• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

Status
Not open for further replies.
And my newest favorite quote:

"[O'Mara] is seeking compensation now for time he spent following bad legal strategy and advice from anonymous Internet trolls."

-
from BDLR's most recent Response:

My newest favorite quote is the first one:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...orge-zimmerman-fight-20130329,0,5792497.story

De la Rionda's pleading, said Orlando attorney Diana Tennis, read as if it were crafted by someone who "writes it drunk at 2 a.m."

Bill Sheaffer, Orlando lawyer and analyst for WFTV-Channel 9, said it was "over the top and … not professional."

Said O'Mara: "I think it is unfortunate and inappropriate."
 
You mist be talking about BDLR harping on that point. He certainly has taken every opportunity.

As to your claim that following someone makes them the "aggressor", I disagree.
ag·gres·sor
Noun
A person or country that attacks another first.
Synonyms
assailant - attacker - raider - invader - assaulter

It's my opinion that Zimmerman probably assaulted Martin, by stalking him on that night, and quite naturally making Martin feel (reasonable) fear. Which makes Zimmerman the aggressor.

According to GZ, the aggressor is TM. According to GZ and witness 8, the person who initiated the confrontation is TM.

Yes, but Zimmerman's account of what happened is both self-serving and impossible, and a person who turns to confront someone who is actively pursuing them is not an aggressor.

If you have evidence that says otherwise, please share.

I've already compared Zimmerman's 311 call, and his reenactment, and found them to be impossible to reconcile. See here.

Feel free to reply.
 
My newest favorite quote is the first one:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...orge-zimmerman-fight-20130329,0,5792497.story

De la Rionda's pleading, said Orlando attorney Diana Tennis, read as if it were crafted by someone who "writes it drunk at 2 a.m."

Bill Sheaffer, Orlando lawyer and analyst for WFTV-Channel 9, said it was "over the top and … not professional."

Said O'Mara: "I think it is unfortunate and inappropriate."

What's O'Mara going to say? He got called out on his part of the bond hearing deception. You know, it is possible he'll be charged with something there if it can be shown that he knew about the money and the passport. You know who would know? Shellie.

It'll be fun to watch this play out.

All I know is one side looks like they're in the catbird seat and the other side is complaining that they can't even put on an immunity hearing even though they had a small fortune to spend on this joke of a defense case.
 
In Zimmerman case, rhetoric heats up between prosecutor, defense

By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel
5:54 p.m. EDT, March 29, 2013

---- includes VIDEO (3:00) ----

Until this week, attorneys in the George Zimmerman murder case had been mostly civilized to each other in public. There had been the occasional barb, but nothing major.

Not anymore.

...On Thursday de la Rionda hit back, filing an angry pleading that was shot through with caustic, sarcastic asides.

He insulted O'Mara's intelligence, ethics, legal strategy and personal integrity in a wide-ranging eight-page rant that quoted William Shakespeare; an arcane 17th-century French writer; Shellie Zimmerman and a pair of angry Twitter post by her brother-in-law, Robert Zimmerman Jr.

De la Rionda's pleading, said Orlando attorney Diana Tennis, read as if it were crafted by someone who "writes it drunk at 2 a.m."

Bill Sheaffer, Orlando lawyer and analyst for WFTV-Channel 9, said it was "over the top and … not professional."

Said O'Mara: "I think it is unfortunate and inappropriate."

What's not clear is what the judge will do about it. She is on vacation next week.

One possibility is a lecture to both sides, something she's already done with a quick word during hearings when the two sides have begun to bicker.


LOL: ( BBM below )

What is rare, said Tennis, is O'Mara's request that de la Rionda be fined.

O'Mara is asking that de la Rionda pay O'Mara's hourly rate - $400 – and that of co-counsel Don West - $350 – for a not-yet-totaled bill equaling the amount of time they've spent trying to track down information about the hospitalization of a young woman who was on the phone with Trayvon just before the shooting.

De la Rionda knew in August there had been no hospital stay on but did not pass that information to defense attorneys until March 4, O'Mara said.

