Folks need to read Bernie de la Rionda’s response to the defense’s motion for sanctions against the State. If he performs in court like he does on paper, this is going to be the most entertaining trial ever. The only thing that could make this better is if Zimmerman decided to fire O’Mara and replace him with dead Johnny Cochran.
Martin is dead because he was shot in self defense. there is no evidence that Zimmerman touched him.
Zimmerman didn’t need to touch him; that’s what his little friend the gun was for.
OMG, thank you for posting that. It’s fucking hilarious. Bernie de la Rionda is complaining that DD never wanted publicity or anything to do with the trial. Aside from the fact she was suppose to be Trayvon’s girlfriend who should have called the police on his behalf if she thought he was in dangerBernie is the attorney who leaked witness names.
That’s right. His legally owned gun, that he had the right to use in self defence. On the other hand we know Martin touched Zimmerman, and have no reason to think he did so legally. If you have any reason to think Martin was acting in self defence - the only situation where he could have acted as he did legally - please share it.
That he didn’t have the right to use to roust a teenager who was doing nothing wrong. He put himself in a position where he could bail out with gun-driven self defense if things went south. And what do you know … that’s exactly what happened.
there was no need for Martin to touch him. Yet he chose to do so. The gun was used well into the beating and as a last resort. Zimmerman showed great restraint in the use of the weapon.
Again, you make statements without evidence. Zimmerman never engaged Martin. He called the police and he had every right to call the police.
He got out of his car, with his gun, to confront Martin. He put himself in that situation, Martin didn’t. But in the world of “Legal Gun Owners Can Do No Wrong,” that doesn’t impart a shred of responsibility for the shit-sandwich he himself created.
Jesus, there is no end to the incorrect information you keep posting. Martin was already around the corner by the time Zimmerman got out of the vehicle. Both Zimmerman and DD’s account show he was out of sight. He NEVER confronts Martin. He specifically DOESN’T confront Martin by his truck. Martin is gone the whole time Zimmerman is walking back and forth on the sidewalk talking to the dispatcher. The shit sandwich was served up by Martin. According to DD he was by his house. He has to travel BACK to where Zimmerman is in order for the confrontation to take place and by both accounts Martin starts that confrontation. He then goes on to beat Zimmerman. All the physical evidence shows Zimmerman is in the area of the sidewalk T which is well away from Martin’s house. There is no excuse you can make for Martin going back to confront Zimmerman and then beating him.
Yeah. I guess there must be some sort of Bermuda Triangle type force that whisked Zimmerman from his car on the street, to behind the houses where he shot Martin. It can’t be Zimmerman’s responsibility that he was back there, right? He didn’t actually walk behind the houses to look for Martin — he just … oops … found himself there, through no fault of his own, so obviously he can’t be held responsible for anything.
And this Martin went back to confront Zimmerman is so much fantasy concocted in your mind from the phrase, “by his house.” You take this as gospel fact that the kid was standing on his porch and he actively went back to seek out a confrontation with the guy he was just running away from.
There’s no Bermuda Triangle force involved. He walked there under his own power. He is responsible for his actions just as Martin was.
Nothing is concocted. This is what Martin TOLD DD. Neither of them can see each other and Zimmerman is walking in plain sight. There is a 2 minute gap in Martin’s activity from where he SAYS he’s at to where Zimmerman can be seen in plain sight. You just can’t ignore the evidence. There is absolutely no reason for Martin to suddenly appear near the T except to confront Zimmerman. There’s your Burmuda Triangle force that whisks someone around. Explain why 2 minutes after he say’s he’s by his house he’s way down the sidewalk by Zimmerman who would have seen him if he was always there.
The location Martin comes from, the one he says he’s at, coincides with Zimmerman’s testimony. It all fits.
I contend that Martin probably never left the area near the T - seems to me he was idling back behind the houses hoping that the creep who was following him would go away and leave him alone. Coincidentally enough, the T is “by his father’s house.”
There is every bit as much evidence for that than for your scenario where Martin runs away from Zimmerman and then runs back toward him just so he can pop whitey in the nose.
no it’s not “by his father’s house”. It’s at the opposite end of the complex to the tune of 350 feet. If he never left the area of the T then he would have seen and heard Zimmerman walking back and forth on the sidewalk.
Cite it. And George is Hispanic so you might want to leave out your racist comments or at least use the correct ethnic slur. But you did finally get something right. Martin punched Zimmerman in the nose. If the police had arrived sooner Martin would be doing some jail time.
See. You’re clinging to “by my father’s house,” as close enough to be practically *in *his father’s house. “I’m by my father’s house,” can be interpreted as, “I’m back in my father’s neighborhood,” especially since the kid was coming back from outside is father’s neighborhood, and, I might add, a neighborhood he wasn’t completely familiar with.
You can’t cite that Martin was a specific number of feet from his father’s house on a turn of phrase.
The only thing you can do is ignore the evidence of what Martin said and then pretend Martin couldn’t see and here someone who is not trying to hide. Zimmerman is walking in plain view talking on his phone and banging his flashlight.
And we know this because Zimmerman said so, so it must be true. Finally, an honest criminal defendant!
If he was by the T he would have seen Zimmerman and heard Zimmerman. Since he lost sight of Zimmerman and said he was by his fathers house then those two pieces of information correlate with each other. Your scenario does not. You literally have to ignore the evidence and make things up to create a scenario that works.
We know where the fight started because there is physical evidence that backs it up. And yes, even without that his testimony counts unless you have evidence that contradicts it. You have to prove it’s FALSE. It can’t be inferred, you don’t get to ignore his testimony and choose not believe him. This has been explained to you by lawyers.