I agree except I don't think since he is the only witness his story necessarily stands. It's the only one we have but that doesn't mean we can't question it.
Similar to Det Serino being pressure to seek charges against Zimmerman, I think that there was pressure for the prosecution to put this case, evidence be damned. Obama sure as hell didn't help things with his Trayvon/Son comment thing either. Here's an article on Det Serino that talks about him being pressured. http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/07/12/2892510/more-evidence-released-in-zimmerman.html
I don't recall many people latching onto Obama's comments besides those people who are in favor of Zimmerman. Those who support Martin haven't been out there purporting this as any type of excuse that it caused anything the way some have anyway.
He should have just left it at..... As a parent, I can understand how Trayvon's parents must feel. My deepest condolonces for such a tragic loss. Then he went on to also imply that the folks at federal, state and local weren't working together on the case. He chose a side with both statements just like he did with the Nutty Professor from Cambridge.
I don't really care about the drugs. But the "injuries" or markings on TM pretty much seal the deal for me. It shows TM was at least winning the fight, still hard to say who started it.
amazing what two different groups see. Zimmerman started the altercation. I don't see how anyone can dispute that
Explain what you define as the different groups on this subject and what your basis is for GZ starting this altercation.
Oops I miss read knuckles as knees for some reason. THAT would have put me over the top, however, still leaning toward a GZ acquittal. The worst thing that can happen now is an acquittal followed by outrage because of te 6 jurors, 5 are white...I am really sick of this being racial and political.
In favor of Zimmerman? I know what you mean but this strikes me kind of oddly. I want every guilty person to be convicted. I got into this thread because there were so many folks berating and convicting Zimmerman out of sympathy for a young man's dying: man vs. child. It wasn't long before the race baiters showed up (including President Obama) and his senseless comment. All that stuff fanned the racist flames. That rendered it black vs white (although Zimmerman is more properly Hispanic I think). Lots of posters have softened their "Hang Zimmerman" attitude that was on display when this thread started because evidence has consistently pointed to Zimmerman's version of events as being accurate and true. People are innocent until proven guilty in a US court of law and should be in the court of public opinion unless one gets too emotionally involved which is exactly what the media response to this tragedy has accomplished by getting people emotionally riled up with out of date photos, doctored audio tapes et al.
Not really all the evidence. Multiple witnesses put Zimmerman on top of Martin. Only one witness so far puts Martin on top of Zimmerman. Not one single witness has Martin banging Zimmerman's head into the ground. Zimmerman's story of events has been inconsistant. Forensics don't back up Zimmerman's version of events. I don't think Zimmerman has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but it certainly isn't as if all the evidence only points to Zimmerman's version being accurate and true.
I think this happened, Zimmerman profiled TM and eventually confronted TM. TM tried to keep it real and reacted. Fight ensued and Zimmerman shot him during the altercation. I don't see a cold blooded execution/murder. I just see a really unfortunate, wrong place/time situation that escalated quickly and became a sad accident.
you can't start a fight and claim self defense after getting your ass whooped. I don't know if the prosecution is over reaching on charges I don't see how anyone can disagree.
1. I look forward to those testimonies. Are these actual people that will ascend to the stand or rumors? 2. Not one witness can only mean that no one witnessed it which surely does not mean it did not happen. See Z's scalp for other evidence. 3. What inconsistencies and forensics are you referring to which might support a major revision of events? Hard stuff please, not surmising.
I didn't say ZM started the fight. I said I think he profiled, followed, and confronted, TM tried to keep it real (started the fight) and **** went down. When keeping it real goes wrong...
English isn't her native language she didn't lie on the stand she didn't want to be contacted because people are making fun of her just as she predicted this is real not the movies her reactions to both sides (prosecution and defense) shows an authenticity that may be appreciated by the jury
the "starting the fight" wasn't in response but more accurately when you start the confrontation maybe not physical fight. Zimmerman was told to mind his business already
1. I'm talking about the people who've already testified. 2. That's correct it doesn't mean it didn't happen. Your claim was that evidence backs up Zimmerman's claim. I was pointing out that it doesn't in every case for sure. 3. The forensics expert who already testified. His scalp did have some abrasions. We heard the medical person who examined him talk about it and conclude that there weren't even any further tests needed. Those abrasions could have come from falling or scraping his head against a tree or bush. The multiple inconsistencies come from Zimmerman's different statements about what happened that were played in court yesterday
