Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If Martin was on top of Z, bashing his head in and Z was screaming and crying and trying to get out, which the one guy witness said immediately after the fact then it is self defense.
If I start whooping your tail and then attempt to disengage and get away and THEN you kill me it is not self defense.
The law and initial witness testimony is available online for reading. if you'd kindly do so before spouting off at the mouth you'd not appear so silly eh?
Here's the thing. Just as Some people absolutely Want gz exonerated, Some people equally Want him convicted.
Was gz on the ground yelling for help ? Or was it tm yelling for help ?
Was tm shot from close range at an angle indicating he was on top of gz, or will forensic evidence indicate a different distance/angle shot ?
Witnesses have already changed their initial statements. Who the heck knows what they'll wind up saying in court.
From what I've read, heard So Far, gz isn't guilty of murder 2. Before anyone says I don't know what will be presented at trial, I Know That. I'm giving my opinion, which has the same import now as after the trial. None.
Here's the thing. Just as Some people absolutely Want gz exonerated, Some people equally Want him convicted.
Was gz on the ground yelling for help ? Or was it tm yelling for help ?
Was tm shot from close range at an angle indicating he was on top of gz, or will forensic evidence indicate a different distance/angle shot ?
Witnesses have already changed their initial statements. Who the heck knows what they'll wind up saying in court.
From what I've read, heard So Far, gz isn't guilty of murder 2. Before anyone says I don't know what will be presented at trial, I Know That. I'm giving my opinion, which has the same import now as after the trial. None.
Witnesses always change their statements.
Witness are considered the most unreliable source of proof. Most defense lawyers will pound the initial statements and most juries will consider that.
We have the initial witness statements and Zimmerman's statements which all match up.
There is no OTHER evidence that Zimmerman's story is false.
Why do you think the cops initially didn't arrest him. They arrested him later because the DA caved to public outcry...
That's what the Zimmerman haters seem to forget.
Just because one gets arrested, charged and taken to trial doesn't mean evidence exists to support the arrest or charge...
OJ, the lady that killed her kid in Florida (already forgot her name), etc.
Interesting that Zimmerman's lawyer does not agree with you.
Do you really think that in this case, in which Zimmerman's attorney has filed an affirmative defense, is that Zimmerman simply has to SAY that he feared for his life?
How many years have you practiced law in the state of Florida?
If you've ever practiced law at all, too bad for your clients.
What is it that you do not understand?
There is an immunity hearing scheduled for April. It has not been cancelled so far.
Fascinating. In post 1038, you wrote --- "Apparently the doctor he did go to couldn't tell for sure, yet you can?" --- yet, you Don't have the medical report ?
To answer your question, yes, I have a link to the report.
Apparently meaning, from what I have read about this issue.
You have a link, but you don't want to share it. Interesting!
That's irrelevant. He didn't have to stay in his car.
Following Martin doesn't excuse Martin's criminal attack on Zimmerman.
However, Martin's criminal attack on mean does excuse Zimmerman shooting the hoodlum.
We do not know who attacked whom, and one of them is dead and cannot testify.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama
Most likely, tm would have walked back to the house, still be alive, and none of us would know their names. Since gz didn't stay in his truck, what crime, if any, did he commit.
He killed Trayvon! He is going to be tried for murder.
Wrong. We have his testimony and witness testimony. Done...
Being tried for murder doesn't imply being guilty of murder...
The witness testimony is contradictory. No, being tried doesn't imply guilty, but that is the crime GZ allegedly committed. Good lord, someone kills somebody and another person is foolish enough to ask, "what crime, if any, did he commit?" He's going to be tried for murder.
That an affirmative defense is planned is a trial tactic. If it ends at the immunity hearing there will be no trial.
AGAIN, do you know what it means to file an affirmative defense of self-defense? How about explaining that if you know. I think you don't know. Your article was dated Oct. 26, 2012. A LOT has happened since that time. EXACTLY what is the trial tactic of filing an affirmative defense??? I mean since a defendant is required to put on evidence if they file an affirmative defense, and they are not required to put on evidence if they don't, how does filing an affirmative defense SCARE the Prosecutor? What does that "trial tactic" accomplish.
At an immunity hearing George Zimmerman's CREDIBILITY IS CRUCIAL. Please let us know how you think he's going to convince a Judge that he was in fear for his life when he already as a record of remaining silent when his WIFE LIED TO THE JUDGE ABOUT THE MONEY THEY HAD IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT? Obviously you've not watched any of the video taped re-enactment Zimmerman gave to the detective. Nor does it appear that you have read any of his contradictory statements, nor have you listened to the TV interviews he gave. Do you think those things cannot be used to impeach this man? Even though the immunity hearing puts the burden of proof on Zimmerman, that's not such a good thing for him. Last I read, O'Mara said he was not going to an immunity hearing and would be using self-defense in the trial.
I'm busy right now, but I will take the time later and go through the court file which is available online and look for any filing asking for an immunity hearing. They undoubtedly have time lines for these types of things, but no defendant is REQUIRED to go to an immunity hearing. The defendant has to request one.
The witness testimony is contradictory. No, being tried doesn't imply guilty, but that is the crime GZ allegedly committed. Good lord, someone kills somebody and another person is foolish enough to ask, "what crime, if any, did he commit?" He's going to be tried for murder.
So what?
The witnesses are wiffle waffling, the forensic evidence supports Zimmerman.
There's no evidence of a murder.
He's gonna walk and then everyone is going to whine some more...
He may not have committed a crime. He is CHARGED with committing murder. That doesn't mean he committed it...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
