Zimmerman Trial ~ (Monday July 1st)

The (*)(*)(*)(*) is flying so badly that Bernie has his work cut out for 'em ... man o man ... LOL

 

That is true. However, my theory is that Zimmerman provoked with his actions, by knowingly escalating the likelihood of confrontation.

Martin had a reasonable expectation he was being pursued, and his behavior was consistent with someone in fear of capture or encounter.

It is still inconclusive what the relative terms mean. The evidence only supports Martin made it as far as the location of the encounter.

No, it is not clear. Only Jeantel’s testimony offers any support that Martin was “near” or “right by” his father’s home. We are also unable to conclude Martin’s state of mind or awareness in an apartment complex of identical buildings. The only thing we do know is that the evidence only shows Martin made it as far as the location of the encounter, which is “near” or “right by” his father’s home, in relative terms.

Yes, provided the provocation is considered to have started at the point of encounter. I’m not saying it is a simple case to make, but I believe Zimmerman’s behavior was an act of provocation. He knew that he had alarmed a person he identified as a suspect, noticed the person had attempted to evade him, and he then proceeded in the direction of Martin. Zimmerman’s willful choice to increase the likelihood of encounter and confrontation, knowing the police were on their way, and having a deadly weapon, in my opinion, amounts to provocation. Whether or not a judge or jury would accept this argument remains to be seen. However, I do not think it would be wise to set a precedent that allows a person to continually follow a person, while carrying a weapon if they believe the person may be a threat, or that the situation could result in a confrontation.

There is not evidence to conclude who started the fight, at the point of encounter.

I’m not as concerned with the inconclusive testimony as I am with the conclusive facts of the case. Jeantel could not testify to Martin’s state of mind, or his exact location. The fact of the case only show that Zimmerman followed Martin, and at some point, came between Martin and his father’s home.

 

I know, I was making fun of the people on this thread that said there were no bushes back there so Z was lying.

 

and the woman also specifically pointed out the inconsistency of Martin walking in one version and Martin Running away in another....she didn't think it was significant, but i think there is a pretty big difference as far as the state of mind that TM was in depending on weather he walked or ran.

 

lmao...You are hilarious.

 

That is false. Look it up. Ask an Investigator. Perhaps it will come up in the trial. But it is the reason cops often ask questions about the same event any number of ways over and over. The truth is always easier to remember.

 

irrelevant. When you say someone ran off that could mean they simply left the area.

- - - Updated - - -

This prosecution sucks. They have NO CASE!

 

Is this the interview now where Zimmys states *I forgot I had a gun* ?

 

I know. Fact is that George didn't know what Trayvon was hiding behind. "Bushes" is just an easy answer. Of course, with Desain, that means its a lie.

Point being, it would have been easy for Trayvon to hide. Which he did. So that he could ambush George.

 

Just got back from vacation........working a bit much today and haven't had time follow on TV or here on PF.......can someone catch me up........are Bernie and his merry band of clowns still putting on the defense's case.......has Angela Nifong made an appearance?

 

All the trayvonites have left is trolling comments . Hope they all stick around after. The smell of fear and desperation is overwhelming at this point .... And the defense hasn't even started with their witnesses yet .

 

Zimmy has been basically pleading guilty to the cops without an attorney present .. LOL.

 

I think you two are both right.

Right after an event, if the suspect has minor inconsistencies, that is actually an indicator that one is telling the truth. If they were lying, their statements are usually word for word, as it has been rehearsed.

Over time, their story may deviate significantly, as they tend to forget what they originally testified to.

 

The forthcoming civil case should provide another years worth of posting on here.

 

There are plenty of sources to support what I said, and that you are mistaken about lying.

 

Why does George keep talking about other events and other black guys?

 

Is Zimmy actually telling the cops that Martin was looking into houses ?

 

You missed the woman with the nice rack from last week. We all were fighting over her and debating if they were real or not.

 

I was simply pointing out another inconsistency because I have seen a number of people saying "seeeeeee.....no inconsistencies in z's statements" that is all. I personally think it could be significant....and if Z gets on the stand maybe he will clarify what he meant.

 

Yes Sir No Sir .. *snicker*

 

They are greasing the wheels on their shopping carts for the looting and pillaging that will follow if Zimmerman is acquitted.

 

Serino: If TM perceived GZ as a threat he had every right to defend himself.

 

Zimmys lies are catching up to him ... sad.

 

This cop is going to get torn apart by O'Mara.

 

Add this to the list of lawsuits Z will have against the media:

CNN Makes Egregious Mistake With George Zimmerman’s Confidential Information