Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[TheL8Elvis]

No, but what I will fall back on is that there has been no determination that de la Rionda was lying. Only people accusing him of lying.

Surely, you must see the difference?

But again, that same old double standard is at play.

Shellie Zimmerman and Mark O'Mara say things that are demonstrably untrue: Not liars.

Someone merely accuses de la Rionda of lying: He's a liar.

The bar set for de la Rionda is so much lower, it's laughable.

So we are back to legal determinations ?

You claim there is simply naked assertion about the States misconduct. So far their have been two court hearings about, complete with evidence.

The difference between SZ and BDLR is the person questioning BDLR didn't ask a poorly worded question that could be interpreted multiple ways. BDLR was asked "Did you receive any other reports" and he said no. Which was a lie.

You are also comparing apples and oranges. Determining whether someone is guilty of perjury is nuanced legal issue, determining whether someone simple told a lie is easy. It doesn't even require a Judge to interpret the results for you.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Another interesting tidbit about that last evidence drop from the prosecution is that they had the original application from George to attend the fight training. In that application, George listed his weight at 255lbs and specifically stated that his intent was to learn fighting skills for his career in law enforcement. And then you can see that over the next two years, he dropped over 50lbs and was still actively training.

http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/states_17_discovery_redacted_exhibits_redacted.pdf

The reason I find this so interesting is that a lot of people have tried to portray George as being "out of shape" vs the "athlete" that he murdered. When in fact, Trayvon was not participating in any sports at all while the defendant was training, successfully based on his dramatic weight loss, at a gym specializing in fighting skills.

This is going to be very effective in convicting him, as it'll be hard for the trained fighter to claim that even though he outweighed his victim, even though he worked as a bouncer, even though he trained at a fight gym, even though he was ARMED, he was so scared that within 40 seconds he went from chasing the "suspect" to scared for his very life.

Where is the evidence of any kind of fighting training ?
Affidavits from trainers ?
Witnesses attesting to GZ mad fighting skills at the gym ?

Anything ? Any evidence that GZ was a skilled fighter, or ever actually had any fight training that would make a difference in his behavior ?

 

[johnny karate]

Why would you expect him to continue to scream after the threat was removed? Zimemrman was aware that the police were en route. By the time he was secure in the fact that the threat had passed, civilian help had already arrived.

Zimmerman didn't know the threat was removed:

"I shot him, and I didn't think I hit him because he sat up and said, 'Oh you got me. You got me, you got it,'" said Zimmerman during a nearly 20-minute re-enactment shot by investigators at the scene of the shooting the next day.

But I keep forgetting, we're supposed to assume a scenario most beneficial to Zimmerman even if it contradicts what he actually claimed happened.

 

[johnny karate]

Where is the evidence of any kind of fighting training ?

You'll find it with your evidence that Martin committed a burglary.

Affidavits from trainers ?

I'm not sure what difference an affidavit would make. You don't believe and affidavit from a law enforcement officer stating he was assaulted by Zimmerman. Why would you believe one from a trainer?

Witnesses attesting to GZ mad fighting skills at the gym ?

Witnesses attesting to Martin having committed a burglary?

Witnesses attesting to Martin having fighting skills or a propensity for violence?

Since there aren't any, I'm sure you'll be quick to point out that those claims are unsubstantiated as well.

Anything ? Any evidence that GZ was a skilled fighter, or ever actually had any fight training that would make a difference in his behavior ?

The evidence has already been presented. Granted, it's circumstantial evidence and I don't think it actually proves anything.

But then again, someone having a photograph of a gun on their phone doesn't prove they own a gun, but you certainly had no difficulty making that leap in Martin's case.

Perhaps if the Conservative Tinfoil Hat posted an article claiming they had evidence Zimmerman had fighting skills that would be sufficient.

 

[johnny karate]

So we are back to legal determinations ?

You claim there is simply naked assertion about the States misconduct. So far their have been two court hearings about, complete with evidence.

What evidence exists that de la Rionda is lying?

Please be specific, and provide citations where necessary.

The difference between SZ and BDLR is the person questioning BDLR didn't ask a poorly worded question that could be interpreted multiple ways.

