"It's ok to speculate.. so long as you don't start to believe your speculation is fact until some evidence supports it."

I know, we know, from months of reviewing the evidence that is out, that GZ clearly hunted Trayvon down - we have enough common sense to surmise that if GZ went so far as to hunt Trayvon down, GZ was the aggressor in this case. The "get off, get off" tells us that. We know enough from the other evidence that GZ did not need to shoot Trayvon and that GZ had the upper hand before he pulled the trigger - that in essence, GZ executed Trayvon while Trayvon begged for his life.

What panics me from time to time is the fact that we have had over 8 months and will have had over a year to review this evidence to figure it all out and confirm over and over in our minds that this is what occurred. The jury, on the other hand, will only have a couple of weeks, and will not have the liberty to ask questions as we had the convenience to ask and search the evidence out to answer. I can only hope and pray that Bernie is THAT good that by the time he finally plays that tape of Trayvon begging for his life, the jury has it figured out and comes to the same conclusions we have.... I want them to realize that this is a case that very well could have and should have been charged as a murder 1. Trayvon deserves that - and his parents deserve that.

After reading what GZ's ex-fiancee' wrote about him, all I have to say is that she's lucky that she dodged that bullet. He's a pig and his actions with her lead me to believe that he felt he had every right to molest his cousin, too. He considers women to be property that he's able to do whatever he wanted with any woman he considered to be his. He apparently felt like his cousin was put there for him to abuse each time he saw her. His actions with his ex-fiancee' were those of a man speaking to a woman he felt was less than him, definitely not his equal. This pattern of behavior continues today with Shellie as heard in his jail-house phone calls. He speaks to her as if she's a young child in need of instructions for the simplest of matters. How many times did he tell her to write things down or to set reminders for herself on her cell phone because he wouldn't be there to tell her what to do, as he said to her repeatedly?

Just listening to GZ's very low, soft spoken monotone voice gives me the creeps! It's all a ploy, intended to make others feel safe around him when in reality, he's the one they need protecting from!

January 5, 2013 at 6:29 am

“all they will know is gz walked, and won’t know why…”

That’s what ticks me off the most. But its their own darn fault. Even if Obama himself preempted every television station in the country for 48 hours and showed the world that GZ is innocent using charts, graphs, Powerpoint, paper dolls, annotated 911 calls with commentary, legal experts, live actors, reenactments….they’d sit sit in the corner and rock, mumbling, “he shouldn’t have gotten out of the car….he shouldn’t have gotten out of the car….”

They do not understand that the law is not flexible according to your desires. Getting out of a vehicle is not illegal – yeah, they WANT it to be in this case, but its not. “Wishing” it does not make it so. Similarly, the same type of people like to say, “Weed’s not bad, weed doesn’t hurt anybody, it should be legal so I’m going to smoke it.” Then they complain when they’re arrested.

The same people like to also complain they received a speeding ticket for going 55 in a 35 because, “it shouldn’t be 35 in that area anyway!”

They also like to believe it should be legal to break someone’s nose for nothing more than “looking at you.”

Ps. Im certain I’m far more conservative than most of you are…

Don’t hold your breath on that one.

Nevertheless, I’ll take you at your word. As such, I trust that you are a literal constructionist with respect to the Constitution, and therefore believe wholeheartedly in the principles of presumption of innocence of the accused, due process, and equal protection. Knowing that you believe wholeheartedly in these principles, I further trust that you recognize that the State, as the accuser, bears the full burden of proof regarding the crimes with which Zimmerman has been charged.

Great! Let’s proceed:

I realize that Trayvon Martin whooped-up on Zimmerman, and that physical evidence supports that. — I’m talking about the confrontation(s) which LED to the fight.

So, you recognize that, under Florida statute, unless Zimmerman was otherwise committing a crime at the time of the altercation, or was the physical aggressor that instigated the altercation, that he is fully and unequivocally immune from prosecution for homicide, because his use of lethal force was legally justified as an act of self-defense.

(Side note: I assume you also recognize that, even if the State can somehow prove that Zimmerman was the physical aggressor that instigated the altercation, that said instigation, while depriving him of civil immunity, would not deprive him of his right to use self-defense under Florida statutes.)

Thus, we are at this point: the State bears the burden to prove that Zimmerman was the physical aggressor who instigated the altercation, or was otherwise committing a crime when the altercation occurred. Zimmerman’s testimony (which has been utterly consistent, both with respect to the several times he has been asked to relate the events of that night, and with respect to all known physical evidence and eye-witness testimony) is entirely irrelevant on this point. Zimmerman doesn’t have to prove that he was not committing a crime or was not the physical aggressor; rather, the State has to prove that Zimmerman was committing a crime, or that he was the physical aggressor.

So what does the physical evidence and eye-witness testimony tell us?

Every single eye-witness identified Martin as being on top of Zimmerman. No eye-witness saw Zimmerman on top of Martin. No eye-witness saw Zimmerman attacking Martin. The autopsy found absolutely no evidence that Martin had been punched or otherwise assaulted.

The State’s star witness, DeeDee, testifies that it was Martin who verbally accosted Zimmerman prior to the assault.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Zimmerman was in any way the physical aggressor who instigated the altercation.

George Zimmerman claims something like, ‘Oh I stopped following him, I was just looking for a street sign, outside of my truck & here he comes, out of nowhere, swinging at me.’

The evidence and timeline support such an account:

- Zimmerman claims that he lost visual contact with Martin.
- DeeDee testified that Martin had successfully eluded Zimmerman.
- Zimmerman claims he never left the vicinity of the sidewalk “T”.
- The attack occurred at in the vicinity of the sidewalk “T”.
- Brandi Green’s home was some 70 yards south of the sidewalk “T”.
- DeeDee testified that Martin was “right by” her house after eluding Zimmerman.

