George Zimmerman Trial

[ACamp1900]

ah... what candy and drink CAN'T be mixed with something to create this or that???


that's a serious reach there pat.

 

[GoIrish41]

I respectfully disagree. If Martin knew or even suspected that Zimmerman had a gun why didn't he call the police instead of calling his girlfriend? Additionally, during her testimony, she never stated that Martin told her he was being stalked by someone with a gun.

It's OK to disagree ... you wouldn't be the first one. I think he was already on the phone with his girlfriend when he went behind the buildings. I've said this many times, but if I was Zimmerman (who told the operator while he was still in the car that he was afraid of Martin) it seems unlikely that he'd follow Martin into the dark area if he didn't have a gun. It could be that Martin didn't notice the gun in his hand (hypothetically) until he was right up on him. By that time, there would have been no time for him to tell his girlfriend what he saw.
I think it is entirely plausible that Martin was terrified and thought Zimmerman was going to shoot him if this is the way it played out. It isn't plausible to me at all that Zimmerman pulled the gun out when he indicated.

 

[GoIrish41]

Now there is this...

It wasn’t just Skittles Trayvon was carrying

And before you blowhards start..Point is... The lies continue to be exposed. I don't think anyone here condones killing someone for da syruup, but its funny how these little facts are left out to paint TM one way, and GZ another.

Just like the photos

'Not only wasn't he an innocent kid, he was ghetto MacGyver? LOL

They're looking for ANYTHING right now...

 

[Irish Insanity]

On the issue of TM being a kid only, he is. 17 years old is legally a child. All the comments about if he committed a serious crime he could be tried as an adult is BS. COULD BE. They would have to file and win in court just to try him then as an adult that he isn't, simply based upon the crime he's committed. If he was an adult, they wouldn't have to file to try him as an adult.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

On the issue of TM being a kid only, he is. 17 years old is legally a child. All the comments about if he committed a serious crime he could be tried as an adult is BS. COULD BE. They would have to file and win in court just to try him then as an adult that he isn't, simply based upon the crime he's committed. If he was an adult, they wouldn't have to file to try him as an adult.

Welcome to the thread. We've been in "could be" fantasy land for the last several pages.

 

[GoIrish41]

Did the prosecution present this theory to the jury? Was there any evidence to support it? If not, what are we doing here arguing about it?

you mean here on IE? are you new to this site?

Noticed you just posted in the "Whose Likely Next?" thread.

 

[gkIrish]

Welcome to the thread. We've been in "could be" fantasy land for the last several pages.

68 or so*










*I think I may see more posts per page than most people so not sure if that's accurate

 

[Irish Insanity]

Welcome to the thread. We've been in "could be" fantasy land for the last several pages.

I've been reading and try to stay out. In my opinion someone wrongfully lost their life at the hands of another person who eventually wasn't held responsible for their actions. I respect all the other opinions that vary from mine. I simply don't get people who have an issue when someone doesn't share their same opinion. Someone can read the same articles and watch the same trial and have been privy to the exact same info regarding the case as the next guy and still have a differing opinion.

 

[Woneone]

It's OK to disagree ... you wouldn't be the first one. I think he was already on the phone with his girlfriend when he went behind the buildings. I've said this many times, but if I was Zimmerman (who told the operator while he was still in the car that he was afraid of Martin) it seems unlikely that he'd follow Martin into the dark area if he didn't have a gun. It could be that Martin didn't notice the gun in his hand (hypothetically) until he was right up on him. By that time, there would have been no time for him to tell his girlfriend what he saw.
I think it is entirely plausible that Martin was terrified and thought Zimmerman was going to shoot him if this is the way it played out. It isn't plausible to me at all that Zimmerman pulled the gun out when he indicated.

If you think TM saw the gun before striking GZ, then I'd love to hear your explanation, given the evidence and testimony before shots fired, how the fight went.

Remember, TM on top, GZ broken nose and abrasions on his head. TM in a mount position. Only 1 shot fired.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

you mean here on IE? are you new to this site?

Noticed you just posted in the "Whose Likely Next?" thread.

I wasn't asking those questions rhetorically. You've followed this case much more closely than I have. Did the prosecution present the scenarios you think most likely to the jury?

68 or so*

*I think I may see more posts per page than most people so not sure if that's accurate

I'm showing 51.

I've been reading and try to stay out. In my opinion someone wrongfully lost their life at the hands of another person who eventually wasn't held responsible for their actions. I respect all the other opinions that vary from mine. I simply don't get people who have an issue when someone doesn't share their same opinion. Someone can read the same articles and watch the same trial and have been privy to the exact same info regarding the case as the next guy and still have a differing opinion.

I was simply pointing out that this thread is full of baseless speculation on both sides. When you get away from the objective evidence of the case, everyone just projects their prejudices onto the situation, and the debate promptly devolves in a shouting match about racism, gun control, etc.

 

[ACamp1900]

..everyone just projects their prejudices onto the situation, and the debate promptly devolves in a shouting match...

Like seriously.. how can anyone NOT love Skittles???

 

[Rhode Irish]

Did the prosecution present this theory to the jury? Was there any evidence to support it? If not, what are we doing here arguing about it?

In fairness, a lot of the discussion in this thread hasn't focused on the trial. I know in my case, the trial was never that interesting to me. It always seemed fairly obvious that Zimmerman would not be found guilty based on Florida law. The situation is interesting, though. My arguments here have always been about moral culpability and not the legal proceedings. I was more focused on how I view what happened and the hypothetical of how I would deal with it if I were king for a day, and what I think about the law that led to the legal outcome.

 

[GoIrish41]

If you think TM saw the gun before striking GZ, then I'd love to hear your explanation, given the evidence and testimony before shots fired, how the fight went.

Remember, TM on top, GZ broken nose and abrasions on his head. TM in a mount position. Only 1 shot fired.

I can picture in my head several posters running toward their keyboards reaching helplessly screaming, "nnnnnnnnooooooooooooooo!" because I've been over this more than a few times. hahaha

Posted it 20 or so pages back. Here you go. Was going for brevity, believe it or not, so it might not have every detail (later posts have more).

My theory is that he pulled the gun out at the moment he decided he was going to follow Trayvon into the darkness behind the condos. With a gun in his hand, he confronted Martin and Martin logically viewed that as a threat and slugged Zimmerman in the face and a fight began. According to eyewitness testimony, Martin was on top AND Zimmerman was on top. I believe that is not conflicting testimony and, because there is a long trail of items belonging to both Zimmerman and Martin, it suggests a struggle was more than the stationary scuffle that Zimmerman said occurred with Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk and his body in the grass.

This paragraph explains why I believe the gun had to already be out (or at least it didn't come out when Zimmerman claims) In my view, there is absolutely no way he could have pulled the weapon out with Travon's knees in his armpits (as he described to his best friend the night of the incident), the gun snugly tucked into a holster inside the right, back hip and covered by a shirt and a jacket. If his story is to be believed, he reached around Travon's legs (instead of blocking some of the 25 blows that were being rained down upon him or cushioning the back of his head with a hand to keep Martin from continuing to bash his head onto the cement), under his body and maneuver his hand under two layers of clothing, over his belt and grab the gun, pull it from the holster and pull it back around the body of a man (who presumably did not try to stop him from doing this, even though he was supposedly in a dominant position to prevent him from using the gun).

If Zimmerman had his gun out when the confrontation started, he can hardly claim self defense. I know it was more than a couple of sentences, but that is the scenario that I think makes the most sense, given what I know about the case.

 

[ACamp1900]

nnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

[GoIrish41]

I wasn't asking those questions rhetorically. You've followed this case much more closely than I have. Did the prosecution present the scenarios you think most likely to the jury?

If I'm reading your question right, I think that there was a lot in the testimony and evidence that I believe they glazed over or just plain ignored in their closing arguments. I also found their closing arguments to be disjoined and it never really provided a narrative for jurors to think about that was more plausible that Zimmerman's account (which was obviously self-serving). That is why we are discussing hypotheticals -- at least it was when we started talking about them, as far as I can tell.

 

[Woneone]

I can picture in my head several posters running toward their keyboards reaching helplessly screaming, "nnnnnnnnooooooooooooooo!" because I've been over this more than a few times. hahaha

Posted it 20 or so pages back. Here you go. Was going for brevity, believe it or not, so it might not have every detail (later posts have more).

