The Zimmerman Case, Day 6

 

The parade of defense witnesses continued today. Which was bizarre, since they were all called by the prosecution. Zimmerman himself got to testify without being sworn in. That was a huge plus for the defense. In most cases, jurors want to hear the defendant’s side directly from the source. They just did . . .

The prosecution played Zimmerman’s video and audio interrogation tapes and the video tape of Zimmerman’s reenactment at the scene the day after the event. All of the tapes showed Zimmerman to be cooperative, respectful, calm, rational, soft spoken and well spoken. All of his stories were virtually identical except for minor details, and they aligned with most of the testimony previously rendered by Jonathan Good, who by all accounts was the most persuasive witness to date. In addition, Zimmerman stated on the tapes that Martin had covered Zimmerman’s mouth and nose during their fight. Attempted suffocation is something we hadn’t heard about previously.

During cross examination of Officer Doris Singleton—whose direct testimony had been favorable to Zimmerman—counsel asked a dumb question. In response, the Officer stated that she was concerned that Zimmerman had to leave his car to check the location, since he lived in the development and was the neighborhood watch guy. Hey, there are only three streets in the subdivision. When asked why she was concerned, she said “I was thinking that he wanted to get out of his car.” Not a major setback for the defense, but something that the defense brought out. Hey, that’s the prosecution’s job.

Listening to lead investigator Chris Serino, it was clear the cop thought Zimmerman was being truthful when he claimed that he was attacked and defended himself and described the relevant events. Well, of course he felt that Zimmerman was being truthful. That’s why he didn’t arrest Zimmerman even when the public pressure to do so started to mount. Serino himself alluded to the pressure during his cross-examination. When O’Mara continues the cross-examination tomorrow, we may find out more about that.

O’Mara has been very good at bringing out a lot of pro-Zimmerman details from the cops. It may be just me, but it sure seems that if the police have chosen a side, it’s Zimmerman’s. Again, we should know more tomorrow.

The tapes revealed a compelling piece of evidence that proves nothing toward guilt or innocence: Serino challenged Zimmerman to put himself in Martin’s shoes. Both Martin and Zimmerman were doing nothing illegal just before the homicide. Both were in a place they had a right to be. Both could have claimed their right to self-defense under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. Martin, being followed in the dark by someone he didn’t know, could have been as worried about Zimmerman as Zimmerman was about Martin. And when Martin challenged Zimmerman – “you got a problem?” – Zimmerman never identified himself as the neighborhood watch captain.

What if he had?

comments

  1. avatar William Burke says:

    I am fearful the jury’s decision will be colored by their desire to avoid race riots which would ensue from Zimmerman’s acquittal.

    I don’t have a dog in this fight. I am merely reflecting what might be an unfortunate fallout which might color their verdict. I want justice to be done, as in any case.

    1. avatar swampsniper says:

      We all have a dog in this fight, the right to effective self defense is on trial with George Zimmerman. Actually it’s the main event, George Zimmerman just got picked to be the sacrifice.

      1. avatar Mat says:

        And after he gets acquitted then stand your ground laws will have to be defended. That’s next to go to trial by the court of public opinion

        1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

          Probably, though once TM had GZ pinned to the ground pounding on his face there was no ability to retreat, so stand your ground doesn’t seem to apply in this case. That is assuming what GZ said was true, i.e., TM basically walked up to GZ and broke his nose, GZ fell, and TM immediately jumped on top of GZ and went to work. If all the evidence is consistent with that story, as it has been so far, then I don’t think he could be convicted regardless of whether the State had a stand your ground law.

          Of course, none of that will stop the anti-self defense/pro-criminal crowd from trying to generate and harness outrage to push their agenda.

        2. avatar SAS 2008 says:

          I think since stand your ground is not being used by Zimmerman and his defence that any attempt to challenge stand your ground laws based on this case will go nowhere.

  2. avatar JeffR says:

    Thank you for these daily summaries.

    1. avatar Splashman says:

      If you haven’t already, check out the trial coverage at legalinsurrection.com. Absolutely awesome.

  3. avatar Gtfoxy says:

    Better question is:

    Why didn’t he?