"He's got an extremely weak case that he's trying to shore up by hiding the ball," O'Mara said Friday. "I want the money because I want him to learn he just can't keep doing it."


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...orge-zimmerman-fight-20130329,0,5792497.story
 
What about someone reaching for your gun, but from far enough away, or slowly enough, that you are able to get to it first?
I'll not only read, but respond!

Re italicised, great hypothetical. When did it happen, and to whom? Since it hasn't happened to me I have no answer to provide.
 
At what point id the state become insistent upon which person first verbally confronted who?

Since the capias. They felt the need to write it again in the non-response regarding witness 8

....it is important to set the record straight about a few undisputed facts. ....Defendant confronted Trayvon Martin

I'm glad to see you realize that TM confronted GZ. Perhaps one day BDLR will see that as well.

Well, aside from the 311 call where Zimmerman jumps out of his car in order to chase Martin - such as at roughly 2:08 here.

Is there really no difference between chase and follow ? And there is no evidence that GZ tried to grab TM.
If George chased a 17 year old kid with his gun in tow, never said why he was chasing him, and then tried to grab him,


There's only one problem. It's perfectly reasonable to confront strangers, in some cases. If I see a stranger in my house, confronting them does not make me responsible for what happens to them. If I confront a stranger in the middle of a martial arts tournament as participants, we're good, as we've both agreed to a non-lethal fight. And if I confront a stranger who is following me around for no reason (I've done this before), then it's a reasonable confrontation.

Zimmerman was following Martin around for no apparent reason, and Martin confronted him because of that. Good for Martin!

Confronting him, reasonable. Assaulting him, not so much.
 
You mist be talking about BDLR harping on that point. He certainly has taken every opportunity.

As to your claim that following someone makes them the "aggressor", I disagree.
ag·gres·sor
Noun
A person or country that attacks another first.
Synonyms
assailant - attacker - raider - invader - assaulter


According to GZ, the aggressor is TM. According to GZ and witness 8, the person who initiated the confrontation is TM.

If you have evidence that says otherwise, please share.

Asking someone why they are following you, even using curse words, is not initiating the confrontation.
 
It's my opinion that Zimmerman probably assaulted Martin, by stalking him on that night, and quite naturally making Martin feel (reasonable) fear. Which makes Zimmerman the aggressor.

That's fine. But your opinion seems to use definitions in a non-legal way, so it's not going to shed light on what is going to happen in the trial.

Also, it seems rather counter-intuitive that GZ is both calling the NEN to report a person and actively 'stalking' that person at the same time.

Yes, but Zimmerman's account of what happened is both self-serving and impossible, and a person who turns to confront someone who is actively pursuing them is not an aggressor.

Until he punched them in the face. Unless you have evidence proving otherwise?

I've already compared Zimmerman's 311 call, and his reenactment, and found them to be impossible to reconcile. See here.

Feel free to reply.

I will review and reply.
 
Until he punched them in the face. Unless you have evidence proving otherwise?


Will you accept that it is possible for there to have been a series of events in which Trayvon was justified in punching George in the face?
 
Will you accept that it is possible for there to have been a series of events in which Trayvon was justified in punching George in the face?

Sure. I even accept that those events might have happened. I haven't seen any evidence on this forum of that. I have been advised that the prosecution probably has all sorts of evidence we don't know about, so I leave open the possibility that the evidence will be revealed at some point in the trial.
 
Florida Student Becomes Violent in Class — Over Trayvon Martin

Published on Mar 28, 2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3MzvsIAg2M&feature=player_embedded


OK ... I found the original source for this one ... it's from a year ago ... not current .. but I think it was over TM's incident anyhow .. or related:

Florida Student Becomes Violent in Class The Day After Being Interviewed About Trayvon Martin

A woman who has apparently had enough with senseless violence in her home state of Florida, attacks her teacher and fellow students in class. She’d been interviewed about the Trayvon Martin case the day before, and some are wondering if this played a role in her actions

http://www.yourblackworld.net/2012/...iolent-in-class-over-trayvon-martin-incident/

or:

Published on Mar 22, 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OH9w9ZHnqsw
 
One interesting item in the state's response is Exhibit B - which is a previously unreleased narrative from W8 and the first telling released to date. It takes the form of a handwritten letter from W8 to Ms. Fulton:

It's interesting in that she doesn't include (among other things) Martin running, pleading with Martin to run home, hearing Zimmerman respond to Martin or hearing Martin shout "Get Off!".

