It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 6:46 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1010 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 51  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 1:47 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
RiseFromBelow wrote:
JQ isn't the only place to find Daft Posts from Trayvon cultists.


Quite right, RFB.... sadly there is a LOT of daft about. :95

Feel free to to shine light of rational thought on "Daft" wherever you find it.

JQ is unique in-so-far-as they hide in shame in a secret sewer forum, and so there is a need to post samples if their posts are to be seen at all by real people, and not just the small handful of Traybot Cretins still paddling in the sewer.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 7:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
More Teeto being Teeto. H/T Rumpole

Teeto uses a lot of legalese here, but gets so much wrong.

Quote:
Teeto
The case of State v. Bryan, 287 So.2d 73,76 (Fla. 1973) holds that an accidental shooting when coupled with malice toward the victim constitutes second-degree murder. Thus, the intentional and forceful striking of the deceased in anger with a loaded pistol which accidentally discharged killing him constitutes an act "imminently dangerous to another" and "evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life." 287 So.2d at 76.


I don't see how this case will have any bearing on the Zimmerman-Martin case, unless Teeto has some evidence that Zimmerman struck Martin with his firearm, thereby causing an accidental discharge?

Quote:
The use of deadly force only becomes justified when “[h]e or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.” No matter how subjectively real the belief is, an unreasonable belief does not provide any right of self-defense. The fear of imminent death must be based on objective facts “such as would induce a reasonably prudent or cautious man to believe that the danger was actual and the necessity for taking life real.” Ammons v. State, 88 Fla. 444, 454, 102 So. 642, 645 (1924).

If GZ was not actually being beaten into diaperdom by having his head bashed repeatedly into concrete -- then GZ was not justified in using force against Trayvon, no matter what his actual beliefs were. GZ may have had the adrenaline rushing through his veins, may have perceived his opponent as a murderous thug rather than a skinny teenager because of the presence of a hoody; it’s possible GZ really did think that a wrestling match on the grass with a skinny teenager somehow put his life in mortal danger. But his subjective hyperactive threat perception system does not excuse him.


[Insert here the photo of Zimmerman, beaten and bloody]

First, a reasonable person very well could conclude that Zimmerman faced imminent risk of death or bodily harm if he continued to be subjected to the beating he was receiving.

Second, the State cannot refute Zimmerman's claim that Martin told him that he was "going to die", once Martin realized that Zimmerman was armed.

Third, the beating - including the broken nose and head-bashing - Martin put on Zimmerman would constitute a forcible felony, as an aggravated battery, as previously discussed.

Quote:
An individual’s right to life is not contingent upon maintaining a constant impression of harmless frailty, “men do not hold their lives at Ammons, the mercy of excessive caution or unreasoning fear of others.” 88 Fla. 444 (1924).

Even if GZ truly believed he was somehow in danger for his life, he was not thereby granted permission to kill Trayvon if his fears were the product of an unreasonable mind. And there is plenty to suggest GZ was in fact acting out of excessive caution and unreasoning fear that night. His hyperactive vigilance...


Objection: speculation.

Quote:
...his willingness to see a boy returning home from a candy run to the store...


Objection: arguing facts not in evidence

Quote:
...as a grave threat to his neighborhood...


Objection: speculation

Quote:
...his professed fear for his life...


Objection: begging the question

Quote:
...due to a tussle...


Objection: arguing facts not in evidence

Quote:
...with an unarmed boy that he outweighed...


Martin was a half-foot taller than Zimmerman, was an experienced fighter, and was in prime physical condition. Zimmerman was 10 years older, overweight, and had a back problem.

Quote:
...if the jury finds from GZ’s behavior that his fears were unreasonable, and that his fear for his life due to a couple scratches on the head was not practical, then the killing is not justifiable as self-defense.


Broken nose (see: medical record)
Blood over 45% of his face/head (see: EMT eye-witness report)
Face battered and head swollen (see: crime-scene photo, police witness report)

Quote:
The SYG law imposes a duty to retreat in instances where the defendant has caused the fight, even if he later finds himself on the losing end of it:

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 776.041. Use of force by aggressor—

The justification described is not available to a person who… [i]nitially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless [s]uch force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant[.]


And the evidence that Zimmerman was the initial aggressor is... where, exactly?