    1. avatar Rokurota says:

      If he was jumpy, he may have not been thinking 100%. “Neighborhood watch captain” is not a title that rolls off the tongue.

      1. avatar Roscoe says:

        Nor carry much weigh.

    2. avatar Tom RKBA says:

      He is not a police officer. Is there a Florida law that says he must identify himself when on duty?

      1. avatar swampsniper says:

        He wasn’t specifically “on duty”, it doesn’t work like that.

        1. avatar Byte Stryke says:

          I think that is the entire point.

    3. avatar Splashman says:

      What would be your state of mind when a guy who previously circled your car, and whom you think might be a burglar, pops out from behind a bush when it’s mostly dark?

      “Adrenaline rush”, perhaps? How about “freaked out”? That would be true of me. I wouldn’t be thinking “gotta identify myself”. I wouldn’t be thinking very well at all.

      And remember, we have no reason to believe Zimmerman was some sort of hothead trolling for a confrontation, or a wannabe cop with a head full of LE procedures. He was just trying to be a good citizen, instead of ignoring a suspicious situation.

  4. avatar HAVE GUN says:

    ” Zimmerman never identified himself as the neighborhood watch captain.
    What if he had?”

    The attack by that Martin guy would have started right then and there.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      Yeah. The statement is devoid of meaning. And if it was, it would be better left unsaid. Now we must deal with it.

      Or not.

    2. avatar Model 31 says:

      Kind of sounds like:
      Paul Blart: Neighborhood Watch Captain.

  5. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

    The attempted suffocation stuff has been out there a long time Ralph. 99% of what has been presented thus far at trial has already been known by those of us who have been following this case. This is why I am so certain the this case has been a crock of racial nonsense for well over a year.

    I do appreciate you taking the time to write these summaries.

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      Ditto.

      This case has been a non-issue blown up into a big racial furor that doesn’t exist. Well, OK, it does exist, simply because the race hustling, poverty-pimping industry needs about one case every other year to peddle their BS. But there is no “white vs. black” angle here. There’s no white guy in this case at all, and their conventional playbook failed here. The media is trying desperately to keep their conventional racial crisis perspective alive here.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        It doesn’t matter whether or not Zimmerman is white. Let’s say that he is. So what? There was never any evidence that Zimmerman had any racial animus. The media fed into the issue because that’s what Yellow Journalism is all about, but still . . . .

        This case may or may not be a tragedy of errors, but the race angle has always been bullsh1t.

        1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

          For the race hustling poverty pimps, there’s no need for any racial animus to be in evidence or extant prior to their regularly planned outrages.

          The media, buying the trope of the race hustlers, were peddling the angle that Zimmerman was white when they drummed up the furor for this case to be instigated. Once the prosecutor’s office had brought a case, then people started to realize that Zimmerman wasn’t white, and the narrative that caused the political hacks to bring this case fell apart.

          Now they’re stuck with the results.

        2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

          Ralph, I’m referring to the Martin family attorneys, the Tallahassee race hustlers who have orchestrated the attempted lynching of George Zimmerman. Personally, I would react the same way if Zim was black and Trayvon was white. Good guy vs. thug, regardless of race.

    2. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      yes – suffocation news is old. thanks for the summaries Ralph – I see you are starting to warm up to reasonable doubts for GZ.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        When it comes to the murder count, I never thought that there was any doubt. This was never a murder case. Period.

        Now I think that the state has over-committed to murder and will have a hard time proving manslaughter.

        1. avatar Ropingdown says:

          Self-defense is, though, a complete defense to the manslaughter charge. Given Good’s testimony and the forensic evidence (these two match) I think in any event Zimmerman “regains his self-defense rights” after the straddling-and-beat-down bit. I’m surprise that I heard Toobin say today, “this makes it all the more important for the prosecution to establish Zimmerman as the instigator of physical contact.” Rubbish. That won’t be determinative if Good’s testimony and Zimmerman’s interrogations hold up. I also note Martin was about 30 feet at most from his father’s back door before, for whatever reason, he closed again with the path Zimmerman was walking. I would guess that will likely come up during the defense case.

