XXXXXX You might see more clearly if you'd look for his (Zimmerman's) narrative of events instead of nitpicking answers to questions that include misinterpretations of what he just tried to explain.

He really doesn't vary from his narrative. Does that make it true? Who knows. But his version is consistent, it's hampered only by questions which misstate his previous answers.

How many times did he tell Singleton the circling was when he was at TTL, and the circling is not the same event as the one when Trayvon first approached his car at the clubhouse? At least 3 by my count.

Who cares whether it's by the clubhouse or at the clubhouse? Maybe he also stopped at the mailboxes. This is the night of the event and the next day and he's trying to recount a traumatic event step by step. That’s difficult for anyone to do.

I make my clients “walk me” through traffic stops and arrests and searches step by step, as close as possible to the event, before their memories fade. They get frustrated, they want to tell the main points and I want baby steps, in sequence. Getting the exact events for a traffic stop can take 3 hours of questioning, and there is no trauma like an assault or death involved. GZ was interviewed for less than two hours, by an officer not familiar with the neighborhood, who hadn’t been to the scene, who kept mixing things up when she repeated what she thought he had said. He started out trying to give her the main points, not knowing to distinguish between point A and point B. When she mixes the two up, he is quick to correct her on all points. He also corrects Serino on the dispatcher not instructing him not to follow Trayvon

He never varies on where Trayvon attacked him, when TM ran, that he cried out for help, that the guy who came out went back in to call 911 instead of helping him . That he was attacked for no reason, out of nowhere. That he kept asking for the police to come. That he never confronted or intended to confront TM, he expected police to do that. That he thought he was responding to the dispatcher’s questions when he got out of the car – to get an address and see which way Trayvon had run.

The jury won’t nitpick this. Why? Because it’s all pretty irrelevant to the charges: Did Trayvon attack him, and when he shot him, did he reasonably believe himself to be in danger of serious bodily injury or death?

No matter where he was, there’s no indication he did anything to provoke Martin’s use of force against him. And even if the jury thinks he did, it still has to acquit him unless it finds he had some other lesser means of extricating himself from danger posed by Trayvon’s fracturing his nose and banging his head into cement.

Witness 6 says TM was on top and GZ was trying to get up and couldn’t. GZ says every time he tried to sit up and get out from under TM, TM would slam his head back down. He has injuries, they don’t have to be life-threatening. What reasonable person wouldn’t fear serious bodily injury if unable to stop the attack? What other means did he have at his disposal – regardless of whether TM saw his gun and was reaching for it?

Keep in mind, GZ’s belief that TM had seen his gun and was reaching for it doesn’t have to be real; it just has to be reasonable and he really had to have believed it.

He had no way out from under TM. If he reasonably feared serious bodily injury or death, whether the aggressor or not at that point, he’s justified in using lethal force.

You are using a microscope to critique points I doubt will make a difference in terms of disproving his defense. Just look though the big lens and see the whole picture. I think it’s right in front of you.

This still stinks..... it is hardly just a slip of the tongue.

+eleventy I believe that there was a prior reference to BDLR mentioning finding a bike video on Trayvon's phone. Seems to me beyond bizarre that O'Mara gets it wrong.

+eleventy I believe that there was a prior reference to BDLR mentioning finding a bike video on Trayvon's phone. Seems to me beyond bizarre that O'Mara gets it wrong.

As I contemplate the fact that the trial will soon start.....

It strikes me that MOM (and even West) have FAILED to convince Judge Nelson about much of anything. Nor did they convince Lester.

Neither MOM (nor West) seem to nail home the point they are trying to make.

Sometimes this kind of thing amuses me. This is like the Justice Department working with black ministers in the area and giving them four seats to maintain peace.

Why is it when they assume it is normal that a certain group won't be able to control themselves if a verdict doesn't go their way it is okay and yet when someone else is suspicious of a person from a certain group they are being racist? It really does make you wonder if even they believe their own hype.

I think O'Mara is picking and choosing what evidence to release into discovery, and he's picking and choosing what to redact from the evidence he does release. I think this has been one of DMan's complaints all along.

Many still have questions ... honest questions, but I don't think here is the place to ask them, and I'm not sure why. For some odd reason, sites have taken sides already. I haven't, but I do wonder about some "choices" made.

Seriously does anybody know where there is a two sided place where people can have a calm, truly civilized, two sided "discussion"?

He got out of the car. At least that is what I have heard is the evidence.

Let's start here: what evidence exists that either disproves beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, or else that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed second-degree murder.

I've been open to consideration of such evidence for the past year. Unfortunately, nobody has ever actually presented any such evidence.