The lie that Zimmerman told that should convict him

[Duer 157099]

(assuming his account his accurate)

"...and then he (TM) said to me 'You got a problem?' and I said 'No, I don't have a problem.'"

BULLSHIT! Why did GZ tell TM there was no problem? He lied to him. Why didn't he just idenfify himself as a resident, or associated with Neighborhood Watch, or WHATEVER, and tell TM that 911 had already been called and were on their way because he, GZ had a problem with TM being there? Yes, he most certainly had a problem! Telling TM there wasn't a problem was enough to convinced TM that the problem was GZ!

The minute GZ lies to TM by telling him there is no problem, in effect HIDING his agenda from TM, is the reason TM rightfully was justified in him thinking GZ WAS the problem. If someone is clearly following me and then I ask them if they are following me and they deny it, I know without doubt that there is a problem. If they admit that they're following me because they think I'm up to no good, then I at least understand why they think they have to follow me. But telling TM that he didn't have a problem was clear evidence that GZ was HIDING SOMETHING. If I'm Trayvon, I'm much more concerned now than I was before.

I hope the jury really can see through all the bullshit and get to the point, which is that this was ALL the fault of Zimmerman. 100%.

[virgogal]

1. I'm confused. So if someone says there is not a problem

you assume there is a problem. If they say there is a problem you assume there isn't one.

Strange logic IMHO.

[uppityperson]

7. Rather than saying "I am neighborhood watch" he basically said he was following for some other

purpose, leaving it up to Trayvon to figure out what that purpose was.

For me, personally, if someone is following me and id's themselves as neighborhood watch, or pounds on the door and id's as police, I'd have a much different take than some random stranger following me or pounding on my door.

[Duer 157099]

41. ESPECIALLY if that person is armed, right???

It's astounding that people cannot see the difference here, or rather, what is crystal clear to me: Zimmerman acted like he was a cop, period. And his delusion led him to believe that TM should have ALSO acted as if GZ was a cop, which is, don't worry about that guy packing heat, he's a good guy. When TM sees the gun, at whatever point that happened, he was absolutely fucking right to panick, as clearly evidenced by the outcome!

Every last thing that TM suspected about GZ was absolutely accurate.

Every last thing that GZ suspected about TM was absolutely inaccurate.

PERIOD.

[Skittles]

51. THANK YOU

one of these two folk feared for his life and it was NOT the gun-toting vigilante

[Jenoch]

54. Did Martin know

Zimmerman was armed?

[Dawgs]

55. Unfortunately, we may never know. Only one that will tell us was shot dead.

But regardless, the point is still accurate. Trayvon, if he saw that Zimmerman was armed, reacted in defense if he didn't realize that Zimmererman was a neighborhood watch person.

[Jenoch]

67. Zimmerman needed to identify himself as a

neighborhood watch person. I don't know how Martin would have reacted to that, but the chances are better than the outcome that did happen. As I have written on these threads before, I think a neighborhood watch person should be armed only with a cellphone and maybe pepper spray. Call 911 and maybe take a photo of suspicious activity.

I don't think Treyvon knew Zimmerman was armed. He might not have participated in any altercation had he known that.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

90. That makes sense. I'm still baffled by the fact that Zimmerman did not identify himself.

Even the detective who was questioning him asked him plainly: Why didn't you just reveal yourself as a Neighborhood Watchman?

I mean, really. Doesn't Zimmerman's actions even matter in this trial? He could have diffused the situation just by using some plain ole common sense.

If I'm being followed by someone, especially as a woman, I am scared shitless. I will do anything necessary to protect myself, including throwing the first punch if someone is physically coming at me. Doesn't Trayvon deserve the slightest benefit of the doubt?

[Jenoch]

95. As I have stated before,

I'm not a fan of armed neighborhood watch programs. (I wonder if others in the same neighborhood watch group were armed with guns?)

The problem the prosecution has is that even though Zimmerman should not have done what he did when he acted like a cop and got out of his car to pursue Martin, under Florida law, if there was an altercation where Martin threw the first punch, then the Florida self-defense law kicks in and Zimmerman has a right to use deadly force if he is afraid for his life.
That is the law and it upsets many here on DU. It upsets me. Zimmerman was responsible for a chain of events that resulted in Martin's death. The particulars of the law get in the way of simply frying Zimmerman in the chair, if Florida still has one.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

102. No, it sounds like what you're describing is the Stand Your Ground law, not a self defense

law.

Again, I personally don't give a fuck if Trayvon drew the first punch. If Trayvon feared for his life, he had every right to. Why is self defense only afforded to Zimmerman and not to Trayvon?

Zimmerman is burying himself. There's no need for the prosecution to do that for him. His statements are inconsistent.

He has to show that he was fearful of his life. He has to show that his wounds were life threatening. We've already heard today that his wounds were NOT life threatening.

