Replies

GZ claims he was returning to his SUV before TM challenged him verbally and punched him. There is no witness to back up GZ’s claim. The only possibility is the arriving officers who took a picture of both men on the ground. Where GZ was laying vs location of his SUV and TM girlfriend’s father’s condo may give a clue on who is telling the truth. Jentel’s testimony said that TM per cellphone conversation said he was being followed by GZ. Despite her clumsy performance, GZ attorney could not shake her story. What happen after that, only GZ version is available, because TM is dead and no other witness saw otherwise. Now it is all down to forensic. Location of the two men, the SUV and TM girlfriend’s father’s condo unit.

“GZ attorney could not shake her story”

I don’t know what trial you were watching but they didn’t have to shake her story because she changed her story and lied under oath repeatedly. She is too stupid to know they compared what she said in her deposition to what she said on the stand.

And I don’t want to hear about the poor illiterate girl, she has had every chance to get an education as anyone else in this country, she chose to be stupid.

GZ claims he was returning to his SUV before TM challenged him verbally and punched him. There is no witness to back up GZ’s claim.

There is, however, some physical evidence. GZ is the only one with injuries. He had a broken nose, possible concussion, multiple hematomas, abrasions and excessive bleeding from his head and face. Martin had some knuckle scratches. What does that physical evidence tell you?

The only possibility is the arriving officers who took a picture of both men on the ground. Where GZ was laying vs location of his SUV and TM girlfriend’s father’s condo may give a clue on who is telling the truth. Jentel’s testimony said that TM per cellphone conversation said he was being followed by GZ. Despite her clumsy performance, GZ attorney could not shake her story. What happen after that, only GZ version is available, because TM is dead and no other witness saw otherwise. Now it is all down to forensic. Location of the two men, the SUV and TM girlfriend’s father’s condo unit.

I guess you are not following the trial, and have never read anything about it. Martin had enough time to get back to the home where he was staying, even at a slow walk, before Zimmerman ever got off the phone with police. Jeantel's testimony indicates that he did get there. Yet the fight occurred steps away from Zimmerman's car.

Of all the possibilities for what might have happened, Martin fleeing in fear is simply not one of them. It is, in fact, patently ludicrous. And not a single witness has materially contradicted Zimmerman's account of events.

With respect you are arguing a different point.

I merely said that you have no basis for a statement you made that was presented as fact, when it was anything but.

“When GZ decided to follow TM after the 911 operator told him it was not necessary he entered a legal no man’s land.”

There is NO evidence that this ever happened - this notion is nothing but race-baiter speculation repeated without respite. Saying something over and over again does not make it true.

As for the point you seem to be trying to make most recently, the state’s own witness testified that TM had reached home. For the two men to have encountered one another where they did, TM must has turned back; otherwise he would have spent the evening sharing Skittles and watching TV.

So who was following who here?

1) GZ isn't some yahoo, he's the neighborhood WATCH captain.
2) As the neighborhood watch captain, he is trained to follow from a distance.
3) The state's own witness who trained GZ admitted watch captains are trained to follow from a distance. Also she said GZ passed all his training.
4) GZ has done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law. He gets a little more cred because he is the neighborhood WATCH captain.
5) He's also on the phone with the police during the so called follow, even more cred he's not some vigilante.

If St Skittles was concerned about being followed, he should have called the police. No call, negative cred.

If GZ was chasing and waving a gun at the thug, then GZ has a problem. There is no evidence that GZ brandished a weapon. The forensics point to the gun being fired during the fight on the ground.

If you understand the LAW, GZ is innocent.

The following nonsense is an OPINION and not the law.