The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[JQPublic1]

Trayvon was punching not scratching...

Grab a basketball and look at how your fingers are splayed on the round surface. Take particular notice of how the fingertips are placed. Also, look at the position of the thumbs. If Martin had grabbed and pounded GZ's head into the ground multiple time as claimed, Martin's thumbs would have been in GZ's eyes, corners of the mouth or around his neck!. So where are the thumb marks on GZ's facial or neck area? And surely, if there was a head slamming at all, Martin would have GZ's DNA all over his fingers and thumbs not to mention under his fingernails. Sallow was right.. the evidence does NOT back Zimmerman's story!

Zimmerman said Martin had his hand over his mouth, want to rewrite your post?

NO! Zimmerman's credibility is about as solid as yours and that is NIL! NADA! NONE!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Seventhtiger the fact that's a reality tells me WHO THE REAL RACIST ARE. This is why I feel the way I do about them....

What's justice to these idiots? One sided on their side period.

regarding "who the real racists are"? just watch MSNBC from 5-11pm.

Rush is going to be on MSNBC?

lol, calling people smarter than you a racist is about all you idiots have left these days.

The other half is referring to all Christians as though we were Westborow Baptists.

 

[JQPublic1]

one does not have to grab another ones head in order to bounce it off the ground. take that from a veteran of many fight on Scollay Square in Boston Massatwoshits.

Yeah.. .another fairy tale custom made for ZimmerBOTS!

 

[JimBowie1958]

Seriously who cares. You all want the DNA to mean something. GZ's DNA was not on the trigger. So, in turn, how can you take any of the DNA on the gun into account? If the admitted shooter does not have DNA on the trigger that he admitted pulling, what does TM's DNA not being on the gun prove?

That's an excellent question. Lack of DNA on the gun apparently means little.

I still want to see a link showing that Zimmerman originally said that Martin touched the gun, if he really said it.

lack of DNA does not mean anything it certainly does not mean something

was not touched

Most people do not understand DNA evidence at all. They think its like a fingerprint, and even fingerprints don't prove you DID NOT do something since you can always put on gloves or wipe them off.

To leave DNA evidence that a lab today can ID to someone its got to be about the size of a large grain of salt. It was raining the day of the Gz self defense, so a lot of DNA likely got washed off by Mother Nature.

 

[Sallow]

the "following" incident ended..... the moment zimmerman "lost him"

So, no.... the scenario does not show martin standing his ground at all. The re engaging of zimmerman in my opinion puts zimmerman in the position of stranding his ground.

These aren't two separate incidents.

And going by Zimmerman's recollection of events, that he left his car to walk off a well lit street into a very dark courtyard to get the name of a street in a three street community, just seems highly implausible.

It makes more sense that Zimmerman left his car to pursue Martin (Something he's admitted too), did not break off the chase as he said, caught up with Martin, and initiated the confrontation.

That is where you are wrong, legally they are. Unless the state can prove that Zimmerman never lost sight of Martin then the act of Martin confronting Zimmerman became a separate incident. Since even that useless female who calls herself the girlfriend claims that Martin confronted Zimmerman and then dropped the phone on the wet grass (How can you hear wet grass over a phone anyway?) the state has a problem.

Under what law are they separate incidents? And why does the state have to prove that Zimmerman never lost sight of Martin? He probably did..which is why he chased him into a dark courtyard and frantically looked for him with his flashlight. When he caught up with him, he initiated the encounter.

 

[JQPublic1]

She can't read cursive.

It's a wonder she can write it.

No one who cannot read cursive can write it.

Ya think?

Cruel and tasteless joke! I doubt the prosecution would have overlooked such a blatant flaw. Its possible but I doubt it!... there has got to be more to this story than is presented here!

 

[Sallow]

No one who cannot read cursive can write it.

Ya think?

Cruel and tasteless joke! I doubt the prosecution would have overlooked such a blatant flaw. Its possible but I doubt it!... there has got to be more to this story than is presented here!

It's pretty easy to figure out.

She dictated the statement to another person. Who wrote it down in cursive.

And these folks are questioning her "intellect". She's from Haiti and could well speak 2 or three languages.

Wonder how many folks on this board have that skill?

 

[JQPublic1]

That's almost the shootin' match.


There's little evidence now that Martin "grabbed" Zimmerman head and slammed it into the concrete.

Hence the dispelling of one of the major Zimmerman's lies.

