Zimmerman trial: Neighbor testifies Trayvon Martin was straddling Zimmerman moments before fatal gun - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Lamar;41230653]It won't until Monday when the trial continues, but it looks like at least Don West thinks he has the case in the bag. [img]http://i193.photobucket.com/albums/z105/sporkfire222/victory_zpsb23df9e8.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Who is this? The lawyer?

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;41230982]ah so only the white man is capable of taking responsibility for his own thoughts and words, while the negro is helpless like a child :downs:[/QUOTE] A white guy can say nigga without being racist.

[QUOTE=Iago;41231025]A white guy can say nigga without being racist.[/QUOTE] News to me

"bu-t-t-t-t, he was totally calm after ward!" He was an shock assholes.

No shit, sherlock.

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41228680]This all predicates on the argument that Zimmerman is a reasonable person which conflicts with the [i]established fact[/i] that Zimmerman left his car to go after Martin on foot despite being told not to by the police dispatcher he was on the phone with.[/QUOTE] For like the 50th time, the police dispatcher has no legal authority to tell you that. Nobody in the country has the legal authority to tell you to stop doing something that isn't illegal.

[QUOTE=butre;41231666]For like the 50th time, the police dispatcher has no legal authority to tell you that. Nobody in the country has the legal authority to tell you to stop doing something that isn't illegal.[/QUOTE] So that makes it a good idea to follow him then?

[QUOTE=Iago;41231684]So that makes it a good idea to follow him then?[/QUOTE] That's not the argument. The argument is that his choice wasn't illegal. It may have been a really stupid choice, in fact you'd have to be crazy to say it wasn't insanely idiotic, but that doesn't make it illegal.

From what I've gotten out of this, Trayvon tried to be tough shit, and didn't realize that Zimmerman was armed / wanted to play vigilante. Either way, I doubt Zimmerman would shoot him for no apparent reason. *edit* Forgive me if I'm wrong, I haven't kept up with this case in a while.

[QUOTE=Iago;41231684]So that makes it a good idea to follow him then?[/QUOTE] You still don't know if he followed him. In the 911 recording you can hear him say "ok" when the dispatcher told him he didn't need to follow him.

I kinda feel bad for Zimmerman whether he's ruled guilty or not. If he's guilty, that sucks because I think he complied with the law and his life would basically be over. If he's not guilty, he's going to be a target for people upset that he wasn't charged. [editline]28th June 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Ridge;41231077]News to me[/QUOTE] It's all in the context

[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;41228894]It's America. Houses get burglarized all the time. You'd have difficulty finding a neighborhood that hasn't had at least one recent burglary.[/QUOTE] I don't think so. [URL]http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4657[/URL] [quote]The rate of household burglary decreased 56% from 1994 to 2011, from a peak of 63.4 victimizations per 1,000 U.S. households in 1994 to [B]27.6 victimizations per 1,000 households[/B] in 2011.[/quote] [editline]28th June 2013[/editline] You can't just blatantly make things up like that, especially on the internet where you have access to so much information.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;41228969]is your defense really just "well he can't be suspicious because he's black!!" a suspicious person is suspicious, regardless of skin color. I'm sorry to inform you that all fingers point to Martin being a potential criminal. I guess black people can't be criminals in your world without it being horribly racist, though.[/QUOTE] Guilty til proven innocent. At least when you're black, because you know, the system is balanced to let black people get off on technicalities and such all the time you know... Just can't allow that politically correct bullpoopie to get in the way of REAL FLORIDA JUSTICE!!!

[QUOTE=a203xi;41232641]Guilty til proven innocent. At least when you're black, because you know, the system is balanced to let black people get off on technicalities and such all the time you know... Just can't allow that politically correct bullpoopie to get in the way of REAL FLORIDA JUSTICE!!![/QUOTE] Guilt and suspicion of guilt are extremely different things, as Iago and Sigma have [I]thoroughly[/I] demonstrated.

