavior in his text messages, tweets and emails. Most of this is in the discovery.

Here is a link to some of the discovery.
State v. Zimmerman (2012-CF001083-A) - . (http://www.flcourts18.org/page.php?129)

Here is a link regarding Martin's backpack having 12 pieces of women's jewelry, a watch and a screwdriver (burglary tool). It explains why he was not further investigated, arrested or otherwise dealt with at the time.

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool… | The Last Refuge (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/05/01/m-dspd-cover-up-the-curious-case-of-trayvon-martins-backpack-with-stolen-jewelry-and-burglary-tool/)

On the bus driver assault: Trayvon Martin's ten day suspension - Charleston Charleston Conservative | Examiner.com (http://www.examiner.com/article/trayvon-martin-s-ten-day-suspension)


So we just have to wait a few more days to hear all about Trayvon Martin's juvenile records and the illegal activity he was up to the night he was killed when the defense puts on it's case. Should be very interesting.

[Bucco]

Sorry, but I do not see that the trial itself is political. The fact that it came to trial, perhaps. Political motivation or not, it is in trial and that is a fact.

I have only posted my personal opinions and observations, not the political or media hype. I just think that GZ had no right to appoint himself judge, jury, and executioner that night.

Getting out of his car and then not following the advice of the dispatcher was not his big mistake. He could have met them at his car, as he originally said he would, and then taken them up the path indicating where he last saw him. Not adhering to NW protocol was his big mistake. Technically, everyone is a member of NW whether they patrol or have a title. They are to be observant and call the authorities to report anything they have a concern about. Call law enforcement and report.. That is what is posted on the sign and what was emphasized in the meetings when their NW was established. The were never instructed to take matters into their own hands. Our CW follow the same guidelines. They have no legal authority just as GZ did not.

I have heard him on the tapes and his interview tell lie after lie. So have the jurors. I still say that will carry a great deal of weight with these jurors.

As for the riots, there are idiots in all walks of life. Remember all the demonstrations outside the Anthony house all hours of the day and night which included bringing young children with them? Talk about bad parenting!

First we agree that the fact this came to trial was POLITICAL.

For me, that makes the trial, which as we agree would not exist except for the politics, POLITICAL.

I cannot comment on the trial as I have not watched it. I have read both good and bad about BOTH folks involved prior to this sad evening, and I surely was not there.

What has prompted me to post here is the atmosphere being applied. This has the makings of having a VERY BAD ENDING.....and I am not speaking of the verdict. It is so like Sharpton's other forays like this. People on here rooting, reading others minds, and ignoring the fact this entire thing was politically motivated from the beginning.

If you agree that it came to trial only because of politics, how can a side be taken ? I have total distaste for the entire thing, not just a Zimmerman mistruth, or a Martin error, so I suppose it is like asking people to disband from watching a riot....I got no shot.

The posters,if on the old political board, would fall into predictable categories, and that seems very sad when speaking of a trial made possible by political movements.

I am not judging anyone, but this has BAD ENDING written all over it. I pray I am wrong.

[NJblue]

So we just have to wait a few more days to hear all about Trayvon Martin's juvenile records and the illegal activity he was up to the night he was killed when the defense puts on it's case. Should be very interesting. While they are definitely pertinent to the case - especially if any of these records show violent behaviour, I will be surprised if they are allowed to be used.

[Patty55]

So we just have to wait a few more days to hear all about Trayvon Martin's juvenile records and the illegal activity he was up to the night he was killed when the defense puts on it's case. Should be very interesting.

No, but you might hear that after he got off the phone with his 16 year old (NOT) GF he put the earpiece in his pocket, maybe IMO because he knew he was going to fight.

[manaboutown]

So we just have to wait a few more days to hear all about Trayvon Martin's juvenile records and the illegal activity he was up to the night he was killed when the defense puts on it's case. Should be very interesting.

The jury, hopefully, will be able obtain sufficient background information on Martin to capably assess Martin's character (or lack thereof), propensity for violence, physical aggressiveness and his actual physical size and conditioning. This would aid them in determining if Martin might have been the aggressor, sucker punching Zimmerman and grounding and pounding Zimmerman using MMA techniques he knew and practiced, or whether he was a "lover" (from his numerous texts related to sex) rather than a fighter. See: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/48402/trayvon-martins-filthy-porno-esque-tweets-if-obama-had-a-son-would-he-talk-like-this/

The jury also, hopefully, will be able to obtain adequate background material on Zimmerman to assess whether he is a trigger-happy cop wanna-be or a level headed concerned citizen trying to reduce the number of felonies occurring in his community - or, most likely, something between those polar examples.

An aside on some of the comments in a few previous posts regarding how the prosecution has handled its case poorly, throwing the case, etc. I was quite puzzled as to why they presented their weakest witnesses first, some of whom almost appeared to be witnesses for the defense. I might be wrong but I now believe they may have been wanting to get the worst (for them) out of the way and have saved the best for last so it will be foremost in the juror's minds, this being the DNA evidence and what will soon follow.

[Barefoot]

All this discussion of evidence or lack there of is just an excuse to exercise your typing skills. NOBODY seems to remember the genesis of this case at all. NOBODY cares about the main players and their history in these type of cases. People are on here flapping about as if the evidence of lack thereoff really meant anything.

Bucco, I apologize for taking your words out of context, but I have a couple of comments.

I think your statement that "nobody cares about the main players and their history" is untrue. Many people have shown by their thoughtful posts that they do care about the players and about the Justice system. The fact that this thread has been viewed over 10,000 times tells me somebody cares.

As far as "an excuse to exercise your typing skills" :024: As with most threads on TOTV, it's just a bunch of homies exchanging ideas and theories. (Homies meaning internet friends).

[Bucco]

Bucco, I apologize for taking your words out of context, but I have a couple of comments.

I think your statement that "nobody cares about the main players and their history" is untrue. Many people have shown by their thoughtful posts that they do care about the players and about the Justice system. The fact that this thread has been viewed over 10,000 times tells me somebody cares.

As far as "an excuse to exercise your typing skills" :024: As with most threads on TOTV, it's just a bunch of homies exchanging ideas and theories. (Homies meaning internet friends).

Point made and accepted !

[gomoho]

I believe the trial is a result of politics, but opinons of what happened are based more on life experience.

[Patty55]

I believe the trial is a result of politics, but opinons of what happened are based more on life experience.

Absolutely, once Sharpton got involved I knew the spin was on. I obviously have no dog in this fight, but I believe in justice (can we still say that? Ms Fulton does have it trademarked-LOL).

I hate to see people quoting the spin and it being accepted as fact.

Life experience? Yep, I worked for a while for the Probation Dept. Saw many a delinquent, saw a loopy parent trying to get a PINS because their child listened to rock music.

I remember Tawana Brawley and how the police were railroaded, their lives and careers destroyed.

Lastly, I know people who have had tragedy in their lives and didn't turn it into a fund raiser.

[Bucco]

Absolutely, once Sharpton got involved I knew the spin was on. I obviously have no dog in this fight, but I believe in justice (can we still say that? Ms Fulton does have it trademarked-LOL).

I hate to see people quoting the spin and it being accepted as fact.

Life experience? Yep, I worked for a while for the Probation Dept. Saw many a delinquent, saw a loopy parent trying to get a PINS because their child listened to rock music.

I remember Tawana Brawley and how the police were railroaded, their lives and careers destroyed.

Lastly, I know people who have had tragedy in their lives and didn't turn it into a fund raiser.

Good post !

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I have heard him on the tapes and his interview tell lie after lie. So have the jurors. I still say that will carry a great deal of weight with these jurors.

And you know it was lie after lie because you were there to witness the whole thing?
Talk about acting like judge jury and executioner. You have this guy convicted when you have no facts.

[John_W]

Sorry, but I do not see that the trial itself is political. The fact that it came to trial, perhaps. Political motivation or not, it is in trial and that is a fact.

I have only posted my personal opinions and observations, not the political or media hype. I just think that GZ had no right to appoint himself judge, jury, and executioner that night.

Getting out of his car and then not following the advice of the dispatcher was not his big mistake. He could have met them at his car, as he originally said he would, and then taken them up the path indicating where he last saw him.

If both parties were black there would be no trial, if both were white there would be no trial. That's about as political as you can get.

Following the advice of the dispatcher? He didn't even have to call the dispatcher. He lived in those apartments, he paid rent for the apartment, his property was in those apartments. There had been numerous break-ins, home invasions and burglaries, as a tenant what would you do?

Tryavon Martin was a guest in his father's apartment. It was dark, it was raining, and he was strollling along between the apartments without a care in the world. His father was as much to blame as anyone for allowing this behavior. George Zimmerman was doing exactly as what I would do in that exact situation. He was checking his neighborhood. Trayvon was the aggressor, he instigated the fight when he jumped George and had the upper hand, he didn't realize that law biding citizens have the right to carry a concealed weapon and he paid the price.


.

[mickey100]

If both parties were black there would be no trial, if both were white there would be no trial. That's about as political as you can get.

Following the advice of the dispatcher? He didn't even have to call the dispatcher. He lived in those apartments, he paid rent for the apartment, his property was in those apartments. There had been numerous break-ins, home invasions and burglaries, as a tenant what would you do?

Tryavon Martin was a guest in his father's apartment. It was dark, it was raining, and he was strollling along between the apartments without a care in the world. His father was as much to blame as anyone for allowing this behavior. George Zimmerman was doing exactly as what I would do in that exact situation. He was checking his neighborhood. Trayvon was the aggressor, he instigated the fight when he jumped George and had the upper hand, he didn't realize that law biding citizens have the right to carry a concealed weapon and he paid the price.


.

A son was a "guest" at his father's apartment? He was strolling between the apartments without a care in the world? And that is a crime why? And why would he have a care in the world when he just went out to buy Skittles for his brother? And his father is to blame for his being out at 7:30 buying skittles? Sorry, you lost me on that one.
There is no conclusive evidence that Martin was the aggressor. We have not heard all the evidence yet. For all we know, Zimmerman decided Martin was the one "expletive a. Hole " that wasn't going to get away, and he made sure that happened. We just don't know all the facts yet

[ugotme]

If it wasn't for Sharpton this whole case might have been handled differently.

And, of course, if it doesn't turn out the way he wants he will be
in the background inciting everyone. IT'S WHAT HE DOES !

[John_W]

A son was a "guest" at his father's apartment? He was strolling between the apartments without a care in the world? And that is a crime why? And why would he have a care in the world when he just went out to buy Skittles for his brother? And his father is to blame for his being out at 7:30 buying skittles?

Well yeah, he was suspended from school 3 times that year. He was caught with stolen property and burglary tools. As a parent it's OK to say, go to the store by yourself, even though it's dark and raining, and he has a tendency to find trouble? At 7:30 in February it is dark, That' a fact. His mother shipped his butt from Miami up to Sanford. If you don't see anything wrong with that scenario, then you are not any better. You have a juvenile delinquent staying at your place and you let him have free roam of the neighborhood after dark. Not a good practice, in fact he's dead for that very reason.

If I lived in a apartment complex with as much criminal activity as this place, the last thing I would want is to have him roaming the neighborhood unsupervised at night. Maybe you have a better insight, but then again, Trayvon is dead for this very type of behavior. I lived for a year in a similar apartment complex in Atlanta. Couldn't go to the laundry room at night, cars were broken into, and I called the police on several occasions about my neighbors. I would never have had a teenager stay for an extended period of time. Then again, I've never had a son get suspended from school on multiple occasions or caught stealing property.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTeB0D5km2eY4Se9_5elvH2fmeU4Azu4 z_fFmED1vv8DM_5NQKX

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRIovldW9-vcy_IZsWIc-OBcj8s7dmaCrULBRyNNjDHM-KdTyC8

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxlwbOmHXvaed57M84hTiCmxgVNiakk 9NhIsG-JtB3ls1f2JMo



/

[Patty55]

A son was a "guest" at his father's apartment? He was strolling between the apartments without a care in the world? And that is a crime why? And why would he have a care in the world when he just went out to buy Skittles for his brother? And his father is to blame for his being out at 7:30 buying skittles? Sorry, you lost me on that one.
There is no conclusive evidence that Martin was the aggressor. We have not heard all the evidence yet. For all we know, Zimmerman decided Martin was the one "expletive a. Hole " that wasn't going to get away, and he made sure that happened. We just don't know all the facts yet

First of all, he was not a guest at his father's apartment. He was a guest at his father's girlfriend's apartment. It was not his brother, it was his father's gf's child. I would think that Mr. Martin's home would have with his wife of 14 years who he didn't divorce until December 2012. More spin?

The Alicia Stanley Story – The Only Real Mom Trayvon Martin Ever Knew | The Last Refuge (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/06/29/the-alicia-stanley-story-the-only-real-mom-trayvon-martin-ever-knew/)

[mickey100]

I see nothing wrong with a 17 year old kid going out at 7:30 at night to take a short walk to the store to buy skittles. I must be a horrible parent. Sue me. The fact is there is nothing illegal or criminal about what he was doing. It matters not who's apartment it was, who's wife or girlfriend it was. It matters not where he had A's in school had a run-in with the law a few months ago, or if he posted rapper type poses on his Facebook page, which by the way, is very common among young men today and doesn't mean they are criminals. The bottom line was - did he do something that particular night that a reasonable person in George Zimmerman’s situation would have suspected Trayvon intended to burglarize someone’s home or steal someone’s property. Walking through the neighborhood when it is raining and looking at houses does not suggest criminal activity. You can't just have a "hunch" that someone has criminal activity in mind, there has to be probable cause, which there wasn't in this case. If Zimm had been a police officer he would have stopped Martin, and identified himself as a police officer and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood, or just asked if he needed assistance. Zimm did neither of those things. In fact Zimm acted as the aggressor when he followed Martin with a loaded weapon. Since Zimm was the aggressor, how about allowing Martin the right to Stand his Groundand defend himself against Zimm ?

[mickey100]

Another thing that has piqued my interest, is Zimm's alleged use of prescription drugs. I read somewhere, might have been the EMS report, that he was taking an amphetamine Temazepam, also known as Restoril, which is known to cause insomnia and anxiety. The drug is also known to cause aggressiveness and hallucinations. Of course the police did such a sloppy investigation, they never tested Zimm's blood, so we'll never know if he did have excessive amounts of the amphetamine in his system. I'm interested in seeing how the prosecution handles that information.

[Monkei]

And you know it was lie after lie because you were there to witness the whole thing?
Talk about acting like judge jury and executioner. You have this guy convicted when you have no facts.

I am assuming that lie after lie means he is either telling the truth at the time of the interview, or at other times after the interview ... it would be impossible to tell which of the stories was a lie, which one was true, or if both were lies.

[Madelaine Amee]

I see nothing wrong with a 17 year old kid going out at 7:30 at night to take a short walk to the store to buy skittles. I must be a horrible parent. Sue me. The fact is there is nothing illegal or criminal about what he was doing. It matters not who's apartment it was, who's wife or girlfriend it was. It matters not where he had A's in school had a run-in with the law a few months ago, or if he posted rapper type poses on his Facebook page, which by the way, is very common among young men today and doesn't mean they are criminals. The bottom line was - did he do something that particular night that a reasonable person in George Zimmerman’s situation would have suspected Trayvon intended to burglarize someone’s home or steal someone’s property. Walking through the neighborhood when it is raining and looking at houses does not suggest criminal activity. You can't just have a "hunch" that someone has criminal activity in mind, there has to be probable cause, which there wasn't in this case. If Zimm had been a police officer he would have stopped Martin, and identified himself as a police officer and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood, or just asked if he needed assistance. Zimm did neither of those things. In fact Zimm acted as the aggressor when he followed Martin with a loaded weapon. Since Zimm was the aggressor, how about allowing Martin the right to Stand his Groundand defend himself against Zimm ?

