Opening statements.[W:458]

[Oceaura]

Specify/break down your evidence of M's fear?

Bring it on and let's analyze it

The fact he ran away is sufficient because it proves he tried to break all contact with the stranger following him and especially taking a route that could not be driven. No need to guess his emotional state as it is moot by the fact he ran away.

 

[Oceaura]

W8 will do damage to the state not to defense counsel

The state should avoid using this unsavory individual

Why is that?

 

[buck]

I pointed out a couple of weeks ago Mortimer does not understand the SD law as well as he claimed and generally it is a very pro Z feed which is fine but not a reliable source.

WTH are you talking about? Who is mortimer? and why are you trying to use him as a source for anything?

 

[Grim17]

There's one for the defense... Body exposed to the rain for 15 minutes... More than enough time in my opinion to wash off blood and DNA evidense.

And to me, that was the only piece of significant information that came from that witness.

 

[ric27]

The totality of his actions prove he was the aggressor which means he provoked the fight. It is impossible to provoke violence and not violate the law.

Wrong and no.... it does not prove Z was the aggressor

Following is not a *legal* provocation nor calling one names or ignoring them

What evidence do you have that Z pushed or hit M or if Z pulled out his weapon before M hit Z?

 

[Oceaura]

WTH are you talking about? Who is mortimer? and why are you trying to use him as a source for anything?

Hmmmmmm.....might be a misunderstanding. Thought you were referencing the live chat but you said live feed so that is my mistake.

 

[JackFrost]

Wrong and no.... it does not prove Z was the aggressor

Following is not a *legal* provocation nor calling one names or ignoring them

What evidence do you have that Z pushed or hit M or if Z pulled out his weapon before M hit Z?

Irrelevant. Per the evidence, Martin did not need to see Zimmerman's gun before defending himself.

 

[Oceaura]

Wrong and no.... it does not prove Z was the aggressor

Following is not a *legal* provocation nor calling one names or ignoring them

What evidence do you have that Z pushed or hit M or if Z pulled out his weapon before M hit Z?

It does not matter who touched whom first. By law T was the only one legally qualified for self defense since he ran away and Z chased him on foot.

Does any altercation happen between the buildings if Z does not chase him?

 

[Excon]

Based on the fact she is black?

Figures, you would automatically go to racial bs.

Use your head.
Based on her prior testimony she is uneducated.
Based on the tweet about the money, you can expect ghetto, and based on her tweet about Robert, you can expect hostile.

But of course in your mind, that is racist right?

 

[ric27]

The fact he ran away is sufficient because it proves he tried to break all contact with the stranger following him and especially taking a route that could not be driven. No need to guess his emotional state as it is moot by the fact he ran away.

Running away is not sufficient

You need *credible evidence* from a *credible witness* to show..at least M begging for his life before being shot

 

[ric27]

It does not matter who touched whom first. By law T was the only one legally qualified for self defense since he ran away and Z chased him on foot.

Does any altercation happen between the buildings if Z does not chase him?

Where's your evidence that M was legally qualified for SD?

 

[buck]

Hmmmmmm.....might be a misunderstanding. Thought you were referencing the live chat but you said live feed so that is my mistake.

I'm listening at work, so not following the chat. I was talking about the lawyers that are discussing the case and what has occured during the breaks.

 

[ric27]

Irrelevant. Per the evidence, Martin did not need to see Zimmerman's gun before defending himself.

Show the evidence that justifies M beating up on Z

Show the evidence M was in fear of Z

Show the evidence that Z was going to assault/detain M

You need to legally justify all of it

You have make Z as the aggressor

Do you understand?

 

[Grim17]

I'm listening at work, so not following the chat. I was talking about the lawyers that are discussing the case and what has occured during the breaks.

Could you please post the things you found significant from today's testimony on the "day 2" thread... Thx

 

[disneydude]

Re: Opening statements.

I've been watching this and one question comes to mind... How in the hell is the state going to prove this wasn't self defense...

I'll go back to watching and look forward to sharon's vivid descriptions of how fat Zimmerman is and the stupid looks on his face... You know, the REALLY important stuff.

Easy. Instigators can't fall back on "self-defense". Trayvon Martin had just as much a right to "stand his ground" against a stalking vigilante wannabe cop. There are reasons why we employ and train law enforcment officials to patrol our streets. It is to keep self-righteous vigilantes who are untrained from taking actions like this.

 

[Grim17]

Re: Opening statements.

Easy. Instigators can't fall back on "self-defense". Trayvon Martin had just as much a right to "stand his ground" against a stalking vigilante wannabe cop. There are reasons why we employ and train law enforcment officials to patrol our streets. It is to keep self-righteous vigilantes who are untrained from taking actions like this.

Only one problem here... Martin is not on trial Zimmerman is, and the state has to prove his actions don't qualify as legal self defense under Florida's self defense statutes. That is the issue here.

 

[disneydude]

Re: Opening statements.

Only one problem here... Martin is not on trial Zimmerman is, and the state has to prove his actions don't qualify as legal self defense under Florida's self defense statutes. That is the issue here.

Yes. But you can't be an instigator and try to fall back on "self-defense". That is the issue...and it sounds like the prosecution is going to establish fairly easily that Zimmerman instigated the incident by not only following Trayvon Martin, not only continuing to follow him after he was told that he didn't have to do that...but also exiting his vehicle and continuing to stalk Trayvon Martin. Just because Trayvon fought back doesn't mean that Zimmerman was any the less the instigator. See Trayvon Martin had a right to stand his ground as well.

 

[disneydude]

Where's your evidence that M was legally qualified for SD?

If someone pulls a gun on you, you have two options....run and get shot or take your chances by trying to get the gun away.

 

[Grim17]

Re: Opening statements.

Yes. But you can't be an instigator and try to fall back on "self-defense".

Yes you can... Read Florida's self defense statutes.

 

[disneydude]

Re: Opening statements.

Yes you can... Read Florida's self defense statutes.

What in Florida's statute makes you think that self-defense only applies to the one with a gun?

 

[buck]

Could you please post the things you found significant from today's testimony on the "day 2" thread... Thx

Save me some time. If you want to... just copy/paste what I indciated regarding wendy dorvial.

 

[Grim17]

Save me some time. If you want to... just copy/paste what I indciated regarding wendy dorvial.

I have no idea where that would be... Geez

 

[Oceaura]

Where's your evidence that M was legally qualified for SD?

Serino was the first one to point it out and basically considering T ran away from the stranger following him proved intent to break all contact. When Z exited his vehicle he sought to re-establish that contact and it placed T as the only one qualifying for SYG. Now, Z can claim SD defense but he has to demonstrate he tried to break all contact before using deadly force.

Did you notice how Nelson stumped Omara's attempt to put SD on the table? It is because the jury instructions are partly created by the evidence presented at trial. In some cases the defendants are not allowed to claim self defense at all which means the jury deliberations are not permitted to consider SD when rendering a verdict.

 

[ric27]

If someone pulls a gun on you, you have two options....run and get shot or take your chances by trying to get the gun away.

Wrong

If someone pulls a gun on me...I freeze. Period

 

[Oceaura]

Re: Opening statements.

Yes you can... Read Florida's self defense statutes.

The person who provoked the fight can claim SD but only if certain conditions are met. If a defendant fails the jury is not allowed to consider SD.