[QUOTE=Iago;41230843]"we beat stupidity"? Coming from the guy who made a fucking knock knock joke in the beginning of the trial.[/QUOTE] His joke was actually pretty good if you understood it

[QUOTE=Iago;41231684]So that makes it a good idea to follow him then?[/QUOTE] No. What it does establish is that Mr. Zimmerman may have been looking for a fight which would mean he was the initial aggressor and would nullify his self defense... defense. That said it may not be enough to prove that he had intent on engaging Mr. Martin, and with the recent testimony of Mr. Martin being on top in the scuffle and the removing at the start of the trial of pseudo scientific witnesses analyzing the 911 audio to figure out who was yelling help I personally find it hard to believe that the Prosecutor can satisfy the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And that bit is what is most important.

Anyone mind explaining this whole thing like im 5, i've seen so much drama, especially around this new woman who looks like shrek.

[QUOTE=kenji;41232784]Anyone mind explaining this whole thing like im 5, i've seen so much drama, especially around this new woman who looks like shrek.[/QUOTE] Basically the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to six jurors that Mr. Zimmerman didn't just shoot Mr. Martin, but did so with malicious intent. And as it stands right now, the prosecution, in my opinion, has not done so. Though there is still time for them to do it.

Whatever the ruling is, one thing that seems pretty clear is Zimmerman is a racist and an idiot. Are people just completely forgetting how he lied in court in this very same case and was caught red-handed and humiliated by the judge he was lying to? Do innocent people usually LIE in COURT in the case where they're supposed to be proving their innocence? Lawyers can be very good at presenting information out of context and defamation of the character of their opponents, hell that's 80% of the job at least, nothing that his lawyer says is good enough to prove that Zimmerman did anything but completely instigate this entire incident because he wanted to feel like TJ Hooker and ended up costing another person their life. It may have been legal to stalk a presumably innocent black teenager under the excuse that he was "suspicious" for no reason (But I'm sure it wasn't cause of his race!) but it is beyond morally despicable and a basic admission of being a racist at the very least, and the fact that his horrible decision making led to the death of another person... His very best chances of being found innocent are basically the chances of him getting off on a technicality, you have to at least admit that.

The shrek like witness, as you put it, was the lady on the phone with Mr. Martin before he was killed. She testified that Mr. Martin was trying to flee from Mr. Zimmerman, and that he used racial slurs to describe Mr. Zimmerman (I do believe Creepy Ass Cracker is a slur, though some, including the witness, disagree.) Another witness states that they saw Mr. Martin on top of Mr. Zimmerman in a MMA like position. An EMT who looked at Mr. Zimmerman suggested that he had injuries consistent with a fight and a Nurse Practitioner, or something similar, stated that Mr. Zimmerman's injuries were not life threatening. That's all I know for the time being, others will undoubtedly fill in and correct what I have wrong or left out.

He still has to prove that Trayvon intended to kill him by shooting him with his own gun, that's basically his entire defense and there were no witnesses to this specific part of the event, just the word of the defendant.

As far as the Mr. Zimmerman being a racist or not, it is irrelevant. It can be argued that he was following Mr. Martin because he was black just as easily as it can be argued that he was following him because he was a young male out late at night wearing a hoodie who took off when he spotted Mr. Zimmerman. Basically it can't concretely establish Mr. Zimmerman's mind set as he approached Mr. Martin.

[QUOTE=Protocol7;41228969]is your defense really just "well he can't be suspicious because he's black!!" a suspicious person is suspicious, regardless of skin color. I'm sorry to inform you that all fingers point to Martin being a potential criminal. I guess black people can't be criminals in your world without it being horribly racist, though.[/QUOTE] zimmerman here thought that trayvon was suspicious because he was black

