The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[legaleagle_45]

The prosecution showed its desperation with their new 'theory' that li'l Trayvon was on top and was trying to 'get away.' I LOL'd when I heard that one.

Literally. Because it was an exercise in pure desperation.

Guess their old theory about a tree attacking GZ did not go over very well?

 

[Sunshine]

What law says that you cannot be suspicious of someone?

I think the testimony this afternoon gave good reason for him to be suspicious.

There isn't one as far as I'm aware.
I'm sorry though, I missed your point.

That GZ was not doing anything illegal either and that if TM attacked him, that would be an illegal thing for TM to do, and if TM was on top of him bashing his skull to the concrete, GZ had the right to defend himself and that if you can not prove that this sequence of events just described is false beyond a reasonable doubt, GZ should walk.

The prosecution put forth a new theory that li'l Trayvon was on TOP and trying to get away! Oh my aching head!

 

[Foxfyre]

The whole thing only happened because GZ was suspicious of TM.
TM was going about his lawful business.
GZ misread the situation.
I don't see how that can be argued against.

What law says that you cannot be suspicious of someone?

I think the testimony this afternoon gave good reason for him to be suspicious.

There isn't one as far as I'm aware.
I'm sorry though, I missed your point.

The point is, you are as much in error of assuming that Trayvon Martin was going about his lawful business as much as you are in error by assuming the George Zimmerman was acting unlawfully or negligently and/or intended to commit murder.

You weren't there. Neither were any of others of us here. We all are informed only by what we see on television or read in the newspapers or on the internet or hear on the radio. George Zimmerman may be as guilty as sin or as innocent as the wind driven snow. Ditto Trayvon Martin. None of us have any way to know that for sure.

But in my opinion, anybody who is any way fair minded has to know that the prosecution has not made a case that George Zimmerman is guilty of anything other than self defense which is not a crime in Florida or anywhere else for that matter.

 

[Sunshine]

The prosecution showed its desperation with their new 'theory' that li'l Trayvon was on top and was trying to 'get away.' I LOL'd when I heard that one.

....Images deleted.....

Literally. Because it was an exercise in pure desperation.

Guess their old theory about a tree attacking GZ did not go over very well?

Except to the media~!

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

I wonder if most residences of Sanford have their legal weapons, "just in case". you have to wonder how many bought guns over the past year "For Obvious Reasons".

 

[Oldstyle]

Completely debunked. It's amazing what people can hear though...if they REALLY want to!

That's what this case is all about...people ignoring reality because it doesn't fit the narrative about American society that they have convinced themselves is reality.

 

[The Rabbi]

1. It isn't illegal to come up to someone to ask a question
2. It is assault to attack someone(trayvon )
3. It is within Zimmermans rights to defend his self when trayvon is screaming I am going to kill you mother ******.

How much more clear does it need to be?

I would love to see what you would think and do if a "Trayvon Martin type" was following your ass around in a truck when you were just walking down the street and minding your business. I would like to see what you would do if he got out of his truck to look for you. See if zimmerman was a Black guy and Martin was a white kid with the same "facts" that are in this case, I can guarantee your ass would be going to the race forum and crying about "the Blacks" and how he killed an innocent white kid who was scared because "the evil Black" was following him when he simply was on his way home with skittles and a drink in his hand.

Thanks for the laugh!!!

That's quite an imagnation you've got.
Unfortunately totally without foundation but thanks for playing.

 

[RKMBrown]

And the story of how GZ suddenly became the second coming of Quick Draw McGraw just in time to kill his attacker while he was screaming for help and getting his head bashed on the concrete and being strangled to death isn't a bit over the top?

 

[Sunshine]

Someone--I don't know who--remarked that he had an unusually interesting and accomplished group of friends.

I haven't thought much about his appearance--under such circumstances anyone who can sit stoically through hours and hours of the legal process gets a pass from me.

'They' thought the woman called as a final witness was a good choice and it clarified to me that he has a genuine interest in his community. That is how I would respond to her testimony.
Far too emotional myself to serve on this jury and perhaps on any jury.

Why he couldn't have hit TM over the head with the gun--but I don't know. Self defense.

Having never engaged in a physical altercation it is difficult to judge what thoughts or feelings might be involved. Adrenaline---but that is the jury's job to decide.

The prosecution showed its desperation with their new 'theory' that li'l Trayvon was on top and was trying to 'get away.' I LOL'd when I heard that one.

Literally. Because it was an exercise in pure desperation.

I wondered about that.