    3. avatar Steve O says:

      Excactly.

  6. avatar jwm says:

    I took one thing for sure away about the detective’s testimony on the stand. It’s obvious that GZ did not lawyer up, was free with his statements and failed to STFU, at least in the immediate aftermath.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      I made that comment over at Andrew Branca’s blog at Legal Insurrection, and it led to quite a bit of back and forth on the subject. You might find it interesting, as it runs somewhat counter to the “don’t say anything ever, ever, ever” that you generally read here and other specifically gun-centric blogs.

    2. avatar Hryan says:

      Taking recent Supreme Court decisions into account, it is better for him that he did not clam up during the “informal” interrogation sessions. Had he done so, the prosecution could have, and likely would have, used his silence as circumstantial evidence of guilt. For future reference; if you want the protection in court, always specifically invoke your right to remain silent. no matter what

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        That’s not what the decision said. If you invoke, you’re golden. If you answer questions and then clam up without invoking when you’re asked a difficult question, then you may have a problem.

      2. avatar Ropingdown says:

        Ralph, I think Hryan simply said it’s good Zimmerman did not clam up. He did not say it wouldn’t have been even better if he claimed his right to remain silent, and pointed that out in his last clause. We have yet to learn what will happen when someone claims the right every other question, then speaks in between…

      3. avatar jwm says:

        Did those scotus rulings happen before or after this incident?

      4. avatar Michael B. says:

        JWM, they’re talking about the Salinas v. Texas ruling. Basically you have to specifically invoke your fifth amendment rights during a non-custodial interview with the police if you’ve already started answering questions and want to stop to avoid incriminating yourself.

        Solution: Don’t talk to the police without consulting a lawyer first.

        Zimmerman is lucky in that his testimony was pretty much consistent even though the detectives thoroughly grilled him and kept trying to trip him up. I read the transcripts. I’m no expert, but I did take an Interviews and Interrogations in CJ course. They did their job. Sometimes the truth is just the truth.

        I’m not the kind of guy to put a lot of stock in a lie detector test, but if your suspect passes one and after interviewing him for several different hours on different days keeps telling you the same thing? Probably innocent.

        The truth is consistent.

  7. avatar Matt in FL says:

    “Serino himself alluded to the pressure during his cross-examination.”

    I thought the line “There were external concerns about racial profiling and I needed to get that clarified” was one of the most powerful and understated of Serino’s testimony.

    Well, except for when he talked about lying to George about having video of the entire encounter, which led to the question, “And what did Zimmerman say when you told him that?” The answer: “Thank God. I was hoping someone got it.” When asked, “What does that response, ‘Thank God,’ tell you about the person who says it?” Answer: “They’re either telling the truth or they’re a pathological liar.”

    Last question: “Do you think George Zimmerman was telling you the truth?” Answer: “Yes.”

    Mark O’Mara did a masterful job of just letting that answer hang in the air, resonating like a bell that’s just been rung. He fiddled with some papers on the podium for about 10 seconds until the Judge realized it was six o’clock, the time she said they were going to end, and she called the recess. That solid, simple “Yes.” is what the jurors took home with them tonight.

    If you want more in-depth information, I highly recommend you check out Andrew Branca’s blog over at Legal Insurrection. You can find the summary of today here, and to all of his posts here.

    1. avatar Tommy Knocker says:

      Absolutely agree. My non-lawyer opinion is that this case is a shear disaster for the state. As the lawyer Mark Geragos said on cnn tonite, in his opinion the cops got thrown under the bus when prosecutors charged murder 2. Now its payback time.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        the cops got thrown under the bus when prosecutors charged murder 2

        It looks to me like the cops also feel that they were thrown under the bus and they are not happy about it.

        While the MSM has been breaking GZ’s balls since day one, almost every commentator that I heard agreed that M2 was a clear case of overcharging. Now the prosecution is paying for it.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Mark O’Mara did a masterful job

      O’Mara has been very good from day one. So, too, was Don West after his failed knock-knock joke. But let’s face it — West had to cross that antagonistic girl who was really the state’s star witness so far. O’Mara cross examined cops that seemed — to me at least — to be on Zimmerman’s side. West had the harder job, and he did it well.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        I agree. People bitch about West being boring, but he’s really, really good. He’s great at the question/objection/rephrase/objection/rephrase/objection/I’ll move on game. Pound the point home with the questions, don’t worry about the answers. I should hope that if I ever find myself in need of an attorney I can find one as good as him.

