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.
To believe that Martin was the aggressor you have to believe a highly illogical scenario from what we know from the 911 tape.
From the 911 tape we know a) that Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, b) that Martin has started to run.
For Martin to be the aggressor you would have to believe that he changed his mind from running away to doubling back to assault Zimmerman.
In any case Zimmerman is a liar because him saying that Martin approached him slowly coming towards his car doesn't jive with him clearly expressing frustration at Martin getting away from him.
How many pursued people who begin to run double back to assault the person who is pursuing them?
If it doesn't make sense, it's not true.
Zimmerman needs to at least be convincted of manslaughter. Self-defense? You've got to be kidding.
None of the salient facts of the case have changed.
How do you know? Have you read the entire court file and investigated all the evidence available? You do know that the Clerk's Office has opened the file to the public online, don't you?
I disagree with your "assessment" because there are constant changes in these types of cases during the discovery process. Just one simple example is that we do not have the deposition of the girl who was talking to Martin on the phone just prior to his being killed.
It is not clear at all, there is no evidence that Zimmerman was the aggressor. There is no proof that George picked a fight. All of the facts and eye witness statements point to Treyvon being the aggressor.
It really appears that you have not read much of the evidence in the court file and seems you have certainly not viewed the video-taped "statement" of Zimmerman to police when he was basically trying to do a re-enactment of what happened that night......and compared what he said in the video to other statements he made prior to and after participating in that video.
You do realize that "eye witnesses," according to many studies, are very, very unreliable witnesses, don't you? Do you know anything at all about the circumstantial evidence in this case? You do know that defendants are often convicted on circumstantial evidence alone, don't you? You seem to be putting most of your "faith" in the eye witnesses. However, you mentioned that "all the facts" indicate that Martin started the fight........can you name some of those facts?
That's the difference between you and me. I am familiar with the facts. You believe babblers on forums.
Unfortunately, from reading your posts on this subject, one would never in a million years guess that you are familiar with any of the facts in this case.
It really appears that you have not read much of the evidence in the court file and seems you have certainly not viewed the video-taped "statement" of Zimmerman to police when he was basically trying to do a re-enactment of what happened that night......and compared what he said in the video to other statements he made prior to and after participating in that video.
You do realize that "eye witnesses," according to many studies, are very, very unreliable witnesses, don't you? Do you know anything at all about the circumstantial evidence in this case? You do know that defendants are often convicted on circumstantial evidence alone, don't you? You seem to be putting most of your "faith" in the eye witnesses. However, you mentioned that "all the facts" indicate that Martin started the fight........can you name some of those facts?
^^ Probably one of the worst posters on here about this case and you bring up evidence?
HOW ABOUT THE PHOTOS?? That you previously claimed didn't exist or were doctored?
Zimmerman is guilty of SLAMMING his HEAD into Martin's fists right?
^^ Probably one of the worst posters on here about this case and you bring up evidence?
HOW ABOUT THE PHOTOS?? That you previously claimed didn't exist or were doctored?
Zimmerman is guilty of SLAMMING his HEAD into Martin's fists right?
Clearly you have me mixed up with someone else. I never claimed that photos didn't exist or had been photo shopped. Initially I said and I continued to reiterate that we didn't know and would not know what evidence existed until discovery in the case was complete. Just FYI, I've worked on at least ten different murder cases as part of the legal teams. How many cases have you worked?
If only cases like this were as simple as you seem to think. If only you were familiar with the Rules of Criminal Procedure and circumstantial evidence. If only you knew the hours and hours and hours of investigation and legal research that goes into preparing for a case like this.
Nancy, I respectfully disagree. You don't always need "eye witnesses" in these cases. Circumstantial evidence can be very strong and very convincing. I think there is a chance that Zimmerman will be convicted of something. Juries are "every-day people" and they use their everyday common sense when deliberating. You never know what they are going to do!
Court is never about finding the absolute truth. It's about proving someone is guilty of breaking the law within the Rules of Criminal Procedure. That's why the verdict forms say "guilty" or "not guilty"........there is no "innocence" form of verdict and that's because we can only discover and know what we know from whatever evidence we have and is allowed under the Rules of Criminal Procedure and the law. Innocent people sometimes get convicted of crimes they didn't commit, just as guilty people go free.
I've always maintained that I feel George Zimmerman is responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin and he should be convicted of manslaughter. Maybe you thought I was saying that, because there were no credible witnesses who saw what really happened, he will/should go free. I realize in Florida someone can be convicted of 2nd degree murder without premeditation, but with his injuries and knowing he first called 911, I don't think he set out to kill someone. I'm not arguing with you, since the trial hasn't started and there might be a lot more we don't know about that night. However, [URL="http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimes/homicide/second-degree-murder.html#Definition"]this[/URL] is what I found online to describe 2nd degree murder in Florida.
Murder with a Depraved Mind
Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.
It's "possible" that Zimmerman is a hateful racist, but I see no indication of this at all.
Last edited by justNancy; 12-07-2012 at 02:21 PM..
Reason: highlight quoted material w/source
What makes you think to save his creepy skin that he won't LIE about how he killed that kid?
No witnesses. Just his mouth. ...
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.
If only you were familiar with the Rules of Criminal Procedure and circumstantial evidence. If only you knew the hours and hours and hours of investigation and legal research that goes into preparing for a case like this.
