The Zimmerman case disintegrates

[Lonestar_logic]

Zimmerman will walk.

On a Murder 2 charge, based the evidence that has been released to the public? I agree.


If they had gone fore Manslaughter instead, it would be much more up on the air.


>>>>

He'd walk on manslaughter charges too. This is a clear case of "stand your ground". IMO

 

[Truthseeker420]

By: John Hayward, 5/21/2012 12:57 PM

The release of evidence in George Zimmerman’s murder trial quickly made a mockery of his second-degree murder charges, and threw a further layer of shame upon media and political opportunists who misrepresented a tragic, but fairly straightforward, case of lethal force employed in self-defense.

Read more @ The Zimmerman case disintegrates | Conservative News, Views & Books

As I've posted before, he'll go free and some blacks will riot.

He wouldn't be the first killer to go free but your basing your opinion on conservative news? It will be the jury who decides on his guilt not some biased newspaper.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Zimmerman will walk.

On a Murder 2 charge, based the evidence that has been released to the public? I agree.


If they had gone fore Manslaughter instead, it would be much more up on the air.


>>>>

He'd walk on manslaughter charges too.

Not quite as clear cut, Manslaughter holds that an individual can be held responsible for actions leading up to an event causing a homicide.

This is a clear case of "stand your ground". IMO

I agree, but the "Stand Your Ground" law is pretty wasted on Martin, he's dead so I doesn't really matter if he feared for his life or great bodily injury from the unknown individual that had repeatedly followed him. If Martin had had a firearm, then he very well could have claimed "Stand Your Ground" because he felt threatened.



>>>>

 

[Lonestar_logic]

On a Murder 2 charge, based the evidence that has been released to the public? I agree.


If they had gone fore Manslaughter instead, it would be much more up on the air.


>>>>

He'd walk on manslaughter charges too.

Not quite as clear cut, Manslaughter holds that an individual can be held responsible for actions leading up to an event causing a homicide.

This is a clear case of "stand your ground". IMO

I agree, but the "Stand Your Ground" law is pretty wasted on Martin, he's dead so I doesn't really matter if he feared for his life or great bodily injury from the unknown individual that had repeatedly followed him. If Martin had had a firearm, then he very well could have claimed "Stand Your Ground" because he felt threatened.



>>>>

You need to read the statute. No where does it say the assailant must be armed.

You fail to forget that Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch and had just cause for following Martin.

 

[WorldWatcher]

He'd walk on manslaughter charges too.

Not quite as clear cut, Manslaughter holds that an individual can be held responsible for actions leading up to an event causing a homicide.

This is a clear case of "stand your ground". IMO

I agree, but the "Stand Your Ground" law is pretty wasted on Martin, he's dead so I doesn't really matter if he feared for his life or great bodily injury from the unknown individual that had repeatedly followed him. If Martin had had a firearm, then he very well could have claimed "Stand Your Ground" because he felt threatened.



>>>>

You need to read the statute. No where does it say the assailant must be armed.

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.

You fail to forget that Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch ...

Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.

and had just cause for following Martin.

Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Not quite as clear cut, Manslaughter holds that an individual can be held responsible for actions leading up to an event causing a homicide.




I agree, but the "Stand Your Ground" law is pretty wasted on Martin, he's dead so I doesn't really matter if he feared for his life or great bodily injury from the unknown individual that had repeatedly followed him. If Martin had had a firearm, then he very well could have claimed "Stand Your Ground" because he felt threatened.



>>>>

You need to read the statute. No where does it say the assailant must be armed.

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.

You fail to forget that Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch ...

Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.

and had just cause for following Martin.

Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

 

[mjollnir]

You need to read the statute. No where does it say the assailant must be armed.

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.




Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.

and had just cause for following Martin.

Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Polygraph tests are inadmissible in court and therefore irrelevant to the proceedings.

You're welcome.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You need to read the statute. No where does it say the assailant must be armed.

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.




Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.

and had just cause for following Martin.

Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

I've already agreed that I don't think the evidence supports Murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

So? "Lie Detector" tests are about useless and you won't see it presented before the court.

We know that Zimmerman is a liar, there are audio tapes that prove that. Whether he was lying that night is unknown but some part of his story are not confirmed for the forensic and autopsy evidence.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Very true. He can sit back and let the prosecution make it's case, when asked to make a defense he can have O'Mara stand up and say "Your Honor we don't plan on making a defense, the defense rests".

He could do that I guess, but I wouldn't recommend it.



>>>>

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.




Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.




Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Polygraph tests are inadmissible in court and therefore irrelevant to the proceedings.

You're welcome.

This isn't a court.

You're welcome.

 

[mjollnir]

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Polygraph tests are inadmissible in court and therefore irrelevant to the proceedings.

You're welcome.

This isn't a court.

You're welcome.

Which is irrelevant to what you stated, since this is about the 'case against him', which takes place in court, and you're trying to reference material that is immaterial to that case since it's inadmissible.