O'Mara: Are you of any financial means where you can assist in those costs?

Shellie: Not that I'm aware of.

At the time she made that denial, records show she had $57,000 in her personal credit union account that had been given to the Zimmermans for the express purpose of aiding in their legal costs.

The question was unambiguous, as was the denial.

She made a demonstrably untrue statement.

BDLR was asked "Did you receive any other reports" and he said no. Which was a lie.

What evidence exists that de la Rionda is lying?

Please be specific, and provide citations where necessary.

You are also comparing apples and oranges. Determining whether someone is guilty of perjury is nuanced legal issue, determining whether someone simple told a lie is easy. It doesn't even require a Judge to interpret the results for you.

I didn't mention perjury, so I'm not sure why you brought it up.

Shellie Zimmerman and O'Mara both made statements that are demonstrably untrue, but that is insufficient for you to believe they are lying.

De la Rionda has only been accused of making untrue statements, and you automatically believe he is lying.

That is called a double standard.

 

[Unabogie]

Where is the evidence of any kind of fighting training ?
Affidavits from trainers ?
Witnesses attesting to GZ mad fighting skills at the gym ?

Anything ? Any evidence that GZ was a skilled fighter, or ever actually had any fight training that would make a difference in his behavior ?

It's right there in his gym application. He joined a gym that specialized in fight training, weighing in at 255 lbs. Then two years later, while still attending that same gym, he was down to 204 lbs. I'm sure that the state is going to bring in people from the gym to corroborate which is why they provided this evidence.

And I never said he had "mad fighting skills". I said he went to fighting gym to train in fighting, which is a matter of record. It's also a matter of record that he did so to learn "self-defense" for his "career in law enforcement". It's a matter of record that he dropped 50 lbs, which is no small feat and shows he was working out pretty regularly.

You put all that together and it's not good for a defendant who claims to have gotten a beat down by a skinny kid, so badly and so quickly that in 40 seconds he needed to pull out a gun and shoot him dead.

 

[Cylinder]

Zimmerman didn't know the threat was removed:


But I keep forgetting, we're supposed to assume a scenario most beneficial to Zimmerman even if it contradicts what he actually claimed happened.

Once again you take upon yourself to apply whatever measure (or lack) of elapsed time it takes to apply your reductio ad absurdum. Everything must happen at once or last throughout.

There's no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that he was unaware that he had hit his target. As any hunter will attest, it's not uncommon for a wounded animal to not react in an obvious manner. At some point as Zimmerman recovers from his trauma and Martin suffers his, Zimmerman would logically become aware that he wasn't having his head beaten against the concrete. His curiosity might even compel him to check on the situation for himself.

It's important for you to realize that these things tend to happen sequentially and one state expires as another presents itself. Time passes and with it some circumstances pass as well. I was hungry earlier, there was an intervening event and I am no longer hungry. I wasn't sleepy at 6PM, there were intervening circumstances and now I feel tired.

I guess with the logic presented here we should be asking why Zimmerman isn't still screaming and beating down doors. He was once, so he must still be.

 

[johnny karate]

Once again you take upon yourself to apply whatever measure (or lack) of elapsed time it takes to apply your reductio ad absurdum. Everything must happen at once or last throughout.

There's no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that he was unaware that he had hit his target. As any hunter will attest, it's not uncommon for a wounded animal to not react in an obvious manner. At some point as Zimmerman recovers from his trauma and Martin suffers his, Zimmerman would logically become aware that he wasn't having his head beaten against the concrete. His curiosity might even compel him to check on the situation for himself.

It's important for you to realize that these things tend to happen sequentially and one state expires as another presents itself. Time passes and with it some circumstances pass as well. I was hungry earlier, there was an intervening event and I am no longer hungry. I wasn't sleepy at 6PM, there were intervening circumstances and now I feel tired.

I guess with the logic presented here we should be asking why Zimmerman isn't still screaming and beating down doors. He was once, so he must still be.

Cool story, bro.

Although I'm not sure what any of it has to do with what is being discussed.