        What’s your opinion on the knock-knock joke being a purposeful “shock” to make the jury forget about what came before? I can certainly see the logic in the theory, although I still think he expected it to land better than it did. But laugh or not, I think it accomplished the task of providing a mental break after the prosecution’s opener.

        1. avatar Ralph says:

          I think that the joke was close to malpractice. But he’s recovered extremely well. They guy is a good lawyer.

        2. avatar Bob says:

          If he loses (they find GZ guilty), the knock-knock joke is grounds for appeal. What’s wrong with that?

  8. avatar stateisevil says:

    Again, I know ttag is trying to sound reasonable and all, but the fact is that this is a show trial. If not for the media, we would have never heard of either GZ or TV and GZ would never have even been arrested.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      I have to agree. This case was exploited by the MSM to attack “stand your ground” laws both in Florida and nationally, and exploited by the progressive left for its nonexistent racial angles. I still remember that the same weekend, 50 (black) people were shot in Chicago, and it didn’t even make the front page, pushed aside by this tempest in a teapot. Reverse racism, anyone?

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      that this is a show trial

      No. A show trial is where the state puts on a trial and controls the verdict, which is a conviction. This is not a show trial.

      1. avatar B says:

        Which type of trial is the one where the state thinks it controls the verdict and is then slapped down by the people?

        1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          A temporary setback that must be corrected through new oppressive laws in the name of fairness and social justice?

  9. avatar ihatetrees says:

    When the prosecution went forward, I assumed they had more, substantial information from witnesses. I figured they’d go for murder and be happy getting manslaughter.

    But sheesh – if the standard for conviction for anything is to establish guilt ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’, there’s already enough. And the defense hasn’t even started its case. Unless the prosecution has a bombshell witness or some other evidence / narrative, they’ve got a very difficult case to make.

  10. avatar In Memphis says:

    Thank you for these summaries Ralph. Even if I had cable I would try to avoid watching the trial, simply because the MSM needs ratings for something (I think) they helped push. Still though, I am curious to everything going on.

    1. avatar Mark N. says:

      I won’t watch either, and even my wife was complaining that she couldn’t get any news this afternoon because of the trial broadcast.

    2. avatar Gyufygy says:

      What IM said.

    3. avatar jwm says:

      IM, I only have cable when I’m at the gym. Then it’s closed captioned. One tv is always tuned to the news so when I’m on the treadmill I watch it.

    4. avatar Ralph says:

      @In Memphis, I’m watching the case streaming for the most part. No cable needed.

  11. avatar Aharon says:

    JPD, thanks man. I’ll be hanging out at the local open-all-night burger joint. I was originally going to write the local White Castle Hamburger yet a hyper-sensitive type might read something non-PC into that name considering my above comment about the Obango Youth Corp.

    1. avatar Avid Reader says:

      If you’re going to hang at the WC, make sure their WC is available or it could be a REALLY long night. . .

  12. avatar Tom Collins says:

    Why has the fact that TM jumped the fence into a gated community been omitted or ignored? That is a huge point in my eyes. Is it just me? WTFO?!?!

    1. avatar In Memphis says:

      Did I miss something? He was on that property legaly. Im not defending Martin but all this mess aside he had reason to be there.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      Tom Collins, he took a shortcut to go “home.” That’s what fit 17 year-olds do.

      1. avatar Matt in FL says:

        Ralph is right. Teenagers jump fences, it’s just what they do. That said, he entered the development from the NW corner, and there’s no fence there, just a hedge with big, man-sized gaps in it.

  13. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    You know, this trial almost makes me think I don’t want to remain silent if I ever have to defend myself and the police ask questions. It looks to me like the key is to make sure that you only speak while the police are video taping and make sure that you really were lawfully defending yourself.