Zimmerman is full of shit. And his defenders are also full of shit.

Welcome to IGNORE. Enjoy replying to yourself.

[Jenoch]

107. I was not describing stand your ground law.

I was describing the self defense law. I am also not a Zimmerman supporter. I have numerous time said I think what he did was wrong and should be found guilty of at least manslaughter. I have been posting facts, and not emotion.

[reusrename]

115. Under the FL statutes it doesn't matter who started it.

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—

The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant...

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html

As long as he was afraid of the black kid, he had every right under FL law to pick a fight with him, get his ass kicked, and then shoot him to death.

I honestly believe that if Zimmerman had told the truth from the beginning then the law could not touch him at all here. Ironically, it's his lies that brought this thing to trial.

[Jenoch]

118. That's interesting.

I'll have to pay more attention to the trial to see when this part of the law is addressed.

[blkrjoe]

142. Why didn't Zimmerman Identify Himself?

Isn't this the 64,000 dollar question? Surely, if he would have identified himself as a member of the neighborhood watch patrol, the young man would have responded differently. Shouldn't ANYONE who carries a concealed weapon (under the same given circumstances) bear the weight of responsibility of identifying themselves? What white male being followed by an older black male wouldn't be scared to the point of provocation? How does one weigh an old fashion butt whipping against a life being snuffed out? Twenty years from now Mr. Zimmerman's broken nose, his busted head will only be a memory - against a life that is snuffed out completely! All because he made the decision against following professional advice not to follow, and continued to do so. And, when confronted chose not to identify himself!! It's ludicrous his position he shot him out of self defense even if he was getting his butt whipped. Somewhere in the confrontation, "I'm on the neighborhood watch patrol" would have diffused everything. Very sad and tragic!!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

143. Indeed!! These are questions that the Zimmerman Cheerleaders refuse to answer. Why?

Because an unarmed black kid is always presumed guilty and never given the benefit of the doubt.

Yet, they will bend over backwards to give Zimmerman, a known perjurer with a history of violence, all the benefit!!!

[Dawgs]

120. "He might not have participated in any altercation had he known" .. "Zimmerman was armed."

What? That's exactly why Trayvon might participate in an altercation. If Zimmerman pulled out a gun, while not identifying himself, on a dark and stormy night, it makes perfect sense that Martin might get in a scuffle with Zimmerman to prevent getting shot.

He probably was already scared as shit.

[reusrename]

114. Zimmerman had prepared by becoming "armed and dangerous."

Then he behaved in an "armed and dangerous" manner.

The Martin boy had every reason to be scared.

To answer your question, yes, at some point near the end of his life he knew Zimmerman had a gun. He probably also knew that Zimmerman was living out his favorite fantasy.

[Jenoch]

117. Wow. I'm trying to deal with the facts

of this case. At some point, it does appear Msrtin became aware of Zimmerman's gun. That may have been his undoing.

[reusrename]

128. I know, the facts are pretty damning.

Unless you think our brave, soldier for justice, Zimmerman would have acted this way if he were unarmed.

He fantasized about this killing long before he ever say the Martin boy. There is no other motive, is there?

[Jenoch]

131. I am unaware of any evidence

about Zimmer
An's fantasies being presented at the trial. Which witness provided this information?

I'm curious about this, but don't assume I'm a Zimmerman defender. I think he must do prison time, but I don't know if the prosecution is doing enough.

[reusrename]

132. What other motive is there?

Process of elimination, really.

[Jenoch]

134. I think it is more likely

that Zimmerman was afraid and shot his gun than it iszthat he had murder fantasies that wished to act upon.

[reusrename]

135. Wtf? If he was afraid of him, why did he follow him?

That's idiotic.

[Jenoch]

137. Watch the trial.

[reusrename]

138. I'm terrified that kid is going to kill me, let me follow him.

Right.

I've got a concealed 9mm against an unarmed teenager, I'm scared for my life.

Sure.

What a bunch of crap.

You honestly believe this stuff? Really? You don't think he had this fantasy of killing a punk.

[Jenoch]

139. Why would I think he had a fantasy about killing someone?

I have not seen anything that provides information about his fantasies. If you have such information, I will read it.

[reusrename]

140. It is called the process of elimination.

There is no other even slightly plausible explanation for what he did.

We know pretty precisely what his actions were. What other reason could he possibly have for behaving the way he behaved other than to fulfill a twisted fantasy?

[Jenoch]

141. You're right, there is NO other explanation for his actions.

[Duer 157099]

10. I'm saying that when TM asked GZ, essentially, why he was following him, GZ denied it

When given the opportunity to explain himself, he declines. Of course it will escalate from there!

He had ALREADY spoken with the police dispatch, so very, very clearly he had a problem. Do you agree with that? GZ had a problem. No question.

