I hope they can throw him in jail for something. It almost seems like the prosecutors want to lose. Trying to go for murder 2. Not prepping their witnesses. This case would set a terrible precedent. Basically you are going to have wannabe cops like Zimmerman doing stupid things that can result in bad things happening.
you're not even following the trial. The defense got a prosecution witness to admit that Zimmerman’s call to police about TM was justified based on Zimmerman’s description of events that was from a PROSECUTION witness. educate yourself
and they told him not to confront martin right? I don't know what your post is exactly disputing but thank you I forgot to mention again he was told to mind his business
it indicated suspicious behavior again -- you're chasing down a rabbit trail GZ was legally authorized to follow and approach TM
after being told not to approach how was he "legally authorized" walking down the street as a black kid is suspicious behavior? do you have anything to dispute that Zimmerman basically liked and said martin jumped out some bushes and confronted him or are you just admitting he lied and confronted martin and some kind of authorization to do so. you would be a terrible witness
i'm pointing to the fact that he lied about it. you do agree that a suspect lying about a key point is bad for said suspect don't you. but i'm glad you admit he lied about it.
keep up dude, you're admitting that Zimmerman confronted him, he told the police that martin jumped out some bushes and confronted him the bushes don't even exist if you watched yesterday, there were no bushes on the tape when Zimmerman went through a walk through at the spot of the shooting the next day. but that's neither here no there, just another lie. the main lie is that martin confronted him which you are saying that Zimmerman confronted martin and had a right to
GZ did have a right to follow and approach TM. period, end of sentence. do you have another point, or is that all you've got? because if that's it, then you're just arguing based on emotion rather than anything factual that impacts the case. just curious - are you an African American? (no racist)
No witness has stated that GZ confronted TM. Unless you were there and you want to get on the stand. You are mistating it. The investigator testified that it was a minor and common for witness recollection to have slight non important variances. I didn't see this testimony but I will assume you twisted whatever was stated. The teenager has been proven to have been assaulting GZ. GZ was in fear of his life. He defended himself. That's the actual case, you know that or maybe you don't. Go look up what has to be proven to get a 2nd degree murder conviction. Abrasions to TM's knuckles, broken GZ nose, injuries to back of GZ's head, credible eye witness that put TM on top of GZ on the sidewalk, plus prosecution has to prove GZ acted with a depraved mind and this little thing called reasonable doubt equals GZ is acquitted.
the med examiner is a prosecution witness, why would I have to lie. she said it was a bloody nose not broken that could be caused by one punch. I assume some of you guys have seen real world fights, a bloody nose can cause a lot of blood.
so now you're claiming to be a medical expert on bloody noses? lol just stop, son you're not convincing anybody. You're emotionally invested in this case and we led astray by the media bias that began this whole thing.
You'd have to lie because this would be the first prosecution witness that didn't bolster the case for the defense. That's why.
this is what the med examiner said. I have stated this is the med examiner's testimony numerous times I tried to ask the question to so you could understand the point she made. please read and stop trying to prove what race I am or what my emotions are
so you believe jeantal when she said martin called Zimmerman a cracker but you don't believe the rest of her testimony?
