yes, the forensic evidence is just a smoke screen. Granville has very bizarre filter when it comes to examining the evidence in this case.
So what does this "evidence" prove? I'd prefer the filter I use rather than the sieve Martin supporters use to allow all the other irrelevant nonsense like hoodies, skittles, iced tea and being told to stay in the car as facts or evidence in this case.
As I understand it, Zimmerman will be arguing that he was punched repeatedly and that Martin forcibly slammed his head against the ground multiple times. So, the counter-argument goes that a throwdown like that would result in DNA and blood on Martin's hands and shirt sleeves. That there is none would suggest that (1) Zimmerman exxagerated his story and his credibility is therefore shaky and (2) the physical altercation happened at more of an arm's length than Zimmerman would have you believe, meaning his life was not so imperiled and he is somewhat less justified in opening fire.
wait, you were serious? what an insensitive and shameful thing to do, make a mockery of a courtroom with jokes while the parents of the dead teenager are present...
Well have skittles and iced tea been introduced as evidence? It doesn't show Martin didn't start the fight. It does show that he was out of the house for a reasons that were innocent and not really suspicious.
This. If Martin did not have Zimmerman's blood or DNA on him, Zimmerman's defense of being in fear for his life becomes a lot less plausible. If his defense is rejected by the jury, he is in a whole lotta trouble.
Zimmerman's lawyer should have started his opening statement by walking up to the jury and saying in his most sultry voice, "So, ya'll come here often?"
Thanks for the explanation. Pretty weak position though since they have a witness that was a few feet away saying TM went MMA on Zimmerman. Broken nose, lacerations to the back of the head (which are not consistent with at a more than an arms length fight). I'm not a gun guy at all. This kind of **** is the reality of what can happen when you choose to use a weapon to end a confrontation justified or not. I can't imagine being on either side of this situation. I sided with the Prosecution on Joe Horn. Dude said he was going to kill them and did and got off. In this particular case, I do feel Zimmerman was defending himself from a violent attack.
No, it really has nothing to do with what he was doing when Zimmerman encountered him. It's stupid and pointless to bring it up. He could have bought skittles and then cased houses. We do know the young man was caught with women's jewelry that he wouldn't say where it came from along with a burglary tool. So let's not act like it's far fetched to think he was contemplating breaking in to a house.
Not a forensics expert here but the cuts on Zimmerman's head are centrally located on the back of his head and it would not surprise me that TM got no blood on him. Since when is the absence of evidence evidence? Also, GZ's testimony was that in the tussling on the ground, TM "felt" the gun in GZ's pocket and went for it, so I don't think it went down like GZ just drew a gun and opened fire on TM.
I'm sure a major point of the prosecution is that we really can't take the word of Zimmerman because of his past history of not being truthful and lying to the court. we'll see
once a liar always a liar, eh? Why don't you go ahead, string him up and hang him since you have all the answers.
I think the beginning of this trial gives us the answer to why Zimmerman was fired from the Men's Warehouse last week.
I think MORE IMPORTANT will be the ME evidence. We STILL have heard nothing (to my knowledge) about the gunshot wound. Was it from close range?
He was never arrested for anything. He was never in possession of anything reported stolen. It is incredibly far fetched to act like he was casing houses based on the evidence. He was found with a tool. Not a burglary tool. You're making up crap now. He was seen buying skittles and tea. Cell phone records show he was on the phone. Those aren't the actions of people casing houses to rob. The skittles and tea don't come into the story at all unless someone is going to make the ridiculous claim that Martin was casing houses to rob.
I don't have all the answers. I'm just waiting to see what happens. But yes, Zimmerman has a history of lying. We don't know if Martin does (and never will).
I think that's part of why it's important to wait and see the trial. There is evidence that could help either side. It will just depend on which evidence the jury finds more credible.
He was able to do all that damage without getting any blood or skin or hair of Zimmerman on him. That's talent! It really isn't going to matter much what the testimony is if the physical evidence doesn't back it up. Maybe the defense can explain it away. Time will tell.