[crim son]

36. I think you make an excellent point.

I'd be interested to know how such watch people are trained to proceed with an encounter or confrontations. I'd imagine they would be instructed to introduce themselves but I don't know, and no doubt it would depend on the circumstance.

[liberal from boston]

44. Neighborhood Watch

From what I read over a year ago The Neighborhood Watch Org. responded that they had an initial orientation with the tenants. During that time they asked who would be interested in training. GZ was the only one who volunteered but he never went thru the training. I remember that the Neighborhood Watch highlighted the fact that Neighborhood Watch persons should not carry firearms & should notify the police & not pursue the suspected criminal.

[bettyellen]

74. and he was supposed to recruit others and assign each block a captain and never did either...

he had a problem with authority - probably afraid someone would cramp his freewheeling style.

[virgogal]

83. I certainly agree with you in this instance. I was referring

to this statement. " If someone is clearly following me and then I ask them if they are following me and they deny it, I know without doubt that there is a problem. If they admit that they're following me because they think I'm up to no good, then I at least understand why they think they have to follow me."

I thought you meant it as a general rule in all cases.

[Duer 157099]

84. Well, it can be somewhat generalized

If someone is behaving oddly towards me, I mean not just my perception but objectively out-of-the-norm, and I ask them about it and they deny it, in some ways that means not only was I correct, but it is so severe that they think they can't talk to me about it. Do you follow my logic?

On the other hand, if they go "Oh, yeah, I was having a hard time that day.." or whatever, then I understand.

Yes it sounds contradictory, but I think there's a logic there. Clearly it is only for very specific situations, and I think the Zimmerman/Martin situation falls into that category, at least to my way of thinking.

And perhaps to Trayvon's way too, because he already knew that GZ had a problem with him before he even asked him. Had George said something like "Yeah man, I was just wondering what you were doing." it may have totally defused the situation.

[demwing]

127. yes you are confused

the OP explained it pretty damned clearly.

I take it back, I don't think you're confused, I think you are attempting to confuse others, or worse yet, to score an imaginary point in a game of verbal one-upmanship.

[frylock]

2. i'm still trying to understand how GZ unholsters his firearm..

with Martin allegedly straddling GZ, covering his mouth and pounding his head on the sidewalk.

[brush]

12. Me too.

zimmy has lied a number of times, including to a judge in court about his finances, but the biggest one, IMHO, is about having his head bashed against the concrete sidewalk.

Anyone who believes that you just get up and walk away from having your head "repeatedly bashed" onto concrete like zimmerman claimed is either naive, stupid, in denial, or their judgment is clouded by their biases.

Human heads + repeated concrete bashing = concussion, cracked skull, semi-consciousness, or knocked totally the fuck out.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, just gets up from that with nothing but a couple of small scratches and a little blood (note: there was no blood found on the sidewalk where zimmy said this allegedly happened).

zimmerman is a lying sack of you know what who thinks people are stupid to believe such crapola. And remember, zimmy has a history of 1.) arrest in a bar where he punched an undercover cop 2.) restraining order by a girlfriend 3.) getting fired from a job for manhandling a woman at a party where he was hired as security. None of that is admissible but he clearly has a history of confronting or attacking others - particularly weaker opponents. He was taking martial arts training at the local gym. EVERYTHING points to GZ attaching TM.

[fleur-de-lisa]

21. About the 'head bashing' . . .

a few days ago someone on DU (sorry, can't remember who) suggested that the injuries to GZ's head might have been from the recoil of the gun when he shot TM. That would account for his swollen nose . . . gun kicks back and hits him in the face. And the force of it would have knocked his head backward into the pavement, which would account for the wound on the back of his skull. I think TM may have seen the gun after the hand-to-hand conflict started and was trying to keep GZ from shooting him.

This works with the testimony of some witnesses who thought GZ was on the bottom and TM was above, straddling GZ.

This seems like a very plausible explanation. Kudos to the DUer who came up with this scenario. Now if only the prosecution makes a good enough presentation, Zimmie should be convicted.

[brush]

22. Except zimmerman claims Martin was

Last edited Tue Jul 2, 2013, 12:04 AM - Edit history (1)

"repeatedly bashing" his head against the concrete. Those are zimmerman's words. You can't play word games to get around that.

He never mentioned that a recoil knocked his head backwards. And that would be just one blow anyway, not the "repeated bashing" zimmy claimed.

The bashing, IMHO, is a cock and bull story to cover his ass. He knew he had to come up with something because he had just murdered an unarmed teen.

The recoil makes some sense for the busted nose, but for the "repeatedly bashed" head, no.

zimmerman is a liar.

[fleur-de-lisa]

24. Oh, I agree completely that GZ is a liar.

Nothing about his story makes sense. His lies about the 'repeated head bashing' are only a lame excuse for murdering an unarmed and innocent kid.

