Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

[spidey07]

One of the witnesses stated that GZ was struggling to free himself. This would meet the criteria of regaining his right to self defense if he was the aggressor in the altercation. It will come down to the prosecution being able to disprove that GZ reasonably feared he was in imminent danger in the seconds prior to him exercising force.

Precedent says that on back, with assailant on top, fear of life is automatically presumed. Even by all stretches. This is clearly self defense.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Keep in mind, folks... it is entirely possible for GZ to have been in legitimate fear for his life, for Trayvon really to have been the aggressor and beating on him, holding him down, etc and for Zimmerman to be entirely, completely in the clear from a legal standpoint.

AND YET

To still be embellishing and adding flourish and even outright deceiving people about the exact details.

Why is this?

Human nature, anyone who understands it won't find this as any surprise.

If you were in a situation identical to what happened to GZ, you'd feel guilty, judged, embarrassed, and like every eye was on you, like a magnifying glass was over you. In fact, you'd be right.

Even if you were completely 100% morally in the clear, you'd STILL feel like shit about it, feel guilty about it, and have a strong natural impulse to twist things a little bit to reduce your own guilt in it, to spread the blame around more, to exaggerate your peril, etc etc. You might not even be aware of this impulse, but most likely you would be to some degree. It'd be a blend of subconsciously doing this, and consciously doing it.

This is simple human nature.

So, yea GZ might be embellishing. He might be exaggerating his peril at that time. Or he might not, it's even possible that he thinks he's exaggerating it but he isn't. If that's confusing, what I mean is he could have a false idea of his peril, which he's then embellishing upward, but in REALITY his peril actually was as bad or worse than he thought.

This is the way complicated, real situations are.

It's entirely in keeping with normal, expected behavior for him to misremember (deliberately, or not, or some combination) the dispatch into saying more stuff which seemed to egg him on to following Trayvon or getting out of his car. This reduces his own guilt in his own mind. This makes his actions seem less stupid in hindsight to himself, and he hopes to those he is recounting the story to. Again, he is some MIXTURE of aware of doing this, and not aware of doing it.

So might he have flat out, 100% fabricated Trayvon noticing and going for the gun? Definitely, very real possibility that he made that up.

Might he have pulled "you gonna die tonight muthafucka" straight out of his ass? Absolutely possible. Maybe even likely.

Is he embellishing certain little elements, to reduce his own feelings of guilt, make it a better more exciting story, cover his ass legally, and try to spread the blame for what ended up happening around more onto Trayvon, more onto the dispatch, more onto the neighbors, more onto the responding officers? Abso-fucking-lutely he is. And once again I say, this is partially conscious on his part, partially subconscious.

Does ANY of this change the fact that the EVIDENCE shows lawful, moral self-defense? No.

THE BALLISTICS.
THE INJURIES.
WHAT JOHN SAW.
GEORGE'S SCREAMS.
THE END.

You do know that all CAPS is the equivalent of shouting and frowned on. What you are doing is the mark of a screaming idiot trying to convince people by volume. Besides your evidence is still open to different interpretation.

 

[spidey07]

You do know that all CAPS is the equivalent of shouting and frowned on. What you are doing is the mark of a screaming idiot trying to convince people by volume. Besides your evidence is still open to different interpretation.

No it is not. These are facts. Indisputable fact.

 

[OCNewbie]

You do know that all CAPS is the equivalent of shouting and frowned on. What you are doing is the mark of a screaming idiot trying to convince people by volume. Besides your evidence is still open to different interpretation.

Did you read the rest of his post? I'm guessing no. Apparently you DID read the part he intentionally made visually distinct from the rest of his post. His attention-grabbing text caught your attention *shock*

You continue to avoid talking about the content of a user's post, and instead talk about their assumed IQ, or other things that aren't conducive to an actual dialog about the topic at hand.

 

[Geosurface]

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/10/04/pow-zimmerman-sues-nbc/#more-49434

Apparently Zimmerman is suing NBC over the edited call.

He should sue Fox News as well, they edited the call too, so that it went straight from "okay we don't need you to do that" to "and what is your name sir?" omitting the "okay" from Zimmerman.

When called out, they took down the video in which they did it, lol. But rest assured, I informed O'Mara.

 

[airdata]

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/10/04/pow-zimmerman-sues-nbc/#more-49434

Apparently Zimmerman is suing NBC over the edited call.

He should sue Fox News as well, they edited the call too, so that it went straight from "okay we don't need you to do that" to "and what is your name sir?" omitting the "okay" from Zimmerman.