Excellent post and thank you for your commonsense response after all the nonsense we have seen posted here.:BigApplause:

[graciegirl]

I see nothing wrong with a 17 year old kid going out at 7:30 at night to take a short walk to the store to buy skittles. I must be a horrible parent. Sue me. The fact is there is nothing illegal or criminal about what he was doing. It matters not who's apartment it was, who's wife or girlfriend it was. It matters not where he had A's in school had a run-in with the law a few months ago, or if he posted rapper type poses on his Facebook page, which by the way, is very common among young men today and doesn't mean they are criminals. The bottom line was - did he do something that particular night that a reasonable person in George Zimmerman’s situation would have suspected Trayvon intended to burglarize someone’s home or steal someone’s property. Walking through the neighborhood when it is raining and looking at houses does not suggest criminal activity. You can't just have a "hunch" that someone has criminal activity in mind, there has to be probable cause, which there wasn't in this case. If Zimm had been a police officer he would have stopped Martin, and identified himself as a police officer and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood, or just asked if he needed assistance. Zimm did neither of those things. In fact Zimm acted as the aggressor when he followed Martin with a loaded weapon. Since Zimm was the aggressor, how about allowing Martin the right to Stand his Groundand defend himself against Zimm ?

Good grief.

Leave race out of this. We have now police wannabe and a punky lookin' kid.

We have the situation where there had been robberies and break ins.

I would have gone home and called the police. He called the police and he was on some neighborhood watch thing if I remember correctly. I don't do guns but George ZimmERMAN had one and a permit. If me, an old lady had followed the kid and he banged my head into the pavement, I would have probably used the gun if I had one and shot him in his elbow because I don't think I would be able to shoot to kill anyone and would probably have missed or he would have shot at me.

I wish they had given each other a black eye. Then the parents of Mart could sue George ZimMERMAN.

[Monkei]

Well yeah, he was suspended from school 3 times that year. He was caught with stolen property and burglary tools. As a parent it's OK to say, go to the store by yourself, even though it's dark and raining, and he has a tendency to find trouble? At 7:30 in February it is dark, That' a fact. His mother shipped his butt from Miami up to Sanford. If you don't see anything wrong with that scenario, then you are not any better. You have a juvenile delinquent staying at your place and you let him have free roam of the neighborhood after dark. Not a good practice, in fact he's dead for that very reason.

If I lived in a apartment complex with as much criminal activity as this place, the last thing I would want is to have him roaming the neighborhood unsupervised at night. Maybe you have a better insight, but then again, Trayvon is dead for this very type of behavior. I lived for a year in a similar apartment complex in Atlanta. Couldn't go to the laundry room at night, cars were broken into, and I called the police on several occasions about my neighbors. I would never have had a teenager stay for an extended period of time. Then again, I've never had a son get suspended from school on multiple occasions or caught stealing property.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTeB0D5km2eY4Se9_5elvH2fmeU4Azu4 z_fFmED1vv8DM_5NQKX

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRIovldW9-vcy_IZsWIc-OBcj8s7dmaCrULBRyNNjDHM-KdTyC8

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRxlwbOmHXvaed57M84hTiCmxgVNiakk 9NhIsG-JtB3ls1f2JMo



/

We get it. Martin was black, he was urbam, he probably listened to rap music, he knew how to make gang signs with his fingers and he wore a hoodie at night. he had to be bad and he deserved to be followed and shot to death. i am assuming that is why you chose to post the pictures.

[Monkei]

It would appear that all kids who do bad things and look suspicious were open season in Zimmerman's complex (not to mention black). Just follow them until you provoke them enough to jump you, then shoot them, claim self defense and all is right with the world. There is something wrong with that scenario and as a gun owner and a concealed weapon permit holder for over 10 years I am sick that someone would put themselves in the situation GZ did. I have heard no testimony yet that does not at it's basic terms boil it down to those facts. Sure we can add kid was suspended three times from school, was out at 7:30 at night (egad!!!) was a guest at the complex (not a crime as far as I could tell) and that Al Sharpton got involved. There has been enough testimony in this case to warrant a trial. Not second degree, but surely manslaughter is a charge that holds some weight.

This if he was white there would be no trial is a crock because I think if he was white, Zimmerman probably would not have followed him, because the white kid did not look like he was trouble or up to no good in the cop wanna be mind of Zimmerman.

Ask yourself this question. Would GZ followed Martin that night if he did NOT have a gun? Or, would he have made the call and left it to police to handle?

[mickey100]

It would appear that all kids who do bad things and look suspicious were open season in Zimmerman's complex (not to mention black). Just follow them until you provoke them enough to jump you, then shoot them, claim self defense and all is right with the world. There is something wrong with that scenario and as a gun owner and a concealed weapon permit holder for over 10 years I am sick that someone would put themselves in the situation GZ did. I have heard no testimony yet that does not at it's basic terms boil it down to those facts. Sure we can add kid was suspended three times from school, was out at 7:30 at night (egad!!!) was a guest at the complex (not a crime as far as I could tell) and that Al Sharpton got involved. There has been enough testimony in this case to warrant a trial. Not second degree, but surely manslaughter is a charge that holds some weight.

This if he was white there would be no trial is a crock because I think if he was white, Zimmerman probably would not have followed him, because the white kid did not look like he was trouble or up to no good in the cop wanna be mind of Zimmerman.

Ask yourself this question. Would GZ followed Martin that night if he did NOT have a gun? Or, would he have made the call and left it to police to handle?

Exactly. I think I read somewhere he made like 50 calls in the past few years to the police, and almost every one was about a black person in the neighborhood. And I do wonder if the drugs he purportedly was on influenced his anxiety and had something to do with his state of mind that night.

[Parker]

I hear a lot of people here who are certain they KNOW what was in the mind's of both parties.

[mickey100]

Good grief.

Leave race out of this. We have now police wannabe and a punky lookin' kid.

We have the situation where there had been robberies and break ins.

I would have gone home and called the police. He called the police and he was on some neighborhood watch thing if I remember correctly. I don't do guns but George ZimmERMAN had one and a permit. If me, an old lady had followed the kid and he banged my head into the pavement, I would have probably used the gun if I had one and shot him in his elbow because I don't think I would be able to shoot to kill anyone and would probably have missed or he would have shot at me.

I wish they had given each other a black eye. Then the parents of Mart could sue George ZimMERMAN.

I didn't write anything about race. YOU did. And we dont' have know who banged who's head on the pavement, and who was the aggressor. Still to be determined. I have no problem with a permit to carry a weapon, but that weapon better be used responsibly. If I'm on drugs, I wouldn't even consider using a weapon, and it certainly raises a question in my eyes about Zimmerman's judgement.

[graciegirl]

I hear a lot of people here who are certain they KNOW what was in the mind's of both parties.

Yes indeedy.

[gomoho]

Monkei - consider this for a moment. What if George Zimmerman did follow Trayvon that night and was not armed. Would Zimmerman have survived that night??? Lots of woulda, shoulda, coulda going on here. No one knows what really happened that night except George Zimmerman.
Some are guilty of assuming Trayvon is the bad guy 'cause he's black and some are assuming he's not guilty 'cause he's black. Stop looking at the color and look at the people.

[manaboutown]

It would appear that all kids who do bad things and look suspicious were open season in Zimmerman's complex (not to mention black). Just follow them until you provoke them enough to jump you, then shoot them, claim self defense and all is right with the world. There is something wrong with that scenario and as a gun owner and a concealed weapon permit holder for over 10 years I am sick that someone would put themselves in the situation GZ did. I have heard no testimony yet that does not at it's basic terms boil it down to those facts. Sure we can add kid was suspended three times from school, was out at 7:30 at night (egad!!!) was a guest at the complex (not a crime as far as I could tell) and that Al Sharpton got involved. There has been enough testimony in this case to warrant a trial. Not second degree, but surely manslaughter is a charge that holds some weight.

This if he was white there would be no trial is a crock because I think if he was white, Zimmerman probably would not have followed him, because the white kid did not look like he was trouble or up to no good in the cop wanna be mind of Zimmerman.

Ask yourself this question. Would GZ followed Martin that night if he did NOT have a gun? Or, would he have made the call and left it to police to handle?

This community of 260 units had in the year prior to the shooting experienced several burglaries, thefts, a shooting and other felonies. Police had been called by residents 402 times in the prior 14 months, about one call per day. Zimmerman had previously called police and waited for the police to arrive and handle things. Of course the suspects were long gone before the cops showed up at the scene. Check out the Background of the Shooting in Wikipedia. Shooting of Trayvon Martin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin)

[Monkei]

This community of 260 units had in the year prior to the shooting experienced several burglaries, thefts, a shooting and other felonies. Police had been called by residents 402 times in the prior 14 months, about one call per day. Zimmerman had previously called police and waited for the police to arrive and handle things. Of course the suspects were long gone before the cops showed up at the scene. Check out the Background of the Shooting in Wikipedia. Shooting of Trayvon Martin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin)

So vigilante justice was ok?

[manaboutown]

So vigilante justice was ok?


Of course not but self defense is.

Vigilante justice is what Al Sharpton and those of his ilk are about.

[redwitch]

What really bothers me is that Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him. Rather than tell him, he denied following him. We'll never know, but would there have been any kind of incident had Zimmerman explained that he was a member of community watch, didn't know Martin and just wanted to make sure everything was okay? Zimmerman set Martin up to react -- whether it was deliberate or not we'll never know. There's no question in my mind that Zimmerman's actions caused this tragedy. I just don't know if he did it deliberately or was just being a dumb schmuck.

[Monkei]

Monkei - consider this for a moment. What if George Zimmerman did follow Trayvon that night and was not armed. Would Zimmerman have survived that night??? Lots of woulda, shoulda, coulda going on here. No one knows what really happened that night except George Zimmerman.
Some are guilty of assuming Trayvon is the bad guy 'cause he's black and some are assuming he's not guilty 'cause he's black. Stop looking at the color and look at the people.

I don't think Zimmerman would have even considered following him without a gun. But that's just my opinion. From judging his actions and looking at his demeanor he just does not strike me as a guy who would put himself in harms way without his gun.

[gomoho]

If the gun had been drawn and he shot Trayvon while he was standing up I might look at this differently. But the only eyewitness said Zimmerman was on the bottom and we now know Trayvon was shot while he was on top of Zimmerman. Point being he only pulled the gun at that point he wasn't blindly chasing him around the complex with a gun drawn.

[Monkei]

If the gun had been drawn and he shot Trayvon while he was standing up I might look at this differently. But the only eyewitness said Zimmerman was on the bottom and we now know Trayvon was shot while he was on top of Zimmerman. Point being he only pulled the gun at that point he wasn't blindly chasing him around the complex with a gun drawn.

But we then have medical professionals who said that zimmermans wounds were not significant. This trial has enough give and take both ways. But there is enough to warrant this trial and not for it to have been swept under the rug ...

[John_W]

We get it. Martin was black, he was urbam, he probably listened to rap music, he knew how to make gang signs with his fingers and he wore a hoodie at night. he had to be bad and he deserved to be followed and shot to death. i am assuming that is why you chose to post the pictures.

He didn't have to be bad, but those photos show he chose to be. Did he deserve to be followed, the leader of community watch thought so. Did he deserve to be shot? The moment he jumped another human being he put himself in that position.


/

[tucson]

Re; the issue of TM screaming; why hasn't it been brought up that if it was TM screaming, then if that is true, why was he screaming? I don't remember hearing about any evidence of TM having evidence of being beaten up prior to him being shot.

[gomoho]

But we then have medical professionals who said that zimmermans wounds were not significant. This trial has enough give and take both ways. But there is enough to warrant this trial and not for it to have been swept under the rug ...

To that point - my husband shared an interesting sorry about when he was in the army. He got into a fight in the latrine - all concrete floors. The guy knocked him down and repeatedly slammed his head into the concrete. He said the pain was so excrutiating he thought he was going to black out. Head trauma does not always clearly show as well as a broken nose might.

[gomoho]

Re; the issue of TM screaming; why hasn't it been brought up that if it was TM screaming, then if that is true, why was he screaming? I don't remember hearing about any evidence of TM having evidence of being beaten up prior to him being shot.

Tucson - good point. Normally people beating someone up aren't screaming for help while they are doing it. And why would he be screaming and not show any evidence of injury? And the only eyewitness clearly states George Zimmerman was on the bottom and someone was screaming for help.

[tucson]

Tucson - good point. Normally people beating someone up aren't screaming for help while they are doing it. And why would he be screaming and not show any evidence of injury? And the only eyewitness clearly states George Zimmerman was on the bottom and someone was screaming for help.

Gomoho, exactly, this has been bothering me from the beginning of this case! I hope the jury is also thinking along these lines. WHY hasn't the defense brought this issue to the forefront of their defense, or do you think they're waiting for the ME to take the stand?

[Barefoot]

Of course the police did such a sloppy investigation, they never tested Zimm's blood, so we'll never know if he did have excessive amounts of the amphetamine in his system.

Doesn't this make your statement about Zimmerman taking drugs pure speculation? Is it possible that if Zimm had exhibited signs of being under the influence of drugs, it would have prompted the police to test his blood?

[ugotme]

Simple - NO ONE here knows or will EVER know what really happened.

Opinions? we are all entitled to them.

I will not opine because I am not watching every minute of the trial.

Therefore. . . Let justice be done !

[Monkei]

To that point - my husband shared an interesting sorry about when he was in the army. He got into a fight in the latrine - all concrete floors. The guy knocked him down and repeatedly slammed his head into the concrete. He said the pain was so excrutiating he thought he was going to black out. Head trauma does not always clearly show as well as a broken nose might.

Well did he shoot him to death?

[gomoho]

Well did he shoot him to death?

I can't believe you even said that to me. This was a pre-arranged fight - no one was ambushed. My husband was only able to get away because a plunger was in reach that he started beating the guy in the head with. At that point they agreed to stop.

My point was you can sustain quite a head beating and there be no evidence; however, I don't think you are willing to see things as they might be, but rather as you wish them to be.

[tucson]

To that point - my husband shared an interesting sorry about when he was in the army. He got into a fight in the latrine - all concrete floors. The guy knocked him down and repeatedly slammed his head into the concrete. He said the pain was so excrutiating he thought he was going to black out. Head trauma does not always clearly show as well as a broken nose might.

My brother died from a fractured skull caused from a fall and there was no open wounds, cuts or blood on his head. So , it IS true as you stated re;head wounds.

[mickey100]

Doesn't this make your statement about Zimmerman taking drugs pure speculation? Is it possible that if Zimm had exhibited signs of being under the influence of drugs, it would have prompted the police to test his blood?

In a murder investigation I would think they would investigate everything pertinent. If the paramedic report said that he was on an amphetamine, you would think the police would have tested his blood for drugs and alcohol, particularly since he killed someone.

[gomoho]

In a murder investigation I would think they would investigate everything pertinent. If the paramedic report said that he was on an amphetamine, you would think the police would have tested his blood for drugs and alcohol, particularly since he killed someone.

Fair enough - and today the medical examiner said he changed his opinion and the amount of marijuana in Trayvon's blood could have affected his judgement - yet the judge would not allow that testimony.

Never hear anything about Zimmerman on amphetmaines - could you please provide a link.

[buggyone]

Well, the judge said the State showed enough evidence in their argument that the trial can proceed for 2nd degree murder. Zimmerman's high priced mouthpiece failed to convince the judge to toss the case.

[Patty55]

Well, the judge said the State showed enough evidence in their argument that the trial can proceed for 2nd degree murder. Zimmerman's high priced mouthpiece failed to convince the judge to toss the case.

I think asking them to dismiss is just a formality.

[mickey100]

Fair enough - and today the medical examiner said he changed his opinion and the amount of marijuana in Trayvon's blood could have affected his judgement - yet the judge would not allow that testimony.

Never hear anything about Zimmerman on amphetmaines - could you please provide a link.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/zimmerman.fdems.report.pdf

The drugs are listed on the first page

[buggyone]

The analysts on FOX were almost guaranteeing the dismissal would happen. The judge could have lessened it to manslaughter but obviously thinks the proper charge is 2nd degree murder.