It doesn't seem to me that his wounds were consistent with 'repeated head bashing' caused by TM. The whole back of his head would have been bruised and bloodied if that were true.

[brush]

32. Yes, and he would have a concussion, possible skull fracture . . .

if not knocked completely out.

[notadmblnd]

78. His wounds don't support the repeated bashing senario

There should have been gray matter on the sidewalk from repeated bashing of head into sidewalk.

I was the one who suggested recoil from the gun, but what makes even more sense to me now that I have seen his re-enactment of the crime video, is a tree branch. I think he ran into a tree a small tree branch, smacked his nose on it and then went on the scratch the back of his head on it.

He didn't mention that he smacked his face on a tree branch either, but what he did say in that re enactment video is that he tripped or fell somehow.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

94. Neither does the alleged broken nose. No offensive wounds on Trayvon's hands or knuckles. NONE!

[Jenoch]

108. Huh?

"There should have been gray matter on the sidewalk...".

The only way there would have been 'gray matter' is if Zimmerman's skull was cracked open and his brain oozed out. I don't think anyone has made such a claim. Hyperbole does not help with this discussion.

[notadmblnd]

119. You need to slow down and re-read what I wrote

nt

[fleur-de-lisa]

123. Hey nota . . .

I apologize that I didn't remember who put the gun recoil theory forward. It makes a whole lot of sense. - FDL

[drhobo]

72. That injury could not be from recoil of Zimmerman's pistol.

Trust this gun owner, a little 9mm Kel-tec will not recoil with enough force to make that type of injury even if you hold it with two fingers and rest it against your nose. 9mm is too weak and the pistol too light, its not even remotely close enough.

Now if he was firing a .308 rifle off his nose it might do that.

I think the focus needs to get back on who started the confrontation.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

96. We all know who started the confrontation. It was Zimmerman. He admits that he continued to

follow Trayvon. I'm sorry, but that's confrontation there. He should have stayed his fat ass in the car and waited for the police.

A complete stranger is following me. Now I don't know about you, but as a woman, I would immediately feel threatened. Had Zimmerman at least identified who he was: "I'm a Neighborhood Watchman and I'm just checking out this situation," that would be one thing. It's altogether another, if you're physically pursuing someone who has done nothing wrong. You can't then turn around and claim self defense if that person acts out of fear of being physically harmed. I don't blame Trayvon. I would've beat Zimmerman's wanna-be ass, too!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

93. O.K., so let's accept for a minute that Trayvon did bash Zimmerman's head..

...Zimmerman also claimed that he had a bloody, broken nose. However, there are no offensive wounds on Trayvon's knuckles. I know that pro-Zimmerman apologists claim that the rain may have washed away all traces of DNA. However, I find it hard to believe that even the most torrential of rain would magically erase bruises on knuckles from a fist jamming into someone else's face.

Zimmerman is a liar. And his cheerleaders have no credibility.

[kskiska]

52. The physician's assistant testified that Zimmerman was already seeing a shrink

Maybe he had anger management problems.

[yardwork]

82. Zimmerman was fired from a job as a bouncer because he was too violent.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/31/1079454/-Zimmerman-was-Fired-from-Security-Job-after-he-Snapped

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

97. History of violence: (1) domestic abuse charge and (2) striking a police officer charge.

Now, he was never convicted. He negotiated a plea bargain.

But again, if we're going to treat Trayvon Martin as if he's guilty of something, then we must be fair when it comes to Zimmerman. Yes, Trayvon had minor bouts with the law for marijuana possession. But he had no criminal record and no history of violence. Zimmerman has a clear history of being the aggressor.

Why his cheerleaders continue to give him the benefit of the doubt is baffling.

[alsame]

27. Apparently the same way he was able to

scream while his mouth and nose were covered and he was being smothered.

[frylock]

31. simply amazing, isn't it?

[alsame]

34. I hope the jury picks up on

all this bullshit.

[HooptieWagon]

56. Only happens if prosecutor introduces them as evidence.

Statements to the police, to the dispacher, should be admissable. Statements to the madia probably aren't... neither are his fathers lies. But the jury won't hear any of Zimmy's lies unless introduced to the jury.

[louis-t]

57. and reaching for the gun all at the same time.

[frylock]

64. was just thinking about that, and per GZ's account, Martin must've had 6 arms..

2 to rain MMA style blows upon GZ's head; 2 to beat GZ's head into the sidewalk; 1 to cover GZ's mouth; and 1 to make a grab for GZ's gun.

[brush]

103. Yeah, he had to be a Budda.

[tblue37]

116. Not Buddha--he had just two arms.

But Kaili, maybe. She has eight.

