Page 4 of 27 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 539

Thread: Zimmerman video testimony - Does this change anything for anyone?

  1. #61
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiegreen View Post
    More like Z gets out of the car and runs up to T and pulls some citizen arrest type shit: "What are you doing here?! (pulls out phone) Wait here I'm calling the cops! To where T reacts angrily and starts hitting him for getting into his face for what he percieves as an unwarranted situation. Then upon losing the altercation Z pulls out his gun and shoots him. I don't think it takes much deliberation on Z's part to say, hmmm should I say I got out of the car and bumrushed the kid or should I say I got out of the car to call 911 when I was ambushed. Yeah, tough choice.
    And there you go. Escalation of conflict. He could have just as easily said "fuck you man" and started walking away or waited for police to explain himself (I can think of many times in my life I was someplace that I wasnt expected or known and would have understood entirely if someone was suspicious). Instead, in your scenario, he physically attacked another person which led to that second person being held down on the ground and pounded thus causing him to fear for his life.

  2. #62
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiegreen View Post
    As repulsive as she was, the testimony of Jeantel, the girl talking to him on the phone, does support that Z confronted T by saying "what are you doing here?". What evidence do you have that she's lying?
    None at all and you havent seen me attack her testimony once either. That being said, she has had a very long time to think about her statements and recall the conversation. As mentioned earlier that is exactly why police conduct interviews/interrogations within hours of the event. I do not believe for a single second that the media surrounding this hasnt influenced her memory of that night. It would be practically impossible not to have.

  3. #63
    Enter the Twilight Zone jcr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Jesus, Tits and God America!!
    Posts
    16,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    And yet you have no evidence whatsoever that he is lying. Not a single human being has come forward or testified that Zimmerman is lying or has even lied in the past. In fact, to the best of my knowledge, there have been zero people even saying anything negative about George Zimmerman's character leading up to that night.

    Why is it that you want to believe this man a liar so badly that you are willing to ignore everything to the contrary?
    What evidence to the contrary? Surely you are not just talking about what Z claims.

    First of all, following does not equal chasing. Secondly, what evidence is there to suggest that Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martin? I already explained to you the importance of situation escalation so what Zimmerman was "looking for" is irrelevant and not only because you are placing thoughts and words into a context that doesnt exist.
    When the other person is trying to avoid you .. it becomes chasing.

    http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-...-police/vGZq9/
    Here is the earlier 911 call and where he already got out of the car to keep chasing him once. Then the time he got out of the car later he supposedly got out to check an address. You know, in the neighborhood he has patrolled for years, he does not know what street he is on

    You going to answer that question about intent? Add to it, what do you think is the intent of the guy who has been trying to avoid someone who was chasing him?

  4. #64
    Enter the Twilight Zone jcr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Jesus, Tits and God America!!
    Posts
    16,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    None at all and you havent seen me attack her testimony once either. That being said, she has had a very long time to think about her statements and recall the conversation. As mentioned earlier that is exactly why police conduct interviews/interrogations within hours of the event. I do not believe for a single second that the media surrounding this hasnt influenced her memory of that night. It would be practically impossible not to have.
    But, somehow, going to jail would not affect Z's testimony.

    And, as for his credibility, I guess that you forgot how he and the wife sat in court and told a judge that they had no money while they were hiding the $100K+ they received in donations.

    Again, you think this guy who you KNOW lied to a judge would not lie to save his ass.

    What a joke.

  5. #65
    Actually drinks Tea on2muchcoffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Mornin' Coyote.
    Posts
    33,070

    Default

    He is going to get off.

    Might as well accept it at this point.

  6. #66
    UJ God Beagleboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    What would Whip do?
    Posts
    23,336

    Default

    There are a lot of arguments, speculations and theories being argued.
    None are PROOF of guilt and none overcome the detective saying he believed Zimmerman.

    The prosecution basically has to prove the detective's opinion was wrong at the time of the event and that it's STLL wrong.

    If I was a juror I'd give 100% weight to a veteran detective's statements unless there was DIRECT proof showing they are wrong or they have a history of being a liar. I'd give about 10% to anyone recounting the events a year later. Zimmerman's storyline would be completely worthless until the detective said he believed it.

    Even a black attorney who was sure Zimmerman was guilty admitted on CNN that the prosecution now has to come up with more evidence nobody knows about and witnesses nobody knows about. At this point, Zimmerman hasn't been proven to be guilty in the trial.

  7. #67
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by on2muchcoffee View Post
    He is going to get off.

    Might as well accept it at this point.
    And watch the riots ensue because people like jcr have painted a picture in their heads that have nothing to do with fact

  8. #68
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcr View Post
    You going to answer that question about intent? Add to it, what do you think is the intent of the guy who has been trying to avoid someone who was chasing him?
    What question about intent?

  9. #69
    Actually drinks Tea on2muchcoffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Mornin' Coyote.
    Posts
    33,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beagleboy View Post
    There are a lot of arguments, speculations and theories being argued.
    None are PROOF of guilt and none overcome the detective saying he believed Zimmerman.