Glad I could clear that up for you, Cindy.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I've read the statute, didn't say they did.




Didn't forget at all.

As the police pointed out, if Zimmerman had simply said that to Martin in the Club House area (something like: "Hey guy, I'm with the Neighborhood Watch, I don't recognize you - care to share what your doing here.") probably the whole event could have been avoided. But know, Martin left the area Zimmerman was at TWICE and Zimmerman pursued/followed. Martin had no idea who this guy chasing him in a truck and then on foot was.




Really, please provide an substantiating evidence beyond claims by Zimmerman that Martin was doing anything other that walking back towards the Father's Fiance's house that night.

Audio recordings other that Zimmerman's claims?

Witness that confirms Zimmerman's claims?

Video perhaps?


Or is there only the claims of the man currently charged with a crime who has already shown that he is willing to lie to the judicial system - something that is recorded on tape and in court documents (Zimmerman had to submit a request for bond and Florida Law required him to disclose all financial assest as part of claiming an indigent status). A man who has the Neighborhood Watch Captain would know exactly what key phrases to use to solicit a police response - in other words what buttons to push.

(DISCLAIMER: Not saying that proves Murder 2, just saying that Zimmerman has shown himself to be a liar so one must look for corroborating evidence.)


>>>>

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

I've already agreed that I don't think the evidence supports Murder 2.

Zimmerman did pass a lie detector test the very next day after the shooting.

So? "Lie Detector" tests are about useless and you won't see it presented before the court.

We know that Zimmerman is a liar, there are audio tapes that prove that. Whether he was lying that night is unknown but some part of his story are not confirmed for the forensic and autopsy evidence.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Very true. He can sit back and let the prosecution make it's case, when asked to make a defense he can have O'Mara stand up and say "Your Honor we don't plan on making a defense, the defense rests".

He could do that I guess, but I wouldn't recommend it.



>>>>

Lie detectors are so useless that every law enforcement agency uses them. Yea, go with that.

I would recomend it, because the prosecution will fail to meet the burden of proof.

 

[mjollnir]

The facts speaks for themself. Zimmerman will be found not quilty of murder 2.

I've already agreed that I don't think the evidence supports Murder 2.



So? "Lie Detector" tests are about useless and you won't see it presented before the court.

We know that Zimmerman is a liar, there are audio tapes that prove that. Whether he was lying that night is unknown but some part of his story are not confirmed for the forensic and autopsy evidence.

BTW the burden of proof is not on Zimmerman. He doesn't have to show evidence of anything.

Very true. He can sit back and let the prosecution make it's case, when asked to make a defense he can have O'Mara stand up and say "Your Honor we don't plan on making a defense, the defense rests".

He could do that I guess, but I wouldn't recommend it.



>>>>

Lie detectors are so useless that every law enforcement agency uses them. Yea, go with that.

I would recomend it, because the prosecution will fail to meet the burden of proof.

LOL! You actually have no idea what they're for and how they're used, do you?

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I've already agreed that I don't think the evidence supports Murder 2.



So? "Lie Detector" tests are about useless and you won't see it presented before the court.

We know that Zimmerman is a liar, there are audio tapes that prove that. Whether he was lying that night is unknown but some part of his story are not confirmed for the forensic and autopsy evidence.




Very true. He can sit back and let the prosecution make it's case, when asked to make a defense he can have O'Mara stand up and say "Your Honor we don't plan on making a defense, the defense rests".

He could do that I guess, but I wouldn't recommend it.



>>>>

Lie detectors are so useless that every law enforcement agency uses them. Yea, go with that.

I would recomend it, because the prosecution will fail to meet the burden of proof.

LOL! You actually have no idea what they're for and how they're used, do you?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Yes as a matter of fact I do.

But go ahead and assume you know me.

You're not the first moron to make that mistake.

 

[mjollnir]

Lie detectors are so useless that every law enforcement agency uses them. Yea, go with that.

I would recomend it, because the prosecution will fail to meet the burden of proof.

LOL! You actually have no idea what they're for and how they're used, do you?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Yes as a matter of fact I do.

But go ahead and assume you know me.

You're not the first moron to make that mistake.

I don't have to assume I 'know you'.

I understand from your posts that you're quite emotionally vulnerable and sensitive and attempt to argue accordingly.

It's why you always look so stupid and have to run from your own words so often.

 

[Godboy]

The fact that lie detctors arent used in court is irrellevent. Its human nature for liars to be scared of lie detector tests. Guilty people dont volunteer for that shit, especially if its a murder case.

 

[Godboy]

The fact that lie detctors arent used in court is irrellevent. Its human nature for liars to be scared of lie detector tests. Guilty people dont volunteer for that shit, especially if its a murder case.

 

[JQPublic1]

He shot an unarmed man because he started a fight and got his ass kicked. If he gets away free, he got away with murder.

Its that simple.