Bob001 asked why Zimmerman's screams for help stopped immediately after the fatal shot is fired:

If that's George screaming for help, why do the screams stop the instant the shot is fired?

You replied that it was because the threat had been removed:

Why would you expect him to continue to scream after the threat was removed?

But Zimmerman's own narrative indicates he was not immediately aware the threat had been removed, so your response does not address the question.

Maybe give it another shot, and this time let's see if we can stick with what Zimmerman actually tells us about what happened instead of just making something up.

Here are some links to Zimmerman's various versions of events, if that would be helpful:
http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php?topic=2144.0
http://forums.talkleft.com/index.php?topic=2145.0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_2NeMrGCvg

I'll bet you could rummage through there and find a version that contradicts the one I quoted.

 

[Cylinder]

Maybe give it another shot, and this time let's see if we can stick with what Zimmerman actually tells us about what happened instead of just making something up.

Strictly working from fact requires first that the expectation for Zimmerman to continue screaming after the attack was over be evidenced. I'm not seeing that.

Zimmerman did not stop screaming the instant of the fatal shot. He stopped screaming about 1 second earlier. Zimmerman narrates that of the time before the fatal shot he was concerned with the beating he was taking and losing control of his firearm. He was screaming during this time. He narrated after the fatal gunshot that the beating stopped, he thought he might have missed and he became concerned that Martin had a weapon. He was not screaming during this period.

She said she was drowning, but stopped flailing her arms as soon as I pulled her from the pool.

 

[Skeptic Tank]

Zimmerman stopped screaming as the gun went off because it's an absolute game-changer moment.

1.) Very loud at that range
2.) Stopped the attack instantly
3.) First time he'd ever shot at another human being, shocking and sobering moment

It's just a complete "holy crap!" moment even if you're the one who pulled the trigger. Unless you're some sort of cold-blooded, experienced killer. Which GZ is not.

 

[sgtbaker]

If we were to go with the view that it was Trayvon screaming when the bullet hit his chest, would you expect to hear a momentary alteration in the scream, at the moment of impact? The bullet is released at a high velocity, and the range is minimal so there is no time for the bullet to lose speed. Consider the alteration to your voice if you even light punch your own chest while expelling any sound (Tarzan style), would you expect to hear a more exaggerated change in pitch and force of air in the voice, on impact, or is the bullet moving at such a velocity that it pierced his chest like a needle point without adding pressure on the rib cage?

 

[Bob001]

Side issue here: Jury selection has begun, and potential jurors are being advised that the case could require four to six weeks, maybe more, and the judge might sequester them. What kind of person would be willing to serve on that jury? Anybody with a demanding job (especially one where part of the pay is sales commissions), young children (especially a single parent), a summer vacation planned and paid for, etc., etc., will do pretty much anything to get out of serving. So you're left with either retirees who have nothing else to do, unemployed single people, or people who have an ulterior motive (they want to write a book, they want to be on TV, they want a chance to impose their version of justice). And apparently this will be a six-person jury, not the traditional 12, so any one juror will have that much more influence on the others.

So what will George's final jury look like? And in a case like this, where the core question is whether GZ was justified under the law, would he be better off making his case to the judge alone?

 

[johnny karate]

Zimmerman did not stop screaming the instant of the fatal shot. He stopped screaming about 1 second earlier.

I'll just go ahead and stop you right there, because that's just simply not true.

The gap between the final "Help me" and the gunshot is virtually imperceptible, and certainly isn't a full second, "about" a second, or whatever increment of time you want to manufacture to retcon a version of events beneficial to Zimmerman.

Since it started out with a demonstrably untrue statement, I didn't bother reading the rest of the rambling sophistry that followed.

Zimmerman narrates that of the time before the fatal shot he was concerned with the beating he was taking and losing control of his firearm. He was screaming during this time. He narrated after the fatal gunshot that the beating stopped, he thought he might have missed and he became concerned that Martin had a weapon. He was not screaming during this period.

Gosh, that's super.

But we're talking about a specific moment in which there was a gunshot, and then the screaming stopped. I understand that what we're trying to do now is disingenuously pretend that these events occurred with some significant span of time between them, but unfortunately, the evidence doesn't bear out such a false scenario.