[Patty55]

Google Zimmerman and drugs. I cannot find the actual report, just many references to the report, which is why I referred in the original post to "alleged" drug use. One of the attorneys (Crump) also spoke publicly about Zimmerman's drug use. Crump said Zimmerman should have been tested for drugs the night of the shooting. I found numerous references to a fire and EMS report that says Zimmerman was on the medications Librax and Temazepam at the time of the incident.

Crump?:22yikes::22yikes: The same Crump that can't be pinned down for a deposition? This Crump....

Benjamin Crump and Subornation of Perjury – The “Horse Shedding” Of Witness #8 (Repost with full prior comments) | The Last Refuge (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/06/26/benjamin-crump-and-subornation-of-perjury-the-horse-shedding-of-witness-8/)

Sorry, Mr. Crump (IMO) is no better that Sharpton. If they had their tongues notarized I still wouldn't believe either one of them.

[mickey100]

Crump?:22yikes::22yikes: The same Crump that can't be pinned down for a deposition? This Crump....

Benjamin Crump and Subornation of Perjury – The “Horse Shedding” Of Witness #8 (Repost with full prior comments) | The Last Refuge (http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/06/26/benjamin-crump-and-subornation-of-perjury-the-horse-shedding-of-witness-8/)

Sorry, Mr. Crump (IMO) is no better that Sharpton. If they had their tongues notarized I still wouldn't believe either one of them.

I guess you failed to see my previous post has been edited. The actual report is now linked and the drugs are listed on the first page.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/zimmerman.fdems.report.pdf

[Patty55]

I guess you failed to see my post has been edited. The actual report is now linked and the drugs are listed on the first page.

Nope, saw it, apparently GZ has ulcers and insomnia.

[gomoho]

I guess you failed to see my previous post has been edited. The actual report is now linked and the drugs are listed on the first page.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/05/17/zimmerman.fdems.report.pdf

OMG are you kidding me???? These are prescription drugs - not recreational like the marijuana Trayvon was smoking. This just keeps getting more ridiculous.

[gomoho]

The analysts on FOX were almost guaranteeing the dismissal would happen. The judge could have lessened it to manslaughter but obviously thinks the proper charge is 2nd degree murder.

I would have felt a lot more comfortable with the judge's decision if she had taken the weekend to mull it over, but to instantly say "nope - charges stand make me believe she is either afraid to dismiss the charges because of the reprecusion or inept. Should have at least pretended like she would think about the argument - instead of demonstrating she had her mind made up before hearing the arguments.

[manaboutown]

Well, the judge said the State showed enough evidence in their argument that the trial can proceed for 2nd degree murder. Zimmerman's high priced mouthpiece failed to convince the judge to toss the case.


This request is SOP in a criminal trial.

[manaboutown]

Fair enough - and today the medical examiner said he changed his opinion and the amount of marijuana in Trayvon's blood could have affected his judgement - yet the judge would not allow that testimony.

This could provide the basis for a mistrial.

[manaboutown]

Nope, saw it, apparently GZ has ulcers and insomnia.

With the amounts of serious crime that community was experiencing had I resided therein I would have suffered a high level of anxiety. Throw in some valium to the mix. I too would have "carried" until I could move out. An area in one of the cities in which I spend significant time has similar crime statistics. It is known as "The War Zone" to the populace and even referred to as such by the local press. I never ever drive through it at night and only rarely during daylight.

[buggyone]

With the amounts of serious crime that community was experiencing had I resided therein I would have suffered a high level of anxiety. Throw in some valium to the mix. I too would have "carried" until I could move out. An area in one of the cities in which I spend significant time has similar crime statistics. It is known as "The War Zone" to the populace and even referred to as such by the local press. I never ever drive through it at night and only rarely during daylight.

I missed some of the testimony, I guess. What serious crime did Twin Lakes Retreat have ongoing besides a few burglaries?

I doubt if the prescription drugs that Zimmerman had anything to do with the killing that night.

I am curious about which city you were in that had an area called The War Zone. I saw you lived in DC, MD, and VA. I lived in Silver Spring for 35 years. I never went into the Anacostia area of DC, lots of Prince George County, or into parts of the Virginia 'burbs but never heard any of those called The War Zone.

[Monkei]

I missed some of the testimony, I guess. What serious crime did Twin Lakes Retreat have ongoing besides a few burglaries?

I doubt if the prescription drugs that Zimmerman had anything to do with the killing that night.

I am curious about which city you were in that had an area called The War Zone. I saw you lived in DC, MD, and VA. I lived in Silver Spring for 35 years. I never went into the Anacostia area of DC, lots of Prince George County, or into parts of the Virginia 'burbs but never heard any of those called The War Zone.

I used to work a government job Mondays thru Fridays in the DC area and one of our offices was in Silver Spring right at the train station. Every week I flew to DC from Atlanta to work in Manassas, DC and Silver Spring.

[manaboutown]

I missed some of the testimony, I guess. What serious crime did Twin Lakes Retreat have ongoing besides a few burglaries?

I doubt if the prescription drugs that Zimmerman had anything to do with the killing that night.

I am curious about which city you were in that had an area called The War Zone. I saw you lived in DC, MD, and VA. I lived in Silver Spring for 35 years. I never went into the Anacostia area of DC, lots of Prince George County, or into parts of the Virginia 'burbs but never heard any of those called The War Zone.

Twin Lakes had MUCH more than a few burglaries going on over the past year prior to the shooting. Zimmerman had called the police before and waited for them while suspected individuals got away. Wikipedia has the story. The crime statistics are available and search engines find them.

The War Zone I mentioned is in the SE part of Albuquerque, NM and I am physically there right now as I write, no not in the War Zone, but in that city. http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/on_assignment/has-new-name-changed-the-war-zone Oh, the city has recently renamed it The International District and put up some signs but the locals still know it as the War Zone. The Villages look mighty safe to me from here!

I know Anacostia and have been out SE Pennsylvania to it several times. I have lived on Capitol Hill, in Bladensburg and Lanham in PG County, Chevy Chase, MD, Alexandria and Great Falls, VA, downtown Baltimore and Towson. A plain clothes DC cop was shot to death on the doorstep of a friend's Capitol Hill house one night after I drove him home. After that incident he and his wife moved to the suburbs.

[CMANN]

Did you notice in the Hannity replay, he said he had never heard of SYG? He said that he hadn't and then Hannity asked him about self defense. Nope. Both lies. I would have to look at it again, but I think this is where he says that it was just "God's will".

he said that he had never heard of stand your ground. Stand your ground is a slang term. It may have been taught in school but certainly not under the name stand your ground. The instructor also stated that he did not teach any Florida law.

Reasonable doubt?

[CMANN]

I wonder if the jury is hearing this evidence with the same glaring differences folks on here see. How will they ever come to a decision if so???
Posts are already on facebook about the riots to come if Zimmerman is acquitted so prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

if there are riots and will not be the white community, I am sure.

[CMANN]

Well, the judge said the State showed enough evidence in their argument that the trial can proceed for 2nd degree murder. Zimmerman's high priced mouthpiece failed to convince the judge to toss the case.

in my humble opinion the judge should be tossed. She's thoroughly bias toward the prosecution. This alone would be grounds for an appeal.

[mickey100]

he said that he had never heard of stand your ground. Stand your ground is a slang term. It may have been taught in school but certainly not under the name stand your ground. The instructor also stated that he did not teach any Florida law.

Reasonable doubt?


The army prosecutor who taught Zimmerman in a 2010 college class on criminal litigation, testified that he covered Florida's self-defense and "Stand Your Ground" laws in his 2010 course. Army Captain Alexis Carter said Zimmerman "was probably one of the better students in the class," calling him an "A" student. In other words, Zimmerman was well versed in Stand Your Ground and was lying when he said we was not familiar with SYG.

[graciegirl]

The army prosecutor who taught Zimmerman in a 2010 college class on criminal litigation, testified that he covered Florida's self-defense and "Stand Your Ground" laws in his 2010 course. Army Captain Alexis Carter said Zimmerman "was probably one of the better students in the class," calling him an "A" student. In other words, Zimmerman was well versed in Stand Your Ground and was lying when he said we was not familiar with SYG.


I am not a fan of guns, but I don't hate George Zimmerman.

Just sayin'.

[Luv2travel]

State rested so you have heard their side, now let's see what the Defense has to offer. It's a long way from ending.

[buggyone]

in my humble opinion the judge should be tossed. She's thoroughly bias toward the prosecution. This alone would be grounds for an appeal.

IF Zimmerman is convicted of murder or manslaughter, his legal team (if there is any money left) will certainly appeal. However, I believe appeals do take a long time to come up (a few years at least) and in the meantime, the convicted person is in prison. A person never is free on bond until their appeal is heard.

Remember, the O'Mara team is not doing this case pro bono. When there is no more money available, there is no more legal dream team.

(Remembering Albuquerque - there was a large and wonderful restaurant called Sadie's. Is it still there?)

[dillywho]

I am not a fan of guns, but I don't hate George Zimmerman.

Just sayin'.

I don't hate him, either. I just think that he made too many assumptions that night, took matters into his own hands, and it cost a kid his life when he was not in the commission of any crime.

Zimmerman's duty was to call in and report...period. When Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he lost sight of him, then he should have just left it up to the police from there and gone on to Target. The dispatcher had already told him the police were on the way. The dispatcher testified that he could not order him to do/not do anything and that 'not to follow' was advice. By that same token, Zimmerman was not obligated to try to keep Martin in sight because the dispatcher asked him what Martin was doing then. When he told the dispatcher which direction he last saw him going, that should have been the end of it. Let the police take it from there.

This is just the way I interpret what I have seen to date and I have been watching everyday.

[Patty55]

Remember, the O'Mara team is not doing this case pro bono. When there is no more money available, there is no more legal dream team.



I really wouldn't call these guys "Dream Team", I'd call them good solid local attorneys.

[graciegirl]

I don't hate him, either. I just think that he made too many assumptions that night, took matters into his own hands, and it cost a kid his life when he was not in the commission of any crime.

Zimmerman's duty was to call in and report...period. When Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he lost sight of him, then he should have just left it up to the police from there and gone on to Target. The dispatcher had already told him the police were on the way. The dispatcher testified that he could not order him to do/not do anything and that 'not to follow' was advice. By that same token, Zimmerman was not obligated to try to keep Martin in sight because the dispatcher asked him what Martin was doing then. When he told the dispatcher which direction he last saw him going, that should have been the end of it. Let the police take it from there.

This is just the way I interpret what I have seen to date and I have been watching everyday.

I think you are exactly right.

[buggyone]

Patty55's statement of "I really wouldn't call these guys "Dream Team", I'd call them good solid local attorneys" was absolutely correct. I should not have been so flippant in my comment. Thanks for the input.

[mickey100]

I don't hate him, either. I just think that he made too many assumptions that night, took matters into his own hands, and it cost a kid his life when he was not in the commission of any crime.

Zimmerman's duty was to call in and report...period. When Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he lost sight of him, then he should have just left it up to the police from there and gone on to Target. The dispatcher had already told him the police were on the way. The dispatcher testified that he could not order him to do/not do anything and that 'not to follow' was advice. By that same token, Zimmerman was not obligated to try to keep Martin in sight because the dispatcher asked him what Martin was doing then. When he told the dispatcher which direction he last saw him going, that should have been the end of it. Let the police take it from there.

This is just the way I interpret what I have seen to date and I have been watching everyday.

I agree. I don't hate him either, but neither do I trust him. At this point, without having seen all the evidence, I'm not convinced he's told the truth. Perhaps additional evidence will convince me otherwise. Even if he mostly told the truth, I agree he should have just left it up to the police to take over. I do think he was acting as a police wannabe and was over zealous.

[NJblue]

What really bothers me is that Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him. Rather than tell him, he denied following him. We'll never know, but would there have been any kind of incident had Zimmerman explained that he was a member of community watch, didn't know Martin and just wanted to make sure everything was okay? Zimmerman set Martin up to react -- whether it was deliberate or not we'll never know. There's no question in my mind that Zimmerman's actions caused this tragedy. I just don't know if he did it deliberately or was just being a dumb schmuck.

There is no conclusive testimony that Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him. This came from the 17 year-old friend who was known to lie about some things and where actual events would indicate that she lied about pertinent details. For example, she also testified that Martin said "get off of me". Yet, eyewitness testimony as well as the physical evidence all points to Martin being the one on top. To me, her testimony was coached and is worthless.

[janmcn]

I don't hate him, either. I just think that he made too many assumptions that night, took matters into his own hands, and it cost a kid his life when he was not in the commission of any crime.

Zimmerman's duty was to call in and report...period. When Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he lost sight of him, then he should have just left it up to the police from there and gone on to Target. The dispatcher had already told him the police were on the way. The dispatcher testified that he could not order him to do/not do anything and that 'not to follow' was advice. By that same token, Zimmerman was not obligated to try to keep Martin in sight because the dispatcher asked him what Martin was doing then. When he told the dispatcher which direction he last saw him going, that should have been the end of it. Let the police take it from there.

This is just the way I interpret what I have seen to date and I have been watching everyday.



Hopefully, these are the thoughts the women on the jury are mulling over and asking themselves, do we want to give this loose cannon his gun back to go out and hunt down more people, as if they are animals, wondering if it could be their children or grandchildren. And then, after the killing, saying he has no remorse and the shooting was God's will.

If convicted, I hope the judge tells Zimmerman that it's God's will that he spend x number of years in jail. He will be in for some fun when his fellow prisoners find out he was convicted for killing an unarmed teenager.

[Bucco]

hopefully, these are the thoughts the women on the jury are mulling over and asking themselves, do we want to give this loose cannon his gun back to go out and hunt down more people, as if they are animals, wondering if it could be their children or grandchildren. And then, after the killing, saying he has no remorse and the shooting was god's will.

If convicted, i hope the judge tells zimmerman that it's god's will that he spend x number of years in jail. He will be in for some fun when his fellow prisoners find out he was convicted for killing an unarmed teenager.

wow !!!

[Monkei]

he said that he had never heard of stand your ground. Stand your ground is a slang term. It may have been taught in school but certainly not under the name stand your ground. The instructor also stated that he did not teach any Florida law.

Reasonable doubt?

The law is well known in that term. In fact the words are included in the portion of the law.

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony"

[NJblue]

Hopefully, these are the thoughts the women on the jury are mulling over and asking themselves, do we want to give this loose cannon his gun back to go out and hunt down more people, as if they are animals, wondering if it could be their children or grandchildren. And then, after the killing, saying he has no remorse and the shooting was God's will.

If convicted, I hope the judge tells Zimmerman that it's God's will that he spend x number of years in jail. He will be in for some fun when his fellow prisoners find out he was convicted for killing an unarmed teenager.

You seem to not understand the laws of self defense. Hopefully the jurors do. If this is the exact scenario that happened that night, even if Zimmerman actually confronted Martin and demanded to know why he was there and even if Zimmerman never identified himself as neighborhood watch, it does not give Martin the right to turn this into a physical attack and it certainly doesn't give him the right to sustain that attack for a minute while Zimmerman is crying for help. It definitely doesn't give him the right to escalate the attack into a potential life threatening attempt to bang his head against the sidewalk.

If the jurors see Zimmerman as the initial instigator and hence fully responsible for all events that transpired, that would be a travesty of justice.

Suppose I see Mike Tyson in a bar and I foolishly call him names and even start to push him - all the while Tyson tries to avoid the confrontation. However, suppose at some point Tyson loses his temper or just reacts from my physical confrontation and starts to beat me up. Once he has the upper hand and I no longer present any threat to him, he has an obligation to stop. He is not allowed to continue the attack just because he wasn't the one to initially provoke it. If he were to continue beating me, despite my cries for help, to the point that I feared for my life, I would then have the right to use lethal force to preserve my life - even though the entire incident would never had happened if I hadn't acted foolishly.

There are a lot of people here who seem to think that if Zimmerman's actions caused the confrontation that he forfeits his right to self defense. I hope the jurors are more schooled in the reality of the law.