Quote:
During the course of his video taped statements and the reenactment, GZ states that he managed to pull his gun from its holster, "aimed" and shot Trayvon. He rationalizes in his written statement that he pulled his gun because Trayvon said, "Your [sic] gonna die tonight Mother Fucker." So in actuality, GZ did not shoot Trayvon because his head was being beaten into the concrete, but because of what Trayvon supposedly said to him. GZ also describes how he contemplated the angle that he needed to point the gun in order to avoid shooting his own hand. If GZ had the time to contemplate the angle he would fire his gun, he had the time to forewarn Trayvon that he intended to fire his weapon.


[Citation needed for statutory requirement for Zimmerman to "forewarn" Martin that he was going to use lethal force]

Quote:
Even LE is required to make this announcement before shooting someone, unless they are coming under direct gun fire themselves. By GZ's own statements, he clearly did not exhaust every reasonable means to escape danger other than use deadly force.


Unless the State can prove that Zimmerman was the initial aggressor, then Zimmerman was under no statutory obligation to exhaust every reasonable means to escape.

Quote:
If you believe that GZ instigated the encounter...


Belief is irrelevant. The State is already on record, in court, stating that they have no evidence to refute Zimmerman's testimony about who initiated the confrontation, or to prove who was the initial aggressor.

Quote:
...then, even assuming he could somehow prove that Trayvon was in fact trying to wrestle GZ’s gun away from him, this still won’t necessarily provide an absolute defense to the killing. GZ was the one who chose to arm himself...


A perfectly legal decision. Zimmerman had the necessary concealed-carry permit.

Quote:
...while pursuing a teenager...


Objection: arguing facts not in evidence

Quote:
...who was rightfully in the neighborhood and doing nothing wrong...


Irrelevant. Also: objection: arguing facts not in evidence

Quote:
...GZ was the one who chose to exit his vehicle looking for the teen...


Exiting his vehicle was perfectly legal. Attempting to maintain visual contact with Martin was also perfectly legal.

Quote:
...even when he was told not to do so by police dispatch...


Whoops; wrong! The police dispatch (sic: actually, the NEN operator) never told Zimmerman not to get out of his vehicle, and never told Zimmerman not to look for Martin.

The NEN operator *did* say, "let us know if he does anything else", *before* Zimmerman got out of his vehicle. Only *after* Zimmerman exited his vehicle, did the NEN operator say, "Are you following him? ...we don't actually need you to do that."

That statement is not an instruction. It is not an order. The NEN operator had no legal authority to issue any commands to Zimmerman. And most importantly: Zimmerman said, "okay" in response, and claims to have stopped. The State has no evidence to refute that claim, or to prove that Zimmerman did anything other than stop at that point.

Quote:
...GZ was the one who created a situation where, if a shoving match occurred...


"Shoving match"? What "shoving match"? We have a one-sided, physical beat-down, with no evidence of reciprocation.

Quote:
...he could then argue that the fact he was armed, made an unarmed teen a potentially lethal threat that put GZ in fear of his life, because GZ knew he had a gun that the boy could theoretically steal. “A killing is not justifiable or excusable if the defendant brought about the necessity therefor through his own wrongful act or without being reasonably free from fault in provoking the difficulty in which the killing occurred.” Lovett v. State, 30 Fla. 142, 11 So. 550, 17 L. R. A. 705; Ballard v. State, 31 Fla. 266, 12 So. 865; Padgett v. State, 40 Fla. 451, 24 So. 145.


Key phrase: "brought about the necessity therefor through his own wrongful act or without being reasonably free from fault in provoking..."

Zimmerman committed no wrongful (i.e. illegal) act. The State has no evidence that Zimmerman provoked anything. And "menacing" or even "fighting words" do not legally justify the felony aggravated battery that Martin committed against Zimmerman; therefore, in order to prove that Zimmerman was the initial aggressor, it must prove that Zimmerman *physically* initiated the confrontation.

Quote:
Even if Trayvon threw the first punch, the fact that GZ provoked the confrontation by, while armed with a gun, recklessly hunting down an innocent teen who was a guest in the neighborhood makes him the aggressor...


"Recklessly hunting down"? Objection: speculation; arguing facts not in evidence.

Zimmerman being "armed with a gun" is utterly irrelevant, unless the State can prove that Zimmerman brandished the gun, or that Martin otherwise knew that Zimmerman was armed.

And absent any proven brandishing, even if the State can prove that Zimmerman pursued Martin, mere pursuit does not legally justify Martin's use of force against Zimmerman.

