• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Family of Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch seeks arrest

H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
I am wondering if Zimmerman can dig himself out of the hole he has dug. If not, he is the type that would commit suicide as an alternative to most of his life in prison.

I would recommend to Zimmerman, that he not read what people have to state about the shooting. All of us are armchair quarterbacks.
That is in part why it is inconclusive.

You make a make a rather quantam leap there on several fronts, I'd say.
Some of us are well down the path of not reading what some have to say about the shooting. My OCDO script enforcing discrimination is well developed and replete.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,265
Location
In My Coffee
That is in part why it is inconclusive.

You make a make a rather quantam leap there on several fronts, I'd say.
I'll bite: if it's part of the reason (only having Zimmerman's voice sample) then by merely reasoning, since there were Zimmerman, and Trayvon...let's see here, if it's likely NOT Zimmerman's voice, then it's the gunman on the grassy knoll?
 

09jisaac

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
1,693
Location
Louisa, Kentucky
I am wondering if Zimmerman can dig himself out of the hole he has dug.
Maybe he dug the hole maybe he just started the hole and everyone else decided it wasn't deep enough for him. He is close to being six feet under. Whether it is from his actions or other's is still to be determined.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,347
Location
Valhalla
Frustration builds as to misleading reporting: doctored 911 call, poor choice of photographs of the principals, materially changing facts i.e. no injuries seen on Z's head. Much of this is still continuing, even where the "misdirection" is discussed, wherein they still show less than accurate current photographs at the same time.
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,233
Location
WA
Sorry, they determined it was, likely, not Zimmerman. Since they don't have the sample of Trayvon, well, we might never know.
All fine and dandy, but "they" are the not the judge and jury. Will such inconclusive testimony even be ruled as admissible? Will the prosecution call an expert wittiness that can only give a 48% certainty? This expert will be more valuable to the defense. And I believe any reasonable jury would see the importance of only 48%. The low 48% probability is reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed any wrong doing.
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,233
Location
WA

Interesting! So we have:
· Witnesses placing Martin on top of Zimmerman beating him.
· Cries for help that cannot be ruled out as Zimmerman.
· 911 tapes backing up Zimmerman, the unaltered ones.
· Now possible, real visible injuries on head from being beaten against cement
· Claim of self defense, claims being beaten, and kid trying to get his gun.
· A bullet hole.

Really beginning to sound like meeting deadly force with deadly force to me.


Yes, and we still have Sharpton willing to call for more civil disobedience if he doesn’t get his way, why?


Refresh me, the prosecutor was fired why? The Chief stepped down way? The Kraken was unleashed why?
 

jbone

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,233
Location
WA
I think both of them voluntarily stepped aside. COP at request, PA preemptively.
I suppose it's a nice way of saying pressure from the community forced the Chief to step down (fired); we know they won't allow his return, he’ll retire. The council voted a complete lack of confidence in the Chief. And for the PA she was removed by the Gov, also another way of saying you’re fired. I think the kraken was completely in charge from the beginning, and saw to it these two were fired, removed, or stepped down, play of words. Because, following the facts went against the racial claims of the community. And know the facts seem to be coming back and in line with why did not arrest, and charge.
But the FBI has come to the rescue now!
 

ccwinstructor

Centurion
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
915
Location
Yuma, Arizona, USA
The mob demanded it. They washed their hands like Pontius Pilate

I think both of them voluntarily stepped aside. COP at request, PA preemptively.
The Mob demanded that they step down. Down with due process. Down with the rule of law.

As far as I can see, there has been no evidence to contradict George Zimmerman's claims, other than emotion laden rants by the family of Trayvon Martin, along with factual distortions and selective memory of evidence by the MSM.

This will become another urban legend, where the lies that have been spread will be consideredt the truth, because it is considered politicaly correct, evidence be damned.

All the contrary evidence will be dismissed as being fabricated by a conspiracy of racists.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,200
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
As far as I can see, there has been no evidence to contradict George Zimmerman's claims, other than emotion laden rants by the family of Trayvon Martin, along with factual distortions and selective memory of evidence by the MSM.

...

All the contrary evidence will be dismissed as being fabricated by a conspiracy of racists.
Lest we be guilty of committing the same offense, I'd point out that the voice analysis, while shaky at an absurdly low degree of "certainty", is still evidence and is not emotion-laden. Hopefully its quality yet leaves room for improvement.

Selective evidence is still evidence. In a trial, both sides present exclusively selective evidence. Generally, one does not discredit either side right off the bat, but considers the weight of the evidence.

The weight of the evidence is in Zimmerman's favor. But saying there is no evidence, or that the only evidence is selective, is to be guilty of the very same selective attention to evidence.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,347
Location
Valhalla
A defense attorney works for his client and may be selective in the evidence that he presents.

The prosecuting attorney while he works for his client (the state) may not legally withhold material evidence of innocence.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
A defense attorney works for his client and may be selective in the evidence that he presents. The prosecuting attorney while he works for his client (the state) may not legally withhold material evidence of innocence.
The prosecuting attorney must present exculpatory evidence to the jury? The state must present all evidence to the defense.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,575
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
A defense attorney works for his client and may be selective in the evidence that he presents.

The prosecuting attorney while he works for his client (the state) may not legally withhold material evidence of innocence.
The prosecuting attorney must present exculpatory evidence to the jury? The state must present all evidence to the defense.
IMHO, if a prosecutor has exculpatory evidence, prosecution should not move forward with a case.

But, seeing cases like Skidmark's show that it doesn't always happen that way.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,200
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
The prosecuting attorney must present exculpatory evidence to the jury? The state must present all evidence to the defense.
This.

IMHO, if a prosecutor has exculpatory evidence, prosecution should not move forward with a case.

But, seeing cases like Skidmark's show that it doesn't always happen that way.
Right on both counts.
 
Top