[tucson]

Is Zimmerman wearing a body armor? It looks like it to me, if so, he's probably had threats to his life.

[dillywho]

You seem to not understand the laws of self defense. Hopefully the jurors do. If this is the exact scenario that happened that night, even if Zimmerman actually confronted Martin and demanded to know why he was there and even if Zimmerman never identified himself as neighborhood watch, it does not give Martin the right to turn this into a physical attack and it certainly doesn't give him the right to sustain that attack for a minute while Zimmerman is crying for help. It definitely doesn't give him the right to escalate the attack into a potential life threatening attempt to bang his head against the sidewalk.

If the jurors see Zimmerman as the initial instigator and hence fully responsible for all events that transpired, that would be a travesty of justice.

Suppose I see Mike Tyson in a bar and I foolishly call him names and even start to push him - all the while Tyson tries to avoid the confrontation. However, suppose at some point Tyson loses his temper or just reacts from my physical confrontation and starts to beat me up. Once he has the upper hand and I no longer present any threat to him, he has an obligation to stop. He is not allowed to continue the attack just because he wasn't the one to initially provoke it. If he were to continue beating me, despite my cries for help, to the point that I feared for my life, I would then have the right to use lethal force to preserve my life - even though the entire incident would never had happened if I hadn't acted foolishly.

There are a lot of people here who seem to think that if Zimmerman's actions caused the confrontation that he forfeits his right to self defense. I hope the jurors are more schooled in the reality of the law.

While I agree with the scenario as you presented it, I have other questions. You know/knew who Mike Tyson is, GZ didn't know TM or anything about him.

I see many of GZ's statements as outright lies and not inconsistencies, although some are simply inconsistencies. We only have the story as he has told it. That being said, he claims he was reaching in his pocket for his cell phone when face to face with TM. How did TM know it was a phone and not a gun? What is the relevance of which pocket he had put it into? He claims he forgot which pocket and it was in the one where he didn't normally put it. How would TM know where he normally put his phone? Why did he put it in any pocket if he were expecting a call at any minute from the police to tell them where he was at that time as he had asked the dispatcher to have them do? Even if it was because of the rain, he could have had his hand on it in his pocket.

There are two versions out there of the words that were exchanged. Not being sure who said what based on what GZ has said, as I asked previously, how did TM know that he was reaching for a phone and not a gun? Does he not then have the right to defend himself, especially from a rough looking character like GZ was that night, not the GZ you see in court presently? GZ never bothered to tell him who he was, why he was following him around, ask him if he could help, nothing...nothing. He had several opportunities to do so and didn't because "he was afraid". Just because TM already had the better of GZ, why would he let him up to maybe finish getting his gun, especially since GZ thought TM "may have seen it or felt it' when he had him down? Not being armed himself, this kid had the right to do whatever he could to save his own life if he felt that he was the one in danger.

Like I said before, too many questions and not enough answers.

[janmcn]

Is Zimmerman wearing a body armor? It looks like it to me, if so, he's probably had threats to his life.


No, that's just 350 pounds of body fat.

[Patty55]

Why is it that every photo of GZ looks like a mugshot and every photo of TM looks like a choir boy? How come this photo is never shown?

[NJblue]

While I agree with the scenario as you presented it, I have other questions. You know/knew who Mike Tyson is, GZ didn't know TM or anything about him.

I see many of GZ's statements as outright lies and not inconsistencies, although some are simply inconsistencies. We only have the story as he has told it. That being said, he claims he was reaching in his pocket for his cell phone when face to face with TM. How did TM know it was a phone and not a gun? What is the relevance of which pocket he had put it into? He claims he forgot which pocket and it was in the one where he didn't normally put it. How would TM know where he normally put his phone? Why did he put it in any pocket if he were expecting a call at any minute from the police to tell them where he was at that time as he had asked the dispatcher to have them do? Even if it was because of the rain, he could have had his hand on it in his pocket.

There are two versions out there of the words that were exchanged. Not being sure who said what based on what GZ has said, as I asked previously, how did TM know that he was reaching for a phone and not a gun? Does he not then have the right to defend himself, especially from a rough looking character like GZ was that night, not the GZ you see in court presently? GZ never bothered to tell him who he was, why he was following him around, ask him if he could help, nothing...nothing. He had several opportunities to do so and didn't because "he was afraid". Just because TM already had the better of GZ, why would he let him up to maybe finish getting his gun, especially since GZ thought TM "may have seen it or felt it' when he had him down? Not being armed himself, this kid had the right to do whatever he could to save his own life if he felt that he was the one in danger.

Like I said before, too many questions and not enough answers.

Even if your narrative had the possibility of being true, it is insufficient to send this person to jail for life. Unless you know it to be true beyond a reasonable doubt - which you admit that you don't, a not guilty verdict has to be the result. I hope no one condones sending someone to prison based on conjecture.

You say Zimmerman had an opportunity to stop this and didn't. We don't know that for a fact. However, we do know that Martin had an opportunity to stop it and chose not to. When Good came out and told him to stop he had the perfect opportunity to say something like, "he's got a gun and wants to shoot me!" or "he attacked me!" or just stopped the beating and kept Zimmerman pinned down in a helpless position - knowing that there was now a witness should Zimmerman try to do something. He chose none of these options and just continued the beating. This is the clearest testimony that Martin was no longer in self defense mode (if he ever was) and was now in attack mode.

Why does it matter which pocket he put his phone in? Why should he have to justify putting his phone in his pocket rather than holding on to it. Are you suggesting that that by putting his phone in his pocket it adds to the case that he is guilty? If so, how so?

As to my bar room scenario. Change Mike Tyson to any random person and play the scenario out. It still doesn't give the random person the right to continually beat someone to the point where their life may be threatened.

[MikeV]

While I agree with the scenario as you presented it, I have other questions. You know/knew who Mike Tyson is, GZ didn't know TM or anything about him.

I see many of GZ's statements as outright lies and not inconsistencies, although some are simply inconsistencies. We only have the story as he has told it. That being said, he claims he was reaching in his pocket for his cell phone when face to face with TM. How did TM know it was a phone and not a gun? What is the relevance of which pocket he had put it into? He claims he forgot which pocket and it was in the one where he didn't normally put it. How would TM know where he normally put his phone? Why did he put it in any pocket if he were expecting a call at any minute from the police to tell them where he was at that time as he had asked the dispatcher to have them do? Even if it was because of the rain, he could have had his hand on it in his pocket.

There are two versions out there of the words that were exchanged. Not being sure who said what based on what GZ has said, as I asked previously, how did TM know that he was reaching for a phone and not a gun? Does he not then have the right to defend himself, especially from a rough looking character like GZ was that night, not the GZ you see in court presently? GZ never bothered to tell him who he was, why he was following him around, ask him if he could help, nothing...nothing. He had several opportunities to do so and didn't because "he was afraid". Just because TM already had the better of GZ, why would he let him up to maybe finish getting his gun, especially since GZ thought TM "may have seen it or felt it' when he had him down? Not being armed himself, this kid had the right to do whatever he could to save his own life if he felt that he was the one in danger.

Like I said before, too many questions and not enough answers.

I agree with NJBlue. It makes no difference what happened in the minutes leading up to the fight. Once TM started banging GZs head on the concrete GZ had every right to self defense and if he felt his life was in danger or he would continue to be attacked he had every right to use lethal measures.

[Suzi]

I grew up in Detroit. I was employed at an inner-city nursing home caring for people long-forgotten. I had the best intentions in the world - to help people that needed it, but I was wrong. I was where I shouldn't have been. A rough neighborhood and (almost) the only white face. I was almost murdered that morning. I was pretty darn lucky that I had the sense to do what I needed to do. I won't go into detail but I learned that there are places where you can go and places where you had better not go. That was almost 50 years ago and things have not changed. Today there are neighborhoods that are unsafe to be in if you are white - get real if you don't agree with this. And if you are black and wearing a hoodie, walking in the rain in a white neighborhood - you probably should not be there.

No one should be deprived of being in any neighborhood and it is very sad about the loss of any life, but it is what it is. If I had been murdered that winter morning, people would have asked "what the heck was she doing there". I was "lucky" and learned a very valuable lesson. Don't go where you don't belong no matter how wrong it seems....I got out alive and he didn't. Its so sad...but its the real world we live in.

[Monkei]

Why is it that every photo of GZ looks like a mugshot and every photo of TM looks like a choir boy? How come this photo is never shown?

Look back through this thread there was posted some pics to remind us just how urban and gang like TM was.

[Monkei]

I agree with NJBlue. It makes no difference what happened in the minutes leading up to the fight. Once TM started banging GZs head on the concrete GZ had every right to self defense and if he felt his life was in danger or he would continue to be attacked he had every right to use lethal measures.

Did TM have the same right?

[Patty55]

Look back through this thread there was posted some pics to remind us just how urban and gang like TM was.

Yes and they lifted from his facebook and twitter, not released by the media.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Did TM have the same right?

He certainly would have if he was being physically assaulted.

[ugotme]

Yes and they lifted from his facebook and twitter, not released by the media.

Are you trying to say the media doesn't play fair?

OMG - I AM SHOCKED !

[dillywho]

Even if your narrative had the possibility of being true, it is insufficient to send this person to jail for life. Unless you know it to be true beyond a reasonable doubt - which you admit that you don't, a not guilty verdict has to be the result. I hope no one condones sending someone to prison based on conjecture.

You say Zimmerman had an opportunity to stop this and didn't. We don't know that for a fact. However, we do know that Martin had an opportunity to stop it and chose not to. When Good came out and told him to stop he had the perfect opportunity to say something like, "he's got a gun and wants to shoot me!" or "he attacked me!" or just stopped the beating and kept Zimmerman pinned down in a helpless position - knowing that there was now a witness should Zimmerman try to do something. He chose none of these options and just continued the beating. This is the clearest testimony that Martin was no longer in self defense mode (if he ever was) and was now in attack mode.

Why does it matter which pocket he put his phone in? Why should he have to justify putting his phone in his pocket rather than holding on to it. Are you suggesting that that by putting his phone in his pocket it adds to the case that he is guilty? If so, how so?

As to my bar room scenario. Change Mike Tyson to any random person and play the scenario out. It still doesn't give the random person the right to continually beat someone to the point where their life may be threatened.

I love good discussions and that is exactly what my intent is here.

I have not said anywhere that GZ deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail. I don't think this rises to the level of Murder 2, but I do think GZ should not be acquitted. I do think that he bears a great responsibility in what happened based on what he did. Reckless endangerment, if nothing else would even work for me. But, the trial isn't over yet.

As to your question as to what it matters which pocket his phone was in, that was my question when GZ said it. My question is not which pocket, but how was TM supposed to know that he was not reaching for a gun? He didn't know who or what GZ was. The law says that you only have to be in reasonable fear that your life or your person might be in grave danger. Given the company indicated that TM kept in Miami, why would he think this thuggy looking guy was not just that...a thug? Some had just suggested that he might have put it in his pocket because of the rain and didn't want it to get wet. Either way, he was expecting the police to call him when they got there so he could tell them where he was.

You're right, TM did have an opportunity to stop when challenged by the neighbor and he should have told that neighbor what was going on. No one at the trial testified that they ever saw GZ getting his head "bashed" into the concrete....just that the scuffle was close to the concrete at one point and that it looked like he was getting hit. Good testified that he couldn't even be sure of that; just that that was what it looked like.

One guy was out there within seconds after the shot and took a picture of TM, but yet did not testify that GZ had TM's arm spread out as he demonstrated. Even those that saw him on top of TM never said they saw that....but then, they were not asked, either. If that were true, then how did the arms get back under him? No one, even GZ standing there looking at him ever said anything about his arms moving back under him. If GZ had seem him put his arms back under him, wouldn't he have done something about that since he already said that he might have been armed? If GZ really thought he was armed, would he not have kept TM's arms spread out until someone else was there to help? Why didn't GZ ask someone to check to see if TM was even still alive? I don't understand why the first officer didn't do that after securing GZ and his firearm. The second officer did and started to do CPR.

If I were on this case in any capacity, those are some of the things I would want to know and am surprised that these same questions have not been asked. I'm not a player in the case, but I still want to know.

[BobnBev]

Are you trying to say the media doesn't play fair?

OMG - I AM SHOCKED !

:a20:

[NJblue]

I love good discussions and that is exactly what my intent is here.

I have not said anywhere that GZ deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail. I don't think this rises to the level of Murder 2, but I do think GZ should not be acquitted. I do think that he bears a great responsibility in what happened based on what he did. Reckless endangerment, if nothing else would even work for me. But, the trial isn't over yet.

As to your question as to what it matters which pocket his phone was in, that was my question when GZ said it. My question is not which pocket, but how was TM supposed to know that he was not reaching for a gun? He didn't know who or what GZ was. The law says that you only have to be in reasonable fear that your life or your person might be in grave danger. Given the company indicated that TM kept in Miami, why would he think this thuggy looking guy was not just that...a thug? Some had just suggested that he might have put it in his pocket because of the rain and didn't want it to get wet. Either way, he was expecting the police to call him when they got there so he could tell them where he was.

You're right, TM did have an opportunity to stop when challenged by the neighbor and he should have told that neighbor what was going on. No one at the trial testified that they ever saw GZ getting his head "bashed" into the concrete....just that the scuffle was close to the concrete at one point and that it looked like he was getting hit. Good testified that he couldn't even be sure of that; just that that was what it looked like.

One guy was out there within seconds after the shot and took a picture of TM, but yet did not testify that GZ had TM's arm spread out as he demonstrated. Even those that saw him on top of TM never said they saw that....but then, they were not asked, either. If that were true, then how did the arms get back under him? No one, even GZ standing there looking at him ever said anything about his arms moving back under him. If GZ had seem him put his arms back under him, wouldn't he have done something about that since he already said that he might have been armed? If GZ really thought he was armed, would he not have kept TM's arms spread out until someone else was there to help? Why didn't GZ ask someone to check to see if TM was even still alive? I don't understand why the first officer didn't do that after securing GZ and his firearm. The second officer did and started to do CPR.

If I were on this case in any capacity, those are some of the things I would want to know and am surprised that these same questions have not been asked. I'm not a player in the case, but I still want to know.

The phone is a non-issue. It doesn't indicate anything.

What Good testified was that Martin was doing a "pound and ground" on Zimmerman. When questioned about actually seeing the blows, he said he couldn't - not because they didn't happen but because it was too dark to see anything other than Martin going up and down with his arms - consistent with a "pound and ground". Couple that with the injuries to the back of Zimmerman's head and, given no other logical way for those injuries to occur, a fair person would have to concede that indeed Martin was banging Zimmerman's head against the concrete. When physical evidence alligns with perceptions of eye witnesses (not to mention the statements of the defendant - who was not aware of Good's testimony at the time), it would be extremely unfair to come to the opposite conclusion and say that beyond reasonable doubt Zimmerman was not acting in self defense.

As to the position of the arms, what does that prove? That Zimmerman was lying? Why would he lie about something like that? If he knew that the arms were under Martin, why would he make a statement that he left them stretched out? If he was such a clever murderer as the defense is making him out to be (with the "knowledge of how to respond to police questions", etc.), why would he make a mistake like telling them he had is arms spread out - it adds absolutely nothing to his case of self defense. As has been agreed to by the medical examiner, Martin could have been capable of minor movements such as bringing his hands under his body. Again - there is nothing here that would, beyond a reasonable doubt, justify sending a man to prison.

In fact, the opposite is true. All of Zimmerman's testimony of the actual scuffle can be mated with eye witness testimony and with the physical evidence, with no holes.

[tucson]

The "who was screaming" issue really bothers me and I'm wondering if I've missed something? When someone is screaming, isn't it b/c they're getting beaten? Did GZ beat TM as well as TM beating GZ? If he did , I didn't see or hear of any cuts, bruises, bumps, etc. from the ME report. Also, the statement some ppl make that it proves that it was TM screaming b/c the screaming stopped after the gun shot does not prove it was TM screaming. To me it proves that the GZ screaming stopped b/c TM stopped beating GZ after he was shot.