    I guess we’ll see if it was a good idea if the jury finds Zimmerman not guilty.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      The rule is STFU. In this case, if GZ had done so, he might be doomed. Call this the exception that proves the rule.

    2. avatar Tom RKBA says:

      The reason one STFU is because adrenaline does weird things to the brain, including jumbling up sequences. You do NOT want to go on record saying the wrong thing. Correcting it makes you look like a liar.

      1. avatar Alan Rose says:

        Innocent people in good shoots have talked their way into prison or have been otherwise railroaded by specious facts and overzealous prosecutors. I’m sure Massad Ayoob et al have a few articles on this phenomena. Harold Fish comes to mind.

  14. avatar JSF01 says:

    This might sound bad, but I am kind of hoping for a not guilty verdict and seeing race riots as a result. Now Its not to see pointless destruction or people getting hurt, or even to possibly see gun owners taking up arms to protect them selves and their property like the Korean’s did during the LA riots, which imagery of could help our cause. No I am thinking if there are race riots they can be blamed entirely on the main stream media reporting on this entire case. while I am not really fallowing the news on this case, it seams that every time I catch it on somewhere, its all being portrayed as Zimmerman is guilty, an things are going quite well for the prosecution. I would love to see the big news outlets sued for any damages caused by any riots because what they are doing is very close to shouting “Fire” in a crowded theater. They are basically creating and priming a powder keg to explode by their actions.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      Might sound bad?

    2. avatar Bob says:

      I’d like to see the MSM held accountable for some of the terrible reporting/propaganda they produce, but it won’t happen due to this case. Too many people have fallen for the ‘media narrative’ in this country, and it will take more than this one case to break that indoctrination.

      I’m hoping GZ is found not guilty. However, I can’t help wondering if our perspective is coloring the way we are seeing the testimony so far. We are viewing from the “I could be GZ” perspective. Some or all of the jurors may be viewing from the “I could be TM” perspective, so they may be interpreting things very differently.

      1. avatar Ralph says:

        We are viewing from the “I could be GZ” perspective.

        That’s a very wise thing to say. Thank you.

    3. avatar Greg in Allston says:

      Ahh, can one ever really get enough hope….and change. The Summer of ’13, when America’s urban cores went up in flames, making the ’67 and ’68 riots look like a peaceful, languorous Sunday picnic in the park. Just think, in a few years we can all look back and think to ourselves good times, good times indeed, those were the days, those lazy, hazy, crazy days of summer. I’m getting all misty eyed and nostalgic right now thinking about all the, wonderful, cherished memories that we’ll all have and be able to share.

      JSF01, Dude!, WTF!!

      Here’s what I’m hoping; that justice is served, everyone chills the hell out, and that nobody get harmed or killed.

      1. avatar JSF01 says:

        I am thinking big picture here. Now It might just be the area I am in but I am getting the feeling that any riots that would happen would be relatively small ones. Hopefully with smaller riots injuries and death would be minimal to none. With some smaller riots hopefully it would be enough of a wake up call that news media needs to be responsible for what they are saying and they cant just be pushing an agenda or trying to get high ratings by manipulating peoples emotions.

        It is my opinion it is better to have some small riots now to call attention to the problem (of the news media picking a side in order to get high ratings and push an agenda), then have nothing happen now, and the next time we do get large riots like 67 and 68, because of the media manipulating peoples opinions.

    4. avatar DerryM says:

      You forget about the MSM’s “Teflon Coat” which they stole from Ronald Reagan.

    5. avatar Alan Rose says:

      The anti-2A MSM needs to be (threatened or) saddled with government restrictions similar to anti-gun laws. Maybe then they’ll figure out what side they should be on.

      1. avatar Alan Rose says:

        I’m more interested in what all the pro-Martin/anti-2A celebrities are going to say/do once the not guilty verdict comes out. As of last weekend there were plenty parading about in their Martin tee shirts.

    6. avatar tdiinva says:

      I don’t think that there will be nationwide rioting over an acquittal. The White House and media certainly hope so but my guess is that most everybody in the black community knows that Martin was a punk and would eventually end up on a slab if not by George Zimmerman’s hand then by some real gangbanger who he pissed off.

