Open Thread on Zimmerman Trial

[MaryT777]

As does George Zimmerman.

Exactly.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Exactly.

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

 

[MaryT777]

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

Well and in the taped police report it was noted that Martin asked him why he was following him (or somethinig as such I didn’t write down the exact words) and Zimmerman said something and then reached for his pocket which he thought had his cell phone.
I wonder if Martin he thought he had a gun and fought to save himself. It’s certainly plausible.

Hopefully this will stop futher armed vigilante police wanna be’s from ending up in Neighborhood
“Watch” programs armed.

 

[MaryT777]

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

A dangerous combination when one person is armed.

 

[vz71]

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

Without a witness to the beginning of the beating, how can this conclusion be drawn?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Without a witness to the beginning of the beating, how can this conclusion be drawn?

Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin.

 

[LisaA]

Zimmerman followed and confronted Martin.

That claim has been countered by testimony from others. It is not illegal to follow someone and it sounds as if Martin was the aggressor in the incident.

I know you brought up a number of purported incidents of Zimmerman being involved in various altercations so in all fairness, don’t ignore Martin’s past activities. He was not a choirboy by a long shot.

Lisa

 

[Cider]

Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

No evidence of that has been presented at trial.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

That claim has been countered by testimony from others. It is not illegal to follow someone and it sounds as if Martin was the aggressor in the incident.

Thanks for reminding me of Zimmerman’s claim that Martin lept out at him from bushes which turned out not to exist. Why does it sound to you like Martin was the aggressor?

I know you brought up a number of purported incidents of Zimmerman being involved in various altercations so in all fairness, don’t ignore Martin’s past He was not a choirboy by a long shot.

I don’t ignore Martin’s past. I just don’t think it’s relevant.

 

[MaryT777]

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

Well then the inconsistency in testimonuy:: Did Martin jump out of the bushes and “ambush” him? Did he come from 15 feet way…which is it?

Why could he apparently see no address when it’s clear on the re-enactment?

Why did he need to “find an address” when there’s few streets in that neighborhood?

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Well then the inconsistency in testimonuy:: Did Martin jump out of the bushes and “ambush” him? Did he come from 15 feet way…which is it?

Why could he apparently see no address when it’s clear on the re-enactment?

Why did he need to “find an address” when there’s few streets in that neighborhood?

In addition to his claim that he was not following Martin, but got lost in the neighborhood he’s lived in for 3 years with a whopping 3 streets.

 

[MaryT777]

Thanks for reminding me of Zimmerman’s claim that Martin lept out at him from bushes which turned out not to exist. Why does it sound to you like Martin was the aggressor?

I don’t ignore Martin’s past. I just don’t think it’s relevant.

There are no bushes; that’s been verified now unless trees can shrink.

 

[Yerusalyim]

And precisely why I voted for manslaughter. Both had a propensity for violence, but Zimmerman initiated the confrontation.

The facts as presented in trial simply do not support that ascertian. It appears Martin initiated the confrontation…Zimmerman followed Martin…but that’s not against the law…there’s really no reason to doubt Zimmerman’s account of the events…that Martin initiated the confrontation.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

There are no bushes; that’s been verified now unless trees can shrink.

Precisely.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

The facts as presented in trial simply do not support that ascertian. It appears Martin initiated the confrontation…Zimmerman followed Martin…but that’s not against the law…there’s really no reason to doubt Zimmerman’s account of the events…that Martin initiated the confrontation.

I think there’s plenty of reason to doubt Zimmerman’s account. He clearly has not been telling the truth.

 

[Yerusalyim]

Well then the inconsistency in testimonuy:: Did Martin jump out of the bushes and “ambush” him? Did he come from 15 feet way…which is it?

Why could he apparently see no address when it’s clear on the re-enactment?

Why did he need to “find an address” when there’s few streets in that neighborhood?

It was dark and it was raining.

 

[Yerusalyim]

I think there’s plenty of reason to doubt Zimmerman’s account. He clearly has not been telling the truth.

Actually his story has been fairly consistent.

 

[MaryT777]

Precisely.

He wasn’t even"on neighborhood patrol duty that night.
He was out lookin’ for trouble as he did previously and often; looking for “suspects”

 

[MaryT777]

Actually his story has been fairly consistent.

So jumping out of non existing bushes and approaching from 15 feet away is your definition of consistent? Ok then, that explains your viewpoint.

 

[Yerusalyim]

He wasn’t even"on neighborhood patrol duty that night.
He was out lookin’ for trouble as he did previously and often; looking for “suspects”

or protecting his neighborhood…