[NJblue]

The "who was screaming" issue really bothers me and I'm wondering if I've missed something? When someone is screaming, isn't it b/c they're getting beaten? Did GZ beat TM as well as TM beating GZ? If he did , I didn't see or hear of any cuts, bruises, bumps, etc. from the ME report. Also, the statement some ppl make that it proves that it was TM screaming b/c the screaming stopped after the gun shot does not prove it was TM screaming. To me it proves that the GZ screaming stopped b/c TM stopped beating GZ after he was shot.

No, I don't think you missed anything. It is extremely illogical for Martin to be the one screaming for help since both Good and the physical evidence supports the notion that Martin was the one on top administering the beating. Good also testified that the person on the ground was the one yelling for help.

The only possible explanation for Martin to be screaming for help (while on top and while administering the blows) would be if he were truly fearful that Zimmerman had a gun. Unfortunately, this theory collapses by the fact that Martin was given the opportunity to call out directly to Good and tell him that Zimmerman had a gun. Instead, he ignored Good and kept on administering blows.

[mickey100]

I leave it to the jury, who sees all the evidence and listens to ALL the testimony to decide "the only possible explanation". I hope they can do it without bias.

[NJblue]

I leave it to the jury, who sees all the evidence and listens to ALL the testimony to decide "the only possible explanation". I hope they can do it without bias.

I hope they do it without bias and with the logical side of their brain and not the emotional side. I also hope they have a good understanding of what the self defense laws are.

[Patty55]

I leave it to the jury, who sees all the evidence and listens to ALL the testimony to decide "the only possible explanation". I hope they can do it without bias.

They really aren't seeing ALL the evidence, they are seeing the admissable evidence.

[Barefoot]

Like I said before, too many questions and not enough answers.

Too many questions and not enough answers equals reasonable doubt.

[CMANN]

IF Zimmerman is convicted of murder or manslaughter, his legal team (if there is any money left) will certainly appeal. However, I believe appeals do take a long time to come up (a few years at least) and in the meantime, the convicted person is in prison. A person never is free on bond until their appeal is heard.

Remember, the O'Mara team is not doing this case pro bono. When there is no more money available, there is no more legal dream team.

(Remembering Albuquerque - there was a large and wonderful restaurant called Sadie's. Is it still there?)

based on all of the testimony I have seen in this case it is inconceivable to me that Zimmerman will be convicted of anything. He should never have been brought to trial. Just my opinion.

[CMANN]

The law is well known in that term. In fact the words are included in the portion of the law.

"(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony"

Zimmerman was not involved in any illegal activity. Martin assaulted Zimmerman. That is an illegal activity

[CMANN]

Did TM have the same right?

using common sense. Of course he did not. He was the attacker.

[Monkei]

Zimmerman was not involved in any illegal activity. Martin assaulted Zimmerman. That is an illegal activity

That is not what the statement was in response to. It was merely a statement to the core of Zimmerman had never heard of the term.

[Monkei]

He certainly would have if he was being physically assaulted.

Lets see a guy is following me around ... There is no evidence or non evidence that I have heard that TM might have seen the weapon at some point before he attacked in fear for his life. This could easily be turned around. GZ is no hero here and no angel. Even if he gets the case dismissed GZ life and safety will be in doubt for years to come.

[Monkei]

Yes and they lifted from his facebook and twitter, not released by the media.

Why should the media release them. Did Fox?

[Monkei]

Are you trying to say the media doesn't play fair?

OMG - I AM SHOCKED !

Not sure I understand your comment. Are you saying there is no pro GZ media out there?

[Monkei]

using common sense. Of course he did not. He was the attacker.

You are wrong then they both had that right. I am sure TM would not have attacked if GZ had not followed him around the complex causing Martin some concern for his safety as witness number 8 mentioned. Martin had no gun or knife he could only attack GZ with his cell phone, his tea can or his skittles. Obviously the only way he could defend HIS RIGHT was to attack Zimmerman, especially if he saw the gun beforehand ... But we will never know.

[mickey100]

.. I am sure TM would not have attacked if GZ had not followed him around the complex causing Martin some concern for his safety as witness number 8 mentioned. Martin had no gun or knife he could only attack GZ with his cell phone, his tea can or his skittles. Obviously the only way he could defend HIS RIGHT was to attack Zimmerman, especially if he saw the gun beforehand ... But we will never know.

I agree - the self defense laws apply to both persons in this case! TM must have felt threatened by this guy following him, making Zimm an aggressor in a sense. And the fact that Zimm had a loaded gun on his person when he followed Zimm adds to the sense he was an aggressor. From all accounts, TM did not give Zimm cause to be followed. He was dressed in a sweatshirt, chinos, and sneakers, hardly "Gang" attire. He was walking in the rain, talking on his cell phone. When he realized he was being followed, TM ran to escape, but Zimm kept on following. After that, the facts are murky, and witnesses disagree about what happened. Add to that a sloppy police investigation as far as how the evidence was handled, photos taken, blood samples not taken, and I too think it will be difficult to come up with a murder conviction. Manslaughter, perhaps. Had the police done a better job of investigating, it might have been easier to corroborate (or not) Zimm's story. Now, we have little except his word, and he's lied about at least one thing, so there is plenty of room for skepticism as far as his testimony.

Had he just taken the time to identify himself and ask Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood, or asked him if he needed assistance, things could have been so much different. Instead he had to play "super cop", and look where that got him.

[gomoho]

Lots of assumptions going on here - hope the jury can avoid that and as someone said use common sense and not emotion.

[NJblue]

You are wrong then they both had that right. I am sure TM would not have attacked if GZ had not followed him around the complex causing Martin some concern for his safety as witness number 8 mentioned. Martin had no gun or knife he could only attack GZ with his cell phone, his tea can or his skittles. Obviously the only way he could defend HIS RIGHT was to attack Zimmerman, especially if he saw the gun beforehand ... But we will never know.

Using your own quote of the self defense laws:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force,

The theory that you put forth - that Martin attacked Zimmerman because he was being followed, does not rise to the "meet force with force" standard of the self defense law. Being followed does not constitute being attacked and does not give one permission to attack the other person.

[Monkei]

Using your own quote of the self defense laws:



The theory that you put forth - that Martin attacked Zimmerman because he was being followed, does not rise to the "meet force with force" standard of the self defense law. Being followed does not constitute being attacked and does not give one permission to attack the other person.

That is not my own quote, it is the law.

Yes it didn't rise to that standard of the law, but then again he didn't shoot the cop wanna be. I am afraid that I would disagree with you on whether he did not have the right ... We will never know because dead men can't speak.

[coolkayaker1]

I don't know if he's guilty or not, but I do know that I'm getting older and whether he did it or not doesn't change that fact at all.

[mickey100]

That is not my own quote, it is the law.

Yes it didn't rise to that standard of the law, but then again he didn't shoot the cop wanna be. I am afraid that I would disagree with you on whether he did not have the right ... We will never know because dead men can't speak.

:BigApplause:

[rubicon]

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law is based on a dichotomy and as such the jury will have only one of two choices. The operative word is "reasonable".
If the jury find that Zimmerman was correct in that he had "reasonable believe that his actions were necessary then he will be set free. Conversely if the jury finds that his actions were "unreasonable" then he will be convicted as charged.

The jury will be charged to judge what the reasonable person would do if faced with the facts presented Zimmerman's .

If Zimmerman does win he can thank his lawyer whom I believe is doing an excellent job of presenting this case to the jury.

I am not enamored with the Judge

[buggyone]

Zimmerman is claiming self defense - not "the stand your ground" defense.

There is a big difference between the two!

[dillywho]

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law is based on a dichotomy and as such the jury will have only one of two choices. The operative word is "reasonable".
If the jury find that Zimmerman was correct in that he had "reasonable believe that his actions were necessary then he will be set free. Conversely if the jury finds that his actions were "unreasonable" then he will be convicted as charged.

The jury will be charged to judge what the reasonable person would do if faced with the facts presented Zimmerman's .

If Zimmerman does win he can thank his lawyer whom I believe is doing an excellent job of presenting this case to the jury.

I am not enamored with the Judge


This trial is based on self defense, not stand your ground. I personally think that GZ's attorney decided to go with self defense because there would be more doubt about which one was standing his ground.

In trying to keep an open mind about the whole thing, I think this business of self defense comes up because GZ shot TM when he was down to keep him from getting to his gun when he said that he thought TM was trying to get it. He did not shoot him just because he got punched in the nose and was getting beat up. Big difference. Unfortunately, at least for me, is about GZ lying on numerous occasions and the embellishments he provided and speaks volumes as to his credibility. With all that went on about hiding the newer passport, trying to hide monies (even from his own counsel), and not even speaking up when he knew his wife was lying speaks volumes for his character. Just remember, too, all of this is based on what GZ has had to say since the other one is dead and cannot rebut any of it.

I think the judge is doing an excellent job following the law. As for her being the judge, it kinda goes back to the old adage of "be careful what you ask for". Remember, there were two others before her.

[gomoho]

If this case is about self-defense how can anyone doubt what happened after the professional witness forensic medical examiner testified today. Any could someone please tell me why Trayvon didn't have a mark on him???

Remember this is not about who started it, but was GZ justified in shooting Travon 'cause he feared for his life?

[Barefoot]

If this case is about self-defense how can anyone doubt what happened after the professional witness forensic medical examiner testified today.

The Forensic Medical Examiner hit it out of the park today for the Defense team.

[SpicyCajunPugs]

The defense is right now at this hour (after 9 p.m.) trying on live TV to still get in the text messages and photos of Trayvon Martin trying to buy a gun, fighting, threatening people, and marijuana use...Stay tuned !!!

[capecodbob]

Been watching the whole trial. He is NOT GUILTY!
Not even close!
But it ain't over for Zimmerman. Expect Martin's parents to start a civil suit and you might even see Eric Holder get involved.
They will (the Martin believers) track and attack George for years. These people will ignore the verdict as they have decided what it is.
The race baiting is at a fever pitch!
BB

[DougB]

Tough ending tonight. Judge Nelson practically walked out on the defense.

[SpicyCajunPugs]

The Judge unbelievably just walked out on the defense at 10 p.m. and will most likely deny all their requests again. And she ordered them to be in court before 8 a.m. even though they have no time to prepare. As a paralegal she is setting herself up for an Appellate reversal bigtime if Zimmerman is convicted. I am seriously wondering if she has been threatened or if she is afraid of retribution.

[buggyone]

Look at reality.

Scene most likely went down as Zimmerman sees Martin, calls police, follows Martin, gets in Martins face by asking why he is there, Martin gets back in Zimmermans face and pops him in the nose; they tussel, Martin is getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman uses his gun to end the fight.

Jury will decide if Zimmerman did the right thing first by following Martin and challenging him and then by shooting him when getting the worst end of the inevitable fight.

Could be actual self-defense, probably not murder, maybe manslaughter.

Jury will decide...but will also have to keep in mind (and not part of justice) how the public will react. This is NOT like the Casey Anthony case where even though the wrong verdict came out but there would be no public "demonstrations". There more than likely will be public reaction (in some manner) if Zimmerman is set free. Best thing for jury to do is to convict, Zimmerman goes to the slammer and gets out in a few years on appeal. May not be justice but may work out the best way possible. Who knows?

[DougB]

Hard job for all of them. Don West said he can't physically keep up with the pace. Looked like he wanted to throw something

[dillywho]

If this case is about self-defense how can anyone doubt what happened after the professional witness forensic medical examiner testified today. Any could someone please tell me why Trayvon didn't have a mark on him???

Remember this is not about who started it, but was GZ justified in shooting Travon 'cause he feared for his life?

Don't know the actual explanation for no marks, but it looks like for all his bravado, GZ made absolutely no effort to defend himself when he was getting beat up. Only when he "said" TM went for his gun, did he make any effort to defend himself. If, in fact, he was the one doing the screaming, how were those screams so clear and uninterrupted until the shot if TM were covering his mouth and nose? It was also surmised that the blood from GZ's nose was draining back into his throat with him on the ground. At that rate, how is it possible to be crying out for help and screaming, either. Too much just does not add up.

Based on some of today's testimony, it seems pretty disgraceful that nobody even bothered to check if TM was dead. Regardless of the fact that he was mortally wounded, the forensics pathologist today testified that he could have lived up to 3 minutes after being shot....lived being defined as still having some heartbeat. He also said that he could have moved maybe 15 seconds after being shot. If GZ turned him over, got on top of him and spread his arms to be sure he couldn't come up with a weapon, did that take less than 15 seconds? If longer, then how and when did TM move his arms back under him like they were when the police got there? Other people were there looking at TM and one was even taking pictures, yet no one saw his arms move? Something else that doesn't compute for me.

[dillywho]

Look at reality.

Scene most likely went down as Zimmerman sees Martin, calls police, follows Martin, gets in Martins face by asking why he is there, Martin gets back in Zimmermans face and pops him in the nose; they tussel, Martin is getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman uses his gun to end the fight.

Jury will decide if Zimmerman did the right thing first by following Martin and challenging him and then by shooting him.

Could be actual self-defense, probably not murder, maybe manslaughter.

Jury will decide...but will also have to keep in mind (and not part of justice) how the public will react. This is NOT like the Casey Anthony case where even though the wrong verdict came out but there would be no public "demonstrations". There more than likely will be public reaction (in some manner) if Zimmerman is set free. Best thing for jury to do is to convict, Zimmerman goes to the slammer and gets out in a few years on appeal. May not be justice but may work out the best way possible. Who knows?

There were many demonstrations before, during, and after the Anthony trial. Do you not remember all the people at all hours of the night and day at the Anthony's house yelling, screaming, grabbing at them, trampling down the neighbors yards in addition? What about all the ruckus at the courthouse with people jockeying for seats and fighting in the lines? What about all the protesters out in front with all their signs and shouting? How about all the people that showed up the night she was released? The worst thing about all that is that they hauled their own kids out at all hours to have to witness their bad behavior. Great training and examples for those little ones, huh? When asked about what he thought, one little boy's response was, "What my Mommy said." He had no clue.

Regardless of the verdict, I hope that neither side will do a repeat performance of the Anthony fiasco.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Look at reality.

Scene most likely went down as Zimmerman sees Martin, calls police, follows Martin, gets in Martins face by asking why he is there, Martin gets back in Zimmermans face and pops him in the nose; they tussel, Martin is getting the best of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman uses his gun to end the fight.

Jury will decide if Zimmerman did the right thing first by following Martin and challenging him and then by shooting him when getting the worst end of the inevitable fight.

Could be actual self-defense, probably not murder, maybe manslaughter.

Jury will decide...but will also have to keep in mind (and not part of justice) how the public will react. This is NOT like the Casey Anthony case where even though the wrong verdict came out but there would be no public "demonstrations". There more than likely will be public reaction (in some manner) if Zimmerman is set free. Best thing for jury to do is to convict, Zimmerman goes to the slammer and gets out in a few years on appeal. May not be justice but may work out the best way possible. Who knows?

Reality? Really? This is your version of what likely went down. The fact that they were in the vicinity of Zimmerman's car when the scuffle and shooting occurred would seem to contradict your scenario.
As I understand it, Zimmerman called to the police while following Martin. He told the police that he was following him and the police said, "We don't need you to do that." At that point Zimmerman broke off his pursuit and headed back to his car. As he approached his car, Martin came from somewhere and started demanding to know why he followed him. Martin began getting in his face and yelling, "You're going to die tonight". Some initiated physical contact. Martin ended up on top of Zimmerman pummeling him MMA style at which point Zimmerman, who feared for his life pulled out his gun and shot him.
Now I wasn't there and I haven't heard all the evidence, but this is part of what I did hear and it is a scenario that makes perfect sense.