So he laid down and beat his own head into the concrete.


good ******* god

Common sense is not a requirement for bias. Hence the non sense that we read and hear from those with white guilt syndrome

Zimmerman is a liar and a dishonest person as evidenced by the attempt to conceal the amount of money he had collected from donations. Just because he said his head was slammed to the ground by Martin doesn't mean that is what happened. A witness says GZ was struggling with Martin, who was on top of GZ, so we assume that he was knocked, pushed or fell to the ground and likely bumped his head when he fell. Now most of us would put our arms out to break the fall but GZ apparently did not. Was it because he was trying to get his gun out when he was cold cocked? That chain of events seems more likely
than anything I have heard from GZ.

 

[JQPublic1]

Ya think?

Cruel and tasteless joke! I doubt the prosecution would have overlooked such a blatant flaw. Its possible but I doubt it!... there has got to be more to this story than is presented here!

It's pretty easy to figure out.

She dictated the statement to another person. Who wrote it down in cursive.

And these folks are questioning her "intellect". She's from Haiti and could well speak 2 or three languages.

Wonder how many folks on this board have that skill?

Well, that is a deposition! She should not have to read a deposition in court. ANd on the question of equating cursive literacy with intelligence, the old timers had better test their own children... cursive writing is no longer taught in many parts of the country!

 

[KissMy]

I just listened to her testimony about where Trayvon was. She never says she knew for sure he was at home. She said that she thought he was "by" his home and in her mind a "couple of houses" away. This kind of goes to my theory that he was near but not there...and near is subjective...could have been near compared to the long walk he just had and hes a full building down, which is what I think.

To me, this is important because the defense wants you to think that the dude went home thought about it and headed back therefore initiating the conflict...but if its not that way and he had just simply cut up the courtyard in between the building, then he is just looking back to see if hes still being followed and then out of frustration finally saying something...giving the appearance that the man continuing to follow is in fact initiating the response he finally got because he continued to give the appearance of pursuit or looking for him.

She said she figured that because he was staying with his father that if he was near that father could help.

IMO, she is ad libbing here trying to defend why she didnt take the situation more serious...she is basically passing the buck saying she figured there would be others there that could help him. So on one hand she is stating not completely home but a couple of houses down but then says she hears stuff in the background...I think she threw that in, because that would mean that the voices in the background were coming from somewhere else...only problem is that its raining and i doubt there was anyone standing around talking outside.
The testimony is here...its really hard to make anything out of what she is saying...you cant get anything exact out of her...lol.

About the 18:00 mark is where she states this:
Witness #8 ? Rachel Jeantel ? Scheme Participation, Dot Connection? | The Last Refuge

There was someone outside talking in the rain. It was GZ talking to police over the phone. TM was close enough to GZ for DD to hear him. A black man in a dark hoodie is hard to see in the dark.

 

[Wyatt earp]

What would happen if Zimmerman is found guilty? Will the right wingers go on a violent rampage? Start shooting up african-american neighborhoods? Will fox go ballistic crying conspiracy as usual?

What happened when O.J. was found not guilty?

You beat me to it.....

 

[jon_berzerk]

I just listened to her testimony about where Trayvon was. She never says she knew for sure he was at home. She said that she thought he was "by" his home and in her mind a "couple of houses" away. This kind of goes to my theory that he was near but not there...and near is subjective...could have been near compared to the long walk he just had and hes a full building down, which is what I think.

To me, this is important because the defense wants you to think that the dude went home thought about it and headed back therefore initiating the conflict...but if its not that way and he had just simply cut up the courtyard in between the building, then he is just looking back to see if hes still being followed and then out of frustration finally saying something...giving the appearance that the man continuing to follow is in fact initiating the response he finally got because he continued to give the appearance of pursuit or looking for him.

She said she figured that because he was staying with his father that if he was near that father could help.

IMO, she is ad libbing here trying to defend why she didnt take the situation more serious...she is basically passing the buck saying she figured there would be others there that could help him. So on one hand she is stating not completely home but a couple of houses down but then says she hears stuff in the background...I think she threw that in, because that would mean that the voices in the background were coming from somewhere else...only problem is that its raining and i doubt there was anyone standing around talking outside.
The testimony is here...its really hard to make anything out of what she is saying...you cant get anything exact out of her...lol.

About the 18:00 mark is where she states this:
Witness #8 ? Rachel Jeantel ? Scheme Participation, Dot Connection? | The Last Refuge

There was someone outside talking in the rain. It was GZ talking to police over the phone. TM was close enough to GZ for DD to hear him. A black man in a dark hoodie is hard to see in the dark.

exactly

 

[Rat in the Hat]

What would happen if Zimmerman is found guilty? Will the right wingers go on a violent rampage? Start shooting up african-american neighborhoods? Will fox go ballistic crying conspiracy as usual?