Also, as a side note, this is the first statement which claims she was on the phone with Martin when he left for the 7-11.

Curiouser and curiouser! This letter takes one straight down the rabbit hole.

I wonder why someone who knew Trevon since kindergarten didn't even know how to spell his name.
 
Sure. I even accept that those events might have happened. I haven't seen any evidence on this forum of that. I have been advised that the prosecution probably has all sorts of evidence we don't know about, so I leave open the possibility that the evidence will be revealed at some point in the trial.


So there are a series of back and forth events which we probably will never know the complete details for. So, let's look at an alternate ending: suppose Trayvon had seen George reaching for his gun and Trayvon manages to get the gun away from George. Is Trayvon then justified in shooting George because George was most definately about to shoot Trayvon?
 
Really? Can you point out the swelling of the nose?

The photo taken by Ofc. Wagner has been posted many times over the last few days, so I'll refer to it.

The blood stains on his clothes?

Stains A, B, C, E, G, I, J, K, L, M, N,O, P, U, V, Z and BB from his jacket (DMS-19). [p. 111/183]

In fact, the FDLE Firearms Lab noted "app[arent] blood" on Zimmerman's jacket surrounding the sample swatches taken by the FDLE Biology Lab.

dsm19.jpg

[p 203/284]]

This was a man that had a broken nose due to a vicious assault, and was fighting for his life on a supine position. Where are the blood stains on his chest?

See above. Of course, Zimmerman's claim is that Martin was sitting on his chest during the assault, so you may consider altering expectations.

He is supposed to have been hit 20+ times on the face and head. Where is the splatter?

I haven't seen an analysis on projected blood, so I can't comment.

Where are the injuries in TM's hands?

Martin had a 1//4" abrasion on his left ring finger below the knuckle. [p. 131/183]

His nose and mouth are supposed to have been clamped shut. Where are the blood residues in TM's hands and fingernails?

There's no evidence that Martin's hands were tested for blood. There's nothing about Zimmerman's claim that requires blood under Martin's fingernails.

The wounds in the back of his head didn't merit even iodine! That means they were very superficial.

Skipping the flaw in logic, Zimmerman is allowed to act in prevention of serious injury. People may not agree, but it is the standard to which he is held.

- angle of entry of the bullet

Martin's GSW was directly front-to-back and in the 5th intercostal space. It penetrated the skin, 5th intercostal, pericarial sac, right ventricle, right lower pulmonary lobe. There was no wound of exit. Fragments were recovered in the pericardial sac and pleural cavity. [pp. 125-131/183]


- powder residues/burns on both GZ and TM clothes

GSR was found on Zimmerman's hand [p. 117/183] and on the right sleeve of his jacket [p. 124/183].

pbsleeve.jpg

[p 203/284]]

GSR was also found on Martin's clothing. From the FDLE Firearms Lab summary of conclusions:

"The sweatshirts each displayed a hole located in the upper left chest area. the areas aroung these holes were microcopically examined and chemically processed for the precense of gunshot residues. Both holes display residues and physical effects consistent with a contact shot."

[p. 122/183]

The Firearms Lab found results consistent with a contact shot including tearing at hole (ME-12) sooting around hole, no powder pattern, vaporous lead residue directly surrounding hole and burning/singeing.

[p 208/284]]
 
Last edited:
So there are a series of back and forth events which we probably will never know the complete details for. So, let's look at an alternate ending: suppose Trayvon had seen George reaching for his gun and Trayvon manages to get the gun away from George. Is Trayvon then justified in shooting George because George was most definately about to shoot Trayvon?

It is still totally dependant on the circumstance that preceded it. Accepting, arguendo, Zimmerman's claims then Martin would first be required to "withdraw from physical contact with the assailant and indicate clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom