Thread: Z's First Court Appearance: He Lied Under Oath

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

The map is wrong. The dot saying where the shooting took place was where Zimmerman was when he was talking to 911 and told them he was heading back towards his truck. The fight ensued at the intersection of the walkways between the buildings.

Zimmerman never stated that he was heading back to his truck

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

People have overlooked how Z straight up lied the first time he spoke in court. During the apology (or whatever label you wish to use) he stated:

"I did not know how old he was. I thought he
was a little bit younger than I was, and I did not know if he was armed or
not."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/20/justic...ils/index.html

He claims he didn't know Trayvon's age and thought he was just a "little bit younger" than he was. Z is 28 so that means Z claimed at the bond hearing Trayvon was approximately 25 years old. I guess Z forgot we have him on a recorded call saying Trayvon was in his "late teens."

From transcript:

Z: "About like his late teens."
http://phoebe53.wordpress.com/2012/0...rayvon-martin/

The operator confirms "late teens" and Z answered in the affirmative.

I've no doubt some of Z's supporters will try to claim he didn't lie but Z's recorded words leave no spin room. Only the room spinning for Z's defense.

His lawyer will be crucified later on for allowing this to happen at a bond hearing.

He lied?

Why that (*)(*)(*)(*)ing liar!

I say we drag in out of hiding and string him up to the nearest tree.

He deserves to die for being a white-hispanic with a gun.

Trial? We don't need no stinking trial. He's guilty for just being white and killing the next Nobel Peace Prize winner, Bobo's son.

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

That will fall on deaf Z supporter eyes. They act like she knew he got shot that night. They have no idea when she found out what happened or when and they don't care. There is nothing about her testimony that is suspicious but they overlook Z's dad (a proven liar on this case) saying that Trayvon told Z "You gonna die tonight if you have a piece." What was the other bit? "You got a problem home?" Then Z had to "reach for" the phone he was holding less than 60 seconds earlier. Z was expecting the cops to call him any minute but he put his phone away???? Goodness......I cannot wait for this to go to trial and I hope they stream it live so we can see Z start crying like a baby when the prosecutor tears him a new one on the stand.

And you know the otherside is losing and getting desperate when they have to make up and misstate the position of the other side so they can argue that and declare themselves correct.

Fail

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

56 minutes???? Yeah...you're real tight to the facts....

There is no known story that T attacked Z.

Yes there is, Zimmerman's, and the investigators have no evidence to contradict it. And the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

Originally Posted by a777pilot

He lied?

Why that (*)(*)(*)(*)ing liar!

I say we drag in out of hiding and string him up to the nearest tree.

He deserves to die for being a white-hispanic with a gun.

Trial? We don't need no stinking trial. He's guilty for just being white and killing the next Nobel Peace Prize winner, Bobo's son.

Its TRIAL.... not trail.

Why are you going to extremes here?

Don't you think a black man has the same rights to walk down the street as a white man?

Under Florida law it can be argued that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon and put him in fear of his life and safety.. without having touched him..

Originally Posted by johnnymo

Zimmerman never stated that he was heading back to his truck

Yes that is what he was discussing with the dispatcher where to meet up with them and it was back towards his truck, the mailboxes were beyond that. The road the police would be driving down was where his truck was parked.

Originally Posted by Margot

Under Florida law it can be argued that Zimmerman assaulted Trayvon and put him in fear of his life and safety.. without having touched him..

Under that fallacious interpretation of the law it can be argued Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first while Zimmerman was watching him from his truck and second when Martin confronted him.

Originally Posted by johnnymo

Zimmerman never stated that he was heading back to his truck

In the first statement put out by SPD it stated that Z claimed after he lost sight of Trayvon he was returning to his truck and was attacked by Trayvon. Made no mention of them exchanging words prior to the physical which is highly suspect since it was not well known at that time that T was on the phone when this all went down.

Just had a look at Z's apology again and this is what he say:

I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am, and I did not know if he was armed or not.

The apology is obviously for following him and then confronting him or whatever he did. He says:
"I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am"

This obviously means Z thought T to be older than T actually was when we have evidence from the call to the dispatcher proving that was not the case. Z had guessed T's age correctly. He did know know T was much younger than him and not a little younger.

Originally Posted by Bluesguy

Under that fallacious interpretation of the law it can be argued Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman first while Zimmerman was watching him from his truck and second when Martin confronted him.

It isn't a fallacious interpretation because the law says harassment or assault does not require actual physical contact and no you can't reverse the components against T because we know with out a doubt Z was following T. Although, I would not be surprised if Zagendas actually tried to claim it was T who started following Z.