[brush]

124. Good catch. Agreed. nt

[notadmblnd]

77. Personally, I think he had his gun out the entire time he was stalking his victim.

from the transcript of his police interview:

Serino: Um…your holster. What kind of holster do you have?
Zimmerman: Um, it’s just one I bought at a gun show, like a nylon in a waistband…
Serino: Like an Uncle Mikes? With a…
Zimmerman: Kind of, yes, sir.
Serino: With a, with a nylon retainer.
Zimmerman: It did not have a retainer.
Serino: So it’s an, an unsecure holster basically?
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.
Serino: OK. No locking mechanism, no safety feature, nothing?
Zimmerman: No, sir.
Serino: It was inside your pants?
Zimmerman: Yes, sir.

https://www.txantimedia.com/?p=1025

[TorchTheWitch]

98. I absolutely believe the gun was already out

And that is why Martin was so fearful that he felt he needed to get into a physical altercation with this guy. I don't believe it matters who started the physical altercation, and I believe that Zimmerman did going by Rachel's testimony as well as testimony from at least one other witness that they heard talking by two people that was a brief exchange of words (one voice, the other voice responding, and possible the first voice again) before the physical altercation started.

And from the moment that Martin saw Z's gun whether because he drew it or displayed it purposefully or by accident Martin then had every right to physically defend himself from and armed creepy guy that followed him in his car and on foot and then confronted him.

It was that gun that gave Z the courage to get out of his car and chase after Martin, hunt around for him after he lost sight of him, finally confront him when he found him again, and there was no way he was going to allow this person he believed was a criminal, a "fucking punk" up to no good either "get away" or cause him any harm. The whole reason a person carries a gun is to protect themselves from what they perceive as danger which Z already long since perceived with Martin being a dangerous person not necessarily to shoot anyone but to let them know that they had the gun either by displaying it or brandishing it to deter the person from physically harming them. No way did Zimmerman not get out his gun until after getting into a physical altercation with Martin nor getting so beaten up that he was in fear of immanent death. That's exactly what his having that gun was meant to prevent, and he would have used it do that by in whatever way making sure that Martin knew that he had it. I just don't think he believed that the gun would cause Martin to fight for his life... in Z's mind the gun would always instantly subdue to most dangerous of persons the moment they saw it.

[csziggy]

111. ANd shot Martin straight through the torso, hitting the heart dead on

That is an amazing shot if Martin was standing in front of Zimmerman.With Zimmerman on the ground and Martin leaning over him, how did Zimmerman manage that angle?

[dionysus]

126. no kidding.

[Xyzse]

3. He had a few instances where he could have diffused the situation

Merely by identifying himself.
He didn't.

I don't know how that will play out, but TM was standing his ground since he was legally there, and he tried to get away.

[Honeycombe8]

4. You're joking, right? nt

[Azathoth]

6. The "fry Zimmerman" crowd have checked out

They crossed the line into parody a while ago.

[uppityperson]

9. Unlike the "zimmy defender" crowd? Is insulting others who have a different opinion really helpful?

[Azathoth]

11. Different opinions? Sure. But that's not a license to say ridiculous things

without getting called out. And from the threads on DU I've seen, the fry Zimmerman side has got the market cornered on ridiculous things.

[uppityperson]

14. Oh there are enough Zimmy defenders posting ridiculous things also.

[noiretextatique]

13. how did you feel about OJ?

apologize much for him?

[Azathoth]

20. lol, I think you've got it mixed up

A lot of the 'fry Zimmerman' folk were the ones chanting 'free OJ' back in the day.

[uppityperson]

25. What makes you say that? I am curious.

[Azathoth]

26. What makes you curious?

[uppityperson]

28. Because I don't see that and wondering why you do. Why do you?

[Azathoth]

29. Maybe we know different people

I take it you wanted OJ to be convicted?

[uppityperson]

30. Why do you say "A lot of the 'fry Zimmerman' folk were the ones chanting 'free OJ' back in the day"?

[Azathoth]

33. Am I wrong? Did you want OJ convicted? n/t

[uppityperson]

35. You are not going to answer my previous question. Got it. Thanks for playing. Again.

[Azathoth]

40. lol, interesting that you wouldn't take the opportunity to prove me wrong

You could've just said "I don't know what people you talk to, but I wanted both Z and OJ convicted. So you're wrong." But you didn't seem to want to say that.

[uppityperson]

59. lol, interesting that you won't answer a direct question but continue to dodge.

[heaven05]

65. that one

never answers directly. Zimpig apologists seem to all have that problem.

[Azathoth]

86. Hmmm....I don't seem to recall you asking me a straightforward question

[heaven05]

122. I didn't

plenty others have and you didn't answer. I'm basically through with you zimpig apologists. This murder was a modern day lynching. Period. If you send zimpig's defense fund some money, you'll probably feel better about yourself.

[LanternWaste]

37. What specifically leads you to believe that?

What specifically leads you to believe that?

Oh... wait, I think I see the implied correlation, as specious and invalid as it may be...