I don't want to turn this into a self-defense topic, but the only way his story doesn't work is if you believe Martin knew about the weapon. Having someone mounted would not prevent them from reaching behind their back, especially if there is no perceived danger in them doing so. Hell, if I'm hitting someone in the face, and they ain't blocking, that's what I want.

What I'd love to hear is how you think TM ends up in this position, not strattled over an arm or in between Zimmerman and the gun, after punching him in the face and knocking him down (that's the first think I'd think someone would do, not jump into a full mount).

Hell, even after wrestling around for a while, with a lethal weapon at stake, that's the most important thing. You don't mount, posture up, and start throwing blows if someone can pull a trigger. It just makes no sense how they'd get to that point if TM knew about the gun.

In any case, I'd actually say that his story is completely plausible with TM not knowing about the weapon, and, to end up in the same positions knowing about said weapon is the story I have trouble with.

 

[Rhode Irish]

If I'm reading your question right, I think that there was a lot in the testimony and evidence that I believe they glazed over or just plain ignored in their closing arguments. I also found their closing arguments to be disjoined and it never really provided a narrative for jurors to think about that was more plausible that Zimmerman's account (which was obviously self-serving). That is why we are discussing hypotheticals -- at least it was when we started talking about them, as far as I can tell.

To break with what I just said about leaving the trial alone for just a second, where the prosecution failed the most was in not developing a coherent and fluid narrative and sticking to it.

 

[GoIrish41]

I don't want to turn this into a self-defense topic, but the only way his story doesn't work is if you believe Martin knew about the weapon. Having someone mounted would not prevent them from reaching behind their back, especially if there is no perceived danger in them doing so. Hell, if I'm hitting someone in the face, and they ain't blocking, that's what I want.

What I'd love to hear is how you think TM ends up in this position, not strattled over an arm or in between Zimmerman and the gun, after punching him in the face and knocking him down (that's the first think I'd think someone would do, not jump into a full mount).

Hell, even after wrestling around for a while, with a lethal weapon at stake, that's the most important thing. You don't mount, posture up, and start throwing blows if someone can pull a trigger. It just makes no sense how they'd get to that point if TM knew about the gun.

In any case, I'd actually say that his story is completely plausible with TM not knowing about the weapon, and, to end up in the same positions knowing about said weapon is the story I have trouble with.

fair enough. we can agree to disagree.

edit: I could easily picture him getting on top of him. I could see the gun above Martin's legs and them fighting over the gun and him getting on top of Zimmerman to take away his mobility so all he had to deal with is his arms. but, I can certainly see other scenarios playing out. I personally can't get past the unlikely scenario (in my mind) of him pulling the gun out when he said he did.

 

[FearTheBeard]

I would answer the questions. If said person harassed me..... Possibly. If they continued harassing me yes.

See, i dont think its wrong for Zimmerman to be suspicious of someone out in the neighborhood at night after the break ins. I feel as if TM would have just answered his questions or talk with Zimmerman to explain what hes doing then it would have been OK. If someone tried to stop you in your neighborhood to ask what youre doing you could talk it out, i dont see why it would be necessary to tell someone to get away or to attack them.

 

[kmoose]

It's OK to disagree ... you wouldn't be the first one. I think he was already on the phone with his girlfriend when he went behind the buildings. I've said this many times, but if I was Zimmerman (who told the operator while he was still in the car that he was afraid of Martin) it seems unlikely that he'd follow Martin into the dark area if he didn't have a gun. It could be that Martin didn't notice the gun in his hand (hypothetically) until he was right up on him. By that time, there would have been no time for him to tell his girlfriend what he saw.
I think it is entirely plausible that Martin was terrified and thought Zimmerman was going to shoot him if this is the way it played out. It isn't plausible to me at all that Zimmerman pulled the gun out when he indicated.

Of course it isn't. That would not fit into your outrage that Zimmerman was acquitted. What difference does it make, if Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he (Zimmerman) not had a firearm? Let me answer that for you.......... it has the square root of f*ck-all to do with it. Martin is the one who initiated the confrontation, so why should I feel sorry for him?

 

[GoIrish41]

Of course it isn't. That would not fit into your outrage that Zimmerman was acquitted. What difference does it make, if Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he (Zimmerman) not had a firearm? Let me answer that for you.......... it has the square root of f*ck-all to do with it. Martin is the one who initiated the confrontation, so why should I feel sorry for him?

because I don't believe he started the confrontation. wasn't I clear on that?

