I really do think there would have been blood spray/splatter/smear from a broken nose on T's clothing. I didn't see anything like that on the hoodie. C'mon. Some of you know that with fighting he would have been slinging bloody snot, there would have been evidence of a nosebleed.

(06-04-2013, 07:21 PM)username Wrote: I hear you FU but if Z was following T that entire time, I don't fault T for confronting G. Sure, he could have kept walking but he was as entitled to stand his ground as G.

Besides the head wound (or seeming lack thereof) the other forensic evidence that bothers me is the lack of G's blood on T. One spot on his hoodie. That's it. If you're punching someone 25 times and smashing their head in to the pavement...I would expect to see some of Z's blood on T's hands. At least a few smears or something.

I would have to say that the roll of the aggressor changed hands at the point where Z cut off the "foot pursuit" as instructed by dispatch, was returning to his auto to wait for LEO and had passed the point where T was hiding. I don't think T had the right to approach Z from the back and confront him. Had T confronted Z earlier, like lets say at the clubhouse or even the point that the "foot pursuit" had began, I would agree with you, but Z had already past T and T had to change direction heading back the way he just came from.

I do think that Z fucked up when T asked him if he had a problem. I feel at that point he should have announced himself as NW. That may have changed things in itself.


With the lack of blood on T's knuckles as well as the minimal amount of wounds Z has I also question the degree of violence in this fight. Did Z fear for his life? I really cant say what the fear threshold was for Z. That is something none of us can say unless we were in that situation. I do however feel that Z was streatching the truth about the fight.

To say that George Zimmerman claims he was jumped from behind is not "strong", it's wrong.

This has been repeatedly posted very recently in this thread, along with the link to George's written police statement. I think even MS gets it now and has switched to "sucker punched".

One more time, the very short version:

George says Trayvon "emerged from the darkness". There was no physical contact between the two until after they exchanged words, during which George chose not to identify himself as NW because he "didn't want to start a confrontation" so he instead said only "no" when Trayvon asked him if he had a problem. At this time, George started searching his jacket for his cell phone to call 911 again. Trayvon said, "you do now" and punched George in the nose. The punch to the nose knocked Zimmerman to the ground. This according to George Zimmerman.

An unexpected punch to the nose can accurately be described as an element of surprise in this context.

However, a punch to the nose after exchanging words cannot accurately be described as being jumped from behind. In any context.

One thing I do know is that I would love to be a mouse in the corner of the deliberation room. If for nothing else just to see how close our discussion here is like that of the juror's discussion.

So T circles Z's truck then runs away, Z gets out to find an address to give the cops, T sneaks back around to confront Z, T sucker punches him and knocks him to the ground going for his gun, Z shoots him in the chest and T sits up and says "you got me partner". It's an unlikely story IMO.

Yeah and the scenario of Z grabbing T by the hoodie or otherwise instigating the first touch (a hand on the shoulder or something) is equally possible. Unfortunately the dead don't talk.

It's cool that this case has garnered the interest of some that don't typically participate in the crime forum.

I'd like to see the jury deliberations too but will enjoy watching the case unfold first.

(06-04-2013, 08:04 PM)username Wrote: Yeah and the scenario of Z grabbing T by the hoodie or otherwise instigating the first touch (a hand on the shoulder or something) is equally possible. Unfortunately the dead don't talk.

And that is most likely the part that Z is leaving out.

NO IT'S NOT!!! Z says they were facing one another (talking) and T punched him.

No offense Six but that keeps being touted as Z's story but it isn't.
[/quote]

OK, I'll give you that. Point is, the only witness contends that T made the first physical contact, And the only blood evidence seems to back his assertions.
FU seems to have it right and I agree, Z fucked up in his interaction with T, he should have ID'd himself as NW and stayed back.

(06-04-2013, 08:23 PM)Jimbone Wrote:

Sorry, Z's story doesn't add up to me for several reasons. Z says that Trayvon was standing in the neighbors lawn as if he was staking out the house, he notices Z watching him and walks off only to walk back and circle Z's parked car. Surely he would have seen Z on his cell phone talking to the cops no matter how dark it was, there are street lamps in the neighborhood and he was circling his car. Niggers don't wait for the cops to come when some one catches them up to no good.

