None of which is a crime.
.
Yet, he showed how the fight progressed that direction in his reenactment.
So why didn't he accept the uniform and car???
Exactly. That was from an interaction with Wendy Dorival (who wanted to recommend him for Citizens on Patrol). He didn't want to do it. Keep in mind that this is closer in time to the night in question than the things people cite as "proof" that he was a wanna-be cop.
(The ride-along that was cited as "proof" was actually a negative experience for him, he ended up standing up at a townhall meeting regarding Sherman Ware where he is recorded on tape criticizing the officer he rode along with, calling what he saw "disgusting".)
There's clear indication that he no longer wanted to go into law enforcement. He also stated in writing to one of his professors that his goal was to go to law school and become a prosecutor and eventually a judge.
Point is its contrary to what GZ stated he was doing and why he exited his vehicle.Following isn't a crime so what's your point
Basically a surprise attack on a very dark night. Minor inconsistences are expected. You are aware that someone giving multiple statements with absolutely no inconsistences is most likely lying?
Are you of the type where you are willing to use a double standard to go after GZ? In so far as you insist he's guilty, then if GZ gives no inconsistences in multiple accounts then you would assert he is lying due to the above knowledge. Whereas if he gives some inconsistences, as he has, then he is still intentionally lying and guilty.
How do you reconcile your perception vs the professionals involved who disagree with you?
Bottom line inconsistences have been covered and do not meaningfully detract from the honesty GZ has shown regarding what occurred that night.
It could have been towards the T. Martin did have to move north at all, he could have been 30 feet south where his body was the entire time.
Harvards Dershowitz discusses Jurys choices in Zimmerman Trial
Posted on July 13, 2013 by ytz4mee
Alan Dershowitz has been a voracious critic of Special Prosecutor Angela Corey from the day she held the presser to announce the Second Degree Murder charges.
In a radio interview on the Steve Malzberg show, he accuses again Corey of being unprofessional and his opinion of what should happen to Angela Corey in the fallout aftermath of this trial: (starts around 4:00)
she should be removed from office, she should be charged with unprofessional conduct, she should be disciplined by the Bar and disciplined by the Court for withholding exculpatory evidence, for overcharging, for raising expectations and for acting in a thoroughly unprofessional manner .
The Dersh also does a good job of outlining Judge Nelsons strategy of allowing the State to request Manslaughter as a consideration for the jury in the hope they will respond to Guys emotional appeal and reach what is termed a compromise verdict.
He goes on to state, @ 6:30 in a hit tip to Progressive cognitive dissonance and contemporary talking points about this case . it is monumentally irrelevant whos morally guilty here .
I dont think that this is the last we have heard from Dersh on this case
Read more: http://theconservativetreehouse.com...z-discusses-jurys-choices-in-zimmerman-trial/
I wish I had a plot of the homes + witness locations. It'd be extremely clear to either confirm or correct my claim of location.
Woman on the right said there was running towards the T. If she lives next to it... that'd mean they were at the T. Woman on the left who did live at the corner heard something at the T moving south.
Someone goes to the T, the assault begins... they (together) move 30' to the south.
Why do you think GZ has been honest about what happened that night? You don't think with his knowledge of criminal law studies he could be lying?
Sure and another witness said she saw two people running north towards the T. Witnesses are not completely reliable.
No, that's the same one I use to believe TM moved to the T in his confrontation of GZ.
So the witness says two people you believe her but think it was only one person?
that doesn't make any sense.
I'm personally convinced BRD he got out to follow him and continued to look for him.
The looking for an address meme is laughable frankly.
I do think he shot in self defense I also think he omitted details that would have put him in a negative light.
Like the fact he kept looking for him.
I suspect his "looking for TM" was standing at the end of the walk looking down the street towards the rear entrance hoping to see TM head out like those before him.
Why do you think GZ has been honest about what happened that night? You don't think with his knowledge of criminal law studies he could be lying?
Am I only allowed to take her testimony as all or nothing?
I honestly am not 100% positive either way. I acknowledge that GZ could be somewhat of a mastermind here, so much so that I'm incapable of seeing that. I do not intend sarcasm there, merely acknowledgement of that which I don't know or don't have the capacity to see.
I feel more strongly that there's no evidence that GZ is an "evil genius" so to speak. Of course if he were, I wouldn't know it. A catch 22.
That being said, while clearly GZ could be lying with intent and intimate knowledge of where/how to lie to get off of charges, I do not think that is his intent or motive for speaking on multiple occasions about what occurred that night. I do generally believe he has been honest about what he believes occurred that night despite some inconsistences across his accounts.
I do say this having been in a similar situation, not that I was an offender, but an observer. I know I remembered things slightly differently during different times and it was simply my intent to be as honest as possible rather than to deceive.