 

[Rhode Irish]

Of course it isn't. That would not fit into your outrage that Zimmerman was acquitted. What difference does it make, if Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he (Zimmerman) not had a firearm? Let me answer that for you.......... it has the square root of f*ck-all to do with it. Martin is the one who initiated the confrontation, so why should I feel sorry for him?

Because one minute he was walking home to eat his skittles and a few short minutes later he was dead in the street? Seems like the kind of bad break that would elicit some sympathy from most people.

If the kid was robbing a store and got shot I could understand the apathy. He wasn't, though.

Also, you seem to have some things backwards. For instance, a person wouldn't not believe Zimmerman's story because they are outraged that he was acquitted. That makes zero sense. People are outraged he was acquitted because they find his story implausible.

 

[kmoose]

Because one minute he was walking home to eat his skittles and then he confronted some "creepy *** cracker", and later he was dead in the grass? Seems like the kind of bad break that would elicit some sympathy from most people.

If the kid was robbing a store and got shot I could understand the apathy. He wasn't, though.

FIFY

 

[Rhode Irish]

FIFY

No, you didn't. You added something to the story, but it doesn't change the fact that the kid was not doing anything wrong when the creepy cracker decided to spend his night harassing him.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Of course it isn't. That would not fit into your outrage that Zimmerman was acquitted. What difference does it make, if Zimmerman would have followed Martin had he (Zimmerman) not had a firearm? Let me answer that for you.......... it has the square root of f*ck-all to do with it. Martin is the one who initiated the confrontation, so why should I feel sorry for him?

He wouldn't have had anyone to confront had GZ stayed in his vehicle and allowed the police to handle the situation as he was urged. Seems so many willingly leave out the fact that GZ could have made a different choices to avoid the final outcome long before TM was even part of it.

 

[kmoose]

He wouldn't have had anyone to confront had GZ stayed in his vehicle and allowed the police to handle the situation as he was urged. Seems so many willingly leave out the fact that GZ could have made a different choices to avoid the final outcome long before TM was even part of it.

No one is leaving out that GZ could have made better choices. We just aren't accepting the notion that the choices he made make him a racist vigilante, bent on shooting Martin. Or that those choices require that he be convicted. It seems to me that others are trying to excuse Martin's initiating a confrontation, by pointing fingers at Zimmerman. Martin made the choice to confront Zimmerman.

 

[Irish Insanity]

And people tell it like GZ simply approached TM in the middle of the afternoon and asked how his day was.

 

[NDohio]

Like seriously.. how can anyone NOT love Skittles???

Just the original flavors. Not a big fan of all the berries/tropical fruit/etc.

 

[GoIrish41]

No one is leaving out that GZ could have made better choices. We just aren't accepting the notion that the choices he made make him a racist vigilante, bent on shooting Martin. Or that those choices require that he be convicted. It seems to me that others are trying to excuse Martin's initiating a confrontation, by pointing fingers at Zimmerman. Martin made the choice to confront Zimmerman.

who said he is a racist vigilante bent on shooting Martin? Pretty sure I've read every post in this thread and nobody said anything close to that.

why would anyone point fingers at Zimmerman, the living guy holding the gun when the police arrived to see the dead guy? If his story made sense, I don't think people would be arguing about anything accept the terrible tragedy that is a dead kid. You are simply taking Zimmerman's story at face value when many of us are not willing to do that. That is your prerogative.

 

[Irish Insanity]

No one is leaving out that GZ could have made better choices. We just aren't accepting the notion that the choices he make him a racist vigilante, bent on shooting Martin. Or that those choices require that he be convicted. It seems to me that others are trying to excuse Martin's initiating a confrontation, by pointing fingers at Zimmerman. Martin made the choice to confront Zimmerman.

I don't think he was a vigilante bent on shooting him or did it for racial reasons. I do think the responsibility for the confrontation lies on GZ. I don't think he was looking for a reason to kill someone. But his actions (meaning what he did prior to the face to face confrontation that he could have done differently to have it not reach that point) ultimately lead to the death of another individual, and I believe he should be held responsible for it. We all debate what did and didn't happen based upon GZ's story, and only his, because the second party can no longer speak for himself.