State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman Trial Thread

[camille]

@Terr

You’re wrong, again (surprise, surprise). It was shown that the SYG law may have been discussed (certainly not “extensively”) in the college course. It was not shown, at all, whether Zimmerman was there on that one day when it was discussed, whether he has read the material for that one day, and whether the law was actually referred to as “SYG” when it was taught.

What is not surprising is that your version does not coincide with the actual testimony. Discussed “only one day”? Is that what the professor testified? Come on now…

[Terr]

@camille

What is not surprising is that your version does not coincide with the actual testimony. Discussed “only one day”? Is that what the professor testified? Come on now…

AFAIR, he was actually asked if he called it “SYG” in class and he responded in the negative. But I don’t have access to the transcripts, and this was a while ago. If you can point me to the full transcript of his testimony, I will be glad to search in there.

[Human_Action]

@Tollhouse

Uh, yea, IF you believe gz…cop batterer, child molester, woman beater and liar, no for some reason I dont buy his bullshit

So, in your view, the evidence suggests that Martin did not travel back to Zimmerman? Please, explain.

[camille]

USA Today coverage:

Zimmerman was set to graduate in spring 2012, the jury will learn. They’ll also learn that Zimmerman had access to literature about how to “excel as a witness” and the theory behind Florida’s stand-your-ground and self-defense law.

“It certainly goes to a state of mind,” said Mantei who added that the records show Zimmerman carried wanted to be a police officer.

Alexis Carter, a former Seminole County College professor, testified that Zimmerman earned an ‘A’ in his criminal litigation class. Carter says he discussed Florida’s self-defense and stand-your-ground laws quite often with students.

Zimmerman was among one of his better students, Carter said.

Prosecutors said Carter’s testimony is important because Zimmerman told Sean Hannity in an interview that Zimmerman didn’t know about stand your ground laws until after shooting Trayvon. Carter told jurors he taught Zimmerman’s class about stand your ground and talked extensively about self defense.

george-zimmerman-professor-testifies-he-taught-extensively-about-stand-your-ground:

In a key bit of testimony, Carter told the jury that he had covered Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law extensively for George Zimmerman’s class. He described George Zimmerman as “one of the better students,” and remembered giving him an “A” in the class.

The testimony contradicts remarks Zimmerman made in an interview with Sean Hannity last year, in which Zimmerman claimed he had not even heard of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law until after the incident that resulted in his killing of 17 year-old Trayvon Martin.

The prosecution was expected to introduce evidence that “Stand Your Ground” was covered in Zimmerman’s college classes, but Carter’s testimony left little doubt that the neighborhood watchman had internalized that information. Carter said that “You always remember your smartest student, or the one that stood out the most, the one that probably wasn’t the best student. He was probably one of the better students in the class.”

Asked to describe the class he taught, Carter explained that while the textbook he used was not Florida-specific, he did cover the “Stand Your Ground” law.

Asked “Did you cover that specifically,” Carter replied “Yes.”

“What can you tell us about how long you spent as part of the course covering ideas like self-defense and stand your ground?” the prosecutor asked.

“Self-defense is affirmative defense,” Carter replied. “It’s a big defense, self-defense, not one of the things you’re going to just whisk through in a day, or after you teach it you will neglect from bringing it back into the classroom. So it was something that I constantly iterated. I was the type of professor that, before I gave a test, I gave a review for the test. It was something that I think the students really wanted to know about. It was so practical. They were very much engaged in class discussion regarding the issue. I remember, you know, talking about it quite a few times. Not just on that particular occasion.”

Not the official court transcript, but two sources of many from the media covering the testimony. Since you are the one making the claim against this common knowledge, it is on you to provide a cite. Put up or retract (not that I’m holding my breath for that).

[Terr]

@camille

Not the official court transcript, but two sources of many from the media covering the testimony.

And neither of those sources claims that he called it “SYG” in class. Not just “self-defense” or “affirmative defense”.

[camille]

@Terr

And neither of those sources claims that he called it “SYG” in class.

So? Hannity didn’t call it “SYG” either.

Anyway, this tangent is only a distraction from your original claim that it was only discussed on “one day”.

Cite or retract please.

[Jack_Batty]

@Human_Action

So, in your view, the evidence suggests that Martin did not travel back to Zimmerman? Please, explain.

There is no friggin’ evidence, beyond an inference from the phrase, “by his father’s house,” that Martin came back from anywhere. I reject the notion outright as 1) it makes no sense that he would go all the way to his father’s fiance’s house and then decide to go back to attack the creepy ass cracker who he was just running away from - all while talking on the phone, mind you and B) the suggestion that in the minute or so between Zimmerman’s call to the cops and the gunshot, that Martin “skipped” the length of a football field and back, conversing with whatshername on the way, just to ask Zimmerman, “why are you following me,” in the hopes that he would get an opportunity to pounce, is preposterous as well.