  15. avatar Mike in NC says:

    Another key detail about those interview/interrogation recordings is that GZ participated in ALL of them without any legal counsel.

    At the current rate of progress the prosecution is making for the defense, this case should be decided by a directed verdict when the state rests, but I doubt Judge Nelson will make that leap.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      Wait and see. The prosecution may have something earth-shaking coming soon. Most prosecutors will hold their best stuff for last, because the jury will remember it better.

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      @Mike in NC, I don’t think that the judge should dismiss the charges in toto or direct the verdict. If she does, she risks a retrial, which everybody would hate. The state would hate the cost, and GZ would hate the continuation of jeopardy.

      IMO her best option would be to take the motion under consideration yet allow the case to proceed. If, after the defense case, the jury acquits, that’s that.

      If they convict and she disagrees, I believe that under FL law she has the power to enter a verdict NOV. The appellate court would then have an entire, fully litigated case to consider and she could be reversed or sustained. In neither case would a whole new trial necessarily be required.

      It’s just cleaner that way. FL lawyers, please correct me if I am wrong.

  16. avatar Namvet says:

    Racist!? There is a RACIST in here? OMG what is the world coming to?

  17. avatar DerryM says:

    The MSM are missing the key fact that George Zimmerman was PRIMARILY CONCERNED with catching a person who had been burglarizing homes in the complex, AND that he NEVER expected to end-up in a confrontation with the person he was calling the Police about and observing (following). He saw a kid he’d never seen in the Complex before and got suspicious this person was connected with the recent burglaries. A reasonable conclusion.

    On the other hand Trayvon Martin was never expecting to have anyone challenge why he was there AND never considered the person he was getting angry with for following him could possibly be a Concealed Carry Weapons permit holder (Florida is a “shall issue” State and it is a serious miscalculation to ever consider physically confronting anyone else in such a State and not consider they might be a CCW permit holder). Martin had been in the Complex for 1 or 2 weeks staying with his Dad’s Fiancee, apparently because of some School trouble, and he had never seen George Zimmerman before.

    Martin became angry that this “creepy-ass cracker” was messing with him, figured he could easily take him in a fight, had no idea Zimmerman was a Neighborhood Watchman, or that previously other people had been burglarizing the complex. He made a bad (fatal) decision to confront and attack Zimmerman. Getting angry on Martin’s part under these circumstances is also a reasonable conclusion (most people don’t don’t take too kindly to this kind of behavior on a stranger’s part).

    Neither person anticipated the possibilities accurately nor made proper assessments of the other. Both acted on grossly incompatible conclusions about the situation and the result was a “tragedy of errors”.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      I would have been pissed off to be followed like that, especially at that age. I might have told GZ to f off.

      The difference is, I never would have just walked up, broken his nose, and started working him over. Never would have occurred to me to open with violence. Again, assuming that is what happened as seems to be the case for now.

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        I would not have opened the exchange with an attack either, but other people would do differently..namely, get pissed and throw a punch at the other guy…just depends on your temperament. TM was on the “more aggressive” side of the Bell Curve of possible responses.

        1. avatar mary says:

          TM punched Zimmerman in the nose when, Zimmerman reached down to supposedly get his cell phone out of his pocket. If a man had been following you for no reason, then he tries to reach into his pocket for a gun or something, wouldn’t you try to protect yourself. TM was only trying to protect himself before Zimmerman COULD DO BOBILY HARM TO HIM. I have heard several cops say that they killed a person because they thought the person was going for a gun. This case is showing the world how black men are treated in the Justice System in this country. This case is saying that TM DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROTECT HIM because he was afraid for his life, BUT ZIMMERMAN HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT HIMSELF FROM BOBILY HARM. WHERE IS THE JUSTICE IN THAT?

