• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Day 6 testimony ( Monday 7/1)

Doris had tears in her eyes after lsitening to that... Might she be sympathetic to him?

I would be too if I knew a guy was totally railroaded and shouldn't have to be going through this trial.
 
No discrepancies? Z claims he was hit and went down at the T where TM got on top and pummeled him.

People are hearing what they want hear depending on how they've made up their minds. Many are going to be surprised.
 
No discrepancies? Z claims he was hit and went down at the T where TM got on top and pummeled him.

People are hearing what they want hear depending on how they've made up their minds. Many are going to be surprised.

Surprised by what? None of the witnesses have said anything to the contrary.
 
No discrepancies? Z claims he was hit and went down at the T where TM got on top and pummeled him.

People are hearing what they want hear depending on how they've made up their minds. Many are going to be surprised.

There are inconsitencies. Expecting someone that had just gone through an (alleged) beating might not be the greatest witness of exactly what occured. Time/space/actions will all be (expectdly) distorted.
 
This is where Z's statements start falling apart.
 
No discrepancies? Z claims he was hit and went down at the T where TM got on top and pummeled him.

.

So what contradicts that?
 
Surprised by what? None of the witnesses have said anything to the contrary.

You're claiming NONE of the witnesses place Z and TM 40-50 feet south of the T where they saw one on top of the other?

You prove my point.
 
You're claiming NONE of the witnesses place Z and TM 40-50 feet south of the T where they saw one on top of the other?

You prove my point.

Huh?....

I'm saying none of the witnesses have saw Zimmerman on top of Martin before the shot.
 
I would be too if I knew a guy was totally railroaded and shouldn't have to be going through this trial.

The jury will see that.. I wonder what they'll make of it.
 
Doris had tears in her eyes after lsitening to that... Might she be sympathetic to him?

Last week when some of the witnesses said they'd seen TM on top of GZ, I thought GZ might get emotional. It's about time he heard someone validating his narrative. I think I would have cried right then had I been him. It must have sounded so good.
 
I think this is where the prosecutors will start actually scoring a few points... I don't expect they will be anything game changing, but they might actually benefit more from this witness then the defense will for once.

It is about the connection of evidence rather than one thing or another. The end game. Whether the endgame leads to murder 2 - I don't think so. Wouldn't be surprised of a lesser charge, though.

I am constantly amazed throughout the threads about how people point fingers and act like one witness is the be all end all.

It is funny, in terms of this witness...yeah..it does look like it is favorable to the prosecution. But who knows how it all will fit together.
 
Huh?....

I'm saying none of the witnesses have saw Zimmerman on top of Martin before the shot.

That wasn't my point, which was according to Z's statements to police the incident happened at the T when it was actually 40-50 feet south.
 
Having done some accident investigations, I tend to look at the individual evidence as circles. Where the union of circles intersect lies the truth based on the evidence. Items outside the union is what someone precieved as the truth. The items outside the union would the inconsistency between the testimony/evidence.

Until all the evidence is in, its a rush to say if GZ is guilty or not.

With that said, I tend to agree nothing so far has proven beyond a reasonalbe doubt that GZ is guilty. Unless something changes, GZ is not guilty.
 
As I thought, he changed his story from the original story, where he claimed he fell on his back right after he was hit. Later, I guess after he thought about the location of the body, changed the story to include some strange stumbling that placed him near the location of Travyon's death.

I knew the prosecution was going to rest their entire case on Zimmerman's statements.
 
Having done some accident investigations, I tend to look at the individual evidence as circles. Where the union of circles intersect lies the truth based on the evidence. Items outside the union is what someone precieved as the truth. The items outside the union would the inconsistency between the testimony/evidence.

Until all the evidence is in, its a rush to say if GZ is guilty or not.

With that said, I tend to agree nothing so far has proven beyond a reasonalbe doubt that GZ is guilty. Unless something changes, GZ is not guilty.

Considering a crime suspect is presumed innocent until the jury decides guilt, I would agree.
 
Z kept calling TM a "suspect"...heheh.
 
That's ridiculous.


I would be too if I knew a guy was totally railroaded and shouldn't have to be going through this trial.
 
Z kept calling TM a "suspect"...heheh.

Where do you think the Prosecution is going with that? My guess is that they'll attempt to make sure the jury knows that Zimmerman is well adept at police talk, which indicates that he is also well adept at police procedures, intimating that Zimmerman was careful in crafting a scenario that would get him off the hook. It's a stretch, IMO, but I think that's where they're going.

Tim-
 
he got punched in the face. We all know that. That's not what the heart of this trial is about.

Surprised by what? None of the witnesses have said anything to the contrary.
 
WTH, keeps using the word suspect......what's the big deal? It means doutful or questionable. THAT IS WHY HE CALLED 911 IN THE FIRST PLACE. What the problem.?
 
We got the statement of Trayvon clasping his mouth and nose too.

I saw George breathing deeply when the recording was played. I think he looked nervous or distressed.

I do think its becoming apparent George took him as one of the home invaders.


As I thought, he changed his story from the original story, where he claimed he fell on his back right after he was hit. Later, I guess after he thought about the location of the body, changed the story to include some strange stumbling that placed him near the location of Travyon's death.

I knew the prosecution was going to rest their entire case on Zimmerman's statements.
 
We got the statement of Trayvon clasping his mouth and nose too.

I saw George breathing deeply when the recording was played. I think he looked nervous or distressed.

I do think its becoming apparent George took him as one of the home invaders.

Well, we really don't know that. But it happened at what? About 7 PM or so? This would be an odd time for a home invasion...and especially by one person. I just think he thought it was suspicious that a guy he didn't recognize was out walking in the rain. I'd think he may have looked odd, since he was talking on his phone without holding it -- and, don't know about the rest of you, but when I'm talkin' my arms and hands are often gesturing. He may have looked like he was talking to himself. *shrug*
 
Does anyone think it's funny that in these statements, oral and written, to this officer that Z doesn't mention W6?
 
Back
Top Bottom