And then, there are the pesky details, such as both Zimmerman and Dee Dee claiming that Martin successfully eluded visual contact of Zimmerman, that Dee Dee stated that Martin claimed that he had reached the vicinity of Brandi Green's home, that Dee Dee stated that not only was Martin *not* scared, but that Martin defiantly refused to run, and that both Zimmerman and Dee Dee stated that Martin was the one who initiated the verbal confrontation.

Quote:
...GZ could have easily avoided any confrontation with Trayvon. GZ himself admits that Trayvon ran away from him when he first saw GZ, trying to escape...


It is especially problematic for the State that Martin was successful in eluding Zimmerman. Martin rounded the side of the building before Zimmerman ever got out of his vehicle. According to Dee Dee, Martin made it to the vicinity of Brandi Green's house, some 70 yards south of the sidewalk "T". And yet, the fight debris and Martin's body were found back at the vicinity of the "T". How did Zimmerman, not knowing where Martin went once he lost visual contact, "hunt down" Martin, some 70 yards away in the dark, and then Martin end up dead, back near the sidewalk "T"?

The preponderance of the evidence is that Martin circled back to confront Zimmerman, NOT that Zimmerman reacquired Martin, and then chased him round-trip back up to the sidewalk "T".

Quote:
GZ did not have to shoot Trayvon. Once he pulled his gun, instead of pulling the trigger, he could have announced to Trayvon that he had a gun and planned on using it if he did not stop. He aimed for the kill shot instead...


The stupidity inherent in this statement forces me to conclude that Teeto has watched far too many movies. This assertion deserves no further comment.

Quote:
...Most importantly, if GZ had not pursued Trayvon, and if GZ had not brought a gun, thereby inserting the possibility of deadly force into the equation where previously there had been none, then Trayvon would be alive today, regardless of who shoved who first...


Zimmerman was fully within his legal rights to be armed that night. Being armed did not deprive him of his right to be where he had every right to be, doing something he had every right to be doing.

Quote:
...“A defendant may, as a reasonable man, have believed that he was in danger of losing his life, or of incurring great bodily harm, and yet the killing may not, under some circumstances, be justifiable or One instance is where he has brought about the necessity excusable. Again, the circumstances of a without being reasonably free from fault. case may at least make it a question for the jury whether a killing was not in pursuance of a previously formed design to kill, instead of having been the result of a mere purpose of self-defense, although at the time of the altercation the first overt act may have come from the Ballard v. State, 31 Fla. 266, 12 So. 865. person slain.”


Yes, in many homicides, the State is able to prove mens rea, and some form of premeditation.

What does that have to do with this case?

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 160
Rumpole; I'd noticed at another site that their apparently confused as to whether George pointed or aimed his weapon prior to fatally wounding Trayvon. I'd suggest they consider the lack of lighting that was present (Officer Smith? stated that one porch light was illuminated upon arrival, probably eyewitness John's light) during the altercation, it was fairly dark. Then consider whether there was any blood, tears (attacking the nose immediately causes blurred vision due to involuntary tearing) or other material obscuring George's vision. Review the images of George's weapon, then read the inventory description of George's weapon & accessories. Standard (cheap) fixed sights; No Red Dot, no Triton night sights nor any other type of low light aiming device. Hence: It's very unlikely that George aligned the sights to aim his weapon at his attacker. I take issue with the description that George aimed his weapon because it's very unlikely that George would've been able to see the weapon's sights due to the lighting & vision limitations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 10:39 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Right, CRG

A lot of things are not really "issues" IMO.

I liken some posting to picking at loose threads... sometimes not even loose... just threads they pull at.

Is it really an issue that in the GZ situation, in the space of seconds he pointed and shot... the "target was inches from his hand?

It was not a situation where his head (eye) was behind the gun looking, let alone aiming.

A red lazer dot. :13 I guess that was it... TM saw the dreaded red dot on his hoodie and was yelling in fear :95

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:14 pm
Posts: 1124
:32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32 :32


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:52 am 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Daily Daft Posts From Justarse Quest

Short and simple today

Papapi:
    "No worries. I have an archive of every single @rzimmermanjr tweet"


What on earth do they think this will achieve?

As mentioned, stalking RZ’s twitter postings now dominate the discussion on the GZ case…… why?

RZ is a supporter of his brother of course, but he is not part of the case. Not a witness,

Yet the Traybots stalk his twitter account, copy and paste to their forum along with their own potty mouthed puerile replies. Then wonder why he blocks some of them.

What possible value do they think, Papapinhead’s copy will be? It would not be a certified copy anyway so of no evidentiary value, and besides… evidence of WHAT exactly?