Did they ever decide how the jury will be charged?

I leave the room and catch the end of whatever has been discussed.

A discussion on time for closing arguments was in progress. 1PM tomorrow for the prosecution.

Not to that bridge yet.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'd just ask what do you want? I'd do everything I could to avoid a fight.

The fact that Trayvon jumped him shows that trayvon was the one that was wrong.

 

[Amelia]

Is English your second language?

I asked the replier if they would at least call him a loser. I made it clear then what I thought he was.

You asked The Rabbi, "Wouldn't you agree that GZ is at least a loser?", because The Rabbi wouldn't go all the way and agree with you that Zimmerman looked sociopathic. Who would The Rabbi be agreeing with about him being a "loser" other than you?

Quit being disingenuous.

Nevermind, forgot for a second who I was talking to.

I asked a question and never asked them to agree with anything. The "agree" thing was just a troll invention on the other guy's part or like I thought, he's a foreigner. lol

I never used the word "agree" in that way.

I quoted you. You said "agree".

Damn, I've given you five minutes of attention today. What a waste.

Goodbye.

 

[RKMBrown]

There isn't one as far as I'm aware.
I'm sorry though, I missed your point.

That GZ was not doing anything illegal either and that if TM attacked him, that would be an illegal thing for TM to do, and if TM was on top of him bashing his skull to the concrete, GZ had the right to defend himself and that if you can not prove that this sequence of events just described is false beyond a reasonable doubt, GZ should walk.

The prosecution put forth a new theory that li'l Trayvon was on TOP and trying to get away! Oh my aching head!

New to the trial yes. But not new to this thread. That was discussed here quite a few times.

 

[RKMBrown]

At this point I think the story about TM maybe backing up at the end is really just a political argument to give the people some reason to not remember TM as a violent thug right up to the end of his life argument that the defense is pressing. Yeah ok it's desperate.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well Martin may have run till he was out of sight then walked. Zimmerman doesn't look so obese that he couldn't run. But I think what is important is that clearly Zimmerman followed Martin, hence why shooting took place away from car.

No, I want to hear your explanation for how Martin, the athlete, ran away and Zimmerman, who was obese according to medical reports at the time, caught up with him and shot him.

Read above, I did explain. Now you said Zimmerman didn't follow him. You explain why he was so far from his car.

First you didnt explain.
Second I never said Zimmerman didnt follow him at all. He did follow him, lost him, returned to his car but was intercepted by Martin before he could get there.
Last chance: how could Zimmerman, who was obese, run and catch up with Martin, who played football?

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

will Liberals ever let go of Slavery? and the 60's? they still act as if slavery still exsists, therefore its ok for Blacks to kill "Slave Owners" and their decendents,,,,aka,,,Conservatives.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

You asked The Rabbi, "Wouldn't you agree that GZ is at least a loser?", because The Rabbi wouldn't go all the way and agree with you that Zimmerman looked sociopathic. Who would The Rabbi be agreeing with about him being a "loser" other than you?

Quit being disingenuous.

Nevermind, forgot for a second who I was talking to.

I asked a question and never asked them to agree with anything. The "agree" thing was just a troll invention on the other guy's part or like I thought, he's a foreigner. lol

I never used the word "agree" in that way.

I quoted you. You said "agree".

Damn, I've given you five minutes of attention today. What a waste.

Goodbye.

"Wouldn't you agree" is a figure of speech or some kind of hypothetical question. I don't know the exact grammatical term for it.

You could ask, "Wouldn't you agree the world is flat." That doesn't mean the person asking the question believes it's flat or wants to convince people of that. I'm going to start charging now for grammar lessons. LMAO

 

[Foxfyre]

I don't even know that much.

Zimmerman just doesn't seem like he would be articulate enough to impress jurors.

I was surprised to learn his father is a magistrate judge? His uncle a sheriff's deputy.

That would impress me or influence me as a juror. He really didn't need to say anything.

I think he is plenty articulate. Apparently he is very well liked and respected and appreciated by his neighbors who know him well, but on camera he is not that sympathetic a person. He is probably very lovable once you get to know him. But on camera, he just isn't somebody who looks adorable either in his appearance or by his demeanor. He just isn't one of those people you are automatically drawn to and feel immediate rapport or sympathy with. And that could go against him under antagonistic interrogation by the Prosecution. I'm sure his defense team knows that too.

Someone--I don't know who--remarked that he had an unusually interesting and accomplished group of friends.