[Azathoth]

43. What is the implied correlation?

Aside from the fact that many of the people I know who were 'free OJ' folks back in '94 now seem to be 'fry Zimmy' folk today?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

49. Why do you say this? There's absolutely no correlation. Why would you say something like this?

Are you assuming something about people who don't support Zimmerman's story?

Wait, don't answer that. From reading your pro-Zimmerman, anti-Trayvon posts, I think the know the reason.

[JI7]

61. i think we all know the reason

but there are people who claim the birther crap has nothing to do with the president being black.

[Jenoch]

71. He wrote that he knew people

who back in the day wished OJ to go free. He is also saying that those same people that he knows are now saying to fry Zimmerman. I didn't find his statement to be complicated. I haven't run into any people like that.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

87. He shouldn't accuse others of the same just because he knows people who supported OJ. It's unfair.

And actually, it's quite sick!

[Jenoch]

91. I'm just reading what he wrote.

He said he knew people who said OJ should go free and Zimmerman should fry. I didn't see any accusations in that.

Are you offended because you wanted OJ to walk?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

100. No, I'm offended because he seems to imply race in the two cases. I believe OJ was guilty as hell.

I am consistent, you see.

OJ = GUILTY AS HELL

Zimmerman = GUILTY AS HELL

Really, is this about revenge? Wanting an all-white jury (one Hispanic, actually) to convict Trayvon because an all-black jury failed to convict OJ?

Honestly that's what he seems to be implying but too cowardly to respond to the question. When confronted, he deflected the issue and didn't answer the question.

And why do you quickly defend him? He didn't answer the question posed. But you see I answered your question straight away. No hesitation. Why? Because I'm an honest person with nothing to hide.

[Jenoch]

109. I don't know this guy.

I wasn't really defending him. I just take the posts that I read at face value. Maybe I should not have played the game here. I too wonder if there are people that defended OJ (I don't think I've ever known anyone in that category) and also want Zimmerman to "fry".

[Azathoth]

112. There's a double standard

It's open season on anyone who isn't eagerly buying tickets for Zimmerman's execution. No one batted an eye when I got accused of being an OJ apologist, but God help you if you turn the accusation around on them.

I happen to know several people who wanted OJ acquitted way back when. Most of them (one exception) now want the judge to throw the book at Zimmerman. Small sample, anecdotal...but given the sudden defensive reaction I got, who knows.

[Jenoch]

113. Everyone I knew wanted him to be found guilty.

I remember where I was when I found out the verdict in the OJ case. I also remember where I was when I found out about the September 2001 attacks. Other great moments in history in my somewhat recent lifetime? Not so much. I don't recall when I found out about the Berlin Wall coming down. I don't recall where I was when the Soviet Union crumbled. I do remember where I was when the space shuttle Challenger went down.

[Azathoth]

85. What are you talking about?

I never said there was a hidden correlation, the post I was responding to did. In fact, this whole thing started because someone decided it made sense to accuse me of being an OJ apologist because I'm not convinced Zimmerman should be convicted. You apparently didn't find that out of line, but felt the need to jump in when I reversed it and suggested that in my experience it was the other way around.

A lot of the 'fry Z' crowd seem to have a double standard.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

89. The relationship should not have been made and whoever made it is really sick. One argument

does not follow the other.

You said: A lot of the 'fry Z' crowd seem to have a double standard

I ask you WHY you make this claim?

If you are inferring anything about OJ, that's sick!!

[Azathoth]

92. And once again

You keep ignoring the poster who brought up OJ while demanding to know why I had the temerity to throw the accusation back at him/her. This is a double standard.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

101. I answered your question below. Yes, I think OJ is guilty. Yes, I also think Zimmerman is guilty.

You didn't answer the question that was posed to you. I wonder why that is?

Read my post and you'll have my answer.

Better yet, welcome to IGNORE. Enjoy replying to yourself.

[Azathoth]

104. lol, see ya

Dude lost his shit because my post didn't acknowledge something he wrote 15 minutes *after* it was posted.

[Duer 157099]

8. No n/t

[blue_heron]

5. +1

I noticed the same thing. And a number of things creeped me out about the whole re-enactment. Is that typical? If it were a white kid dead on the ground and black man with the gun, I bet he'd be in a jail not walking around explaining things to the cops. The cops treated him differently from the moment he was taken into custody.

But what really creeps me out is his eerily unemotional demeanor, in every conversation with every interview he's telling a story like it was just going to the mall. He doesn't show remorse. He doesn't show fear. He doesn't show anything. He sits there stone faced in the courtroom listening to all the testimony and pictures.

The contrast of his voice and language on the non-emergency number that night as he's describing TM, following him in the rain with a gun. That's the real Zimmerman.

[noiretextatique]

15. zimmerman is banking on racism

to save his ass. he is hoping that his lies and inconsistencies will simply be ignored, and the jury will instead buy his "fear of black man" drivel.