Then Z says Trayvon takes off again disappearing into the dark night. Trayvon hides behind the buildings waiting to attack Z even though he has no way of knowing that Z is going to follow him and get out of his car and look for a house number to give the cops. For all he knows Z left, but he decides to wait for him anyway in the rain despite the fact he's just a block or so from the home he was headed to in the first place.

Z got out of his goddamn car and tried to grab the kid, that's what happened.

This is an audio of the detective walking George through the NE911 call. Well worth the listen.

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/statemen...0229_3.mp3

So Z is recorded telling the 911 dispatchers "shit, he's running"? So who takes off running just to hide behind a building waiting to attack? Was Trayvon on some PCP that we don't we didn't know about?

(06-04-2013, 10:43 PM)sally Wrote: So Z is recorded telling the 911 dispatchers "shit, he's running"? So who takes off running just to hide behind a building waiting to attack? Was Trayvon on some PCP that we don't we didn't know about?

Oddly enough, George was the one who had numerous drugs in his system. But he wasn't considered a hood rat so that makes it okay. Somehow.

ETA: if t had tested for all the drugs that Z had in his system, the defense would be saying "see, see"!!! He was a druggie!!!

I don't usually participate in the crime forum, but this one pisses me off. Especially when I see the father crying on TV and his teenage son being dragged through the mud like he was a monster.

So... in a nutshell, George is a stick-his-nose-in-other-peoples'-business-type-neighbourhood-watcher-cop-wannabee who has a chip on his shoulder about the stereotypical standpoint that most hood rats get away with the petty crimes they commit before the cops get there; he's seen it a thousand times before. He's a bit amped up on whatever is in his system and he's like a dog with a bone and ten feet tall and bullet proof. He's sick of it and thinks to himself this one's not getting away. He pursues the black kid to the point where the black kid feels like a trapped animal and retaliates, scuffle ensues. George panics because all of a sudden he's in a jackpot that he's not sure he can handle anymore, he panics, draws his gat and said black kid is no more.

Did George pre-meditate it? I don't think so. Should the black kid be dead? No, I dont believe so at all. Was the black kid totally innocent just walking back from the store? This is where I'm not sure..maybe/maybe not, but all the fucking about he did just doesn't add up, unless he was actually scared of George. Should George go for murder? I don't think so. Should George go for Manslaughter (or whatever that lighter form of murder you all have is)? Hell yes.

(06-04-2013, 12:10 PM)Adub Wrote:

(06-04-2013, 11:24 AM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Some of the images, texts, etc.

17 year-olds aren't just out handling guns on a whim. It's because they're surrounded by people that are leading them down the wrong path.

The gun photo? OMG! It was being held by a black hand. Must have been Trayvon's black hand. And it has yet to even be authenticated. You do know that photos can be uploaded off the internet. Just because one has a photo on a social media site, or even on their cell phone, does not mean that they took the photo. Get with the times, MS.

I am disappointed in the defense team for releasing false statements about video of Trayvov's friend's fighting - in court, via the internet, and to the Orlando Sentinel.

A statement posted to Zimmerman’s legal defense website on Sunday said:

During the Tuesday, May 28^th hearing, Mr. O’Mara misstated the nature of video from Trayvon Martin’s cell phone which was included in the Defendant’s 3^rd Supplemental Discovery. He stated that the video showed “two buddies of his beating up a homeless guy,” when what happened was Trayvon Martin, along with a buddy, was videotaping two homeless guys fighting each other over a bike. Though it was unintentional, it is a particular concern to us because we are and have been committed to disputing misinformation in every aspect of this case, not causing it. For that, Mr. O’Mara apologizes.

Given this, no reason for me to accept that the photo of a hand holding a gun belongs to Trayvon, even if it mattered. I don't care about any of the photos/images that Judge Nelson ruled inadmissible in court due to irrelevance, as per the rules of evidence.

