Do you have an absentee father? I would hear my daughter's scream amongst a group of girls screaming.
Just curious, when do you think the last time TM's Father could remember his son screaming? I know my father wouldn't know my screams, but my mother would.
The problem is there isn't a clear reason WHY TM did "all those things". GZ had wounds consistent (though to what degree of consistency, that gets frequently debated) with the attack he describes, was seen below TM just prior to the shot (which also is consistent with his story), and ballistics seem to indicate strongly that TM remained beneath GZ at the time of the shot. Many also believe (in fact, even TM's father, on initially hearing the screams, said they weren't TM's) that the screams were GZ's and argue that there isn't an obvious reason the screams would have been TM's.
There's 3 or 4 things that lend credence, in fact very strong credence, that GZ had a reason to fear for his life, and thus react with self-defense in mind. TM has nothing remotely close to the same known reasons to have feared for his life. Taking a page from emperus' book, this is a false equivalence.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used.
Everyone knows you are the one who is constantly proven wrong.
Here is your idea of trolling with facts
When the fact is the exact opposite, which makes you an idiot.
Florida jury instructions.
3.9(d) DEFENDANT NOT TESTIFYING
Give either paragraph, or both, if defendant requests.
The constitution requires the State to prove its accusations against the defendant. It is not necessary for the defendant to disprove anything. Nor is the defendant required to prove [his] [her] innocence. It is up to the State to prove the defendant's guilt by evidence.
The defendant exercised a fundamental right by choosing not to be a witness in this case. You must not view this as an admission of guilt or be influenced in any way by [his] [her] decision. No juror should ever be concerned that the defendant did or did not take the witness stand to give testimony in the case.
Originally Posted by Druidx
Everyone knows you are the one who is constantly proven wrong.
Here is your idea of trolling with facts
Is legality the basis of morality? Or did you give 1000 to someone that's legally good, but morally a racist fuck?
Does it show someones lack of morality when they throw around the term racist fuck when the evidence says different?
The actual evidence shows that Zimmerman pursued Trayvon under the assumption he was actually another black person.
So, there you go proving your bitch as wrong yet again. Never gets old.
-Source : Official Sanford police report
Everyone knows you are the one who is constantly proven wrong.
Yet again you seem confused.
This is simply a deflection from the overwhelming evidence of Zimmerman's gross negligence leading up to the killing.
You know, all of the stuff Londo agrees to as well but says " but was it illegal?''
You guys simply have high hopes that the jury won't look at anything prior to witnesses seeing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. All of Zimmerman's actions prior to this however are too important to be passed over.
If Zimmerman does as he was supposed to do that night, nobody gets hurt, nobody dies. It's all on him.
From Florida jury instructions.3.9(d)UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?
GILBREATH: Do I know?
O'MARA: Right.
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.
Based on what Gilbreath has testified they don't have any evidence to prove GZ continued to follow TM or started the physical altercation. doesn't look like the state's or your facts/evidence can prove GZ is guilty of any crime.It is up to the State to prove the defendant's guilt by evidence.
LOL
OH NO... you quote posted posts about people pleading the 5th... How funny it is that you claim I'm always proven wrong and then as proof you actually take the time to dig up posts regarding the 5th amendment which really is a moot point in this case. You fail to show anything else that's been posted... There's a big difference between being proven wrong and having people post unrelated bullshit to deflect from something they dont want to admit agreeing to as you and londo and company do so often.
Please tell me though.
If a person has the ability to incriminate themselves... how then are they not guilty?
And if that person is the only person with evidence damning enough to convict on the spot, are they not actually hindering an investigation and/or tampering with evidence at the same time?
You can post all of the legal talk you want about it, I'm arguing a logical point.
An innocent person simply has no logical reason to plead the fif. An innocent person doesn't have the ability to magically incriminate themselves, but quite the opposite. An innocent person has the ability to completely clear themselves by telling the truth.
Look at one of the only pieces of evidence cited against Trayvon in that somewhere in dee dee's story trayvon says something about going back.
Well... if dee dee is spot on , she also proves Zimmerman to have given a false statement. And if that's the case, his testimony wouldn't matter much to begin with since then he'd simply be a liar.
Yet again you seem confused.
This is simply a deflection from the overwhelming evidence of Zimmerman's gross negligence leading up to the killing.
You know, all of the stuff Londo agrees to as well but says " but was it illegal?''
You guys simply have high hopes that the jury won't look at anything prior to witnesses seeing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman. All of Zimmerman's actions prior to this however are too important to be passed over.
If Zimmerman does as he was supposed to do that night, nobody gets hurt, nobody dies. It's all on him.
The actual evidence shows that Zimmerman pursued Trayvon under the assumption he was actually another black person.
So, there you go proving your bitch as wrong yet again. Never gets old.
-Source : Official Sanford police report
Of course the police and FBI reports say the exact opposite of what you claim, which is why you cited them as a source but didn't supply a link.
http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf
Page 124. Serino believed that Zimmermans actions were not based on Martins skin color.
Still trolling with fantasy and fallacy?
Fact is Trayvon had a 1/4 by 1/8 abrasion on the left fourth finger..Straight from the Autopsy Report, no report of scraped or bruised knuckles from the supposed minute long viscious MMA beating of Zimmerman. Fits my theory of the fight. No one swung a fist.
Fact Check, where forth are you?
Dude, it's not Zimmerman's fault he was attacked and had to defend himself. Your argument is moot. He wasn't doing anything illegal, and had just as much right to be wondering around as trayvon.
I've been on a jury before, and I sure as hell don't buy your argument.
Of course the police and FBI reports say the exact opposite of what you claim, which is why you cited them as a source but didn't supply a link.
http://www.clickorlando.com/blob/view/-/15490330/data/1/-/kligxm/-/Zimmerman-documents.pdf
Page 124. Serino believed that Zimmermans actions were not based on Martins skin color.
Still trolling with fantasy and fallacy?
Also Druid... on the same page..... " " The encounter between GZ and Trayvon was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman.."
Just get that out there you know... since you're posting this stuff on your own.
While it's been fun pointing out how you are wrong almost every time you post, it's grown tiresome. So, I will just say time by saying "see signature below"
Also Druid... on the same page..... " " The encounter between GZ and Trayvon was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman.."
Just get that out there you know... since you're posting this stuff on your own.
"There is no indication that TM was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."
Another gem from page 124 Druid....
"Serino described Zimmerman as overzealous and as having a " little hero complex"...