[QUOTE=a203xi;41232831]Whatever the ruling is, one thing that seems pretty clear is Zimmerman is a racist and an idiot. Are people just completely forgetting how he lied in court in this very same case and was caught red-handed and humiliated by the judge he was lying to? Do innocent people usually LIE in COURT in the case where they're supposed to be proving their innocence? Lawyers can be very good at presenting information out of context and defamation of the character of their opponents, hell that's 80% of the job at least, nothing that his lawyer says is good enough to prove that Zimmerman did anything but completely instigate this entire incident because he wanted to feel like TJ Hooker and ended up costing another person their life. [B]It may have been legal to stalk a presumably innocent black teenager under the excuse that he was "suspicious" for no reason (But I'm sure it wasn't cause of his race!) but it is beyond morally despicable and a basic admission of being a racist at the very least, and the fact that his horrible decision making led to the death of another person.[/B]. His very best chances of being found innocent are basically the chances of him getting off on a technicality, you have to at least admit that.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25] 911 dispatcher: OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic? Zimmerman: He looks black. 911 dispatcher: Did you see what he was wearing? Zimmerman: Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42] 911 dispatcher: He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK. Zimmerman: Now he’s staring at me. [00:48] 911 dispatcher: OK, you said that’s 1111 Retreat View or 111? Zimmerman: That’s the clubhouse. 911 dispatcher: He’s near the clubhouse now? Zimmerman: Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band. And he’s a black male.[1:03][/QUOTE] Again with this whole "he suspected him because he was black".

[QUOTE=a203xi;41232917]He still has to prove that Trayvon intended to kill him by shooting him with his own gun, that's basically his entire defense and there were no witnesses to this specific part of the event, just the word of the defendant.[/QUOTE] Not necessarily, in reality Mr. Zimmerman can be acquitted in two ways. 1. He successfully establishes that he feared for his life while scuffling with Mr. Martin. Whether he feared Mr. Martin would go for his gun or bludgeon him to death with his fist is irrelevant. If he can convince the jury he genuinely feared for his life for any reason, and that he didn't initiate aggression then he may be acquitted. 2. If the Prosecution is unable to satiate the burden of proof and establish that Mr. Zimmerman's intent when he shot Mr. Martin was malicious then the jury would acquit. [editline]28th June 2013[/editline] Personally I don't care what color you skin is, if you are wearing a hoodie and walking around my neighborhood at night and I didn't know who you are, I'd be suspicious too.

[QUOTE=a203xi;41232831]Whatever the ruling is, one thing that seems pretty clear is Zimmerman is a racist and an idiot. Are people just completely forgetting how he lied in court in this very same case and was caught red-handed and humiliated by the judge he was lying to? Do innocent people usually LIE in COURT in the case where they're supposed to be proving their innocence? Lawyers can be very good at presenting information out of context and defamation of the character of their opponents, hell that's 80% of the job at least, nothing that his lawyer says is good enough to prove that Zimmerman did anything but completely instigate this entire incident because he wanted to feel like TJ Hooker and ended up costing another person their life. It may have been legal to stalk a presumably innocent black teenager under the excuse that he was "suspicious" for no reason (But I'm sure it wasn't cause of his race!) but it is beyond morally despicable and a basic admission of being a racist at the very least, and the fact that his horrible decision making led to the death of another person... His very best chances of being found innocent are basically the chances of him getting off on a technicality, you have to at least admit that.[/QUOTE] Everything you just posted about racism and instigation has been gone over a thousand times in this thread. There is no evidence of instigation and none of racism.

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;41228630]because zimmerman would not instigate such an encounter with trayvon. trayvon had a height advantage, and could easily overpower zimmerman in hand-to-hand combat. if zimmerman had actually tried to attack trayvon pre-emptively, he would have pulled out his gun, at which point trayvon would not have had the chance to punch zimmerman in the first place. if trayvon was on top of zimmerman, punching him, the only reasonable conclusion to make is that trayvon took the initiative and attacked zimmerman.[/QUOTE] 'hand-to-hand combat' really

Zimmerman is not racist.

[QUOTE=_jesterk;41233092]'hand-to-hand combat' really[/QUOTE] If Zimmerman remembered the basics of CQC, this might not have happened.

[QUOTE=Skullivan21;41232936]As far as the Mr. Zimmerman being a racist or not, it is irrelevant. It can be argued that he was following Mr. Martin because he was black just as easily as it can be argued that he was following him because he was a young male out late at night wearing a hoodie who took off when he spotted Mr. Zimmerman. Basically it can't concretely establish Mr. Zimmerman's mind set as he approached Mr. Martin.[/QUOTE] Being a racist would matter. Motive and state of mind is extremely important in law.