[Monkei]

Reality? Really? This is your version of what likely went down. The fact that they were in the vicinity of Zimmerman's car when the scuffle and shooting occurred would seem to contradict your scenario.
As I understand it, Zimmerman called to the police while following Martin. He told the police that he was following him and the police said, "We don't need you to do that." At that point Zimmerman broke off his pursuit and headed back to his car. As he approached his car, Martin came from somewhere and started demanding to know why he followed him. Martin began getting in his face and yelling, "You're going to die tonight". Some initiated physical contact. Martin ended up on top of Zimmerman pummeling him MMA style at which point Zimmerman, who feared for his life pulled out his gun and shot him.
Now I wasn't there and I haven't heard all the evidence, but this is part of what I did hear and it is a scenario that makes perfect sense.

Regardless of the jury decision Zimmerman will be hounded and his life in danger for a long long time. I wish the prosecution would entertain the question on whether Zimmerman would have followed the "suspect" if he did not have a gun on him. I don't know how you get hat question into the trial bu it's a valid question the jury should consider.

So regardless of the result Zimerman will pay a price for his actions which is only fair. Hopefully they take his carry permit away from him he has proven he does not posses the common sense and maturity to have the right to carry.

[Monkei]

There were many demonstrations before, during, and after the Anthony trial. Do you not remember all the people at all hours of the night and day at the Anthony's house yelling, screaming, grabbing at them, trampling down the neighbors yards in addition? What about all the ruckus at the courthouse with people jockeying for seats and fighting in the lines? What about all the protesters out in front with all their signs and shouting? How about all the people that showed up the night she was released? The worst thing about all that is that they hauled their own kids out at all hours to have to witness their bad behavior. Great training and examples for those little ones, huh? When asked about what he thought, one little boy's response was, "What my Mommy said." He had no clue.

Regardless of the verdict, I hope that neither side will do a repeat performance of the Anthony fiasco.

I think you can blame Nancy Grace and the non stop coverage of that trial on TV and in media for the resulting demonstrations. That case was covered way to much and I still have no idea other than Casey was somewhat attractive why that case was covered while others might get local only coverage.

[senior citizen]

We have followed 90% of the live trial. To both of us it seems very clear that it was self defense. In Florida, I assume, as in Vermont, it is legal to carry a firearm. He was registered to carry it. With all the crime we read about in the newspapers, perhaps he was just packing the gun for his own personal feeling of safety.......not necessarily as a vigilante.

It is unfortunate for any "kid" to be killed; shot dead.

However, it truly does sound like Zimmerman "feared for his life".
None of us know how we would react under those circumstances.

Some time ago, I had relayed a story of how "gangs" from the "cities" had come to our small town and a few folks did not take kindly to whatever insinuation that might have meant to them personally............but it's true. Our town was a safe town up until these city gangs (as said by our local police, our state police, out detectives, etc._ ) infiltrated our town and other small towns in our state in order to SELL DRUGS and hook the youth on drugs............awhile back our police chief did a major "drug bust" in one day, rounding up 60 folks and booking them all the same day.

These "youth" come up here, hook up with a dumb young gal, move into her apartment and the rest is history. It's not the same town we raised our family in.

Drugs are a cause of lots of crime. We are glad the judge will allow the part about the marijuana in the system.

When my husband had his jewelry store, near the end of his work life, he kept a gun in the store. He had video cameras to record the unsavory ones who entered.
They did not look like the rest of the Vermonters..........they could be spotted with the huge diamond stud earrings (men) huge gold chains (men), gang style baseball hats (oversized) and shorts hanging down to their ankles......a look the police chief and the rest of us recognized............know this is not P.C. but it's the truth.

The longtime residents are happy that the police are cracking down on drug sellers and gangs. So, packing a gun may be a necessary evil in the interim.

Bad things happen. I don't condone killing or guns.....but when society changes and people do fear for their lives.......again, things happen. We heard that this would never have even gone to trial had not the media and public attention been drawn to it. It would have just been, what it was, a tragic accident. This past week, Zimmerman had a lot of good folks speaking out for him..........positively.

Again, no one wishes to see a teenager dead. It is a sad story for everyone involved, especially the boy's parents. He was unarmed with only a can of juice and some candy skittles.........however, I do believe Zimmerman feared for his life and his head shows it. He was underneath at some point in the struggle.

None of us know what we might do. I am totally NON VIOLENT.....but if I was in Z's shoes, who knows?

[kittygilchrist]

I hope Zimmerman is found not guilty and that no lesser charges are acceptable to the jury.
Do you know that all that is necessary for jury duty is a driver's license? Having served on a couple of juries, let's just say I hope this group understands law better than a lot of drivers understand driving. In the two cases I served on, some jurors were:
gender biased
memory-challenged
unsure of what constituted evidence
afraid to make an independent decision
wanted to protect a female from jail time
apparently unable to use critical thinking

arggh. so called-justice...

[mickey100]

I suspect zimm will get off. That doesn't mean he's innocent, just that due to circumstances and the sloppy police investigation, there wasn't enough evidence to prove what really happened that night. It is troublesome to me that he has lied about a number of things, and so I do not believe all that he says. We will never know the truth.

[Parker]

Zimmerman might never have carried a gun that fateful evening if our justice system wasn't so ineffective at removing criminals from our streets. When I was young, violent people were in jail or were afraid enough of getting caught that they didn't commit the crimes in the first place. Now, everyone gets probation, or insignificant jail time, or early release due to overcrowding of the prisons, or have their charges dropped entirely. Now criminals don't appear to be afraid of getting caught.

All this has led to law-abiding people feeling the need to protect themselves and their neighborhoods. I don't think Zimmerman is a bad guy, just a guy who was trying to protect his neighborhood, and made some poor decisions in that effort. Why are we not all outraged that so many criminals run the streets? Maybe Trayvon would be alive today if we weren't all so concerned about our safety that we feel we have to rely on ourselves for protection.

[gomoho]

Look at reality.


Best thing for jury to do is to convict, Zimmerman goes to the slammer and gets out in a few years on appeal. May not be justice but may work out the best way possible. Who knows?

Wonder if you would think that way if it was you or a loved one on trial???

[senior citizen]

Zimmerman might never have carried a gun that fateful evening if our justice system wasn't so ineffective at removing criminals from our streets. When I was young, violent people were in jail or were afraid enough of getting caught that they didn't commit the crimes in the first place. Now, everyone gets probation, or insignificant jail time, or early release due to overcrowding of the prisons, or have their charges dropped entirely. Now criminals don't appear to be in the much afraid of getting caught.

All this has led to law-abiding people feeling the need to protect themselves and their neighborhoods. I don't think Zimmerman is a bad guy, just a guy who was trying to protect his neighborhood, and made some poor decisions in that effort. Why are we not all outraged that so many criminals run the streets? Maybe Trayvon would be alive today if we weren't all so concerned about our safety that we feel we have to rely on ourselves for protection.

I agree totally with all that you have posted above.

We were actually raised in a city. We often recollect how as kids, our parents never warned us not to walk around our city......we did it all the time, totally unharmed. That was the 1950's.

When my mom went back to work, she had to walk to work through some pretty seedy neighborhoods with taverns, etc. and guys loitering outside.
She got out at midnight and had to retrace her steps back home.......
No one ever bothered her. She was a very petite attractive young lady.

My dad couldn't go and get her as he had to watch the children, who were sleeping at midnight.

The bar crowd seemed to know better. They never bothered anyone.
They feared the law back in those days.

Things have changed. We have young family members who live in and around college towns in North Carolina, etc. and other southern states.
The newspapers always show how young coeds are kidnapped, raped, murdered, etc.............a totally different world. And, there is no reverse discrimination to cry out against their perpetrators.

Just like in Egypt, where they are constantly protesting and rioting.....
its the squeaky wheel gets the grease..........

There is no rioting in our streets when a young coed gets attacked.
Everyone is afraid to speak up nowadays..........

With all the "smash and grab" robberies in jewelry stores all over our country, esp. when the gold prices soared.......my husband felt safer "packing a gun" as no doubt George Zimmerman did.

The questionables "from the cities" would case our store....walking around looking in the cases, but as soon as they saw the video cameras, they would hastily leave.

On the national "videos" of the smash and grab looters.......they all looked the same and fit the "gang profile" in dress, etc.

We never had our heads in the sand........although, if truth be told, we never thought our beloved adopted state would be so infiltrated by crime from "away". Luckily, they stand out like sore thumbs up here and luckily we have a young Dad who is the police chief.....a man proud of his town and wanting to keep it the way it was........as do all the detectives up and down our state.

[mulligan]

Regardless of the jury decision Zimmerman will be hounded and his life in danger for a long long time. I wish the prosecution would entertain the question on whether Zimmerman would have followed the "suspect" if he did not have a gun on him. I don't know how you get hat question into the trial bu it's a valid question the jury should consider.

So regardless of the result Zimerman will pay a price for his actions which is only fair. Hopefully they take his carry permit away from him he has proven he does not posses the common sense and maturity to have the right to carry.

"common sense" and "maturity" are not included in the criteria used to grant a permit to carry. The jury will not be allowed to judge based on hypothetical situations.

[graciegirl]

I suspect zimm will get off. That doesn't mean he's innocent, just that due to circumstances and the sloppy police investigation, there wasn't enough evidence to prove what really happened that night. It is troublesome to me that he has lied about a number of things, and so I do not believe all that he says. We will never know the truth.
I think many decisions about this case by lay people with their minds made up were made long ago before the trial.

I am pretty sure we will have organized riots after too. And vandalism and blood shed, although all they do is cause more distress to all, solve nothing and build hatred.

I decided that a long time based on my beliefs and my common sense.

Jumping to conclusions is what we seniors do well, and some with more concern and common sense and fairness than others. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, than it isn't an elephant. Except now because of political correctness, we aren't allowed to call it a duck.

(Talking about riots)

[Monkei]

"common sense" and "maturity" are not included in the criteria used to grant a permit to carry. The jury will not be allowed to judge based on hypothetical situations.

If only we had a process to truly vett a person to determine whether the should be able to posses a permit ... Oh wait we can't do that.

[gomoho]

If Zimmerman is convicted there are so many grounds for appeal based on the judge's rulings. Part of Zimmerman's defense is that Trayvon was the aggressor, but the judge will no allow testimony showing his aggressive side.

Also seems like she is more interested in getting jury deliberation started than being sure the time is given to due process. Wonder if she is being pressured to get this over with?

[tucson]

If Zimmerman is convicted there are so many grounds for appeal based on the judge's rulings. Part of Zimmerman's defense is that Trayvon was the aggressor, but the judge will no allow testimony showing his aggressive side.

Also seems like she is more interested in getting jury deliberation started than being sure the time is given to due process. Wonder if she is being pressured to get this over with?

Yes she is, based on what happened before this trial, activists created a rigorous campaign to push this into a racial case. To the point of going to the Governor and possibly the Fed's. That's my personal opinion based on what I've gleaned from reading about, and watching the trial.

[Happinow]

I would have thought the judge would have allowed the jury to hear the testimony regarding Trayvon's text messages and Facebook pages. After all, she allowed it to be know that GZ was training in the gym and MMA, fighting and other related activities. It's highly unlikely that someone would have gotten a hold of TM's cell and texted on it. Those texts were most likely sent by him and the FB postings were posted by him.These texts and posts are indicative of his character at times.....aggressive.

[USSGompers]

The army prosecutor who taught Zimmerman in a 2010 college class on criminal litigation, testified that he covered Florida's self-defense and "Stand Your Ground" laws in his 2010 course. Army Captain Alexis Carter said Zimmerman "was probably one of the better students in the class," calling him an "A" student. In other words, Zimmerman was well versed in Stand Your Ground and was lying when he said we was not familiar with SYG.

The "Castle Doctrine" was signed into law on October 1, 2005 by Gov. Jeb Bush.

It was later nicknamed the "Stand your Ground" law. That is not the law's official name and not used when taught in school.

[mickey100]

Wonder if you would think that way if it was you or a loved one on trial???

Wonder if you would think that way if it was your loved one that had been killed.

[janmcn]

I think many decisions about this case by lay people with their minds made up were made long ago before the trial.

I am pretty sure we will have organized riots after too. And vandalism and blood shed, although all they do is cause more distress to all, solve nothing and build hatred.

I decided that a long time based on my beliefs and my common sense.

Jumping to conclusions is what we seniors do well, and some with more concern and common sense and fairness than others. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, than it isn't an elephant. Except now because of political correctness, we aren't allowed to call it a duck.

(Talking about riots)


Who will be conducting these "organized riots" if George Zimmerman is convicted? Will it be Hispanics? Or maybe fat people? Or bus loads of Village residents who support Zimmerman? Or maybe Twinkie makers?

The only people I hear inciting riots are posters on this forum. Did you attend any of the peaceful demonstations that led to Zimmerman's arrest?

[ilovetv]

The photo and story contained in this link make it quite clear who is "inciting" people:

Broward County Sheriff's Office Prepares Zimmerman Verdict Riot Plan (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/08/Broward-county-sheriff-riots)

[Patty55]

The photo and story contained in this link make it quite clear who is "inciting" people:

Broward County Sheriff's Office Prepares Zimmerman Verdict Riot Plan (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/08/Broward-county-sheriff-riots)

Yep, that's what he does.

Anyone else remember Crown Hts, Tawana Brawley and Howard Beach?

[gomoho]

Wonder if you would think that way if it was your loved one that had been killed.

I'm not sure what you are specifically referring to - if my loved one was the victim I would want the judge to follow everything to the letter of the law so a good, fair trial would be held, all the information provided so there is no room for appeal if a conviction comes in. I wouldn't want the defendant sent to jail to prevent the worst from happening in the community. That is certainly not how our justice system works.

[gomoho]

Looks like another home run for the defense with this expert witness. He is almost making the closing statement for the defense.

[tucson]

This case IS definately politically motivated! From The Washington,DC to Tallahassee,to Sanford...

[dillywho]

Many people have said that following Martin was not illegal for GZ to do. I think that goes to how he was following...perhaps menacingly? There was a man yesterday that was afraid on the highway because someone started following him and called 911. He was on the phone with them when the guy caught up to him and attacked. Did that guy break the law by following in such a manner as to instill fear in this man?

My biggest concern with GZ getting out of his car and "following" someone who he had already expressed fear of, is why? He had never followed any of the others on foot when he called about their suspicious behavior to the NEN. If he truly thought he was about to see a crime be committed, why didn't he call 911. That is an emergency and warrants a quicker response than simply dialing the NEN.

I don't care if GZ was not as fit as TM, he seemingly never made any effort to defend himself. There were 4 ladies approached by a carjacker at a Publix yesterday and they all fought back. One was even 80 years old! GZ was 28 at the time. Of course, this is something the jury will never know about until after the trial.

Sorry, but I just think that had GZ done what he was supposed to do and then gone on to his shopping errand, this would not even be a discussion and would never have become a political agenda for anyone. I just think GZ is not the sharpest knife in the block and wants so badly to be somebody. I don't think his childhood was any picnic, either. Maybe that's part of it.

I just sincerely hope that the jury does not have to live in fear for whatever decision they render. Too many people don't realize just what it is to serve on a jury and not have every analysis, public opinion, newscast, etc. at their disposal to consider. Their considerations are very limited and they cannot convict or acquit on personal feelings or courtroom emotions. Jurors have the hardest job of all and should have the highest respect from everyone.

[mickey100]

I'm not sure what you are specifically referring to - if my loved one was the victim I would want the judge to follow everything to the letter of the law so a good, fair trial would be held, all the information provided so there is no room for appeal if a conviction comes in. I wouldn't want the defendant sent to jail to prevent the worst from happening in the community. That is certainly not how our justice system works.

All of us want the law to be followed, and any criminal to be sent to jail. We all want the justice system to function correctly. That is not the question. Your posts have been pretty much pro-defense. The point is, if your husband had gone to the store to buy you skittles, was chased by a black person, ended up confronting that aggressor, and was then shot to death, you might look at things a little differently. Just saying.