[Duer 157099]

16. Of course he is

The racism has already presented itself in this courtroom, in the difference in approach to the witnesses Rachel Jeantel and John Good. Both had inconsistencies in the exact wording that they used to describe the event, and yet RJ was the one that was grilled over it while barely a word (if any) was said about Good's. Disgusting.

[noiretextatique]

17. indeed it seems to be the defense strategy

claiming martin made it "racial"

[gollygee]

68. Absolutely he is

And the prosecution is playing this "black brute" stereotype, as if a skinny teenage kid was bigger than Zimmerman because he was a couple of inches taller. Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old kid with candy and iced tea. My hope is that the jury of women includes some with 17-year-old sons, or sons who were once 17, and who can identify with that. But I admit I'm afraid that the prosecution might be guessing right in playing up this racist stereotype and it might work. I hope it doesn't.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

18. I don't think that's not a prosecutable offense.

telling TM that he didn't have a problem was clear evidence that GZ was HIDING SOMETHING. If I'm Trayvon, I'm much more concerned now than I was before.

Declining to identify as neighborhood watch would not excuse a violent confrontation.

[Duer 157099]

19. Unless it was precipitated by GZ? Then it's excused? Or what?

If nothing else, it calls into question GZ motivation and state of mind. He wasn't interested in protecting anyone's property, he was out trolling for a fight, or worse.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

45. How can you establish a desire for confrontation from a non-confrontational response?

Wouldn't someone looking for a fight say something along the lines of, "Yeah, there is a problem."?

[Duer 157099]

46. GZ himself established a desire for confrontation by his own actions

Namely, following TM. Namely, declining to reveal to TM what "his problem" with TM was. And most importantly, namely the FACT that a confrontation ensued and TM wound up DEAD.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

47. Following someone is not a crime. Not having a problem with someone is not a crime.

You'll notice the DA declined to list either of those in the indictment.

[Duer 157099]

48. You act like those things are completely unrelated to what happened.

If you're honest, you know that they both have EVERYTHING to do with the eventual outcome of that evening.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

50. They are not, in and of themselves, crimes.

Declining to say "I have a problem with you," confers no culpability whatsoever. If you think so I would be interested in seeing the relevant statute.

Just out of curiosity, do you think the DA will offer your line of argument and if not, what then?

[Caroline-Vivienne]

58. But...

Part of self defense justification is....did he do everything possible before he pulled the trigger???


No, i believe Zimmerman did not....

He fought with Martin....the 'suspect'....he screamed for help from a third party...and then he shot Martin. At no time during the altercation did he tell Martin who he was or why he was confronting him....he never said that he was a worried/nosy neighbor checking on things...even when they were fighting.....I think it's the least you can do before you kill someone.

And I think that's because Zimmerman was stuck on the 'thug' meme, so it didn't occur to him...

And since Zimmerman walked away from the scene without any stitches and didn't need a hospital stay....I think he shot too soon...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

63. There's no legal basis for that argument.

If he claims self-defense then all is needed was a reasonable belief he might suffer death of grievous bodily injury. He need not have sustained serious injury, only have had a reasonable belief that he might. As he was obviously injured that will be hard to overcome, prosecution-wise.

If Zimmerman initiated actual physical violence then he would probably lose the right to self-defense but as everyone in this thread is arguing, he apparently took the non-confrontational route of, "There's no problem."

[heaven05]

66. yeah

yeah, yeah. Tiring, all this apology for poor zimpig and his fear of the black kid walking in his neighborhood with those dangerous skittles and iced tea in his hands, while talking on phone. Everyone of zimpigs apologists know that every black kid is a thug, right?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

76. If you feel better now perhaps you can move past your emotionalism

and actually discuss the issue at hand. Seeing as the prosecution hasn't even come close to forwarding the "novel" legal theory presented in the OP I don't see how I can be labeled an apologist for Zimmerman.

[heaven05]

121. oh please

defend zimpig all you want, your right if it makes you feel better. No emotionalism super logical being. Just responding to the modern day lynching of an innocent kid. I'm through with responding to you zimpig apologists. Did you send money to his defense fund? That would probably help YOU feel better about yourself.

[joeglow3]

125. You realize you lose all credibility when you resort to attacking the poster

ALL they did was ask a non-confrontational question without saying a thing about you personally and this is your response? Amazing!!!!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

130. I honestly believe the intent is to shout down anyone that questions.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

129. Why hasn't the prosecutor advanced the OP's argument?

[Jenoch]

110. "And since Zimmerman walked away from the scene without any stitches and didn't need a hospital stay

The problem with this is that we don't know what injuries Zimmerman would have sustained if he had not used his weapon. This is not an apology for his actions, this is Florida law.

[Nevernose]

53. Taken individually, GZ's actions were mostly legal

It's not illegal to follow someone or carry a gun or ask, "What are you doing here?" or any of the other stuff he did.