When called out, they took down the video in which they did it, lol. But rest assured, I informed O'Mara.

Doing anything and everything they can to talk about anything BUT the case. That's their defense strategy.

 

[momeNt]

Jeez. Nearly 11 posts per day on

ONE TOPIC

That's pretty obsessive. Please seek medical help geo, you have a problem.

 

[Geosurface]

Jeez. Nearly 11 posts per day on

ONE TOPIC

That's pretty obsessive. Please seek medical help geo, you have a problem.

Erm, got news for you little stalker. I post in lots of topics, not just this one. If you have nothing to contribute to THIS topic other than inept stalking attempts, kindly GTFO.

If you go out to the P&N main page and look at total post counts in this thread, you'll notice there are 3 people with more posts in this thread than myself, you'll also note there are plenty below me with similar post counts to me. Some of whom registered months after I did. You're not calling them obsessive, for whatever reason. There's no denying that the vast majority of my posts are in this thread, but this thread is what initially inspired me to register. I find this case interesting. Clearly, you can't exactly paint me as weird for finding it interesting seeing as how it's the same case which has broken all thread length records on these boards, from what I've heard. (And I've got news for you, it would've done that without me here too)

And you want to talk about "obsessive"? you're the one who, as far as I recall, I've never spoken to before, and yet you come in here and try to run some analytics on my posts? That seems obsessive to me. Personally I'd rather be the one obsessed about the major national news story with implications for the justice system, race relations, and individual rights, so yea, in summation, fuck off.

 

[corwin]

So it appears we have the same civil dialog going on in here as the last time I checked in...anything major going on that I've missed?

 

[spidey07]

So it appears we have the same civil dialog going on in here as the last time I checked in...anything major going on that I've missed?

Zimmerman suing NBC for editing the 911 tape. He'll win big or settle big, either way he's going to be rich.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Doing anything and everything they can to talk about anything BUT the case. That's their defense strategy.

Why do they have to talk about the case in public?

 

[Geosurface]

It is precisely because they have such a strong case that they have a webpage for it, have hundreds of thousands of dollars coming in from regular citizens to help with it, and are doing this lawsuit.

 

[momeNt]

Erm, got news for you little stalker. I post in lots of topics, not just this one. If you have nothing to contribute to THIS topic other than inept stalking attempts, kindly GTFO.

If you go out to the P&N main page and look at total post counts in this thread, you'll notice there are 3 people with more posts in this thread than myself, you'll also note there are plenty below me with similar post counts to me. Some of whom registered months after I did. You're not calling them obsessive, for whatever reason. There's no denying that the vast majority of my posts are in this thread, but this thread is what initially inspired me to register. I find this case interesting. Clearly, you can't exactly paint me as weird for finding it interesting seeing as how it's the same case which has broken all thread length records on these boards, from what I've heard. (And I've got news for you, it would've done that without me here too)

And you want to talk about "obsessive"? you're the one who, as far as I recall, I've never spoken to before, and yet you come in here and try to run some analytics on my posts? That seems obsessive to me. Personally I'd rather be the one obsessed about the major national news story with implications for the justice system, race relations, and individual rights, so yea, in summation, fuck off.

It's easy to see posts per day, takes 2 clicks from a user post. Took me 3 seconds, nearly all of it was just page loading.

The facts have been known as much as they can be known before the trial starts for a long time now. There really shouldn't be anything more to talk about.

 

[spidey07]

There may not even be a trial, as long as you know that. Self Defense laws prevent going to a jury trial if a preponderance of evidence shows self defense. In this case there is WAY beyond a preponderance of evidence of self defense. Should never even go to trail if justice is to be done.

 

[airdata]

Why do they have to talk about the case in public?

Who said anything about talking about their case in public?

I'm simply stating that the defense is clearly doing everything they can to detract from the legal process and confuse the situation in the legal realm.

Oh, they're mad because the judge wasn't happy about Zimmerman decieving the court and having his bond revoked? big deal... take responsibility for your actions.

The defense doesn't want to goto trial. They don't want Zimmerman on the stand.

If you were trying a case where your client was actually innocent there'd be no reason to keep them off the stand.

 

[airdata]

It is precisely because they have such a strong case that they have a webpage for it, have hundreds of thousands of dollars coming in from regular citizens to help with it, and are doing this lawsuit.

The donations are from idiots of which a good percentage probably have the same spidey, spatial mentality of GOOD another dead N******. Amiright?