[Bucco]

I think many decisions about this case by lay people with their minds made up were made long ago before the trial.

I am pretty sure we will have organized riots after too. And vandalism and blood shed, although all they do is cause more distress to all, solve nothing and build hatred.

I decided that a long time based on my beliefs and my common sense.

Jumping to conclusions is what we seniors do well, and some with more concern and common sense and fairness than others. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, than it isn't an elephant. Except now because of political correctness, we aren't allowed to call it a duck.

(Talking about riots)


You are spot on with this post, and despite the sarcastic mean spirited response you get, you nailed it and it makes some uncomfortable. You do not deserve that kind of sarcasm and venom in reply to your opinion.

This has been decided by folks IN ADVANCE, because it was a political SHOW from the beginning.

If you read the law and what the police were required to do in cases like this, and what they were trying to do......THEN, the politicians took over from them. If you read the daily history of the case the police were trying to do their job then got ambushed. Just imagine the meetings that have now been made public that were held in the Mayors office with the family of Martin and his lawyer, with no police presence nor any charges yet filed and an invstigation still in progress !!!!

Once the national media made it left versus right, it was all over for JUSTICE There would be none.

The sarcasm you received in your response showed the naive and either lack of knowledge or refusal to accept the knowledge of the key players in this game. Mr Sharpton has made a living with cases such as this.....and he has already implied, threatened or whatever words you want to use about this consequences of a verdict that he does not like. He plays on racial divide, and will always do so.

Do not allow that kind of response to deter you...you are correct as to what this case is about, and the reason you feel the sides were chosen BEFORE facts, is because you are correct......it has become a political football and all the talk of justice and facts is a waste of time.

Now I have to stop as I was warned about saying this so often.....instead of really looking at what we have been manipulated into this case, we stick our heads in the sand as if we were not involved in a political discussion.

Had the politicians stayed out of this and allowed the police to do what they are paid to do, we might have had a logical and sane conclusion. That opportunity is past.

[Bucco]

Just for the record....not an opinion piece....

"A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents."

Read more: DOJ provided security for anti-Zimmerman protests | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/doj-provided-security-for-anti-zimmerman-protests/#ixzz2YftqOiyU)

"Sharpton, who promoted the Tawana Brawley hoax in the 1980s and in 1995 led a protest against the “white interloper” owner of a Harlem clothing store that ended in a deadly shooting rampage at the store, was a featured speaker at the March 31 rally, called “The March for Trayvon Martin,” where he advocated for Zimmerman’s prosecution."

Read more: DOJ provided security for anti-Zimmerman protests | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/10/doj-provided-security-for-anti-zimmerman-protests/#ixzz2Yfu7kLXe)

The underline and italics under the word HOAX was mine, and not in the article.


Cannot wait for the promised statements !!

[tucson]

Where is Sharpton and the DOJ where there are SO many murders in Orlando and other cities in Florida between young black men killing each other???????

[Monkei]

Where is Sharpton and the DOJ where there are SO many murders in Orlando and other cities in Florida between young black men killing each other???????

You have a problem with all this I guess.

[Monkei]

The "Castle Doctrine" was signed into law on October 1, 2005 by Gov. Jeb Bush.

It was later nicknamed the "Stand your Ground" law. That is not the law's official name and not used when taught in school.

But the law has the term "stand your ground" in it.

[gomoho]

Where is Sharpton and the DOJ where there are SO many murders in Orlando and other cities in Florida between young black men killing each other???????

They don't acknowledge "black on black" killings because it doesn't serve their purpose. 91% of black men killed are killed by other black men. Where is the outrage and intervention for that fact??? What are they doing to remedy that problem?

[gomoho]

All of us want the law to be followed, and any criminal to be sent to jail. We all want the justice system to function correctly. That is not the question. Your posts have been pretty much pro-defense. The point is, if your husband had gone to the store to buy you skittles, was chased by a black person, ended up confronting that aggressor, and was then shot to death, you might look at things a little differently. Just saying.

I would want justice done. You are assuming George Zimmerman was the aggressor. If my husband attacked that person and was shot by a white man or black man or the man in the moon I would have to wonder what the hell he was thinking.

There is no definitive proof GZ was chasing Trayvon. When Trayvon started running GZ got out of his car to see where he was headed. If Trayvon was in fact running why didn't he make it home in the 2 minute time period that is unaccounted for? Where was he? Stalking GZ???

None of us but GZ were there and will never know what really happened. You can only go on the forensic evidence and all indications are Trayvon was the aggressor and GZ shot in self defense.

And so the jury will decide.

[buckscounty]

Not guilty......

[tucson]

They don't acknowledge "black on black" killings because it doesn't serve their purpose. 91% of black men killed are killed by other black men. Where is the outrage and intervention for that fact??? What are they doing to remedy that problem?

Exactly! That's what I have been thinking about. Sharpton, and others are just trouble makers, they still think it's 1950s and 60's where blacks had practically no rights. This trial is all about race and gun control. Why doesn't Sharpton and other civil rights activists focus on the fact that young black men are the majority in prisons in our country and come up w/a plan to end that problem???

[capecodbob]

Did Justice Department support anti-Zimmerman protests after Martin shooting? | Fox News (http://fxn.ws/12EJ7d9)

[gocubsgo]

Absolutely not guilty...total self defense!

[AJ32162]

Exactly! That's what I have been thinking about. Sharpton, and others are just trouble makers, they still think it's 1950s and 60's where blacks had practically no rights. This trial is all about race and gun control. Why doesn't Sharpton and other civil rights activists focus on the fact that young black men are the majority in prisons in our country and come up w/a plan to end that problem???


"Reverends" Sharpton and Jackson are just a coupe of do-nothing talking heads. To them, racial disharmony is livelihood from which they profit handsomely. The more they stir the racial hatred pot the fuller their coffers get!

[golf2140]

The Judge should be dismissed !!!!!!!!!

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Regardless of the jury decision Zimmerman will be hounded and his life in danger for a long long time. I wish the prosecution would entertain the question on whether Zimmerman would have followed the "suspect" if he did not have a gun on him. I don't know how you get hat question into the trial bu it's a valid question the jury should consider.

So regardless of the result Zimerman will pay a price for his actions which is only fair. Hopefully they take his carry permit away from him he has proven he does not posses the common sense and maturity to have the right to carry.

Why is that a valid question? What someone might have done if is not a valid question at all. It calls for conjecture and has no place in a court of law. The law is only interested in what actually happened not what might have happened.
I suspect that the prosecution won't entertain that question because it wouldn't be allowed by the judge.

[manaboutown]

"Reverends" Sharpton and Jackson are just a coupe of do-nothing talking heads. To them, racial disharmony is livelihood from which they profit handsomely. The more they stir the racial hatred pot the fuller their coffers get!

:agree:

[lady_tattler]

One of the contentious part is the sequence of events. My take and I have posted it on my Google+ is a crime camera would have helped a lot.

It will take us years perhaps decades of technology but we could use an eye in the sky (satellite perhaps) or a simple cat's eye that when activated can record all those details and stored online real time so no one can defile what really happened.

Right now, it's all colors and hues.
_______
Thanks, this is my first post. Great to be here.

[senior citizen]

Did anyone see the young female witness for the defense.....Olivia ?
She and her husband moved out of the same development after her "scare".

To paraphrase, she had been home alone with her first born infant son when she heard banging on her front door; not having a peephole.....she went upstairs and saw two African American males.......she was frightened and called her mom who told her to call 911 or the police. Long story short, she was told to stay in the far corner of the upstairs bedroom.........meanwhile, ahead of the police arrival, the two guys had broken in to her town home and fled with a camera and laptop but had no luck in disconnecting the t.v...........all I'm saying is that the "climate" of fear in that particular neighborhood....and other places in Florida.....can make it understandable why George Zimmerman might have feared for his life. There had been criminal activity around .........so I would think that it would always be in the back of one's mind......to be ever vigilant.........or else move away.

We thought she was a good witness for the defense....to help understand the climate at the time.

[senior citizen]

I don't know how I feel about this case. My family told us kids not to be where someone could misinterpret your actions, like in a dark alley in the middle of the night. And stay away from trouble and trouble will stay away from you.

I don't know what profiling really means, jumping to judgment based on a persons appearance and whereabouts? I don't know. But I just wish they had both ended up with black eyes and broken noses and continued on their lives wherever their lives were taking them.

I don't know what I would have thought if I ran into George Zimmerman with a gun in the dark or he ran into me with a hoody and something in my hand in the middle of the night.

I just don't know what to think.

We all react dramatically different in the dark when we are alarmed than when we are at the breakfast table.

Overkill is very deep word.

Where in the Cinci burbs were you residing when the Cincinnati riots were going on?

We had been made aware of the situation long before we left Vermont......but it's very different when one is in the thick of things, living in or near Cincinnati.

We had the misfortune of getting "lost" in Cinci enroute to our son's home when he was working at Proctor and Gamble right out of grad school.

We were a bit frightened ourselves. We definitely had taken the wrong exit.

I can totally comprehend George's fear for his life.

We also can remember from our "youth" the climate surrounding the riots in Newark, New Jersey with the crime in its aftermath..........many people became hyper vigilant. That was the 1960's.

Now it's Detroit and Chicago with the crime problems.

We predict George will either be acquitted.....or face some lesser charge.
He carried the gun with a permit. He feared for his life. The kid was taller than he was and banging his head into the ground.

Had he not been suspended from his own high school, the young man would not have been in Sanford Florida with his dad and the dad's girlfriend. I think they should use the marijuana in his system.....in their closing arguments. Drugs can change a person's personality. Everyone is different.

We've had more than a few druggie types infiltrate our town.
Thankfully, our police chief is doing a great job...........

[senior citizen]

If people weren't watching, they wouldn't be showing it on four channels. I haven't watched any Zimmerman coverage. I hate wasting good daylight hours. However I have to admit that I got hooked on both the Arias trial and the Casey Anthony trial. I guess watching pure evil is addictive.

Ditto about wasting good daylight hours. I agree with you totally.

However, we have had daily rain every single day in July.......plus pretty close to daily rain in June, May, etc. We need Noah's Ark. Flash flooding all over plus in neighboring states. Our governor says it is the worst in our history.

The court trials at least challenge our brains to think.......compared to the other inane daily shows.

Too bad we will miss Jodi's August "repeat" trial as we will be gone to Maine on vacation with all of the kids and grandkids......for two weeks.

Guess they will show her ultimate sentence on the evening news.

p.s.
Actually, the first trial we ever watched was Casey Anthony's......I followed Caylee's disappearance via the Orlando Sentinel from day one.

I think George disposed of his grand daughter's body; I do believe Casey had multiple personalities , thus her "imaginary friends" poster that Jose Baez put up at the end. It probably was a pool accident. All of that stuff about her drugging the kid to go partying.....was media hype. However, that said, she had some pretty shifty friends who were never called to testify very much.........I wonder if there will be a retrial. I had heard that there might be a redo as a "federal crime".......something in the realm of child neglect..........not murder per se.......or molestation of a child????
Perhaps the friends will then be called back. Casey definitely had psychological issues from her own childhood........and her mom was in denial about all of the family dynamics.

[senior citizen]

Not that it should matter, but I think Casey Anthony and Jodi Arias, being attractive young women, were both "easy on the eyes". And I think their appearance affected the Jury perception of whether they would be capable of a violent crime. I don't think Zimmerman makes a good impression as he sits there with his impassive expression. Not that he can change the way he looks, just an observation.


All through the trial I did believe that Jodi was a victim of domestic emotional violence; that she played along with it to snag him into marrying her.

However, after seeing the LIFETIME MOVIE and the way that her crime against Travis was committed........if that was truly based on forensics and what the police really think happened in that bathroom.........then she is very guilty.

To have committed that much carnage in a few short minutes.....is hard to take in.

She could have chosen to NOT return to the scene of domestic abuse. She could have cut all the ties that bind. It was her choice to return. There was no good reason to return to Travis........

He was not a saint himself, even though he supposedly was a Bishop.
It often seems that the very rigid and strict rules of religion in general creates these warped perspectives on love and such. All religions with man made rules.

I don't believe it was premeditated though.

Something must have "snapped" in her mind when she fully realized he was going on vacation with the gal he was considering as a good pure Mormon wife.

She has ruined so many lives........including her own. Another sad story.

[senior citizen]

I think it is about both.

If I felt afraid of someone, or thought someone was behaving suspiciously, being a woman, I would leave them ALONE and call the police. Unless they were trying to hurt my family or me and who knows what I would do. I would probably have profiled him as a young punk wearing a hoody walking around in the middle of the night. His color could have been purple or bright green. I would look at and wonder what that kid was doing in a hoody in the middle of the night.

I would end up being hit with my own gun or shooting someone or something I didn't aim at. I am an emotional women.
I know what I can do and what I can't do. I don't want a gun in my home, everyone gets madder than hell at someone at some time in their lives and they do NOT behave rationally. EVERYONE.

It is a mess, the whole situation. Again, not easy to figure it out.

I'm pretty sure that I read he was wearing a "hoody" because it was raining out.

I also do not believe in using guns; have never fired a gun. Anti gun myself.

However, our state is a big hunting state. My husband has always had guns and still has guns. Used to be a hunter.

He brought a gun into his jewelry store, for protection of himself and his sales associates, after all the media attention to "smash and grabs" meaning a certain element , seen on video camera, breaking cases in jewelry stores in Albany N.Y. area and other regions........there was a rash of these jewelry store heists when the gold and platinum prices soared.

He never had to shoot or kill anyone......but our state does allow people to pack a firearm.

Back in the 1960's my sweet little 50 year old mother in law at the time said she would get herself a gun and shoot anyone who came looting her house. She sure didn't fit the profile of a crazed gun owner as I recall, but she was ready to defend her modest home from what was going on in the cities at the time.....the riots..........with tons of looting. So, one never knows how they might respond when they perceive danger.

[senior citizen]

By now we have the testimony of the police who said that indeed, Zimmerman' clothes were more wet on the back than the front and also had grass blades on the back. That, plus the closest eye witness claiming that it was Trayvon on top and Zimmerman on the bottom seems to bolster Zimmerman's story.

The other obstacle that the prosecution has to overcome is that even if Trayvon were on the bottom, how did he get face down which was how his body was found? Eyewitness testimony says that the bottom figure was face up during the fight. Also, Trayvon was shot from the front. So, if Zimmerman was on top and shot him in the chest, he would also have to roll him over for him to become face down. None of the witnesses saw anything that would resemble moving the body, nor would there be any reason for Zimmerman to do this.

Maybe more will be revealed, but as of now, the best evidence seems to support Zimmerman's story.

Very very good post. This is exactly how we perceive the situation based on what we've heard and read.........

Are you a N.J. police officer? Our nephew retired from the force.

[gomoho]

[QUOTE=senior citizen;706250]I'm pretty sure that I read he was wearing a "hoody" because it was raining out.

Unfortunately "hoodies" are also worn as a message of intimidation - wanting to portray a persona of hiding or threatening. Don't know if that is why Trayvon was wearing his that night, but then again their is an indoor picture of him with a hoody on.

[senior citizen]

[QUOTE=senior citizen;706250]I'm pretty sure that I read he was wearing a "hoody" because it was raining out.

Unfortunately "hoodies" are also worn as a message of intimidation - wanting to portray a persona of hiding or threatening. Don't know if that is why Trayvon was wearing his that night, but then again their is an indoor picture of him with a hoody on.

I do understand what you are saying. Just responding as far as the weather that evening.

Hey, high school kids up here all wear hoodies....and they are not punks.
I have a few myself....

[graciegirl]

Where in the Cinci burbs were you residing when the Cincinnati riots were going on?

We had been made aware of the situation long before we left Vermont......but it's very different when one is in the thick of things, living in or near Cincinnati.

We had the misfortune of getting "lost" in Cinci enroute to our son's home when he was working at Proctor and Gamble right out of grad school.

We were a bit frightened ourselves. We definitely had taken the wrong exit.

I can totally comprehend George's fear for his life.

