Reply With Quote
Good call. I fixed it.
After all the evidence has been presented anyone that still believes that those six jurors will unanimously find Zimmerman guilty of murder 2 is incapable of rational thought.
And you accuse ME of being the emotional one...
You just suck on SO many levels.Such insight and analysis.Translation:
No one should believe this or insult
I know you are but what am I
Insult
Good call. I fixed it.
So Mr. insight and analysis, explain to me why those six jurors are going to unanimously find Zimmerman guilty of murder two.
The facts of the case simply don't justify it.
And the little runs away. Nice.
just heard cowardman didn't take the stand today....not surprised at all.
He would have been crazy too. State clearly hasn't proven their case. No reason to give them a chance to try to discredit him on cross. It's just good legal advice. The prosecution gave the jury multiple chances to hear Zimmerman's side of the story by playing all the interviews which did nothing but allow the jury to see how the physical evidence and eye witness testimony matched his story.
how to survive a cowardman attack: 1) don't look su ious, 2) tell creepy watchman where you're going, 3) if being stalked or followed, don't run and 4) don't fight back.
yea that's true. took the casey anthony route and let the lack of evidence do the talking for her.
I knew you would figure it out eventually...
oh forgot number 5) don't be black.
I'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have shot a white/asian/chicano/puerto rican/haitian/hawaiian/etc. sitting on his chest doing MMA ground and pound. Don't take it personally.
Your inferiority complex is showing...
Really dude? You're better than that.
okI'm pretty sure Zimmerman would have shot a white/asian/chicano/puerto rican/haitian/hawaiian/etc. sitting on his chest doing MMA ground and pound. Don't take it personally.
Your inferiority complex is showing...
what? if you want to survive a stranger approaching you in the middle of night, don't fight back. if you do, you might lose your life. just acquiesce to the strangers demands and you'll live to see another day.
Fighting back implies that someone else started a fight. That doesn't appear to be the case here.
that's because trayvon didn't follow rules 1 and 2. if he would have, he would be alive to tell his side of the story. he shouldn't have looked su ious and he should have just told cowardman where he lived, he was going and told him he was alone with his little brother, he wouldn't have had to fight for his life.
See, there you go again TLong bringing up those pesky facts. In Trills world eye witnesses don't count. Trill believes DeeDees story that she "knows" Trayvon was attacked by Zimmerman because if Trayvon was planning to whip that creepy crackers ass he would have called her and told her before he did it.
zimmeran saw tray while he was in his vehicle and was convinced tray was su ious and on drugs. if tray would have fought zimmerman at his car i could see how he started the fight. a creepy watchmen got out the vehicle, followed and stalked a 17 year old kid and the kid reacted accordingly. i just wish tray wasn't looking su ious that night, maybe he'd be alive.
So, FuzzyLump s wants analysis?
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...=1#post6743059
Trayvon acted accordingly?
LOL. No. Accordingly implies he acted the right way. But he got shot. He got shot because he acted rashly.
I am not interested in predictions. Murder 2 requires proof of malice under Florida law. I personally do not think that is the case. At the same time I could see jurors not buying Zimmermans account and finding the contradictions go one way and convict him of murder.
So Mr. insight and analysis, explain to me why those six jurors are going to unanimously find Zimmerman guilty of murder two.
The facts of the case simply don't justify it.
What I think you guys are ignoring is that manslaughter is in play. I could very easily see the jurors think as I do and think Zimmerman is lying on multiple accounts about the confrontation just as he lied during the bail hearing. Given that, I believe they could say that he has not met his burden of proving self defense and find him criminally negligent a la manslaughter.
However given all this I have no way of knowing what a group of women of multiple races from Florida that I have never met much less know well enough to make any claims.
Some of us cannot sit around at work ing around on the internet while our employees work in unsafe conditions.
No , especially since this ME didn't actually examine the Zimmerman. Only went by the photos.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 07-10-2013 at 07:26 PM.
First quote in my sig. Think about it.
In FL, the presumption is not that the killing was in self defense. Zimmerman has to prove that. There is no doubt that Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. The defense then has to prove self defense was the reason. Prima facia it should be obvious that this is the case.
This guy's analysis assumes the wrong presumption and as such what follows does not follow.
Mark O'Mara Presser July 10 2013
Yep, it's laughable that people hang on to an experts words that did not examine him.
Just how ignorant can someone be? I don't watch the news much, are the M$M's leaving this important tidbit out?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
