For a guy who is focused on "facts" you seem to be assuming a lot based on the statements of a guy who has everything to gain by lying.
For a guy that claims to know the facts as you told us that you listened to the 911 call over and over again "with my own ears", why have you misrepresented the FACT that Zimmerman didn't ignore "the direction of the police"?
The 911 OPERATOR testified that he said, " Okay we don't need you to do that". He added that they don't give directions because of insurance liability concerns.
According to you Zimmerman is the one with something to gain by lying. Yet you have repeatedly misrepresented that 911 call in multiple posts. What are you trying to gain through your deception?
You note he has different recollections of events. Perhaps he does, but then he was in a fight, broken nose, bloody face, and the back of his head bloody from it being bashed into a concrete sidewalk? Then there's the lifeless body. Dead from his gun. Might your adrenalin be pumping? Your heart racing? Your head aching? How lucid would you be when the police interrogated you on the scene for their report?
Then how consistent would you be during in-depth interrogation at the station by trained interrogators with the threat of spending the rest of life in prison?
The reason I ask is that in each one of your posts on the 911 call where you stress that he was the confronter because he refused to follow the directions the you heard with your own ears many times ... you changed the wording AND the meaning of the OPERATOR suggestion. You didn't change the OPERATOR's words once, you misrepresented the wording and the lack of authority that OPERATOR possesses each time. Your inconsistency was consistent, passionately inconsistent
Why? A lifetime of outrage? Don't listen well? Or just trying to win an internet discussion? Whatever the reason, you've had 18 months to watch the news, read and reread articles, look at photos, and the ability to replay the call with your own ears many times and you got it wrong. He did it in real time.
That's why there's a justice system.
All of the evicence I heard with my own ears suggests that Zimmerman was the aggressor. He is the only one who said that Martin said he was going to kill him and attacked. My question is why should we believe him since he is the one who ignored the direction of the police
.
No, he didn't get "direction from the police" he got a suggestion from an operator that he didn't HAVE to do that.
If the jury finds him guilty under the statute charged, I trust they do so because the evidence proved he was guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. Not because they can't listen, nor they don't like his attorney's inept joke, nor because they want an eye for an eye guilty or not.