She said she was drowning, but stopped flailing her arms as soon as I pulled her from the pool.

I'm not sure what to make of this.

Are the italics supposed to make it extra true?

How's this:
She said she was drowning, and continued flailing her arms when I grabbed her because she was in a state of panic and didn't realize the danger had passed.

Note that I put it in italics to give it that extra bit of truthiness.

Also note that it is more honestly analogous to Zimmerman's situation.

Zimmerman stopped screaming as the gun went off because it's an absolute game-changer moment.

I didn't know "game-changer" = "stopped screaming", but okay...

1.) Very loud at that range

Ha ha...

2.) Stopped the attack instantly

Which "attack" was that? The slamming of his head onto concrete, or the smothering? You might want to review Zimmerman's statements before answering.

And Zimmerman didn't immediately realize he had hit Martin, so in that instant he stopped screaming he didn't actually know the "attack" was over.

3.) First time he'd ever shot at another human being, shocking and sobering moment

Zimmerman didn't immediately realize he had hit Martin.

It's just a complete "holy crap!" moment even if you're the one who pulled the trigger. Unless you're some sort of cold-blooded, experienced killer. Which GZ is not.

Zimmerman didn't immediately realize he had hit Martin.

So it seems that what we're left with that doesn't either ignore the facts or try to dishonestly misrepresent them is a hypothesis in which a loud noise will render a panicked, screaming person in a life-or-death struggle into an immediate state of silence. Not very convincing stuff.

I'm actually a little disappointed in these responses.

I was hoping for something a little more entertaining in the vein of Zimmerman sliding around on his back for 40 or 50 feet to explain why he killed Martin in a location other than where he claimed the altercation took place.

Better luck next time.

 

[Unabogie]

Dismissed juror candidate E-7 was escorted from court property for being disruptive as a spectator inside courtroom. Apparently the candidate was trying to confront Team Zimmerman about Facebook research.

Did Mark O'Mara really disclose to the media this juror's identity? Did I get that right? If so, I don't blame the guy for going after them.

 

[Cylinder]

Did Mark O'Mara really disclose to the media this juror's identity? Did I get that right? If so, I don't blame the guy for going after them.

No, you did not. MOM disclosed his Facebook post to the court. If a juror is excused, the name is no longer protected. MOM confirmed his name later when asked by a media member according to that reporter, but they did not get the name from MOM.

 

[WildCat]

Did Mark O'Mara really disclose to the media this juror's identity? Did I get that right? If so, I don't blame the guy for going after them.

It's a simple matter to learn the name of the poster once you know the page and have a quote.

Such is the price of using your real name on Facebook or any other public forum.

 

[Cylinder]

It's a simple matter to learn the name of the poster once you know the page and have a quote.

Actually, they had the date of the post and the Facebook group to which it was posted. They also have the information that the person lives in Seminole County. As you point out, that's enough information to easily resolve a name.

 

[Unabogie]

No, you did not. MOM disclosed his Facebook post to the court. If a juror is excused, the name is no longer protected. MOM confirmed his name later when asked by a media member according to that reporter, but they did not get the name from MOM.

So in other words, yes, he did out this juror's name. After all the phony "death threats" and the spectacle of Zimmerman wearing his vest to court, an ethical lawyer would have simply said "no comment". O'Mara is not an ethical lawyer and has really disgraced himself in this case.

 

[Cylinder]

So in other words, yes, he did out this juror's name.

Yes, those would be other words, just not factual ones.

O'Mara is not an ethical lawyer and has really disgraced himself in this case.

Once again, the excused jurors' identities are not protected. If one bothers to read the article I quoted, they'd find that the court also confirmed the perjured jury candidate's identity.

 

[Unabogie]

Yes, those would be other words, just not factual ones.

Did O'Mara confirm to the media the identity of a juror that he didn't like? Yes, he did. That speaks for itself.

Once again, the excused jurors' identities are not protected. If one bothers to read the article I quoted, they'd find that the court also confirmed the perjured jury candidate's identity.

Perjured? You think perjury has been established here?

Remind me again what your position is on what George and Shellie did at the bond hearing?