Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

[St_Francis]

Thank you for providing George Zimmerman’s narrative NOT fact.

Again, Zimmerman’s narrative, not fact.

I always laugh when someone states George Zimmerman’s unsworn testimony as fact.

I don’t laugh at the fact, George Zimmerman killed someone the police say was not doing any wrong in the apartment complex.

Do you have any evidence to show that Zimmerman was lying?

Zimmerman gave his multiple statements to police before he got a lawyer. He gave them knowing there were witnesses but not knowing what the witnesses said. Zimmerman gave his statements having been told there might be a video of the incident. Zimmerman said, upon being told there might be a video, Thank God! not, oh, let me change a fee points in my statements.

Zimmerman’s actions during his statements and the fact that his statements line up with whatever independent evidence there is, all give a lot of credence to his statements. There seems to be no evidence that he is lying at all.

And it is very clear from the evidence that at the time he shot, he was in reasonable fear of his life or serious physical harm *at Martin’s hands. *

It has been mentioned that Jeantel suggested to Martin that Zimmerman was a homosexual rapist. So explain to me why Martin was where he was when he had plenty of time to get to a safe place, and seems, from all the evidence including his own words to Jeantel, to have almost reached home? I can see why he might not have gone in, but I do not understand why he was then in a dark place back where he started from right near Zimmerman. Martin was not in a well-lit place, he was not further away from Zimmerman… Waht does Martin’s *returning *to a dark spot near where he had seen Zimmerman indicate?

 

[lcburgundy]

Do you know something that refutes this below?

That’s just general commentary on legal issues and has no bearing on what actually occurred that night. I can make up scenarios where the HOA’s statements or actions would have or could have mattered, but they are just that: made up scenarios.

I would not argue against the idea that, from a personal liability protection perspective, it’s really better to just go home and lock your doors and let your neighbors fend for themselves.

 

[BroomWagon]

The police also said he acted in self-defense.

I list the statute below and shorten this post, using “self-defense” does not translate to one attacked the other first per Florida law.

Please see a few posts below.

It is a fact that Zimmerman had a broken nose and wounds to the back of his head.

This shows nothing less than he was in a fight.

I don’t know how you determine fact but it has been established as fact that Zimmerman was attacked for you to say it is not fact is indeed a fact. Yes it is Zimmerman’s version which is supported by the evidence not just his word.

If it is so well established Martin struck first, then there should be some sort of authoritative document that states it is a fact, seeing how that can not be produced except possibly by some bloggers, I would say you don’t have an objective basis for your statement.

Zimmerman’s version is not under oath, was not questioned on cross-examination. The jury has not submitted to stating they believe George Zimmerman’s testimony.

His testimony is his unsworn interviews and a broken nose.

Again, Zimmerman’s attorney told the jury they have to find beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman did not use self defense. Mark O’Mara says that even if the jury thinks it is ‘highly unlikely’ Zimmerman used self-defense, that is not enough.

This certainly does not seem to say George Zimmerman’s narrative is absolute fact as you make it out to be. Or should we say Zimmerman’s narrative is absolute fact backed by the evidence if we must go by that route.

breitbart.com/InstaBlog/2013/07/12/Zimmerman-Trial-The-Sound-of-Silence

Here is some on the Self-Defense law: not sure if this was the earlier link:

leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

 

[MaryT777]

Do you have any evidence to show that Zimmerman was lying?

Zimmerman gave his multiple statements to police before he got a lawyer. He gave them knowing there were witnesses but not knowing what the witnesses said. Zimmerman gave his statements having been told there might be a video of the incident. Zimmerman said, upon being told there might be a video, Thank God! not, oh, let me change a fee points in my statements.

Zimmerman’s actions during his statements and the fact that his statements line up with whatever independent evidence there is, all give a lot of credence to his statements. There seems to be no evidence that he is lying at all.

And it is very clear from the evidence that at the time he shot, he was in reasonable fear of his life or serious physical harm *at Martin’s hands. *

It has been mentioned that Jeantel suggested to Martin that Zimmerman was a homosexual rapist. So explain to me why Martin was where he was when he had plenty of time to get to a safe place, and seems, from all the evidence including his own words to Jeantel, to have almost reached home? I can see why he might not have gone in, but I do not understand why he was then in a dark place back where he started from right near Zimmerman. Martin was not in a well-lit place, he was not further away from Zimmerman… Waht does Martin’s *returning *to a dark spot near where he had seen Zimmerman indicate?