        2. avatar DerryM says:

          @mary Your racism is showing along with your ignorance. There’s no question of “BOBILY HARM” in this case. There is a question of “BODILY HARM”, however. The Law requires that a person need only believe he/she is in danger of bodily harm, so if TM punched GZ when he saw him reach in his pocket he could have felt in fear of bodily harm and thrown a punch. No problem. Once TM threw the punch, jumped on top of GZ and started pummeling him, he put the matter of fear of bodily harm into GZ’s court. Both had the right to defend themselves based on their state of belief of the threat of imminent bodily harm from the other and the terms of Florida Law.
          Your blanket assertions and rhetorical question: “This case is showing the world how black men are treated in the Justice System in this country. This case is saying that TM DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROTECT HIM because he was afraid for his life, BUT ZIMMERMAN HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT HIMSELF FROM BOBILY HARM. WHERE IS THE JUSTICE IN THAT?”…are merely poorly thought-through speculation and race-baiting on your part.
          This Case is about self-defense under the terms of Florida Law. Nothing more, nothing less. I, personally, have no predisposition as to whether GZ should be acquitted or convicted, but I do have an interest about how this Jury interprets the evidence presented and admitted in Court to arrive at their verdict. I would have that interest regardless of the race or ethnicity of the two persons involved. In this Case the distinction of who was ultimately in the right or in the wrong revolves around where is the tipping point of who was justified in defending themselves against the other and to what extent. That, essentially, is what the Jury will decide in their verdict. It may affect future Cases of a similar nature in Florida.
          If I could have my “druthers”, I would wish GZ’s shot had never been fired, or that it would have missed TM, landed harmlessly in a nearby swamp and the encounter ended when the Police arrived in the next 10 seconds. That, sadly, is not the case.

          BTW here’s a URL you might find helpful in reading my response: http://www.dictionary.com;

  18. avatar Rebecca says:

    I’ve already pointed out the lack of wounds on Trayvon Martin’s hands from the coroner’s report. Here’s a video of George Zimmerman being taken to the police station the night of the incident:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oJjeUY6I-A

    On this video, I’d like to ask questions: where’s the blood on his shirt from the bloodied nose? Where’s the wound(s) on the back of his head? Why doesn’t his nose look misshapen?

    1. avatar Juliesa says:

      On that video, the resolution is so poor that that the facial features of the police can hardly be discerned.

      Watch the trial. The injuries were documented by the EMT at the scene and by a PA the next day. The police investigators also noticed the injuries. Photos were taken at the scene that clearly show blood and a swollen nose. Anyone who bases her opinion of the case on this low res security video is misleading herself.

      The fact that Zimmerman had some injuries is not in dispute, nor is injury necessary to meet the standard of self defense.

      I don’t like taking sides as for a football team, but I can’t help but remark that many who are are sure GZ is guilty of murder are just ignorant of any basic facts. Of course, the media are partly to blame for this. They’ve deliberately misled the public on this story from the beginning.

    2. avatar Joke & Dagger says:

      Rebecca, did you miss the up close pictures taken at the scene with the blood and mis-shapen nose? You have been reaching the last few days, and badly.

  19. avatar Kirk says:

    The prosecution has utterly failed to make the case for Second Degree Murder or any of the lesser includes charges. Anyone paying any attention is not surprised by this.

    The prosecution’s witnesses were at best terrible and at worst helpful to the defense. Investigators testifying today averred they believed George Zimmerman and that they did not believe there was sufficient evidence to warrant any charges.

    The only outstanding question at this time is whether the defense team will present their case because the prosecution has failed to provide anything to defend against.

  20. avatar Ropingdown says:

    The prosecution hasn’t begun to deal with the “reasonable fear of…” self-defense issues yet. I’m looking forward to see how they’ll deal with that.

  21. avatar swampsniper says:

    Thinking back to when I was 17 I would have realized why I was being watched and called out “hey, I’m visiting down the street, staying with my father”. I wouldn’t have had that chip on my shoulder telling me that I was being “dissed”.

  22. avatar g says:

    Good summary, Ralph. While I’m definitely not in the camp of GZ being some sort of 2A saint of self defense, the evidence and testimony that keeps getting brought up re-affirms that a lot of dumb decisions were made on both sides, GZ and Martin… now one guy is dead, and another faces jail time. I think it’s foolish for law-abiding gun owners to continue to hold up GZ as an example – anytime you’re involved in a DGU, you had better had damned be sure you have 100% legit reason to pull the trigger and end another human’s life. We’ll probably never the know the truth.