If they really want to archive tweets I would suggest the complete works of NatJack or Bigboithedog (and the associated dog pack) might be worth saving…. As a testament to the nasty rabid posting that has gone on, and as potential evidence in future civil actions.

Please stick broadly to GZ case in this thread.

To discuss JQ, go to
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=63&p=20129#p20129

( I have added a "BONUS" daft post from Teeto in the other thread)

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 10:50 am
Posts: 66
They go after everyone and anything remotely related to George. They get off on hating and attacking people. It's what their 'club' is all about. George and his family aren't the first and they won't be the last.

I suspect they are also constantly trying to provoke him so that they can try and use his responses to somehow prove George murdered Trayvon and that Robert and his entire family are lying, racist scum as well as gain more (imagined) ammunition to attack the entire family.

They are thugs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:04 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Zimmerman attorneys depose pro-Trayvon witnesses
By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel
11:44 a.m. EST, January 22, 2013

George Zimmerman's attorneys have deposed a key state witnesses, Mary Cutcher, who didn't see Zimmerman kill teenager Trayvon Martin but told authorities she heard the gunshot then saw a man standing over Trayvon Martin's body, straddling it and appearing to press down on him.

In the days after the shooting. Cutcher became an outspoken critic of the Sanford Police Department for not immediately arresting Zimmerman and for not taking her seriously or keeping appointments.

According to court paperwork recently released, Cutcher and three other witnesses were deposed Wednesday by defense attorneys. The others include Selma Mora, her roommate whose account is similar to Cutcher's, and two other people who also called 911 that night.

...more at link
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loc ... 6456.story

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 9:11 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Arizona
SYG is an immunity hearing. If this case is thrown out in an SYG hearing, like it should be, this will never go to trial. The trouble is, it is the judge's decision. Will the judge have the balls to do this in this politically charged case? It would cause civil unrest IMO.

If the judge sends it to trial, the defense can use everything they used in SYG as a defense. I can't see 6 or 12 jurors agreeing to 2nd degree murder. Makes no sense to me. Maybe a hung jury? The state can not prove GZ shot and it was not in self defense.

With those injuries GZ should have never been charged. If this would have gone to a GJ, I don't believe they could have brought back a true bill.

Because of protests and the possibility of riots, the governor, who is a known nut, took it away from the city and gave it to his puppet, Corey. She would have never gone before a GJ. She knew better.

Just look at the governor and how he was trying to disenfranchise voters in the National election. He had no business sticking his nose in this case.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:58 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
We can only speculate.
One thing is certain... the decisions in this case so far have not been based JUST on legal considerations and the facts of the case.
The Scheme Team, Political considerations, threats of mob violence etc played a part in deciding to lay these charges... and those same factors will play a part in future decisions. But......... a LOT more evidence and information has come to light since the decision to push through a charge of Murder2. Obviously more facts about the case and evidence detail, but also revelations about some of the Shenanigans by the Scheme Team etc.
So..... I still don't know for sure what Nelson will rule at the Immunity hearing.... but she will have less room hide than Lester did in the early stages. I am guessing that if she decides "No" with such overwhelming evidence presented.. she will be reversed on appeal.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
murderbythebook wrote:
SYG is an immunity hearing.


It is actually a self-defense Immunity hearing, not a "Stand Your Ground" hearing. Stand Your Ground is but one, minor aspect of the Florida statutes regarding the use of force in self-defense.

Quote:
If this case is thrown out in an SYG hearing, like it should be, this will never go to trial. The trouble is, it is the judge's decision. Will the judge have the balls to do this in this politically charged case? It would cause civil unrest IMO.


If Judge Nelson somehow divines (from the penumbras of Dee Dee's grass-whispering testimony?) a preponderance of evidence in the State's favor, and denies Zimmerman immunity, Zimmerman will appeal. I fully believe the 5th DCA will overturn Nelson's decision, and grant Zimmerman immunity.

Given that all findings of *fact* are and will be in Zimmerman's favor, any decision other than granting immunity will be a worse miscarriage of justice than the minor offenses that caused the appeals court to compel Judge Lester to recuse himself.

Quote:
If the judge sends it to trial, the defense can use everything they used in SYG as a defense. I can't see 6 or 12 jurors agreeing to 2nd degree murder. Makes no sense to me. Maybe a hung jury? The state can not prove GZ shot and it was not in self defense.

With those injuries GZ should have never been charged. If this would have gone to a GJ, I don't believe they could have brought back a true bill.

Because of protests and the possibility of riots, the governor, who is a known nut, took it away from the city and gave it to his puppet, Corey. She would have never gone before a GJ. She knew better.

