And not see anything out of the ordinary. By my crude mathematical skills, the odds of having one black juror by chance out of six are right around 50/50 (9% chance, six iterations), so not having one doesn’t raise my eyebrows at all.
(This is, of course, complicated by the overlap between white and Hispanic).
I truly don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. There was a witness to what transpired after the shooting. What problem in court is there over Zimmerman’s claim he searched the body.
Martin knew where Zimmerman’s truck. It’s logical to assume Zimmerman would return to it. And according to Dee Dee Martin said Zimmerman was coming back. Which corresponds to Zimmerman’s account of walking back on the walk he came from and the location of the fight.
Now take a moment to review what is occurring. Zimmerman made no attempt to hide. He made no attempt to talk quietly on the phone. He actually bangs something (presumed to be his larger flashlight). He has a smaller flashlight he’s using. He is a walking beacon. Martin, according to Dee Dee is by his house and has lost sight of Zimmerman. He has also lowered his voice and his breathing changes. It appears he is trying to be stealthy. He goes from his house or wherever he can’t hear and see Zimmerman to the location of the fight which is the direction of his car. He then acknowledges that Zimmerman is coming back. If he was hiding near the location the fight started he would never have lost sight of Zimmerman.
Now, is it possible that another scenario exists? Of course. But where Martin said he was fits the narrative versus contradicts the narrative. You can’t pretend Martin was not near his house because you want to. It fits the reason he gave for not running any more and it fits not being able to see (or hear) Zimmerman. He’s far enough away that he can’t. It’s a logical conclusion versus some other possibility.
At some point, yes.
But, in fact, GZ was not back at his truck. Whether or not you hold it to be alogical conclusion, it would have been an incorrect one.
The point is: the only things you “know” Are whatever things Zimmerman claimed. The point is the only “evidence” You believe exists, is evidence which supports what Zimmerman said. The point is, you completely ignore any facts which disagree with your beliefs about Zimmerman.
The point is Zimmerman told a rather elaborate lie about what happened after he shot Martin. The point is we know it was a lie because of physical reality disproving his lie. The point is that this is one of many lies, and it’s an important lie, and it’s a lie which undermines his story. The point is that we’ve known about this lie for a year, we’ve talked about this lie off and on for a year, the point is that here we are at trial and you are still retelling his lie.
The point is: you are a Zimmerman apologist so devoted to his story you clearly do not have any conscious awareness of anything other than what George Zimmerman has said along with anything you believe supports what George Zimmerman has said, and therefore you have sacrificed any claim you try to make on knowing or understanding the facts of what happened in this case.
What evidence that shows he’s lying? You’ve repeatedly claimed to have it but you’ve not presented it, and neither have the State in discovery, so it’s not evidence that’s in the public domain.
Why do you think he’s lying? What “physical reality” shows that? What “facts” are people ignoring? An why do you keep claiming they exist but refusing to share them?
where is the lie? Are you saying he didn’t check Martin for weapons? Again, there is a witness who could tell us this didn’t occur so I really don’t understand what point you’re trying to make. If you have a specific item I’ve talked about then spell it out in detail and we will debate it.
Bricker, I know my people. The only reason why that Court room is not packed with supporters is specifically because the Court won’t allow it or they were turned away. I can guarantee you that, 100%.
You live in Seminole County and know a lot of people or is this going to be another bit of racial clairvoyance on your part? Either cite that black people were turned away or retract the statement.
The really scary part is that I think the two of you honestly believe what you are saying. And I guess I have to just take this as a really disturbing lesson in the power of people’s desire to believe.
You claimed they weren’t your people, but a collection of disparate individuals with nothing in common earlier. Obviously, protesters of any sort won’t, and shouldn’t be allowed in a courtroom, and “supporters” is nothing more than a euphemism for that.
What’s disturbing is that you can’t post a single argument and stick to it. This is the 3rd time you posted about something to do with Martin’s arms without spelling it out. Cat got your tongue? Is you keyboard missing the keys necessary to construct a cogent thought? what is the exact nature of your problem that you can’t do this simple thing?
I was planning on attending for a day or 2, but didn’t feel like messing around with the drawing, and I bet many people lost interest for the same reason.
Due to Seminole being predominately white, I’m guessing the more vocal supporters are in neighboring Orange county.
No, what’s scary is that you believe what you’re saying despite the fact that you have no evidence for it. We have the evidence, and have provided it over and over again.
We know Zimmerman didn’t follow Martin, because we know, from the NEN call, where he stopped. We know Martin chose to confront him, because there is no other way they could have encountered each other - because we know Martin went home.
We know it was self defence because we can see the injuries on Zimmerman’s face and head, and the injury to Martin’s hand, and we can see the lack of any other injuries, or any evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman started the fight.
Every single claim you’ve made has been rebutted, again and again, whether it’s a claim about the facts of the case, or the law in Florida.
Again, you have refused to answer the questions. What evidence is there against Zimmerman? Why do you believe he lied to the police? Why do you believe his killing of Martin was illegal? What evidence is there?
I know you won’t answer those questions, because I know the truthful answer. You know because you have decided the truth regardless of fact, and will work as hard as possible to reshape the world to fit the truth you wish to impose on it. Facts are irrelevant to you, as is evidence. You are incapable of learning, either from your own mistakes, or from the lessons of others. This, by the way, is not an insult, it’s an observation. You are not stupid, or lazy, but for whatever reason, you will not attempt to learn.
The state is bring up -exactly- the same point I noted about 100 pages ago: if Zimmerman wanted to get an address of the house he was parked in front of, it was available right in front of him as he walked up the cut-through. Lit up and everything.
But that can’t be. Honesty knows his people. the court must be separating the drawings into two piles and throwing away the pile marked “Honesty’s People”. He’s assured us 100%. Of course, if he’s actually researched it his “people” held a townhall meeting at a local church.
Here is a citecomplete with pictures and everything.
Honesty, unless you retract that post you will be asked for a cite until you do. I’m not going to let another one of your baseless statements go unchallenged.