Zimmerman's Pointless Trial

[_DarkHelmet]

Because GZ apparently didn't make the slightest attempt to protect himself. His hands would have shown defensive wounds.

He sucks at defense. How does that help the prosecution?

[_beastie]

Because GZ apparently didn't make the slightest attempt to protect himself. His hands would have shown defensive wounds.

He sucks at defense. How does that help the prosecution?

Because it's improbable that a man armed with a gun, having taken MMA training for a year, who outweighs the skinny teenager he's fighting by a significant amount is simply going to lay back and take 25 punches and 25 head slams without raising a hand to protect himself. His uninjured hands make it more likely he's lying about the beating. There's no doubt TM punched him at least once, but 25 times without GZ raising his hands to protect himself at all? Seriously?

[_krose]

Why would anyone not assume George made up a lot of the story, or at the very least, embellished it?

Anyone who found himself in that kind of "uh-oh" situation would immediately start to construct the story in a way that benefits himself the most, and puts himself in the most positive and sympathetic light possible. That's just human nature -- the instinct of self preservation. And if the other participant is dead, and no one else really saw what happened, there is no real obstacle to whatever story he presents.

Of course he lied about what happened. Who wouldn't?

[_beastie]

Why would anyone not assume George made up a lot of the story, or at the very least, embellished it?

Anyone who found himself in that kind of "uh-oh" situation would immediately start to construct the story in a way that benefits himself the most, and puts himself in the most positive and sympathetic light possible. That's just human nature -- the instinct of self preservation. And if the other participant is dead, and no one else really saw what happened, there is no real obstacle to whatever story he presents.

Of course he lied about what happened. Who wouldn't?

This is why I'm amazed that so many posters here are willing to just accept him at his word.

[_DarkHelmet]

Why would anyone not assume George made up a lot of the story, or at the very least, embellished it?

Anyone who found himself in that kind of "uh-oh" situation would immediately start to construct the story in a way that benefits himself the most, and puts himself in the most positive and sympathetic light possible. That's just human nature -- the instinct of self preservation. And if the other participant is dead, and no one else really saw what happened, there is no real obstacle to whatever story he presents.

Of course he lied about what happened. Who wouldn't?

This is why I'm amazed that so many posters here are willing to just accept him at his word.

I never accepted him at his word. I'm sure he is exaggerating and embellishing to put himself in the best light, but part of the exaggeration could be that he truly thought he was getting the crap kicked out of him. What swayed me away from the prosecution story is the physical evidence. GZ took a beating, TM did not. GZ did not make up that evidence. GZ might be a total dick, but plenty of respectable witnesses have backed up his story. Was the beating as bad as GZ is claiming? Was his life really in danger? I don't know, but legally if you feel your life is in danger you are allowed to defend yourself. This case was a loser from the beginning.

[_beastie]

I never accepted him at his word. I'm sure he is exaggerating and embellishing to put himself in the best light, but part of the exaggeration could be that he truly thought he was getting the crap kicked out of him. What swayed me away from the prosecution story is the physical evidence. GZ took a beating, TM did not. GZ did not make up that evidence. GZ might be a total dick, but plenty of respectable witnesses have backed up his story. Was the beating as bad as GZ is claiming? Was his life really in danger? I don't know, but legally if you feel your life is in danger you are allowed to defend yourself. This case was a loser from the beginning.

It is possible that GZ received his injuries from one punch to the face, and then from rolling around on the sidewalk tussling with TM. His injuries were insignificant. The only part of his story that is backed up is that, at least at one point, TM was on top of GZ. Other witnesses put GZ on top. They were obviously wrestling and rolling around.

I agree that GZ is likely not guilty of second degree. But to say he's not even guilty of manslaughter? I find that incredible.

Do you accept any of Rachel Jeantel's testimony?

[_DarkHelmet]

Do you accept any of Rachel Jeantel's testimony?

Of course I consider all the testimony from every witness. The weight of the evidence just puts too much reasonable doubt in my mind. Who knows what the jury is thinking. They might nail him for murder 2, but I think the best the prosecution can hope for is manslaughter, but that will still be tough to get if jurors believe GZ acted in self defense. All the defense needs to prove is that GZ thought his life was in danger, whether it really was or not. That's where I think the injury evidence is so important. It shows a one sided fight. I think Martin should face some punishment because a kid is dead at his hands, but who am I to second guess him if he truly thought his life was in danger?

[_beastie]

Do you accept any of Rachel Jeantel's testimony?

Of course I consider all the testimony from every witness. The weight of the evidence just puts too much reasonable doubt in my mind. Who knows what the jury is thinking. They might nail him for murder 2, but I think the best the prosecution can hope for is manslaughter, but that will still be tough to get if jurors believe GZ acted in self defense. All the defense needs to prove is that GZ thought his life was in danger, whether it really was or not. That's where I think the injury evidence is so important. It shows a one sided fight. I think Martin should face some punishment because a kid is dead at his hands, but who am I to second guess him if he truly thought his life was in danger?

As others have already noted, it's easy to get away with murder. Just get someone alone, provoke them until they punch you - push, taunt, whatever - then shoot them. Who can question you feared for your life once you have black eyes?

[_beastie]

I can understand why some people think GZ will be aquitted. What I don't understand is the people who think there shouldn't have even held a trial. That is astonishing to me.

GZ has lied at every step of this journey. His instinct has been to lie. GZ was well aware of what his story needed to sound like to qualify as self-defense. The fact that he felt the need to lie instead of just tell the truth means that the truth didn't meet that standard.

[_DarkHelmet]

As others have already noted, it's easy to get away with murder. Just get someone alone, provoke them until they punch you - push, taunt, whatever - then shoot them. Who can question you feared for your life once you have black eyes?

It's a good point. There is the principle of equal force in most self-defense laws. I don't know if it has been brought up in this trial or not, and there are people here far more knowledgeable about the law than me (they actually know it:)). But usually you can only defend yourself with equal force. You can't escalate the violence. Since TM was unarmed, you would think GZ didn't meet the equal force standard, but the way the legal experts are talking, it seems in Florida all you have to do is feel your life is in danger and you can use deadly force to defend yourself. I know stand your ground is controversial because of that, but I thought GZ was not using the SYG defense, but instead is using the standard self defense argument.