Just look at the governor and how he was trying to disenfranchise voters in the National election. He had no business sticking his nose in this case.


Yep; it is entirely political. But thus far, the 5th DCA has shown indication that it is not willing to set the rule of law aside for politics.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:14 pm
Posts: 1124
Chip, isn't it referred to as a Dennis Hearing? Or is that tailored to SYG also?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
DebFrmHell wrote:
Chip, isn't it referred to as a Dennis Hearing? Or is that tailored to SYG also?


That level of detail would exceed my knowledge of the situation. All I know is that it is a self-defense *immunity* hearing, whereby the judge determines if the defendant shows, with a preponderance of the evidence, that he acted in self-defense according to the relevant statutes, and as such is *immune* from criminal or civil action. The "does not have a duty to retreat" clause of the statute covering the use of lethal force in self-defense may or may not ever factor into the hearing.

I contend that, in the Zimmerman case, it won't factor. Zimmerman had no means or opportunity to retreat.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:36 am 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Daily Daft Posts from Justarse Quest

They are STILL fixated with RZ's twitter... I suppose that is good.... keeps them occupied and off anything related to the GZ case, except they take every opportunity to pour out vile hate for GZ and his family... it makes unpleasant reading even if you skim over it.

They are hoping for bad things for Shellie tomorrow, of course, but my guess is her case will be continued.

In the rare post where they talk about the GZ case, they keep going back to pick old scabs.

Worry away at minor details that have little bearing on the overall case.

For example: The location of TM’s body being some sort of Holy Grail for some.

The body is clearly seen in evidence photos outside the the second unit down from the “T” which is totally consistent with GZ’s description, and all the witnesses.

With calculations and solving difficult sums the Traybots have decided that the body is further down from the “T” than George said and this is so important it proves it was murder2??

Javahog wrote:
I don't know if any jury'll ever hear any augmented recordings, but the location of the body? That is a Big Problem for O'Mara. There is absolutely no logical reason beneficial to GZ for where Trayvon was found, imo.

Papapi wrote:
This has always been my greatest sticking point in the belly of the defense and no matter how hard I "begged" those who would defend the murderer, not one of them has ever offered the least bit of plausible, logical explanation. It is, as I see it, the piece de resistance of the prosecution's case. I think the defense will choke on it, and any jury can't fail to see the significance if properly pointed out.


Papapinhead has been doing sketches and calculations from day one.... he is clearly no mathematician :31

The debris field is mapped accurately... but the exact location of TM's attack is not precisely known. Could have been the "top" edge ot the T or the bottom.. or even a few steps already down the path towards the south. Papapinheads calculations are meaningless for that reason. Even so, even if Papapinheads largest distance is correct (which it is not) .... so what?
The attack started near the T and "scuffle" continued as far as second unit... There is no evidence of anything else.


Please stick broadly to GZ case in this thread.

To discuss JQ, go to
viewtopic.php?f=45&t=63&p=20157#p20157

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 9:34 pm
Posts: 133
I've said repeatedly in multiple CTH comments, "The 'keys' are the key." The attack starting where Georgie dropped his keys, period. Do they think Georgie gets hit and thinks to himself while staggering from the blow, "Gee, I need to throw my keys near the "T" to make everyone think it started there." Absurd!

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Rumpole wrote:
For example: The location of TM’s body being some sort of Holy Grail for some.

The body is clearly seen in evidence photos outside the the second unit down from the “T” which is totally consistent with GZ’s description, and all the witnesses.

With calculations and solving difficult sums the Traybots have decided that the body is further down from the “T” than George said and this is so important it proves it was murder2??
...
Papapinhead has been doing sketches and calculations from day one.... he is clearly no mathematician :31

The debris field is mapped accurately... but the exact location of TM's attack is not precisely known. Could have been the "top" edge ot the T or the bottom.. or even a few steps already down the path towards the south. Papapinheads calculations are meaningless for that reason. Even so, even if Papapinheads largest distance is correct (which it is not) .... so what?
The attack started near the T and "scuffle" continued as far as second unit... There is no evidence of anything else.


I've not seen these "sketches", nor do they matter to me.

Why? Because while he is busy triangulating inches and feet of body and attack debris with respect to the sidewalk "T", Brandi Green's house remains SEVENTY YARDS away.

The locations of Martin's body and the attack debris may prove that Zimmerman moved away from the sidewalk "T" immediately prior to or at the exact moment of the attack; however, the location of Martin's body and the attack debris do not prove that Zimmerman followed/chased/pursued Martin, and that is the key.

According to both Zimmerman and Dee Dee, Martin successfully eluded Zimmerman's visual contact. From the NEN call, it is obvious that Zimmerman lost sight of Martin while Zimmerman was still in his vehicle. Martin eluded visual contact by going around the building and turning toward Brandi Green's house. At this exact moment in the timeline, we have Zimmerman still in his vehicle, and Martin having rounded the corner of the building, headed toward Brandi Green's house.

According to Dee Dee, Martin reached the vicinity of Brandi Green's house (he was "right by" it).

So, the State, in order to prove the claim that Zimmerman chased down Martin, would have to provide evidence that Zimmerman went all the way down to Brandi Green's house, then chased Martin back up to the sidewalk "T", where the attack took place.

In that regard, and given the direction of scatter of attack debris, the State proving that Zimmeran moved *from the sidewalk "T"* at the time of the attack actually undercuts their theory that Zimmerman chased down Martin, because the attack debris moves *from* the sidewalk "T" *toward" the direction of Brandi Green's house, not the other way around.

That attack debris is found within feet of where Martin's body was found, and within feet of the sidewalk "T" - rather than some 70 yards away, near Brandi Green's house - strongly supports Zimmerman's testimony that he never left the vicinity of the sidewalk "T", and that the attack happened in the vicinity of the sidewalk "T".

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 6:14 pm
Posts: 1124
Image

This is how close the shooting happened at the "T" intersection. After reading that it was X# feet away usually in the 40-50 ft distance, one look at this picture shows the truth.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:51 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
"I "begged" those who would defend the murderer, not one of them has ever offered the least bit of plausible, logical explanation."

Asked and answered "a million" times.

Papapinhead may not LIKE the answers but this has been answered may times... by me here, and by many posters at TL and at CTH. I have even seen the point answered in replies to Papapinhead in his own delusional Trayvon Zone. (While logic was outlawed, but before it was banned there)

It really is a prime example of a "rabbit hole"... I went down it, and did my own best calculation and got 30ft... but so what on my calculation even.

As Chip states above it really is a silly number to bother calculating anyway. It is not a matter of..
30ft = GZ telling the truth
40ft = He is a pathalogical liar

All the evidence, including the location of TM body, is consistent with GZ, description of events.

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:57 pm 
Online
ADMIN
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:30 pm
Posts: 56973
Location: Pomeroy's Wine Bar
Special prosecutor: I have jurisdiction to charge Shellie Zimmerman
A hearing on the defendant's motion to dismiss is Feb. 19.
By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel
12:30 p.m. EST, January 23, 2013

SANFORD - The special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin murder case argues that her office does have jurisdiction to put the defendant's wife, Shellie Zimmerman, on trial for perjury because the governor last month issued a new executive order expressly saying so.
SNIP.................
Defense attorney Kelly Sims in November asked a judge to throw out the perjury charge, saying Corey's office didn't have jurisdiction to file it. Corey serves Duval, Clay and Nassau counties, and Shellie Zimmerman was in Seminole County when she testified at that bond hearing. That means the local State Attorney, Norm Wolfinger, had jurisdiction – not Corey – Sims argued in court paperwork.

But Corey's office filed paperwork, made public today, countering that argument.

Last month, Gov. Rick Scott renewed Corey's appointment as special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case, and this time, the order expressly spelled out that Corey's assignment included "the cases filed against George Zimmerman and Shellie Zimmerman."

Corey's lead prosecutor in the perjury case, John I. Guy, wrote that even without the new order, Corey has jurisdiction because Scott's original executive order charged her to investigate "all matters pertaining to the death of Trayvon Martin."

Circuit Judge Marlene Alva will decide the jurisdiction argument in the Shellie Zimmerman case. She's scheduled a hearing Feb. 19.

....more at link
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/loc ... 2641.story

_________________
Image Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 am
Posts: 892
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Rumpole wrote:
Last month, Gov. Rick Scott renewed Corey's appointment as special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case, and this time, the order expressly spelled out that Corey's assignment included "the cases filed against George Zimmerman and Shellie Zimmerman."


So, the governor gave Corey jurisdiction over a certain, pending case.

However, the problem as I see it is that said case was brought *without jurisdiction*. Thus, whether Corey has jurisdiction to prosecute such a case, the case itself was still brought without jurisdiction, and, I would think, therefore moot.

Need a lawyer's input here...

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1010 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 51  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group