But, this was either an extremely underhanded and unethical act, or an unbelievably irresponsible and sloppy one. Terrible lawyering by O'Mara either way.

(06-04-2013, 06:24 PM)SIXFOOTERsez Wrote: Yo man, you really need to work on the reading comprehension skills.
In the part of my post that you ignored, I was responding to Adubs suggestion that height and weight indicate that Z should have been on top of the skirmish.
My point is that H&W don't always mean much. You should be able to understand these concepts. In previous posts I came right out and stated that T had no training, no tactics and not much in the way in brains, neither did Z, thats why he is dead.
From Z's version of things, what T did have was surprise, he supposedly jumped Z from behind, that constitutes surprise. I'll spell it out for you, an untrained, uneducated, unskilled attacker can have a good shot at a more qualified opponent If he is able to surprise or attack from behind, got it?
I don't know how tough is, was, I suspect not very. I also do not know how tough T was, also not very, but likely as not, more so that Z.

Got it? Do I need to type slower?

Yo man I think you need to check your reading skills motherfucker.

Let me try and make it as clear as i can for you so it can penetrate that unripened canteloupe you call a brain.

TRAYVON DID NOT JUMP ZIMMERMAN FROM BEHIND OR BY SURPRISE THEY HAD A FACE TO FACE CONFRONTATION AND EXCHANGED WORDS BEFORE THE INCIDENT TOOK PLACE.

Got it? Do i need to type slower fucknut?

George is going down. I spent months thinking he was probably going to walk but I no longer believe that.

I don't get involved with many cases, but this one has caught my eye. I have done more reading on this case than I have any other in my life. While reading about it today I found this poll that The Gulitpoll is conducting as to weather or not Z is guilty or not. While I cast my vote in the undecided category, I was surprised at a couple things. 1 is how many people have already made up their minds as to Z's guilt [weather guilty or not]. 2, after seeing the majority of posters here say they thought Z was guilty, the majority of people polled feel he is not guilty. Yess the votes are close and there are less than 1000 votes in that poll, but I still find it interesting.








http://www.guiltpoll.com/2012/05/will-ge...-innocent/




Is George Zimmerman guilty or innocent of murdering Trayvon Martin?

•He's Innocent (48%, 468 Votes)

•He's Guilty (41%, 401 Votes)

•I'm Not Sure (11%, 100 Votes)


Total Voters: 969

Thanks for posting the poll, F.U.

It was actually started over a year ago and a lot of evidence/info has been released to the public since May 2012; this isn't a poll conducted to render results which reflect how people feel at this time.

Still, though it's a very small sample size, likely participated in by people following the case on the internet (which isn't reflective of those who will participate in the jury), it wouldn't surprise me if a professional at-this-time poll was conducted with a bigger sample size and rendered similar results; pretty close split and strong opinions on both sides of the fence, imo.

I'm in the minority "not sure" with you.

Ive read the court documents, testimony, witness statements, videos/interviews and the defense team's statements (the State isn't giving pre-trial interviews and likely has evidence that will first be revealed at trial).

The comments and analysis by people not involved in the case are very interesting, but I need to hear the legal cases presented by both sides to make a decision on whether Zimmerman is guilty of Murder 2 (or manslaughter, if the attorneys request lesser charge instructions). This case isn't as cut and dry as some others, for me.

I wanna see what the state has to support their charges. And, I have a lot of questions about George Zimmerman's version of events, apparent inconsistencies, and the "reasonableness" of his actions. I want Zimmerman to testify and be cross-examined so we can hear directly from him under oath.

Most defendants claiming "self defense" testify on their own behalf. I think if Zimmerman was going to testify and was prepared to answer the tough questions under cross, he would have gone for Stand Your Ground immunity. I tend to believe that he won't take the stand or that O'Mara will wait to gauge the strength of the state's case in court before he and Zimmerman decide if George will talk or not.

Anyone have strong opinions as to whether George will testify or not?