I haven't thought much about his appearance--under such circumstances anyone who can sit stoically through hours and hours of the legal process gets a pass from me.

'They' thought the woman called as a final witness was a good choice and it clarified to me that he has a genuine interest in his community. That is how I would respond to her testimony.
Far too emotional myself to serve on this jury and perhaps on any jury.

Why he couldn't have hit TM over the head with the gun--but I don't know. Self defense.

Having never engaged in a physical altercation it is difficult to judge what thoughts or feelings might be involved. Adrenaline---but that is the jury's job to decide.

I have been physically assaulted. I was working alone when a transient, a guy plenty big enough to take me out with a single blow, came in demanding money. When I told him I didn't have any he became angry and irate. He locked the door and had me cornered and was so threatening I honestly thought I was a goner. I had no weapon of any kind at my disposal. I honestly cannot remember every detail--trauma of that kind does that to you--but somehow I did manage to convince him I would need to get to the (nonexistent) safe in the next room, he stepped back just enough to let me get past him and out another door and ran to the Methodist church next door. The transient was rifling through my desk--he somehow missed my purse that was under it--when he was interrupted by my boss returning and he fled.

If I had had a gun that day however, and had seen no way to escape, would I have shot? I almost certainly would have. Would my intent be to kill the guy? I don't think so. It would have been to stop him from whatever violence he intended to do. And he hadn't even touched me yet. In the situation almost everybody now believes George Zimmerman was in, was he justified in shooting? I would have. Was his intent to kill or stop the assault? I would guess the latter. But none of us know for sure do we?

 

[Oldstyle]

That's why I have over 2,000 posts in discussions about Zimmy.

I have been listening to the live feed for two days now and when I glance at it, I mostly look at the prosecution, defense, judge or witnesses. I saw the jury but it wasn't a wide-shot, at least, not one I saw.

Dude, you are one clueless person! The identity of the jurors is not being given out, ostensibly to protect them in this highly charged case. You didn't see the jury because they aren't SHOWING the jury! Duh?

I only started watching the trial yesterday. Gimme a break.

Like I said, I only glanced at people seated in galleries in the courtroom. I already admitted my mistake, why do you feel the need to belabor the point? But thanks I didn't know that either. I also thought juries were always seated in the courtroom. Florida has some strange ass procedures when it comes to juries.

Why is this mistake so important to you?

What makes you think the jury ISN'T seated in the courtroom? Dude, you are killing me with this stuff!

Here's how it works, Sparky...the jury is seated in the courtroom unless the lawyers are arguing over what may or may not be shown to the jury...at which point the jury is sent out of the courtroom. Let me guess...never served as a juror before?

 

[idb]

What law says that you cannot be suspicious of someone?

I think the testimony this afternoon gave good reason for him to be suspicious.

There isn't one as far as I'm aware.
I'm sorry though, I missed your point.

The point is, you are as much in error of assuming that Trayvon Martin was going about his lawful business as much as you are in error by assuming the George Zimmerman was acting unlawfully or negligently and/or intended to commit murder.

You weren't there. Neither were any of others of us here. We all are informed only by what we see on television or read in the newspapers or on the internet or hear on the radio. George Zimmerman may be as guilty as sin or as innocent as the wind driven snow. Ditto Trayvon Martin. None of us have any way to know that for sure.

But in my opinion, anybody who is any way fair minded has to know that the prosecution has not made a case that George Zimmerman is guilty of anything other than self defense which is not a crime in Florida or anywhere else for that matter.

Don't assume that I'm on anyone's side here...I'm not hoping for a conviction, nor an acquittal.
GZ might have been assaulted, I don't know.
But, the fact remains, it happened because GZ was suspicious of TM.
He wouldn't have been there otherwise.

 

[The Rabbi]

I asked a question and never asked them to agree with anything. The "agree" thing was just a troll invention on the other guy's part or like I thought, he's a foreigner. lol

I never used the word "agree" in that way.

I quoted you. You said "agree".

Damn, I've given you five minutes of attention today. What a waste.

Goodbye.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/300245-the-official-zimmerman-trial-thread-3.html#post7512515

"Wouldn't you agree" is a figure of speech or some kind of hypothetical question. I don't know the exact grammatical term for it.

You could ask, "Wouldn't you agree the world is flat." That doesn't mean the person asking the question believes it's flat or wants to convince people of that. I'm going to start charging now for grammar lessons. LMAO

You are one stupid, ignorant ************. You don't know what you write, much less what anyone else writes.
Go on ignore. Leave us alone.