    The prosecution was dumb to charge GZ with murder 2. They *perhaps* could have gotten a manslaughter charge on account of criminal negligence, or even just recklessness. We’ll see how well GZ’s lawyers can play their profession and get GZ, but I regardless of the criminal trial account, I bet a civil suit for wrongful death is already waiting in the wings.

    1. avatar Michael B. says:

      I think it’s foolish for law-abiding gun owners to continue to hold up GZ as an example

      Who the f**k is doing this, exactly?

      So many of you on the left wanted the guy to really be guilty but it doesn’t look like things are going your way.

      Zimmerman’s no saint. He’s kind of a dumb schmuck and if he’s an example of anything, it’s WHAT NOT TO DO. It’s best to mind your own business and do as little as possible unless someone is being attacked.

      But Zimmerman’s also not the demon your side has consistently tried to portray him as.

      I will say that you are being more reasonable about this than Rebecca above, who hasn’t been paying attention at all and still really wants to see him go down.

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        Agree. Are people who CC biased toward believing GZ as others have said? I guess that can’t be avoided. I have seen some pro-GZ fanatics.

        However, the ones I see truly pushing a point of view regardless of facts (or lack thereof) are the left. I’m sure they all have different reasons. In addition to ideology, there is a financial side. The media want good TV drama for ratings.

        Regardless, the gun grabbers would really love an example of concealed carry gone bad, since there are so few to be found. The available data point to CC by law-abiding citizens as a pure, unmitigated plus, and the leftists would love a good anecdote or two to combat that.

        “Innocent kid minding his own business shot by CC vigilante nutjob? Perfect! If the facts don’t fit that narrative, we’ll just twist the facts until they do.”

  23. avatar TRP says:

    I’ve been watching the trial on-and-off during the day. Good to educated yourself should you ever end up in Zimmerman’s shoes. As stated earlier, not only does Zimmerman have to defend himself in court, but in the court of public opinion. The main street media is so biased that they will never present both sides (Martin’s angry posts about fighting and wanting to by a gun, etc…), nor will that information be allowed in court….

  24. avatar Alan Rose says:

    So what if he was El Capitan of the HoodWatch? That gives him no authority over nothin’ and if he had done so, would go to (wrongly) prove his inflated sense of himself.

    As far as Martin covering Z’s mouth and (broken) nose, and the prosecution’s opening allusion to there being no blood on Martin’s hands, we also heard that there was blood on Martin’s hoodie hem. Has anyone besides me figured out yet that maybe Martin was using the hem to get a better seal over Z’s air-holes?

    Likewise, police finally figured out several years ago that restricting a suspect’s breathing is NOT a good way to gain compliance, as that tends to make even the most complacent suspect “resist” as they work to satisfy the human body’s need to breathe.

    1. avatar swampsniper says:

      Blood on Martin’s hands would have been wiped off by the wet grass, the ground was soggy. I also heard that the crime scene techs did not bag Martin’s hands before they moved the body.

  25. avatar Alan Rose says:

    I can already feel NBC’s plans for a “Trayvon Martin” movie of the week getting quietly axed. My wife made me watch the movie about whats-her-name-that-stabbed-and-shot-her-BF that came on last week. Made the BF look like an angel, which he most definitely was NOT according to court testimony. Sainthood for Martin will not be so forthcoming.

  26. avatar Fug says:

    Neighborhood Watch operative is not exactly a title that carries any weight. Given what has been demonstrated about Trayvon through young man’s own words and selfies, I think he would have beat Zimmerman’s ass anyway.

    I don’t know if there was any hope for Trayvon becoming a good citizen. Maybe there was, but he got killed the way countless young men before him have… he picked a fist fight with a man over nothing and got shot. If you are pummeling someone into the ground you should not be surprised when you hear a sudden bang underneath you or feel a knife in your belly.

    Personally I can’t believe they tried to say Zimmerman was on top of Trayvon, when he was a fraction of Trayvon’s size and had injuries to both the front and back of his head. Did Trayvon have any injuries other than a bullet wound? I doubt it.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email