Therefore, the only plausible scenario is the one in which Martin left the vicinity of Brandi Green’s house and returned to the vicinity of the sidewalk “T” to confront Zimmerman.

But George is clearly a conniving b.s. guy.

Objection: speculation. Arguing facts not in evidence.

Since you keep demanding more evidence: where is your evidence for this otherwise specious assertion?

So how can anyone just think he’s telling the truth?

Maybe because the law requires accepting his testimony as truthful until proven otherwise?

Maybe because all existing physical/forensic evidence and eye-witness testimony is consistent with, if not outright corroborative of, his testimony?

Unless you’re already taking his side without respect to anything else.

Straw man. Everything I’ve posted involves empirical, physical evidence and eye-witness testimony. None of what I’ve posted relies on Zimmerman’s testimony. I’ve merely indicated where Zimmerman’s testimony is corroborated by other evidence.

That’s my point.

Then you admit that your point is a straw man, based on a specious premise.

I wish there was more evidence. Thank you.

I don’t believe that a security camera recording that captured the entire altercation would disabuse you of your preconceived notions regarding either the character of George Zimmerman or the truth of what happened that night.

You believe that Zimmerman is a “conniving b.s. artist”, and that he is guilty. No amount of evidence will change your mind.

You wish there was more evidence. I wish that Martin supporters weren’t so obtuse.

O Hell! WTF!?!? New spin is that Trayvon wrapped his knuckles with the trash bag by the T. Thus explains no cuts, blood, bruses, body fluids of numb nuts on his hands. Hard for me to type this and believe I am.

it is officially official. The thinking process is astounding. And we are the ones with fabricated stories that disregard the truth. oh lmao!!! but there would be gzs blood and dna on the bag. was there any of that? Just wow

ROFL I saw that. So then the bag must have been been filled with George's blood and DNA. Oops, no it wasn't. And how could a flimsy bag alleviate any bruising? If he wrapped it around his hand he would have had to secure it, was the bag found tied? Why didn't george see a bag in Trayvon's hand after he shot him, got on his back and tried to detain him?

George said he was punched how many times? over a dozen or something like 25 times?, then smothered, guess he couldn't tell it was a plastic bag hitting him in the face and smothering him. Riiiight

Hey, at least they're finally acknowledging that Trayvon had no cuts, blood or bruises on his knuckles. Funny, how they were accusing the funeral director of lying about the no bruises or cuts, and involved in the big NAACP, Crump coverup and conspiracy. Funny how they attacked others for saying what was really in the case files. Imagine that..

Sometimes I think they are being punked. They come up with the wildest theories.

Me, too. A while back, one of them posted that gz should just start acting crazy in court if things go bad. I immediately wrote it off as a troll but after reading their dreck for months...I'm not so sure.

So do they also think Trayvon stopped after the punch and rewrapped to cover both hands and cuffs when he supposedly used both hands to smother GZ? Did they forget there was none of GZs DNA on either of Trayvon's hands or the cuffs of his hoodie? You are right though -- at least they are finally acknowledging the knuckles had no cuts or blood.

yet, we are the uninformed....

And let's not forget, Trayvon ran home and got changed but kept the can, candy and the bag on him, and thru his supersonic vision and eyes behind his head, he not only knew that this strange adult had gotten out of his car, he knew where he was going to be.

Right, it is something that they're at least acknowledging that there's a problem with the lack of injuries to Trays knuckles and that it NEEDS to be explained.

Problem is, that none of the explanations are very logical, and in fact border on fantastical ---- and certainly not as logical as it simply being because Trayvon wasn't doing much punching, if at ALL.

Combine the lack of injuries on TM's knuckles, with the relative minor injury to the nose and the lack of smearing of blood on GZ's face (TM smothering?)

It it starts to become VERY obvious that the injuries simply do not match up with the stories told by Zimm as to how his injuries occurred.

Zimmerman is lying or delusional.

This is clearly a scenario where Occam's razor applies.

Not to mention, so does "Correlation does not imply causation". Just because Zimmerman has injuries and that there was a struggle between Trayvon and Zimmerman ---does not mean that Zimmerman's injuries were caused by Trayvon.

Especially when Trayvon's lack of injury to himself puts into SERIOUS question the type of struggle that occurred.

I promise you that's hogwash. The bag was the bag with which they tried to cover his wound because it was sucking air. But it was wet from the rain and they didn't have the kind of tape (if any) that would create much of a seal under those conditions. Eventually, it just got tossed aside or blew off as the EMTs arrived and put the heart monitor on them.

This is another example of them seriously reaching for explanations because they don't want to accept the more logical, evident answers.

So when we see ridiculous arguments like that... we should take comfort in them. For it means they're having a very difficult and desperate time in coming up with viable, logical, realistic answers. Which means that Zimmerman's case against Trayvon and/or FOR himself is pretty damn bad if they have to contort themselves so violently to come up with these kinds of scenarios.

That's the advice I've been giving myself lately. Instead of being upset with the lunacy of "The place that shall not be named" and "RZimmermanJr" ... I remind myself that the higher the level of crazy denial and delusory gyrations --- by default --- the stronger the case against Zimmerman must be.

If Zimmerman really is innocent, it shouldn't be so hard to prove it. But it IS hard for them. Because he really is guilty. Hence their chronic lunacy.

I've been trying for the same mind-set when I hear about this stuff they come up with. Gotta say, they never quit surprising me with their made up stories to justify a murder.