The history of Zimmerman lying has been addressed before already.

Zimmerman’s statements to the police don’t impress me much. He aced the class where they discussed self defense laws and he knew exactly what to say to save himself.

There was no such statement that he was a “homosexual” rapist. The person that posted that that has retracted it. The rapist part is correct and fact. What would you think about someone following you all around in their truck/car and then on foot? Surely that’s not a real good sign. We know Z profiled TM.

 

[Robert_Sock]

The history of Zimmerman lying has been addressed before already.

Zimmerman’s statements to the police don’t impress me much. He aced the class where they discussed self defense laws and he knew exactly what to say to save himself.

There was no such statement that he was a “homosexual” rapist. The person that posted that that has retracted it. The rapist part is correct and fact. What would you think about someone following you all around in their truck/car and then on foot? Surely that’s not a real good sign. We know Z profiled TM.

 

[MaryT777]

That’s just general commentary on legal issues and has no bearing on what actually occurred that night. I can make up scenarios where the HOA’s statements or actions would have or could have mattered, but they are just that: made up scenarios.

I would not argue against the idea that, from a personal liability protection perspective, it’s really better to just go home and lock your doors and let your neighbors fend for themselves.

lt’s actually specific commentary on why the lawsuit was settled. The HOA endorsed Z by noting after the police to call him. That’s an endorsement. Legally, it puts the HOA
responsible for Z’s actions. That said I highly doubt they thought Z would profile, follow
in a truck and car and on foot and kill someone.

It is indeed much better to go home AFTER calling the police and let the police handle it lest someone end up dead. TM was not a criminal. Z should have gone home, I agree with you on this one. Neighbors don’t need to take the role of the police officers; if they do then no reason for taxpayers to subsidize a police force.

 

[lcburgundy]

If it is so well established Martin struck first, then there should be some sort of authoritative document that states it is a fact, seeing how that can not be produced except possibly by some bloggers, I would say you don’t have an objective basis for your statement.

There was no evidence TM was ever struck. Except for the gunshot wound and some abrasions on his knuckles, there was not a scratch on him.

Zimmerman’s version is not under oath, was not questioned on cross-examination. The jury has not submitted to stating they believe George Zimmerman’s testimony.

Police examination is cross examination, in fact it is much more hostile than deposition or court cross-examination:

• You have no counsel.
• Police are allowed to lie and to ask questions based on false premises
• There is no way to strike what you say to police. Once it passes your lips it’s on their record forever.
• What you say to police can never be used to exculpate you.
• You have no opportunity for direct examination.

It’s really surprising to me how uninformed people are about police investigations and what can be used against them. The notion that police questioning is not hostile is just so naive that I hope for your sake you are never a considered a suspect in any crime.

 

[lcburgundy]

lt’s actually specific commentary on why the lawsuit was settled. The HOA endorsed Z by noting after the police to call him. That’s an endorsement. Legally, it puts the HOA
responsible for Z’s actions. That said I highly doubt they thought Z would profile, follow
in a truck and car and on foot and kill someone.

Um, no, that site would know nothing of why the case settled. That site is like a newsletter. The case was never tried and I don’t think an iota of discovery even occurred. Speculation on why it settled is not why it settled.

It is indeed much better to go home AFTER calling the police and let the police handle it lest someone end up dead. TM was not a criminal. Z should have gone home, I agree with you on this one. Neighbors don’t need to take the role of the police officers; if they do then no reason for taxpayers to subsidize a police force.

How quaint, another person who thinks the police are there to protect them. Have you ever called the police about a drunken violent person on your property only to wait a half hour for them to show up? I’m guessing not.

 

[BroomWagon]

Adrift: Here is the Florida Statue I was looking for:

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Note those conditions to number 2 above.

Does this not seem to say one could initiate a fight then lose the fight, they are now scared of severe harm or death and so now can use “self-defense” even though they initiated the fight.

So, I would say, we still can not be sure who attacked first.

One of the jurors days ago said she thought Martin threw the first punch but then news came out the other jurors distanced themselves from her testimony. I don’t know if it was about that particular statement or her statements in general.

 

[MaryT777]

There was no evidence TM was ever struck. Except for the gunshot wound and some abrasions on his knuckles, there was not a scratch on him.

