• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • 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.

Opening statements.[W:458]

Re: Opening statements.

sharon said:
Will you post proof of the clerk's height?
Click to expand...

It was just provided at the trial. Did you not watch? Right afterwards Omara walked up to him so they could see the height difference between.
 
Re: Opening statements.

sharon said:
Will you post proof of the clerk's height?
Click to expand...
Still showing you do not pay attention to that which has come before. What a shame.


Did you not watch the trial. He said he was 5'10".
 
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
They do if they are including the person in a group.
Click to expand...

The difference between "these" and "this".

Is that plural inclusive? I'm sure it has a name and definitely includes M in the group "these assholes".

Does Z just say that everytime he thinks about the burglaries?

Wouldn't that be "those" assholes.

Seems some missed school when we learned how to conjugate verbs.
 
Re: Opening statements.

Excon said:
:doh
iLOL
Wait until the PA testifies.
Click to expand...

I don't want to ruin the suspense for you, but the PA is going to testify to what she noted in the medical report.

The lacerations
Click to expand...

Two small cuts that required no sutures.

multiple impact abrasions
Click to expand...

Not only is that not noted in the medical report, but it's not even a thing. Abrasions are not impact wounds.

swelling and bruising is significant trauma.
Click to expand...

Even if that were true, any swelling or bruising in the medical report is noted as being symptomatic of the broken nose, and not injuries to the back of the head.

And like I have been saying. You must think he wasn't resisting, because resisting the downward push would greatly lessen the impact.
Click to expand...

And like I've explained to you, either Zimmerman had his head slammed onto the concrete or he didn't.

What you're trying to do is thread some ridiculous needle in which Zimmerman both did and didn't have his head slammed onto the concrete.

And trying to hold two contradictory ideas at that same time is something called "cognitive dissonance".
 
Re: Opening statements.

Excon said:
No, the Prosecutor admitted ™ initiated the confrontation by verbally confronting Zimmerman. Care to reply?
Click to expand...

just as he also stated that martin threw the first blow
 
Re: Opening statements.

buck said:
I dunno.. the defense indicates that even the prosecution's expert witness will show that it is consistent with hitting concrete. Do you believe that the defense is lying in open court (without any objections), or do you think you know better then that expert?
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on which expert we're talking about.

Everyone seems to know better than the medical examiner who measured Martin's height, but apparently an expert that we haven't haven't even heard from yet is already infallible.
 
Re: Opening statements.

Excon said:
:doh
iLOL
Wait until the PA testifies.
The lacerations, multiple impact abrasions, swelling and bruising is significant trauma.

And like I have been saying. You must think he wasn't resisting, because resisting the downward push would greatly lessen the impact.
Click to expand...

Skull hitting ....no being SLAMMED REPEATEDLY against concrete multiple times with only superficial injuries???Not significant trauma. I have no clue it that really happened- with that much force (slammed repeatedly) I would expect possible skull fracture, subdural or epidural hematoma. His lack of significant trauma is akin to the JFK magic bullet from my perspective. It could happen I guess - but I "need" to see how.

But like I said, I am open to expert witnesses and evaluations.
 
Re: Opening statements.

charlie hodge said:
I don't want to ruin the suspense for you, but the PA is going to testify to what she noted in the medical report.



Two small cuts that required no sutures.



Not only is that not noted in the medical report, but it's not even a thing. Abrasions are not impact wounds.



Even if that were true, any swelling or bruising in the medical report is noted as being symptomatic of the broken nose, and not injuries to the back of the head.



And like I've explained to you, either Zimmerman had his head slammed onto the concrete or he didn't.

What you're trying to do is thread some ridiculous needle in which Zimmerman both did and didn't have his head slammed onto the concrete.

And trying to hold two contradictory ideas at that same time is something called "cognitive dissonance".
Click to expand...
How sad.
You don't know the evidence do you.
Hate to break it to you. The PA was not the only one who saw the injuries. Duh!

The swelling was seen. As West stated today, big bumps from getting his head slammed.

And I also hate to break it to you, that his actually injuries really do not matter as to the a reasonable belief of great bodily harm or loss of life as required to use self defense.
The fact that he was injured only goes to support the fact that he was attacked. Duh!

