Judge refuses to step down. Seems like a bad decision to me. If this case ever goes to appeals then it could be a factor. This judge obviously was/is pissed over the bail bond fiasco and that could make him biased in the trial.
Concisely, Zimmerman complained “These assholes always get away,” at 7:11. Two minutes later, dispatch advised him to stop actually running after Martin. Two minutes after that, Zimmerman declined to meet police at the mailboxes, asking that the police call when they arrive, so he could let them know where he’d be. Two minutes after that, Martin was shot in the heart.
The level of willful pretense required to claim that Zimmerman was a passive victim in this is staggering.
Only four minutes elapsed between the time he was running after someone he worried might “get away” and the moment he pulled the trigger. Martin was heard to say “Get off!” early on in the struggle, and Zimmerman has provided a narrative that is ludicrously implausible. It seems fairly obvious that in those two minutes Zimmerman chased after Martin and laid ahold of him - unless you have some emotional or political reason for treating his statements as gospel and ignoring everything that casts doubt on them.
There is evidence that he was following him, and evidence that he lost him and was no longer following him. There is no evidence that Zimmerman was hunting him.
AFAIK, we have only DeeDee’s word for this, some time after the fact. Since her call was not recorded, we cannot establish what was said with any certainty, especially not that it was Martin speaking.
Many of the major elements of his story are backed up by evidence, as has been demonstrated.
Actually my reason for not accepting this account is that it has very little to back it up. We don’t know who, if anyone, said “get off of me” and given the injuries to Zimmerman, and the witness statement who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, it is unlikely to have been Zimmerman. Likewise your timeline does nothing to establish that Zimmerman was chasing anyone. It is just as possible for Martin to have doubled back and attacked in two minutes as for Zimmerman to have attacked Martin. And since there is no real evidence that Zimmerman attacked Martin, and there is evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman, your attempt at well-poisoning is not particularly effective.
From what I remember from the 911 calls, Zimmerman is sitting in his truck when he says something like, “he’s running now,” after which he gets out of his truck to follow Martin. I believe it was less than a minute later when the dispatcher tells him, “we don’t need you to [follow him].” Zimmerman says, “okay.” At that point, he wouldn’t have been in back of the houses. So if he wasn’t still following Martin, why else did he end up behind the house? Because he was looking for him. The shit hit the fan behind the houses, minutes later.
What’s that, he left the street to walk behind the houses to check for an address? Riiiiight, makes perfect sense.
No. Because you left out a step. Or perhaps i did. The jury is the finder of fact. They can choose to believe or disbelieve any of the evidence they see or hear. (They cannot, however, believe something for which there is no evidence at all).
The reasonable hypothesis left over only exists if the jury believes Bob.
But – if the jury believes Bob, then, yes, he’s acquitted.
I don’t agree. On appeal, there is no way this record would justify recusal. If the judge makes biased rulings during trial, then of course those rulings can be appealed.
This post was made two years ago – before the Zimmerman shooting happened. In other words, the poster has no motive to support either Zimmerman or Martin.
the sidewalk he was on led to the street he knew the name of. Which is what he stated in the video. When he said OK to the dispatcher he would have been in the back yard along the T given a jog time of 20 seconds.
I think Lester figures that O’Mara will appeal and Lester will be overruled and Lester won’t have admit that he is biased. Lester has actually lost appeals several times.
I don’t believe that for a second. He left a street that he was on, to walk behind the houses to a different street altogether – away from the entrance where the cops were due to show up, mind you – because he knew the name of the other street? Horse balls. He went looking for Martin.
the phone call timeline to the dispatcher puts him at the T intersection. He’s where he said he was. Last time I checked it wasn’t a crime to walk on a sidewalk.
He has ruled on issues that the appellate courts have ruled differently on. No judge on any reasonable time on the bench can say he’s never been reversed.
That’s a lot of minutes little Trayvon could have ran, walked or even crawled home to “safety” from the pursuing, chasing, stalking hunter/executioner Zimmerman. Interestingly enough, Zimmerman’s keychain/flashlight was found at the top of the “T”. Ear-witnesses describe the altercation beginning at the top of the “T” and making it’s way down to where the shooting took place. In other words, the altercation began at the top of the “T”. Which means that Zimmerman didn’t chase little Trayvon down.
Only? There are people that can run a four minute mile. Of course, Trayvon probably wasn’t that fast. But he was closer to a FOOT from the top of the “T” when the altercation began. The level of willful pretense required to claim that Trayvon was a passive victim in this is staggering.
Actually it seems completely obvious that this did not happen and, in fact, is outside the bounds of reason.
This is why “the law” is so confusing at times. Zimmerman is charged with 2nd degree murder but because of the way the statute is written, the jury doesn’t decide if Zimmerman murdered Martin??? If I was on this jury, unless the judge specifically told us NOT to consider this a “murder”, I would be thinking, “This is a murder trial”.
We know that items 1 and 5 meet the standard. Items 2, 3, and 4 have yet to be proven in court and beyond a reasonable doubt.
Item 2 suggests that the prosecutor must prove that Zimmerman commited a “criminal act”. Not everything has been released yet but I haven’t seen or heard any evidence/testimony that suggests Zimmerman was commiting a criminal act. If Zimmerman had attempted to detain or restrain Martin, that could be considered a crimminal act but no one who was there has said that is what happened.
Item 3’s “depraved mind” suggests that, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman had “no regard for Martin’s life”. According to LECTLAW.COM :
The condition of mind described as depravity of mind is characterized by an inherent deficiency of moral sense and integrity. It consists of evil, corrupt and perverted intent which is devoid of regard for human dignity and which is indifferent to human life. It is a state of mind outrageously horrible or inhuman.
Zimmerman has an established history of trying to help people regardless of age, sex, or race. The FBI hasn’t found any history of racism. There is one co-worker who suggest Zimmerman is racist but he has yet to be cross-examined. There is an incident with an ex-girlfriend but they filed charges against each other. I’m not sure if the incident with the underage drinking police is even admissable but it was reduced.
Item 4 has been argued ad nauseam on the internet. Yes, Zimmerman was injured but was he injured “enough” to warrant lethal force. I believe that A) Zimmerman was being beaten by an unknown assailant and B) Zimmerman was calling to his neighbors for help. No help arrived (regardless of who was calling) and the struggle was ongoing. Others disagree. So item 4 will be decided by how each member of the jury relates to the evidence.
Do all 5 items have to be proved? By that I mean, can proving items 1, 2, 3, and 5 result in a guilty verdict?
One basic fact is that one abrasion equals one injury, not injuries as your incorrect cite states in post 4635. Another basic fact is that the abrasion is not located on Martin’s knuckle, as the chart attached to the autopsy report shows. Hence, Martin’s knuckles? Unscathed.
Also note that the abrasion is 1/4 by 1/8 inch in size. I’ve had larger marks on my fingers from torn hangnails.
Well, for starters, can you identify which part of the deer’s heart the bullet passed through or lodged, and how much did the deer’s heart weigh? We need this information if we’re going to compare the deer’s injuries to Trayvon’s.
I’d also like to hear more about how deer and human gunshot injuries compare and contrast. After all, freshly decapitated chickens are capable of running around for a few seconds, while there are no credible stories of freshly decapitated humans doing the same. Thus, that makes me suspect that there could be differences between deer and human nervous systems that lead to different reactions to similar wounds.
I have to, if not reject, put that first claim on hold because I am unable to read the book, and have not been able to find a more in-depth look at that case online. So, I don’t know if that really happened or, more to the point, how that man’s injuries compared to Trayvon’s.