Thread: Zimmerman in Hiding

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

In legal terms his burden is lower than the threshold for the prosecution's burden.

His burden on self defense is the same as it is on all elements of the crime. He merely needs a reasonable doubt.

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

In legal terms his burden is lower than the threshold for the prosecution's burden.

Yes.. that's true, Sky.....

Originally Posted by dixon76710

No, the burden of proof is on the prosecution to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman DID NOT act in self defense. If there is not enough evidence to prove this, he SHOULD walk free.

Oh that's right, I've been thinking in family law mode lately.....

Originally Posted by RosePop

You do realize though, that there really IS a report from a real doc who will verify the broken nose? Do you think that far at all? Do you pretend right now because you have not seen it, even though if you watched the bail hearing Zimmermans lawyer was actually holding the report and entered it into the court at that time, you just fight its a lie, until its actually released? LOL.

LOL.

You have no idea what the medical report actually states but you claim it proves T gave Z a broken nose.......lol

Originally Posted by dixon76710

His burden on self defense is the same as it is on all elements of the crime. He merely needs a reasonable doubt.

How can he create reasonable doubt without providing evidence it was self defense?

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

So you were not honest when you claimed "medical reports." Thank you for another example of a Z supporter making an outright false claim and refusing to own up to it.

No, its an accurate claim. Nothing for me to own up to, OTHER than you needing to own up to the fact that you dont have even a shred of evidence to indicate his nose was not broken. Not even any one with any knowledge claiming his nose was not broken.

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

More than two months later and you still don't have a shred of evidence of a broken nose.

???? I never claimed I had any of the evidence, silly. Like you I can only read what was reported. Difference is, that it has been reported that his nose was broken. There have been no reports that his nose was not broken. And yet, you continue to believe as unquestionable fact that his nose was not broken. Based upon nothing more than your ability to imagine that it was not. You seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the real world and that world you have imagined. Consider treatment.

Originally Posted by Margot

Yes.. that's true, Sky.....

Subject change....the photo of his head helps prove his nose was not broken because his head is facing down yet no blood was on his shirt in the police video. He was not bending over while talking on the phone two minutes after shooting T so if his nose was broken there would have been a good amount of blood coming out. The police report does not indicate how badly it was bleeding and if his nose was really broken it's amazing the cop didn't see that as well.

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

How can he create reasonable doubt without providing evidence it was self defense?

By asserting he acted in self defense, even if only through his attorney. If that isnt quite sufficient for particuliar jurrors, they would introduce into evidence the police reports describing his injuries, testimony from paramedics who treated his injuries, testimony from the Dr who treated his injuries the following day, Cell phone photos of his bloody head and finally testimony of eye witnesses who saw trayvon on top of zimmerman beating him. All he needs is to create a reasonable doubt that he MAY HAVE acted in self defense. On the other hand, the prosecution must show BEYOND a reasonale doubt, evidence that he DID NOT act in self defense.

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

Subject change....the photo of his head helps prove his nose was not broken because his head is facing down yet no blood was on his shirt in the police video. He was not bending over while talking on the phone two minutes after shooting T so if his nose was broken there would have been a good amount of blood coming out. The police report does not indicate how badly it was bleeding and if his nose was really broken it's amazing the cop didn't see that as well.

I am not the least bit concerned about the EMT reports.. or even concerned about a broken nose. If Trayvon punched him hard enough to knock him down.. his nose may have been broken. (I doubt it) and so what?

Is a punch justification for shooting someone?

Originally Posted by SkyStryker

Subject change....the photo of his head helps prove his nose was not broken because his head is facing down yet no blood was on his shirt in the police video. .

What silly twisted logical backflips you go through to convince yourself. You can have a broken nose without any blood.