Not like the teacher doesn't stop and acknowledge the person in room. In a scuffle, the simple physics of a scuffle says the hoody would come off your head. If it was as dark as everyone claims it was back there, how can you tell if someone is wearing a hoody, especially if they are going at it MMA style.

So Zimmerman shot the kid while the kid was on top, got him off of him, then stood up and straddled the kid? Or were they standing up after Trayvon displayed his ground game was polished as his hand work, and Zimmerman pulls, Trayvon screams for help, and Zimmerman shoots, Trayvon falls face first and then Zimmerman straddles him.

 

The witnesses obviously saw a hoody, otherwise they wouldn't have ever mentioned someone wearing one.

My mind is made up. It's up the defense attorney to make me believe otherwise.

The witnesses obviously saw a hoody, otherwise they wouldn't have ever mentioned someone wearing one.

 

Could've seen he was wearing a hoody while he was dead. So it is not obvious. I can see people standing over this dead boy's lifeless body and Zimmerman saying, "Yeah, he looks like one of the recent robbers. One of those guys who were here when I called police on Feb. 2. Somebody call the police."

 

Could've seen he was wearing a hoody while he was dead. So it is not obvious. I can see people standing over this dead boy's lifeless body and Zimmerman saying, "Yeah, he looks like one of the recent robbers. One of those guys who were here when I called police on Feb. 2. Somebody call the police."

 

I can see a lot of things. Doesn't mean that any of them actually happened.

I can see a lot of things. Doesn't mean that any of them actually happened.

 

Then get a new lens.

 

Then get a new lens.

 

This makes no sense. But okay.

This makes no sense. But okay.

 

It makes no sense because you don't get the picture.

 

No I haven't. I've made up my mind that the evidence the general public has heard makes it really hard for me to believe he's guilty of the murder charge. There could very easily be evidence that sways that belief. I totally believe that Zimmerman is at fault for the death in that if he doesn't leave his vehicle Martin is most certainly still alive. I just haven't seen the evidence it would take to convince me he's guilty of murder. I in no way see him as a racist like you do for profiling. Almost everyone in the country profiles daily. He had a reason to be on the lookout for suspicious black people.

 

I've said from day one I can only think he'd be possibly guilty of manslaughter in some degree. To be guilty of murder there would have to be intent. I do not think he intended to kill him.

 

It makes no sense because you don't get the picture.

 

Murder isn't the correct charge at all in this case. I agree that I believe he should have been arrested. But I don't think that there was an intent to kill Martin on Zimmerman's part.

 

It makes no sense because you don't get the picture.

 

It makes no sense because it makes no sense. :lol:

Murder isn't the correct charge at all in this case. I agree that I believe he should have been arrested. But I don't think that there was an intent to kill Martin on Zimmerman's part.

 

Then he has to prove the gun went off and he did not pull the trigger. Or else, why pull the gun in the first place? To show a dude whom just whipped you that you have one? The specifications of a 2nd degree murder charge in Florida are clearly written. Everything Zimmerman did fits the criteria.

First day of law school, I'm told anyway, the professor is teaching and a mysterious person walks in the room wearing various items. Shows face and leaves after 15-30 seconds. Professor then asks students to identify the person as best as possible. This is done to show the unreliability of eyewitness testimony.

 

Apparently the so called "voice experts" are equally as shakey in this situation since the audio is not conclusive. I would say an eyewitness that was concentrating on the incident would be much more reliable than your situation where there was nothing to draw their attention to the person. Completely different scenario.

SSC; 75Center have already made their minds up, just as I and others have made ours up saying Zimmerman is guilty. Point blank (pardon the pun). Cops say Zimmerman could have avoided confrontation. Audio experts say screams for help are not Zimmerman's voice. I bet Tracy Martin said that wasn't his son's voive because the voice sounded so wimpy. But having a gun drawn on you can do that. Zimmerman got handled by a kid, and killed him. Zimmerman caused this by himself. The thing that keeps this from being an open and shut case is that ZImmerman was not given a drug or urine test after shooting. He will go down for something. As I said way back when, the killing of an unarmed high school student, at the hands of a grown man is not just good clean fun. Although the law was made by bureaucrats, this was a crime against a human and must be punished. I saw a lawyer analyst say this on CourtTV many years ago. It stuck with me. They were talking about a murder of a pregnant woman and the defendant, whom was not related to her, had such circumstantial evidence agisnt him, and not any real hard evidence if memory serves. But the man was convicted. The thing about somebody has to pay was the analysts explanation for the weak conviction. We definitely know who shot this unarmed high school pedestrian. We know the confrontation was avoidable. Zimmerman will pay.

All making excuses for Zimmerman need a reality check. He killed a kid. You are not supporting conceal/carry or any controversial law in Florida. You are supporting a cold-blooded killer. And as I have said before, Zimmerman white friend (Frank Taafe) and his black friend (Joe? Oliver) have both said more than once on prime time cable television these exact words, "All Trayvon had to do was say he was visiting his stepmother's house, and none of this happens." That is what ultimately is going to do Zimmerman in. It shows Zimmerman accosted him and asked a question of some sorts. Trayvon is allowed to stand his ground at that point. For SSC and 75Center and others clearly supporting ZImmerman, at what point was Trayvon allowed to use the stand your ground law in his favor? Just because he didn't have a gun, doesn't mean he wasn't standing his ground. He stood his ground and whipped a grown man with his bare hands. How impressive. The grown man didn't like it, this uppity negro in his neighborhood and has the nerve to beat me down, so I will shoot and show him a thing or two.

 

I've made my mind up????? Really??? I guess trying to remain neutral is hard for you to understand. I support Zimmerman? Too funny. And sad. Hope you're never on a jury.

I've said from day one I can only think he'd be possibly guilty of manslaughter in some degree. To be guilty of murder there would have to be intent. I do not think he intended to kill him.

 

Agreed. Not sure why some people keep saying Martin was winning the fight therefore it's murder. To me the reason it isn't murder is because Martin was winning the fight. Even if you concede that Zimmerman started the fight ( I don't ) the peole saying Zimmmerman couldn't beat up a kid make me laugh. They're view is so clouded that they're ignoring the law.

I've made my mind up????? Really??? I guess trying to remain neutral is hard for you to understand. I support Zimmerman? Too funny. And sad. Hope you're never on a jury.

 

Totally agree.