Or are we still sticking with that “you got a problem, homie?” nonsense, too?

[Terr]

@camille

So? Hannity didn’t call it “SYG” either.

Fine. “Stand Your Ground” - did the professor state that that is what he called it in class? Because it could be that he discussed it without using its nickname. That is not what the law is officially called.

Anyway, this tangent is only a distraction from your original claim that it was only discussed on “one day”.

Retracted. I saw the transcript where he said it was on “more than one occasion”.

[camille]

@Terr

Fine. “Stand Your Ground” - did the professor state that that is what he called it in class? Because it could be that he discussed it without using its nickname. That is not what the law is officially called.
Retracted. I saw the transcript where he said it was on “more than one occasion”.

Again, from the previous cite:

The prosecution was expected to introduce evidence that “Stand Your Ground” was covered in Zimmerman’s college classes, but Carter’s testimony left little doubt that the neighborhood watchman had internalized that information. Carter said that “You always remember your smartest student, or the one that stood out the most, the one that probably wasn’t the best student. He was probably one of the better students in the class.”

Asked to describe the class he taught, Carter explained that while the textbook he used was not Florida-specific, he did cover the “Stand Your Ground” law.

Asked “Did you cover that specifically,” Carter replied “Yes.”

[Terr]

@camille

Again, from the previous cite:

Again, nowhere in the direct or cross did he say that he called it “Stand Your Ground” in class. You are aware that that’s not what the law is officially called, right?

[Jack_Batty]

Okay, Nathan Thurm.

[camille]

@Terr

Again, nowhere in the direct or cross did he say that he called it “Stand Your Ground” in class. You are aware that that’s not what the law is officially called, right?

Aaand again:

Asked to describe the class he taught, Carter explained that while the textbook he used was not Florida-specific, he did cover the “Stand Your Ground” law.

Asked “Did you cover that specifically,” Carter replied “Yes.”

[Terr]

@camille

Aaand again:

He covered it, yes. What did he call it in the classroom?

[Terr]

Fox News Shows | Fox News

Alternate juror E-54 says he would have voted to acquit.

In the interview he says that the NEN call was the best evidence for George Zimmerman. He says he saw no profiling or ill will whatsoever.

He also says that Zimmerman’s injuries were a significant factor in his would-be acquittal decision.

And, as a lot of people here said, he agrees that DeeDee’s testimony and call times show that most probably Martin went all the way to his father’s house, then returned to the T intersection.

[camille]

@Terr

He covered it, yes. What did he call it in the classroom?

I’m satisfied to rest on the record of our exchange here.

Asked to describe the class he taught, Carter explained that while the textbook he used was not Florida-specific, he did cover the “Stand Your Ground” law.

Asked “Did you cover that specifically,” Carter replied “Yes.”

[Terr]

@camille

I’m satisfied to rest on the record of our exchange here.

Yep. You have no idea what he called it in class. Note that the prosecution didn’t ask him. Guess they didn’t know either. And there is this maxim that an attorney should not ask his witness questions to which they don’t know answers.

[camille]

@Terr

Yep. You have no idea what he called it in class. Note that the prosecution didn’t ask him. Guess they didn’t know either. And there is this maxim that an attorney should not ask his witness questions to which they don’t know answers.

LOL. I can’t take you seriously anymore. You’ve clearly lost perspective on this subject.

[doorhinge]

@Tollhouse

Uh, yea, IF you believe gz…cop batterer, child molester, woman beater and liar, no for some reason I dont buy his bullshit

LOL. You’re a hoot. It was Jeantel who placed TM by his daddy fiance house. GZ had no idea where TM had run off to. Unless you believe that Jeantel is also a lying liar.

Everyone in Florida, including you, are entitled to use force against force to defend yourself. You also have the option of using lethal force if you reasonably believe that your life is in danger.

Cab drivers, plumbers, felons, children, jews, blacks, royalty, homeless, teachers, students, chinese, dog walkers, floridians and even internet users can use lethal force to defend themselves against imminent (immediate) danger.

[Tollhouse]

You are more invested in the need to believe gz, than the truth itself.

[Magiver]

@Condescending_Robot

Is this satire? There’s no dents to the can in the pictures from the scene. Try hitting a full can of anything against a surface; it will explode. Aluminum drink cans are pressurized.

It wasn’t a carbonated drink. It was a fruit drink. And I’ve dropped quite a few aluminum cans without them exploding and that’s against a hard surface. A human face is not a hard surface.

Zimmerman has a cut on the side of his nose and it’s the side of his nose that’s swollen. Given his testimony and the physical evidence I think it’s likely that the can was used for the initial blow. Why would you think Martin would not use the can in an assault?