    The prosecution basically has to prove the detective's opinion was wrong at the time of the event and that it's STLL wrong.

    If I was a juror I'd give 100% weight to a veteran detective's statements unless there was DIRECT proof showing they are wrong or they have a history of being a liar. I'd give about 10% to anyone recounting the events a year later. Zimmerman's storyline would be completely worthless until the detective said he believed it.
    Even more, there is corroborating evidence to support Zimmerman's story.
    The wounds to his face and the back of his head.
    Then you have a mixture of eye-witness testimony, of which you really only need minimal support from, which they do.

    It all adds up to not guilty.

  10. #70
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beagleboy View Post
    There are a lot of arguments, speculations and theories being argued.
    None are PROOF of guilt and none overcome the detective saying he believed Zimmerman.

    The prosecution basically has to prove the detective's opinion was wrong at the time of the event and that it's STLL wrong.

    If I was a juror I'd give 100% weight to a veteran detective's statements unless there was DIRECT proof showing they are wrong or they have a history of being a liar. I'd give about 10% to anyone recounting the events a year later. Zimmerman's storyline would be completely worthless until the detective said he believed it.

    Even a black attorney who was sure Zimmerman was guilty admitted on CNN that the prosecution now has to come up with more evidence nobody knows about and witnesses nobody knows about.
    the really pathetic part is that all of this testimony has come up as a result of witnesses and experts for the prosecution.

  11. #71
    Left-Wing Nutjob stumpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Back in the USSA
    Posts
    22,349

    Default

    Did anyone answer why Zimmerman had to "get out of his car to call 911"??

    That makes no plausible sense, given the subsequent results.

  12. #72
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stumpin View Post
    Did anyone answer why Zimmerman had to "get out of his car to call 911"??

    That makes no plausible sense, given the subsequent results.
    We've talked about it, yes but why does it matter? Is it a crime?

  13. #73
    Actually drinks Tea on2muchcoffee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Mornin' Coyote.
    Posts
    33,070

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stumpin View Post
    Did anyone answer why Zimmerman had to "get out of his car to call 911"??

    That makes no plausible sense, given the subsequent results.
    Probably to look around to see if he could locate T.
    But it doesn't matter. It's a question that won't get asked of Z since he'll likely not take the stand.

  14. #74
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by on2muchcoffee View Post
    Probably to look around to see if he could locate T.
    But it doesn't matter. It's a question that won't get asked of Z since he'll likely not take the stand.

    He doesnt need to. The prosecution is doing a bang up job of acquitting him all by themselves

  15. #75
    Enter the Twilight Zone jcr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Jesus, Tits and God America!!
    Posts
    16,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    What question about intent?
    Do you think the guy chasing someone around the neighborhood and twice getting our of his car to continue chasing is 1) looking for a confrontation or 2) avoiding a confrontation.

    Does the FACT that Z lied to a judge not change your opinion about the reliability of his testimony?

  16. #76
    Left-Wing Nutjob stumpin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Back in the USSA
    Posts
    22,349

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    We've talked about it, yes but why does it matter? Is it a crime?
    It matters if it destroys the credibility of his narrative.

  17. #77
    Does that make me gay? stymiegreen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    27,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    None at all and you havent seen me attack her testimony once either. That being said, she has had a very long time to think about her statements and recall the conversation. As mentioned earlier that is exactly why police conduct interviews/interrogations within hours of the event. I do not believe for a single second that the media surrounding this hasnt influenced her memory of that night. It would be practically impossible not to have.
    That tidbit from her about him walking up and saying "what are you doing here?" has been out in the media since as long as Zimmerman's orignal account way back when this story broke. I presume it was recieved in the same manner Zimmermans account was, police interviews. Her recounting it on the stand was just for the sake of the jury.

  18. #78
    UJ God Beagleboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    What would Whip do?
    Posts
    23,336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Turfmunch View Post
    the really pathetic part is that all of this testimony has come up as a result of witnesses and experts for the prosecution.
    I only know the case I was in as a juror. If the detective had said he believed the defendant's story - (and the defendant hadn't testified), I'd have voted not-guilty.

  19. #79
    UJ's Tightass Turfmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    UJ's Oval Office
    Posts
    42,940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcr View Post
    Do you think the guy chasing someone around the neighborhood and twice getting our of his car to continue chasing is 1) looking for a confrontation or 2) avoiding a confrontation.

    Does the FACT that Z lied to a judge not change your opinion about the reliability of his testimony?
    What I think doesnt matter. Confrontation is not an excuse for violence on any planet.

    About the reliability of his testimony? No. The money was being raised to help with his defense. In a bail hearing you are asked about your assets and cash on hand. I doubt that I would have considered that as either of those myself. I think, after listening to the talking heads, that it was an honest mistake on his part.

  20. #80
    UJ God Beagleboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    What would Whip do?
    Posts
    23,336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcr View Post
    Does the FACT that Z lied to a judge not change your opinion about the reliability of his testimony?
    Has that information been given to the jury?

    In a lot of these TV cases, facts are known by the viewers of CNN that the jury never gets told.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •