Eye witness testimony is very unreliable. Does the witness say he was on top of him when the gun was fired? Didn't think so.

 

Let me make sure I understand you. You are questioning eye witness testimony as unreliable but you are willing to take the word of voice recognition experts listening to a tape?

Obviously the prosecutor better have something we don't know about as this case is a real mess which looks like it't not going to be resolved otherwise.

Not at all. I'm trying to figure out why you guys are taking everything that comes out in defense of Zimmerman as 100% factual and not giving the evidence supporting murder any credence.

 

As PP and others have stated, the DA wouldn't have charged him with 2nd degree murder if they didn't have quite a bit of solid evidence (evidence that you and SSC haven't seen or heard). Do you really think in a high profile case like this they would risk a "not guilty" verdict by "overcharging" Zimmerman? Not a chance in hell and you are smart enough to know that.

First off, I think it should be a manslaughter charge and what Zimmerman should be convicted of with no more than what I have seen. From everything I have read or watched thus far and "evidence" I read about on here, the DA is going to have a tough case. For every point made on the side of Martin, just as strong of a refuting point is made for Zimmerman. Maybe there is more than anyone on here knows about. And I am sure that is the case. But up until now we have not seen any strong evidence that will convict Zimmerman and not sure where everyone else is seeing it if you feel the opposite. Obviously my mind can be swayed once information comes out during the trial.

Let me make sure I understand you. You are questioning eye witness testimony as unreliable but you are willing to take the word of voice recognition experts listening to a tape?

 

Eye witness testimonies have been proven to be one of the most unreliable pieces of evidence in cases. Expert witnesses are much more neutral, unbiased, and reliable.

Eye witness testimonies have been proven to be one of the most unreliable pieces of evidence in cases. Expert witnesses are much more neutral, unbiased, and reliable.

 

You forgot "and paid well."

 

There is no perfect witness. As you point out we all see things differently. However, a hired expert IMO has more bias and can have his/her motives questioned more than a witness.

Eye witness testimonies have been proven to be one of the most unreliable pieces of evidence in cases. Expert witnesses are much more neutral, unbiased, and reliable.

 

I just wonder if everything were flip flopped if you would still feel the same as to which one to trust.

I just wonder if everything were flip flopped if you would still feel the same as to which one to trust.

 

Absolutely. There's scientific research and studies to back up the assertion that eye witnesses aren't reliable.

 

From six year agos, but still a very good informative read on the subject: "How Reliable is Eyewitness Testimony?"

Absolutely. There's scientific research and studies to back up the assertion that eye witnesses aren't reliable.

 

From six year agos, but still a very good informative read on the subject: "How Reliable is Eyewitness Testimony?"

 

I do not doubt the assertion that eye witnesses can be wrong.

 

However, eyewitnesses have a lot of impact with a jury. The jury is human. If the witness is convincing and compelling it will have more sway than an audio expert who will have his/her credibility attacked. If the voice is so indiscernible that an expert has to be called in the eyewitness will have more impact.

If it was indeed Martin crying for help and it is proven that will weigh heavily on how I feel. As of right now I don't think it was him. His father said instantly it wasn't him. I'm trusting his father and the eye witness over a voice analyst here, but leaving the door open that I could totally be wrong. In the same way UKMF is pointing out that it benefits the father of Zimmerman to say it is him it benefits Martin's mother to say it was him. Martin's father and the witness have no benefit whatsoever saying it wasn't Martin.

UKMF, your mind seems to be made up and you are unwilling to look at the evidence in an unbiased subjective manner. That's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But when you make statements like "let's call it what it was, murder" your objectivity is gone. Your mind is made up and there isn't any need to proceed with the discussion. Clyde has done a very good job of laying out the facts of the case and none of the facts that we know of equal murder. Like others have said I hope the prosecutor has more evidence that hasn't been made public yet. If not they have over stepped with the murder charge.

Absolutely. There's scientific research and studies to back up the assertion that eye witnesses aren't reliable.

 

From six year agos, but still a very good informative read on the subject: "How Reliable is Eyewitness Testimony?"

I didn't read the entire article so if I missed something I apologize. I don't think many will disagree that eyewitness testimony is unreliable when we are talking about identifying an individual/s but that's not what the eyewitnesses in this case are doing. They simply said the guy in the hoody was on top. Is that dispute that Martin wasn't wearing the hoody and Zimmerman was?

^Shooting an unarmed 17 year old kid is murder anyway you slice it. Now he may not get convicted of it, but let's not act like it's an accidental death. He pulled the trigger, he knew full well he was ending Martin's life when he did. Even if you kill someone in self-defense, you still "murdered" them. It's a justified murder, but it's still murder.

The confortation could have been avoided if TM had been polite and just simply said what he was doing and where he was going. It isn't like Zimmerman drove up and just got out of the car and shot him w/o saying anything.

 

TM is a victim of other thieves breaking into homes in the neighborhood and police not being there to arrest the criminals. Zimmerman had every right to suspect TM was up to something.

 

It's a tragedy that happens every day, just watch Nancy Grace and see how many little kids are murdered.

 

I don't agree w/ this. Neighborhood watch is the eyes and ears in a community for the cops, it is not an enforcement arm. Just like ANY citizen, they can make an arrest of suspect if a crime occurs in their presence, however, they must be very careful on how intrusive they become. They can not, as far as I am aware, make Terry stops and investigative stops. Here, you have a guy, who is NOT working under the color of the law (the law was on the way) tailing a kid. If I'm the kid, I become extremely paranoid and go w/ either fight or flight.

 

Maybe a lot of guys would have followed the suspicious kid, but when you follow someone in the dark, don't be surprised if they attempt to confront you. They don't know your motives, only that they want to protect themselves.

I didn't read the entire article so if I missed something I apologize. I don't think many will disagree that eyewitness testimony is unreliable when we are talking about identifying an individual/s but that's not what the eyewitnesses in this case are doing. They simply said the guy in the hoody was on top. Is that dispute that Martin wasn't wearing the hoody and Zimmerman was?

 

I have no idea what you're talking about now. I never said Martin wasn't beating the crap out of Zimmerman. I said the eyewitness wasn't watching the moment the gun was fired. He had went to call 911 and heard a pop.

^Shooting an unarmed 17 year old kid is murder anyway you slice it. Now he may not get convicted of it, but let's not act like it's an accidental death. He pulled the trigger, he knew full well he was ending Martin's life when he did. Even if you kill someone in self-defense, you still "murdered" them. It's a justified murder, but it's still murder.

 

I guess it depends on what definition of "murder" you are using. The legal definition would not support your theory. Murder also has such a negative connotation that it doesn't fit with self-defense.