And I doubt anybody really cares about your"cognitive dissonance in trying to hold tow contradictory cognitions. So can your bs.
 
Re: Opening statements.

year2late said:
Skull hitting ....no being SLAMMED REPEATEDLY against concrete multiple times with only superficial injuries???Not significant trauma. I have no clue it that really happened- with that much force (slammed repeatedly) I would expect possible skull fracture, subdural or epidural hematoma. His lack of significant trauma is akin to the JFK magic bullet from my perspective. It could happen I guess - but I "need" to see how.

But like I said, I am open to expert witnesses and evaluations.
Click to expand...
How sad. Resorting to calling them superficial when they apparently were not.

And you like the other are still indicating that you think he wasn't resisting, because resisting the downward push would greatly lessen the impact.
 
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
Since T is inherent to the situation Z's comments inherently label T.
Click to expand...

You see, its ok to kill the guy you think shot yer pa.

Because you thought he was the guy who shot your pa.

Doesn't really matter if it was the guy or not.

(You're not allowed to say chase or pursue here, its derogatory, because Z says that's not what he was doing.)
 
Last edited:
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
We dont know who touched whom physically first but that may come second tier due to Z following T on foot. If Z is found to be the aggressor by his actions he has to show he tried to break contact before the shooting.
Click to expand...

actually, the state acknowledged martin threw the first blow
 
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
He left his keys in his truck when he got out to chase T. Omara is trying to get this out there before the Prosecution shows his keys are proof he returned to his truck before the fight started.
Click to expand...

don't think so
the prosecution exposed that zimmerman left the vehicle with two flashlights
and since one of them (the operational one) was on his key chain, then his keys were with him
 
Re: Opening statements.

Grim17 said:
Something else I thought was very important was the timeline of when the police call with Z ended and the 911 call was made by the neighbor on the corner... From that, it would seem that Martin stayed in hiding and waited untill Z ended his call before confronting him... Please note I said "seem", because there are no witnesses, just a timeline with common sense deduction and reasoning.
Click to expand...

So M heard Z through a building?

Z was supposedly on RVC when the call ended, and M was a short distance down between the buildings.

Quite a ways.

I can't wait to see the visual aids the pross will come up with.

Maps with paths and timestamps. This is where Z said he was at this point in the NEN call, etc.

I think once people start visualizing Zs version its going to be VERY interesting.
 
Re: Opening statements.

What is sad is that the Prosecutor wont call the "fruit juice cocktail" what it was, Arizona Watermelon drink.
Is that a racial thing?
 
Re: Opening statements.

buck said:
It was just provided at the trial. Did you not watch? Right afterwards Omara walked up to him so they could see the height difference between.
Click to expand...

I missed it.. Was the clerk in court? How tall is OMara?
 
Re: Opening statements.

What if...? said:
So M heard Z through a building?

Z was supposedly on RVC when the call ended, and M was a short distance down between the buildings.

Quite a ways.

I can't wait to see the visual aids the pross will come up with.

Maps with paths and timestamps. This is where Z said he was at this point in the NEN call, etc.

I think once people start visualizing Zs version its going to be VERY interesting.
Click to expand...
I think you are the one who is going to be surprised.
 
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
Which of Z's accounts are evidence? Self serving hearsay is not evidence. It is more likely T kept going away from Z and once he thought he lost him tried to return to Brandi's.

Z had over four minutes to get back to his truck before the verbal argument started. He said on his 1st written statement he tried to return to his truck when dispatch said "we dont need you to do that." More than 4 minutes elapsed so what was Z doing during that time?
Click to expand...

He was trying to get his flashlight working so he could see if the guy he was only going the same way as was still where he saw him last before he stopped following him...

Or something like that.
 
Re: Opening statements.

Oceaura said:
If he wanted to watch Z he wouldnt have run away from him.
Click to expand...

No, he used the hypnotic "skip" to lure Z to an ambush.

Knowing for certain Z would be unable to resist exiting his vehicle, M could be confident in knowing he wouldn't be sitting in the bushes in the rain all night.

Or something.like that.
 
Re: Opening statements.

justabubba said:
actually, the state acknowledged martin threw the first blow
Click to expand...

I really dont care either way. By law it doesnt matter since Z was the aggressor by chasing him. I just wanted to see where the State said T touched him first and nobody could verify that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom