The Zimmerman Trial

reply to post by Rulkiewicz


almost 0%

The jury already has 4 different recordings of GZ's account on what happened.

reply to post by ugie1028


So, you don't see that even if Bernie doesn't intend it, he's showing that George must have been lying when he said he'd been fearful moments before when Trayvon had been circling his vehicle. Why would he be sounding so calm and matter of fact under such circumstances - as all the defence witnesses are saying - if he was quickly getting out of his vehicle to keep an eye on a potentially violent criminal?

reply to post by UnBreakable


I know that, you know that... what we are discussing is why? My claim is that it was because it was a deliberate execution shot, your claim seems to be that's it is because he wasn't really a wannabe-cop and didn't have those automatic instincts. Or, that's how I'm reading you. If you want to elaborate and explain yourself more fully, feel free.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by ugie1028

 

So, you don't see that even if Bernie doesn't intend it, he's showing that George must have been lying when he said he'd been fearful moments before when Trayvon had been circling his vehicle.

you're clueless

The time of the recording that witness was commenting on was the time he lost Trayvon, not around the time he circled the car.

if you're going to pick a side... at least have a sense of time-lines before you comment. you're coming off more and more of a charlatan than an investigator looking for truth in all this. You obviously have an agenda.

Originally posted by Rulkiewicz
What's the likely-hood of GZ testifying in this case?

He kind of already did. We heard his story from him like five times in recorded testimony.
I highly doubt that the defense will put him on the stand. There is no need to.

My take from this morning .... the prosecution kept trying to make Zimmerman out to be an angry guy who was probably out of control .. but every time they played the tape of him calling dispatch, it became more and more clear that Zimmermans voice never changed and he was using the "fn punks' and 'a-h's" cuss words as just more nouns and adjectives. He was clearly not angry.

The prosecution, on the other hand, was being snotty and even at one point was laughing at a witness.
They have failed and are going down. Their frustration is evident.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by UnBreakable

 

I know that, you know that... what we are discussing is why? My claim is that it was because it was a deliberate execution shot, your claim seems to be that's it is because he wasn't really a wannabe-cop and didn't have those automatic instincts. Or, that's how I'm reading you. If you want to elaborate and explain yourself more fully, feel free.

So if it was a "deliberate execution shot" according to you, then the state should be seeking a murder 1 conviction.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

If the state are backing off using the word you seem mad about, it's because it couldn't scientifically be proved what he'd said(don't ask me why), so he went with "punk" in order to avoid having to keep saying "goon," which sounds too much like the other word.

funny i've never seen or heard of a report that says he may have said " fecking goons", i stand with my origainal remark and say that you said it that way to get around T&C on these boards.

Interesting reasoning by ABC news ... .

They aren't saying that he's 'not guilty' .. they are saying he won't be convicted ...

ABC News .. Zimmerman won't be convicted of murder or manslaughter

As a legal matter, even if jurors find parts of Zimmerman's story fishy, that is not enough to convict. Even if they believe that Zimmerman initiated the altercation, and that his injuries were relatively minor, that too would be insufficient evidence to convict. Prosecutors have to effectively disprove self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. So what exactly would that mean based on the facts as we know them?

More at the link.

Originally posted by UnBreakable
So if it was a "deliberate execution shot" according to you, then the state should be seeking a murder 1 conviction.

If Zimmerman 'went hunting' and wanted to gun down Martin ... then Zimmerman wouldn't have called dispatch and told them everything that was going on .. Zimmerman would have been a lot more worked up and his voice would have reflected his attitude but instead his voice was pretty deadpan calm ... and Zimmerman would have unloaded his clip and 'the one in the chamber' into Martin. But instead, Zimmerman just fired one time which was enough to get Martin to stop beating up on him.

reply to post by ugie1028

It's you that needs to familiarise with what you are talking about. Do you accept that the clip Bernie was playing is the bit where George gets out of his car? In case you wasn't sure, he is. This then has to be AFTER the bit in the nen call where he's said Trayvon came back and circled the car, acting all threatening and moody, right? So, if George has already had a heart-racing experience at the point that Bernie has played over and over, how come all these people who know George so well can't tell? The part of the recording they are all hearing is the part where George by now should at least be a little agitated, considering he's on the trail of a guy he suspects of trying to rob his friend, and who within the last 30 seconds or so has just been walking menacingly around your vehicle, don't you think?

I can see why the prosecution wants to get rid of the ex medic. He would have the best first hand knowledge of how voices appears in a normal and stressed times.

reply to post by IvanAstikov


speculation isnt fact.

hate to keep bursting your bubbles.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


Where did I say it was in a report? I'm not sure where I came across the word "goon" in connection to this case, but I know I didn't invent the occurrence.

reply to post by UnBreakable


Doesn't it have to be pre-meditated? Nobody is saying he'd been planning it all week. It could well have been a spur of the moment idea, or a moment of madness one. Prosecution is going to state he still did it with malice, and not as an act of kindness.

reply to post by roadgravel


Fact of the matter is, there's no ethical scientific method of proving either way. Believing something is true and it being true aren't quite the same thing. A person can genuinely believe lots of things that can't be proven beyond some element of uncertainty, and I'm sure the art of recognising screaming relatives is still in its infancy.

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

Where did I say it was in a report? I'm not sure where I came across the word "goon" in connection to this case, but I know I didn't invent the occurrence.

please, you can't weasle out of it.

here where you said this,

"goon," "coon" and "punk" are still all in the running.

so he went with "punk" in order to avoid having to keep saying "goon," which sounds too much like the other word.

where has it ever been said by any one anywhere besides yourself, that " goon:" is in the running for what he said, the only two and count them two word under doubt is "C..." or "cold" you were relaying on the CNN tape and you know ot.

you know what you did and are trying to deny it. stop playing the game cause no one believes that bs that you are slinging.