OH sorry. Alkemyst belongs to that club as well.

Those are the people donating to Zimmerman so that he can pay off his credit cards and pay for his wife's tuition... Idiots being swindled. Stop making it sound like it's some honorable thing to pay for a murderers bills.

 

[momeNt]

There may not even be a trial, as long as you know that. Self Defense laws prevent going to a jury trial if a preponderance of evidence shows self defense. In this case there is WAY beyond a preponderance of evidence of self defense. Should never even go to trail if justice is to be done.

Yea, I'm not read up on Florida law enough to know how much provocation can play into the validity of the self defense claim, and if provocation even in lawful self defense provides criminal immunity, if it also precludes civil suits. Because what Zimmerman did was still extraordinarily stupid and maybe was negligent.

 

[airdata]

Well, when DeeDee testifies that GZ caught up to that fucking punk, that asshole he wasn't going to let get away.. All your pitiful self defense bullshit is right out the fucking window.

 

[spidey07]

Well, when DeeDee testifies that GZ caught up to that fucking punk, that asshole he wasn't going to let get away.. All your pitiful self defense bullshit is right out the fucking window.

Z-man can lawfully shoot in self defense even IF he was initial aggressor (and there is zero evidence he was, prosecution even admitted they had no evidence showing he was) when his attacker is on top of him and he is on his back unable to retreat.

That's the law, that's what makes this such a clear cut case of self defense. There is no doubt it was self defense.

Can anybody provide a single shred of evidence it wasn't self defense according to the law?

 

[thelastjuju]

Man I hate this story.. the only good it did was to show how easy it is to rile up the political pawns.

Zimmerman AND Treyvon both fucked up big this day, yet the hyper-partisan tools on both sides had made up their minds before we knew a damned thing for sure.

 

[Druidx]

Well, when DeeDee testifies that GZ caught up to that fucking punk, that asshole he wasn't going to let get away.. All your pitiful self defense bullshit is right out the fucking window.

The same nonsense from the guy who claimed GZ was on meth because its the same as adderall.
LOL

 

[Druidx]

The donations are from idiots of which a good percentage probably have the same spidey, spatial mentality of GOOD another dead N******. Amiright?

Those are the people donating to Zimmerman so that he can pay off his credit cards and pay for his wife's tuition... Idiots being swindled. Stop making it sound like it's some honorable thing to pay for a murderers bills.

LOL
Oh I remember when you and a few others tried to make a big deal about how Zimmerman used the money to pay off his wife's school loan. Feeling the need to condemn him of something since the facts weren't going your way on Murder 2. You fell flat on your face like usually when it turns out the school loan you where bitching about was actually $250 or was it $500.
Only in your world and that of Judge Lester does someone who is planning on running from his murder 2 charge bother with paying off their bills 1st.

 

[TerryMathews]

Well, when DeeDee testifies that GZ caught up to that fucking punk, that asshole he wasn't going to let get away.. All your pitiful self defense bullshit is right out the fucking window.

How could DeeDee possibly testify to that? She was in another state.

 

[Geosurface]

If you were trying a case where your client was actually innocent there'd be no reason to keep them off the stand.

I can think of a couple of other reasons to keep them off the stand without even trying. Try these on for size:

1.) You keep your client off the stand because he has a tendency to word things poorly, and has trouble recollecting the exact details of what happened. If you have unlimited time in a no-stress environment with him, like your law office, and you can go over his various statements and ask him any number of questions you care to... then you can jog his memory and get around to his best recollection. However, on the stand where his future is on the line, and national TV cameras glaring down, he has a tendency to say stupid shit or struggle with those memories.

2.) You know that the media already has it out for your client, and that a large percentage of the population also has made up their mind that they dislike him and that he's an awful person. This is irrespective of whether they have any logical or factual reason to feel this way, it's just a fact that they do. You judge that you aren't going to be able to completely overturn all the efforts of the Martin family, Crump, the media, etc, and that it's in your and your client's best interest to just focus on the facts and the evidence, and try to remove George Zimmerman's personality and face from the equation as much as possible, because he's taken on a boogie man status in a lot of eyes and minds, again, whether there was any reason for that to be the case or not.

These are two fantastic reasons to keep him off the stand which still apply just as well if he's innocent. I could think of more if I took some time.

 

[spidey07]

Don't forget, airdata believes if you don't take the stand you are automatically guilty. Lots of team skittles believe one must prove their innocence when charged of a crime. It's despicable.