Police examination is cross examination, in fact it is much more hostile than deposition or court cross-examination:

• You have no counsel.
• Police are allowed to lie and to ask questions based on false premises
• There is no way to strike what you say to police. Once it passes your lips it’s on their record forever.
• What you say to police can never be used to exculpate you.
• You have no opportunity for direct examination.

It’s really surprising to me how uninformed people are about police investigations and what can be used against them. The notion that police questioning is not hostile is just so naive that I hope for your sake you are never a considered a suspect in any crime.

There was really no reason for TM to have been struck. He saw the gun because Z testified he
reached for it
touched it (both accounts who knows given Z)
It was a fight for his life.

My personal opinion is that Z knew exactly what to say to get off this Charge based on the self defense laws he had studied in the class he Aced. I think he thought he was “one of the boys” there and loved being at the police station.

 

[maryjk]

The history of Zimmerman lying has been addressed before already.

So you want to look at Zimmerman’s past, but refuse to look at Martin’s??

And yes, it has been addressed, but not where it showed that he actually lied.

Zimmerman’s statements to the police don’t impress me much. He aced the class where they discussed self defense laws and he knew exactly what to say to save himself.

Again, that must be a great class. It somehow teaches you how to see into the future. It shows you how to give a statement to the police that will line up with what others might say. I want to attend a class like that.

There was no such statement that he was a “homosexual” rapist. The person that posted that that has retracted it. The rapist part is correct and fact. What would you think about someone following you all around in their truck/car and then on foot? Surely that’s not a real good sign. We know Z profiled TM.

“Yes. Definitely. After I say, ‘Might be a rapist.’ For every boys or every man, every who’s not that kinda way, see a grown man following them, would they be creep out? So you gotta take as a parent. You tell a child, “You see a grown person follow it you, run away,” and all that.”

What kind of way?? What could she possibly mean?

If Martin was really afraid of Zimmerman, why did he leave the relative security of his father’s girlfriend’s back yard? Why didn’t he go inside and lock the doors? Why didn’t he return to the store? Why didn’t he call the police? Why didn’t he call his father? Why would he go back toward Zimmerman?

Could it be that he wasn’t as afraid as some are making out? Could it be that he knew he could take down this guy?

 

[MaryT777]

There was no evidence TM was ever struck. Except for the gunshot wound and some abrasions on his knuckles, there was not a scratch on him.

Police examination is cross examination, in fact it is much more hostile than deposition or court cross-examination:

• You have no counsel.
• Police are allowed to lie and to ask questions based on false premises
• There is no way to strike what you say to police. Once it passes your lips it’s on their record forever.
• What you say to police can never be used to exculpate you.
• You have no opportunity for direct examination.

It’s really surprising to me how uninformed people are about police investigations and what can be used against them. The notion that police questioning is not hostile is just so naive that I hope for your sake you are never a considered a suspect in any crime.

No one on this thread has said that police investigations are not hostile. GZ thought he was one of the boys with his knowledge of the self defense laws. He did indeed know all about them and aced that class; he saved himself based on his knowledge in my opinion.

 

[adrift]

lt’s actually specific commentary on why the lawsuit was settled. The HOA endorsed Z by noting after the police to call him. That’s an endorsement. Legally, it puts the HOA
responsible for Z’s actions. That said I highly doubt they thought Z would profile, follow
in a truck and car and on foot and kill someone.

It is indeed much better to go home AFTER calling the police and let the police handle it lest someone end up dead. TM was not a criminal. Z should have gone home, I agree with you on this one. Neighbors don’t need to take the role of the police officers; if they do then no reason for taxpayers to subsidize a police force.

No it was speculation of a newspaper what I posted was from the actual settlement which stated it was settled to avoid litigation.

So now he is following in both a truck and a car? How did he do that? TM was not a criminal? If so, why did he have stolen goods? Why did he try to buy a gun? As the police themselves state they cannot be everywhere and so they need the neighborhood to watch. Some of the things they stated to watch for was unknown people in the neighborhood. People who were wandering around. Both of which fit TM.

 

[maryjk]

There was really no reason for TM to have been struck. He saw the gun because Z testified he
reached for it
touched it (both accounts who knows given Z)
It was a fight for his life.

My personal opinion is that Z knew exactly what to say to get off this Charge based on the self defense laws he had studied in the class he Aced. I think he thought he was “one of the boys” there and loved being at the police station.

Martin was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot. Why was he there? If Zimmerman started the fight, and Martin got the upper hand, where are Martin’s injuries? Where did Zimmerman hit him?