An unarmed man does not automatically translate to an innocent man.

It's that simple.

And an armed man does not translate to an innocent victim automatically even if he is of lighter complexion than the unarmed man!

 

[paperview]

The State released the 10th supplemental discovery today. It shows the original charges by the lead homicide detective was to charge Zimmerman with Murder.

He revised it four times after that.

http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/18054072/data/2/-/t40yfvz/-/Zimmerman-case-doc-2.pdf

A snippet:

From Page 25, paragraph 4:

Quote:
Investigative findings show that George Michael Zimmerman had at least two opportunities to speak with Trayvon Benjamin Martin In order to defuse the circumstances surrounding their encounter.

On at least two occasions, George Michael Zimmerman failed to Identify himself as a concerned resident or a neighborhood watch member to Trayvon Benjamin Martin.

Investigative findings show the physical dimensions of Trayvon Benjamin Martin, and that of George Michael Zimmerman, coupled with the absence of any specialized training !n hand to hand combat between either combatant, did not place George Michael Zimmerman In an extraordinary or exceptional disadvantage of apparent physical ability or defensive capacity.

Investigative findings show the physical injuries displayed by George Michael Zimmerman are marginally consistent with a life-threatening violent episode as described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force was deployed by Trayvon Martin.

The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained In his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement, or conversely If he had Identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog in an effort to dispel each party's concern.

There is no Indication that Martin was involved In any criminal activity at the time of the encounter.

Zimmerman, by his statements made to the call taker and recorded for review, and his statements made to investigators following the shooting death of Martin, make it clear that he had already reached a faulty conclusion as to Martin's purpose for being in the neighborhood.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

LOL! You actually have no idea what they're for and how they're used, do you?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Yes as a matter of fact I do.

But go ahead and assume you know me.

You're not the first moron to make that mistake.

I don't have to assume I 'know you'.

I understand from your posts that you're quite emotionally vulnerable and sensitive and attempt to argue accordingly.

It's why you always look so stupid and have to run from your own words so often.

Obviously you assume a lot.


Emotionally vunlerable? Sensitive? You get all that from text?

Damn you're not very good at interpreting text if that's what you assume.

Let's see some examples of me "running from my own words".

Fact is polygraph testing is a useful investigative tool. Now you may disagree with that but you have the right to remain ignorant.

 

[paperview]

Zimmerman underwent a Voice Stress analysis test.

Here it is:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2cEqhj5dBY"]George Zimmerman initial Voice Stress Analysis | SyndicatedNews.NET - YouTube[/ame]

Yamiche Alcindor and Marisol Bello reporting for USA Today said:

Zimmerman was asked nine questions, including two related directly to the shooting: “Did you confront the guy you shot?” the tester asked. “No,” Zimmerman responded. “Were you in fear for your life, when you shot the guy?” the tester asked. “Yes,” Zimmerman said. The examiner concluded that Zimmerman “told substantially the complete truth.”

Ron Grenier, a former FBI agent and lie detector expert, said the voice stress analysis test is not as reliable as a polygraph test. Also, he said, it’s unclear what the examiner meant by “confront.” Further, such tests don’t measure a person’s state of mind or fear at some other time, he added.

“He may have convinced himself that he was in fear of his life, but whether or not he was is not definitive,” Grenier said.
Zimmerman’s responses would be more meaningful, he said, if he had been asked, ” ‘Did Trayvon Martin attack you and knock you to the ground?’ Or ‘Was Trayvon Martin on top of you hitting you before you shot him?’ ”
Joe Navarro, a former FBI agent who teaches interviewing techniques at Saint Leo University, agreed. “You have to ask precise questions,” he said. “You want to know at what point you feared for your life.”

​

I agree with Ron Grenier’s criticism that the question, “Did you confront the guy you shot?” is an improper question.

The question is vague because it is too subjective to be of any use in determining whether GZ followed TM and was the aggressor. Note that the legal test for self-defense depends on the objective circumstances of the encounter between GZ and TM and whether a reasonable person in that situation would have concluded that it was necessary to use deadly force to prevent imminent death or grievous bodily harm.


A confrontation can be verbal or physical and GZ may have believed or convinced himself, without any rational basis for doing so, that TM’s presence in the neighborhood and his attempt to elude GZ justified GZ in attempting to prevent him from getting away. Therefore, GZ might have perceived any resistance by TM as a confrontation, even if TM were merely standing his ground and using force to defend himself.


Similarly, the test result does not help us decide if GZ was the aggressor.

Finally, even if proper questions had been asked, there are any number of examples of guilty people who passed polygraph tests. One person with whom I am familiar is my former client Gary Ridgway, the Green River Killer, who passed a polygraph in 1987 when he denied being the Green River Killer. He was released and continued killing until he was arrested in the fall of 2000, after DNA test results implicated him in several homicides.

Polygraph Test Result in Zimmerman Case Is Unreliable and Useless | MyFDL