We also can remember from our "youth" the climate surrounding the riots in Newark, New Jersey with the crime in its aftermath..........many people became hyper vigilant. That was the 1960's.

Now it's Detroit and Chicago with the crime problems.

We predict George will either be acquitted.....or face some lesser charge.
He carried the gun with a permit. He feared for his life. The kid was taller than he was and banging his head into the ground.

Had he not been suspended from his own high school, the young man would not have been in Sanford Florida with his dad and the dad's girlfriend. I think they should use the marijuana in his system.....in their closing arguments. Drugs can change a person's personality. Everyone is different.

We've had more than a few druggie types infiltrate our town.
Thankfully, our police chief is doing a great job...........

Senior,

If you had read to the end of this thread you would see that my opinion had changed over time as the information in the trial was presented. At the beginning, I was TRYING to place my self in a non judgmental position. But as the information has presented itself, I have changed my mind and feel that Trayvon Martin did attack George Zimmerman. You responded to one of my earlier posts on this matter.

I am aware of riots. And of fear. And of the climate of the downtown area of Cincinnati changing over time. Long ago the area called "Over the Rhine" in downtown Cincinnati, once a lovely place inhabited by hard working German immigrants has now become a place to be feared to drive in at night. There is a drug culture there and bad things happening and people murdering each other over drugs. I remember reading in The Cincinnati Enquirer a long time ago that we were on the drug corridor and that Detroit was being overrun by drug users and drug dealers and they were coming our way.

I wish that the young men could find jobs they liked and wanted to work hard to find success and not be lured by the dangerous life of easy money dealing drugs. Each year the Cincinnati Enquirer shows the people murdered downtown. They are mostly young men and have killed each other in the same ugly business.

It is hard not to jump to conclusions when you see an expensive car parked way off in the corner of a Kroger's parking lot in suburbia with a young man sitting inside in the middle of the day and see people coming and going from the car.

I guess that is profiling.

It is a terrible thing to grow old and jump to conclusions and to grow out of the trust and kindness and fairness of youth.

[dillywho]

GZ has told so many different versions of that night. One portion did not vary and that was that he felt that TM was going to get his gun and he got to it first and fired. Based on that, it should be self defense but guilty of total stupidity for not just calling in and then leaving the rest up to actual law enforcement. TM was not in the commission of a crime when spotted by GZ, just looked suspicious to him. He might not have looked suspicious to someone else. That was GZ's judgment alone.

The fact that he was in a fight is not what he has said that made him fear for his life. TM reaching for his gun was. If what he says about that is true, then I don't understand why so much emphasis has been on the fight being his big fear and very little on that part. As a juror, that is what I would question.

[Patty55]

One of the contentious part is the sequence of events. My take and I have posted it on my Google+ is a crime camera would have helped a lot.

It will take us years perhaps decades of technology but we could use an eye in the sky (satellite perhaps) or a simple cat's eye that when activated can record all those details and stored online real time so no one can defile what really happened.

Right now, it's all colors and hues.
_______
Thanks, this is my first post. Great to be here.

SCARY, very scary.

[senior citizen]

Senior,

If you had read to the end of this thread you would see that my opinion had changed over time as the information in the trial was presented. At the beginning, I was TRYING to place my self in a non judgmental position. But as the information has presented itself, I have changed my mind and feel that Trayvon Martin did attack George Zimmerman. You responded to one of my earlier posts on this matter.

I am aware of riots. And of fear. And of the climate of the downtown area of Cincinnati changing over time. Long ago the area called "Over the Rhine" in downtown Cincinnati, once a lovely place inhabited by hard working German immigrants has now become a place to be feared to drive in at night. There is a drug culture there and bad things happening and people murdering each other over drugs. I remember reading in The Cincinnati Enquirer a long time ago that we were on the drug corridor and that Detroit was being overrun by drug users and drug dealers and they were coming our way.

I wish that the young men could find jobs they liked and wanted to work hard to find success and not be lured by the dangerous life of easy money dealing drugs. Each year the Cincinnati Enquirer shows the people murdered downtown. They are mostly young men and have killed each other in the same ugly business.

It is hard not to jump to conclusions when you see an expensive car parked way off in the corner of a Kroger's parking lot in suburbia with a young man sitting inside in the middle of the day and see people coming and going from the car.

I guess that is profiling.

It is a terrible thing to grow old and jump to conclusions and to grow out of the trust and kindness and fairness of youth.

Yes, I eventually did read it to the end...........but I began at the beginning.

I know exactly where you were coming from in trying to be non judgemental.

However, there are times when we have to use our gut instincts and our knowledge of the surroundings.

I had black friends when I was a kid.......as did my mom.
I had Jewish friends and still do; one of whom survived the concentration camps.
I was raised with all ethnic groups, all religious groups, etc.
I learned to judge people on their own personal merits.
There is good and evil in all types of people.

There is also bias against Italians , believe it or not....when folks think they are all like the SOPRANOS as depicted in that popular t.v. show ( which we are watching again as we own all the seasons; hubby loves that show .....believe it's our sixth time )......

As a child I never heard anything of the mob.....but we were raised in a German/Polish neighborhood (which is nowadays Portuguese).

My Italian family lived in New York City, Brooklyn, The Bronx, Staten Island and Long Island, Connecticut, etc. and Massachusetts.

When I was a young mom, already living in Vermont....my Italian aunt and Godmother would call from Brooklyn on occasion.......I still recall my asking her "Is the mob for real? Is there really organized crime such as the Mafia?".........that would have been in the 1970's.

She simply said, "Yes, they exist...but they protect the neighborhoods." "If anyone has a problem, they know who to "go to"...and that was that.

I thought back and do not recall my dad ever mentioning anything about the Mafia in his neighborhood which was Little Italy.

However, later, in hindsight...........I remembered when we were about 19 years old, engaged to be married........and attending the rehearsal dinner of a German school friend of my fiancé's......who was marrying a nice Italian gal.......we were all approaching or had reached age 20 which was the magical age for getting married back then..........

My husband had heard that his friend, who was a truck driver, would tell everyone that they had been approached by the "mob" to transport "hot goods" etc........and that everybody did it. I didn't pay much attention.
This would have been at Port Newark.

He also told me that the bride to be's uncle was in the mob. Ditto.

Before the wedding, she invited us all to go down the Jersey Shore to her uncle's vacation house on the water...........he took us for a speedboat ride which was quite exhilarating if you don't mind all that hairspray we wore back then to get totally yucky. All kinds of strangers were there; not just the family. Expensive home with dock. Very hospitable to us young folks.

She was a sweet gal and her family was middle class like the rest of us.

Now , the large corporation office where I was working as a private secretary (Just like MAD MEN, I can so relate to those times).........had an inventory dept. One of the gals and I would chat at lunchtime.
She happened to be Italian....a bit older than me. She would tell me about her "boyfriend" being in the mob. But that she always felt "protected".......that he hung out at the Italian Club and they sat outdoors (like on the Sopranos at the Pork Store)......and that all the neighbors felt "safe"..........ha ha. Believe me, I couldn't make this up.

Later, at the rehearsal dinner........a month later......guess who was sitting across the table from us????? My friend from work and her boyfriend.

Which means that there was indeed something to the fact that the bride's uncle was in the mob or mafia.
How many "degrees of separation" before we are all connected??????

He was quite handsome, if truth be .told. Very mannerly, a perfect gentleman and sedately dressed.......not overweight like all the Sopranos.

This was 1965. My fiancé was sitting next to me; he was the best man and I was one of the bridesmaids to be.....again, this was the rehearsal dinner....at a restaurant. Her "uncle" who also was her Godfather" was hosting it.......not the parents.

My work friend's boyfriend struck up a conversation with me and asked me if I ever made lasagna........so I proceeded to tell him how I had learned to make it............and it was exactly like he made it. Italian men are taught to cook by their mothers.

Anyway, we all had a pleasant evening.

Comes the day of the wedding...........guess who is my driver?
Him. Mr. Mafia. I had never ridden in a Buick Riviera which was a luxury car at the time and it was like a cloud mobile compared to ours........

He again was mannerly and a gentleman. Admired my bridesmaids gown.
He had to be 25 to 30 to my 19. Anyway, my now husband was the best man and transported with the groom.........turned out to be a great wedding..........we often wonder what became of everyone......we kept in touch for a few years until we all had children and moved out of state.

Never really thought about it again until we started watching THE SOPRANOS..........as hubby says, not all are killers.....some just move hot stuff or own stores that take in hot stuff. We never did. Honest Injun.
Other than my Godmother, whom I asked, none of my dad's family ever even mentioned the Mafia.......and I do not condone organized crime.

Just relaying this to say I do not believe in profiling.....but I do rely on my gut instincts.

[collie1228]

Zimmerman: Probably guilty of something, but certainly not murder-2. But is it fair to successfully defend against a murder charge and have the judge allow the jury to convict of something less? Not fair in my opinion, but I'll bet it happens.

Judge: Unbelievably biased against Zimmerman and his defense team. She's a disgrace. Her badgering of Zimmerman and Don West yesterday was the last straw for me. Just unbelievable.

Attorney Mark O'Mara: A really good defense attorney.

Attorney Don West: Not so good. Appears to be out of his league.

Prosecutors: Not sure if they believe in their case or not. They sure have been helpful to the defense throughout the trial.

I'll bet that the jury will be allowed to convict on a lesser charge and Zimmerman will get a few years in prison. This way the state may avoid riots in the streets. Isn't that a sad commentary on our justice system?

[John_W]

Zimmerman: Probably guilty of something, but certainly not murder-2. But is it fair to successfully defend against a murder charge and have the judge allow the jury to convict of something less? Not fair in my opinion, but I'll bet it happens.

Judge: Unbelievably biased against Zimmerman and his defense team. She's a disgrace. Her badgering of Zimmerman and Don West yesterday was the last straw for me. Just unbelievable.

Attorney Mark O'Mara: A really good defense attorney.

Attorney Don West: Not so good. Appears to be out of his league.

Prosecutors: Not sure if they believe in their case or not. They sure have been helpful to the defense throughout the trial.

I'll bet that the jury will be allowed to convict on a lesser charge and Zimmerman will get a few years in prison. This way the state may avoid riots in the streets. Isn't that a sad commentary on our justice system?

Probably guilty of something, what would that be? This entire trial is about whether he committed a crime, I don't see any crime committed. TM committed the crime when he hit GZ in the nose and jumped on him while on the ground.

I agree with you about the Judge. In fact, Judge Nelson has tried so hard not to be the next 'Judge Ito', that she has bent over backwards with her rulings favoring the state. Even with that said, I don't see a conviction because it's just not there. Even though the Sanford Police didn't get to finish their investigation, it's like what Sheriff Lee said, they didn't arrest GZ because no charges were justified. However, the outside agitators ran Lee out of office and got the these bogus charges.

I've been watching trials on Courtv or other channels since they first became televised many years ago. Whether it was Scott Peterson or Jodi Arias. Attorney Don West has been one of the best cross-examiners I've seen. His slow and laid-back style allows the listener time for his question to soak in, and makes the respondent answers confirm his point. Just because West gets into confrontations with the Judge doesn't make him bad. Both West and Mark O'Mara are excellent and if I was ever in need of a defense attorney, they would be my first choices.

[buggyone]

The bet of an ice-cold Yeungling (at Codys) is still open to the first taker who thinks Zimmernan will be found "not guilty" of all charges.

[Bucco]

Probably guilty of something, what would that be? This entire trial is about whether he committed a crime, I don't see any crime committed. TM committed the crime when he hit GZ in the nose and jumped on him while on the ground.

I agree with you about the Judge. In fact, Judge Nelson has tried so hard not to be the next 'Judge Ito', that she has bent over backwards with her rulings favoring the state. Even with that said, I don't see a conviction because it's just not there. Even though the Sanford Police didn't get to finish their investigation, it's like what Sheriff Lee said, they didn't arrest GZ because no charges were justified. However, the outside agitators ran Lee out of office and got the these bogus charges.

I've been watching trials on Courtv or other channels since they first became televised many years ago. Whether it was Scott Peterson or Jodi Arias. Attorney Don West has been one of the best cross-examiners I've seen. His slow and laid-back style allows the listener time for his question to soak in, and makes the respondent answers confirm his point. Just because West gets into confrontations with the Judge doesn't make him bad. Both West and Mark O'Mara are excellent and if I was ever in need of a defense attorney, they would be my first choices.

THANK you for saying very clearly what I have been unsuccessful in doing.

"Even though the Sanford Police didn't get to finish their investigation, it's like what Sheriff Lee said, they didn't arrest GZ because no charges were justified. However, the outside agitators ran Lee out of office and got the these bogus charges."

There is discussion on here about something that has been POLITICAL from the STOPPING OF THE POLICE INVESTIGATION to ignoring the initial investigation. Meetings held to discuss and hear the 911 tapes with only the Martin family and their lawyers present and NO POLICE presence in the office of an elected political official. This trial has been tainted from the beginning.

You mentioned other trials...at least they had a complete, unfettered, uninterrupted non political investigation.

[NJblue]

Probably guilty of something, what would that be? This entire trial is about whether he committed a crime, I don't see any crime committed. TM committed the crime when he hit GZ in the nose and jumped on him while on the ground.

I agree with you about the Judge. In fact, Judge Nelson has tried so hard not to be the next 'Judge Ito', that she has bent over backwards with her rulings favoring the state. Even with that said, I don't see a conviction because it's just not there. Even though the Sanford Police didn't get to finish their investigation, it's like what Sheriff Lee said, they didn't arrest GZ because no charges were justified. However, the outside agitators ran Lee out of office and got the these bogus charges.

I've been watching trials on Courtv or other channels since they first became televised many years ago. Whether it was Scott Peterson or Jodi Arias. Attorney Don West has been one of the best cross-examiners I've seen. His slow and laid-back style allows the listener time for his question to soak in, and makes the respondent answers confirm his point. Just because West gets into confrontations with the Judge doesn't make him bad. Both West and Mark O'Mara are excellent and if I was ever in need of a defense attorney, they would be my first choices.

The issue of whether following Martin was a crime came up in the charge discussion this morning. When West pointed out that following someone either in a car or by foot was not against state law, the judge asked him to cite the law or case law to support that. Note that she didn't contest that there was no such law but she expected the defense to find a specific citation which states that. Unbelievable! That's like expecting there be a law to specifically state everything that is legal. With rulings like this, she could be a great kangaroo trial judge. Zimmerman is entitled to a fair trial but he certainly is not getting it.

[janmcn]

Judge Nelson rules jury can charge manslaughter and will rule later on third degree felony murder after studying case law. If

convicted of murder three, Zimmerman will face life in prison under 10-20-life rule.

[Monkei]

Zimmerman: Probably guilty of something, but certainly not murder-2. But is it fair to successfully defend against a murder charge and have the judge allow the jury to convict of something less? Not fair in my opinion, but I'll bet it happens.

Judge: Unbelievably biased against Zimmerman and his defense team. She's a disgrace. Her badgering of Zimmerman and Don West yesterday was the last straw for me. Just unbelievable.

Attorney Mark O'Mara: A really good defense attorney.

Attorney Don West: Not so good. Appears to be out of his league.

Prosecutors: Not sure if they believe in their case or not. They sure have been helpful to the defense throughout the trial.

I'll bet that the jury will be allowed to convict on a lesser charge and Zimmerman will get a few years in prison. This way the state may avoid riots in the streets. Isn't that a sad commentary on our justice system?

well that's your opinion. Mine is that this state has such lax hand carry laws.

[Happinow]

I think if we put ourselves in GZ position, we would have done the same thing in the end. His life was in danger and luckily he had a means to defend himself. If I were on the ground with someone beating on me I wouldn't wait to see how long I could take the beating. GZ could have passed put from the blow to the nose or from his head being slammed on the concrete. Then, Trayvon could have taken his gun and shot him. I am going to save myself and answer questions later. GZ had no choice but to shoot TM. I wish it would have never happened.....