 

[BroomWagon]

There was really no reason for TM to have been struck. He saw the gun because Z testified he
reached for it
touched it (both accounts who knows given Z)
It was a fight for his life.

My personal opinion is that Z knew exactly what to say to get off this Charge based on the self defense laws he had studied in the class he Aced. I think he thought he was “one of the boys” there and loved being at the police station.

Now, I don’t say this is fact or even valid speculation but if Zimmerman was rejected by the Police Department and he is in this case about protesting to the police per the treatment of this one man we have heard about, it’s not totally unlikely that one could take a jab at someone who rejected their employment. I don’t know the timeline but I do know people can often come to resent people they wanted to go work for but were rejected.

This to me, also speaks that it seems Zimmerman became a bit of an “autonomous” police source, that if there were problems at Twin Lakes, problems could be reported to Zimmerman.

Though no media outlets have produced a copy of the newsletter, many report that under the heading “Neighborhood Watch,” the HOA recommended that residents who become crime victims first call police and then contact “our Captain, George Zimmerman…so he can be aware and help address the issue with other residents.”

hoaleader.com/public/What-Should-HOAs-Learn-from-the-Trayvon-Martin-Tragedy.cfm

I use this quote here because it is interesting that Zimmerman “can be aware and help address the issue with other residents.” Meaning here is not clear but one could suggest this means Zimmerman should not totally handle a situation alone.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Z testified he
reached for it

It was a fight for his life.

It was a fight for the gun. TM reached for the gun, Then of course the gun was discharged in the struggle.

 

[MaryT777]

So you want to look at Zimmerman’s past, but refuse to look at Martin’s??

And yes, it has been addressed, but not where it showed that he actually lied.Again, that must be a great class. It somehow teaches you how to see into the future. It shows you how to give a statement to the police that will line up with what others might say. I want to attend a class like that.

What kind of way?? What could she possibly mean?

If Martin was really afraid of Zimmerman, why did he leave the relative security of his father’s girlfriend’s back yard? Why didn’t he go inside and lock the doors? Why didn’t he return to the store? Why didn’t he call the police? Why didn’t he call his father? Why would he go back toward Zimmerman?

Could it be that he wasn’t as afraid as some are making out? Could it be that he knew he could take down this guy?

Albeit it was quoted and attributed to me I never said TM was a perfect angel. Neither TM
or GZ should be killed due to prior bad acts. We need to let the police do their job or quit spending so much money on a police force and let the citizens take the law into their own hands which some think would be a better alternative; like Z and those now “out to get him.” I myself appreciate the police and the work they do.

I’d be afraid if I saw the gun someone had that was following me; who wants to go home and be stalked more?

Zimmerman’s lies have been well documented already on this thread.

Could it be TM was terrified? Could it be he saw the gun and thought fight or die by gunshot which he did anyway? Better than running away and risk being shot in the back;
at least you can see the guy with the gun and report it to the police.

 

[BroomWagon]

Truck, Car, SUV, it was a vehicle and to point out one’s words seems immaterial. I have made this error numerous times.

Vehicle we will call it from now on.

 

[MaryT777]

Now, I don’t say this is fact or even valid speculation but if Zimmerman was rejected by the Police Department and he is in this case about protesting to the police per the treatment of this one man we have heard about, it’s not totally unlikely that one could take a jab at someone who rejected their employment. I don’t know the timeline but I do know people can often come to resent people they wanted to go work for but were rejected.

This to me, also speaks that it seems Zimmerman became a bit of an “autonomous” police source, that if there were problems at Twin Lakes, problems could be reported to Zimmerman.

I use this quote here because it is interesting that Zimmerman “can be aware and help address the issue with other residents.” Meaning here is not clear but one could suggest this means Zimmerman should not totally handle a situation alone.

Not everyone in that neighborhood was happy with Z’s overzealous nature according to the HOA insurer.

 

[BroomWagon]

Not everyone in that neighborhood was happy with Z’s overzealous nature according to the HOA insurer.

Also, I’m not sure if the earlier post: “to avoid litigation” per paying out by the HOA again, translates to “not wanting to fight the matter in court, not wanting to pay lawyer’s fees” etc.

“To avoid litigation”, we are dealing with so many subjects to switch gears constantly but I don’t see why one could say “to avoid litigation” is just as much an admission to liability but we are all being armchair lawyers on this case.