When added all together, though, it's manslaughter at the very least.

Not answering a question isn't illegal, but it would have defused the situation; just another of Zimmerman's stupid actions that led to a dead child.

[pacalo]

23. Like the typical troublemaker, he chose to create drama rather than make a genuine, civilized

attempt to find out why Trayvon was in the area. That was Zimmerman's opportunity to identify himself & explain why he had been staring at him & following him, preventing any trouble.

[Rex]

38. He got out of his car, chased the kid and shot him.

And the case didn't get swept under the rug like the Zim family and the local PD hoped it would. Now it is of national attention and is pissing off the Rwing to no end. Foxnews already decided on who is the winner, sadly some here sound just like Foxnews.

[Jenoch]

69. " He got out of his car, chased the kid and shot him."

That's what the prosecution needs to prove. I don't think it has been easy for them thus far.

[crim son]

39. I've always had a problem with Z's claim that Trayvon said "You got me" upon being shot.

Who would say that? Nobody. Nobody would say that.

[Duer 157099]

42. If anything, I can imagine saying "You SHOT me!"

As in, "you fucking asshole! You shot me! Why the fuck did you do that????"

[brush]

105. Only people in old ganster movies

Maybe Cagney or Edward G. Robinson.

It's made up, cover his ass hogwash.

[arely staircase]

60. Z's claim that M said "you are going to die tonight" sounds way too self serving.

sounds like someone trying just a little too hard to lay the groundwork for a self defense claim. And yeah, if M said "you got a problem?" as Z claims, why didn't Z said "no problem, sir. I'm George Zimmerman with the neighborhood watch and we have had some burglaries around here and I just wanted to see what you are up to?"

[H2O Man]

62. That never happened.

Zimmerman made that up. He was following TM, and initiated the confrontation. It is possible that GZ grabbed TM, and attempted to restrain him until "backup" arrived .... I put that in quotes, because GZ believed he was "almost" a police investigator (undercover outfit, complete with firearm). At that point, TM MAY have said, "What is your problem?" But there is less than absolute zero chance that it happened in the context GZ claims.

[B2G]

70. if Martin was being followed and was runnig from him

Why didn't he call the cops?

[TeeYiYi]

73. Because he was almost home....

He might have called once safely home, but alas...

...he never made it, did he?

TYY

[Grammy23]

75. Martin was on the phone with his friend....the one who testified last week. He was concerned

and upset about why the man was apparently following him and they had discussion about this and what he should do. I think his friend recommended that he run because he was not too far away from the unit where he was staying. It probably all went down so fast he didn't have time to call 911 if he thought about doing that.

George Zimmerman could have done what was recommended by the person he was speaking to on the non-emergency line he called when he noticed Martin walking in the complex. He drew his own conclusions about who Martin was and what he was doing there. He even made a comment to the person on the line with him that gave away his perceptions about who Martin was and why he was in his neighborhood. "They always get away." Then disregarding what he was told---- "We don't need you to do that." (follow him)-- he continued to pursue the "suspect" (Zimmerman's words) and when they met he never told Martin who he was and instead lied and said there was "NO problem." Why would he NOT tell the teenager who he was and why he was following him? Because he had already made up his mind that Martin was a suspect. There is NO good reason for not identifying himself as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer. If he had, the outcome of the whole thing may have gone in a different direction. Trayvon would probably have quickly told him who he was and where he was headed....a unit only a short distance down that sidewalk that could be verified. All's well that ends well and Zimmerman could have called the cops back and told them they did not need to come.

Instead he jumped to a conclusion and inaccurately assumed Martin was up to no good, followed him, scared him and then had to deal with the consequences of that. Trayvon Martin had as much right to "stand his ground" as George Zimmerman did and unfortunately paid for it with his life.

[yardwork]

79. How many black teenagers would think to call the cops if they are being chased?

[Duer 157099]

81. No kidding. For that matter, white teenagers would also be unlikely to call 911

If anything, they'd call a friend.

[flvegan]

88. (facepalm)

Please, this sort of thing is embarrassing.

"You got a problem?" "No, I don't have a problem."

ELECTRIC CHAIR!!!11!11

Law school profs should be quaking in their boots at the folks around here coming for their jobs in the very near future.

[Duer 157099]

99. Context is everything

isn't it?

[flvegan]

106. Really?

Sigh.

[sofa king]

136. I'd just like to say...

..."fuck this trial."

Unless the Republicans figure out how to start another damned war, it's going to be another one of those "shark summers" where the bullshit television media has no stories and congregates on the sources--like court trials--that provide a constant flow of pre-fabricated press releases and verified quotes.

There is plenty of real news out there, much of it important, some of it critical to the future survival of many millions of Americans taking the chute to peon-town. You won't see any of it on television.