What happened when O.J. was found not guilty?

And, as another of Black_Label's threads fails spectacularly, we say Aloha.

 

[Brain357]

I don't see why people care so much about this trial. I'm confident in our court system that they will sort it out. Guilty or not guilty it won't effect me.

 

[squeeze berry]

in this case the term "redneck" would be a racial slur

 

[Black_Label]

The prosecution sucks!

I doubt if he'll be found guilty.

We will let the judicial process continue, but the right wing machine has been treating Zimmerman like a god since day one.

If he was found guilty, it would be interesting to see if the ignorant right wingers would go on a violent rampage,...

 

[Stephanie]

man, desperation by the troll

 

[25Caliber]

I just listened to her testimony about where Trayvon was. She never says she knew for sure he was at home. She said that she thought he was "by" his home and in her mind a "couple of houses" away. This kind of goes to my theory that he was near but not there...and near is subjective...could have been near compared to the long walk he just had and hes a full building down, which is what I think.

To me, this is important because the defense wants you to think that the dude went home thought about it and headed back therefore initiating the conflict...but if its not that way and he had just simply cut up the courtyard in between the building, then he is just looking back to see if hes still being followed and then out of frustration finally saying something...giving the appearance that the man continuing to follow is in fact initiating the response he finally got because he continued to give the appearance of pursuit or looking for him.

She said she figured that because he was staying with his father that if he was near that father could help.

IMO, she is ad libbing here trying to defend why she didnt take the situation more serious...she is basically passing the buck saying she figured there would be others there that could help him. So on one hand she is stating not completely home but a couple of houses down but then says she hears stuff in the background...I think she threw that in, because that would mean that the voices in the background were coming from somewhere else...only problem is that its raining and i doubt there was anyone standing around talking outside.
The testimony is here...its really hard to make anything out of what she is saying...you cant get anything exact out of her...lol.

About the 18:00 mark is where she states this:
Witness #8 ? Rachel Jeantel ? Scheme Participation, Dot Connection? | The Last Refuge

There was someone outside talking in the rain. It was GZ talking to police over the phone. TM was close enough to GZ for DD to hear him. A black man in a dark hoodie is hard to see in the dark.

Okay well, dd gives that as the reasoning that she thinks Trayvon is near home...or at home as some say...because she can hear people in the background that could help him...so are you saying that GZ is close to trayvons house?

Or are you saying that they are listening to GZ 100 yards away?

 

[jon_berzerk]

What would happen if Zimmerman is found guilty? Will the right wingers go on a violent rampage? Start shooting up african-american neighborhoods? Will fox go ballistic crying conspiracy as usual?

that is a big if at this point

 

[jon_berzerk]

I just listened to her testimony about where Trayvon was. She never says she knew for sure he was at home. She said that she thought he was "by" his home and in her mind a "couple of houses" away. This kind of goes to my theory that he was near but not there...and near is subjective...could have been near compared to the long walk he just had and hes a full building down, which is what I think.

To me, this is important because the defense wants you to think that the dude went home thought about it and headed back therefore initiating the conflict...but if its not that way and he had just simply cut up the courtyard in between the building, then he is just looking back to see if hes still being followed and then out of frustration finally saying something...giving the appearance that the man continuing to follow is in fact initiating the response he finally got because he continued to give the appearance of pursuit or looking for him.

She said she figured that because he was staying with his father that if he was near that father could help.

IMO, she is ad libbing here trying to defend why she didnt take the situation more serious...she is basically passing the buck saying she figured there would be others there that could help him. So on one hand she is stating not completely home but a couple of houses down but then says she hears stuff in the background...I think she threw that in, because that would mean that the voices in the background were coming from somewhere else...only problem is that its raining and i doubt there was anyone standing around talking outside.
The testimony is here...its really hard to make anything out of what she is saying...you cant get anything exact out of her...lol.

About the 18:00 mark is where she states this:
Witness #8 ? Rachel Jeantel ? Scheme Participation, Dot Connection? | The Last Refuge

There was someone outside talking in the rain. It was GZ talking to police over the phone. TM was close enough to GZ for DD to hear him. A black man in a dark hoodie is hard to see in the dark.

Okay well, dd gives that as the reasoning that she thinks Trayvon is near home...or at home as some say...because she can hear people in the background that could help him...so are you saying that GZ is close to trayvons house?

Or are you saying that they are listening to GZ 100 yards away?

as of 2010 trayvon really didnt have a home anymore so to speak

rather bunched around from here to there