Well, someone had to be. Unfortunately, that person brought a gun to a fist fight.

 

Right, which means he could've just as easily got up and ran off, or at the very least not shot TM because he had the advantage, which negates self-defense IMO.

How did he shoot him in the chest if he was on top and TM ended up on his stomach on the ground? Seems more likely that GZ shot upward at TM and TM fell off of him on his stomach.

 

I don't see murder 1, maybe murder 2 or manslaughter but not murder 1

 

Seeing as he isn't charged with murder 1, you won't have to worry about that.

Two others have said in their opinion it was TM calling for help. How come this witness, who admitted on the stand that his testimony has changed since his initial statement, is more credible than them?

He's not but he is also as credible as the other two one of which changed their answer each time she was asked a question. But what this prosecution witness does do, is puts doubt into the case as to what actually happened and I think he may have been the closest to the altercation as well.

This witness said that TM was "Ground and Pounding" GZ and that TM WAS on top. Also saying that GZ was calling for help... Did prosecution witness just make the case for the defense?

 

I just missed part of his testimony, that was what the HLN analyst said during a break.

 

Could we be looking at a directed verdict?

I think that is a real possibility. This has come down to a he said she said. If there isn't reasonable doubt in the jury's mind then they had their minds made up before ever stepping foot in the court room. The prosecution completely dropped the ball on this one charging him with murder 2. They let the public pressure get to them and as a result GZ will walk.

My bad I thought he was...

 

I don't worry about any of them, I am not emotionally involved in this case. I'm just home watching it because there is nothing better on daytime TV.

Two others have said in their opinion it was TM calling for help. How come this witness, who admitted on the stand that his testimony has changed since his initial statement, is more credible than them?

 

I think his words were that he "clarified" and not changed his testimony.

He's not but he is also as credible as the other two one of which changed their answer each time she was asked a question. But what this prosecution witness does do, is puts doubt into the case as to what actually happened and I think he may have been the closest to the altercation as well.

 

Which one are you talking about changing their answer? The two that said it, have said the same since originally questioned.

Two others have said in their opinion it was TM calling for help. How come this witness, who admitted on the stand that his testimony has changed since his initial statement, is more credible than them?

I think the bigger point here is we are seeing first hand why eye witness testimony is unreliable at best. How many people saw this and how many different accounts are we getting?

I think that is a real possibility. This has come down to a he said she said. If there isn't reasonable doubt in the jury's mind then they had their minds made up before ever stepping foot in the court room. The prosecution completely dropped the ball on this one charging him with murder 2. They let the public pressure get to them and as a result GZ will walk.

 

If the bolded occurs I give it 2 years before someone takes the law into their own hands.

Which one are you talking about changing their answer? The two that said it, have said the same since originally questioned.

 

The young lady that said she heard him and the wet grass on the phone, she may have said the entire time that she heard TM but she gave numerous answers to numerous questions and left the stand lacking credibility, IMO.

I think his words were that he "clarified" and not changed his testimony.

 

He was asked by the defense if his story has changed slightly, does that mean you've lied? He said it doesn't mean he lied.

The young lady that said she heard him and the wet grass on the phone, she may have said the entire time that she heard TM but she gave numerous answers to numerous questions and left the stand lacking credibility, IMO.

 

She's not one of the two I was talking about.

HLN showing replay of testimony about MMA style fight right now

She's not one of the two I was talking about.

So you are talking about the one that said TM was on the bottom based on a picture she saw of him when he was much smaller (12 years old)

He was asked by the defense if his story has changed slightly, does that mean you've lied? He said it doesn't mean he lied.

 

He was asked by the state if his story had changed any. And his response to that was, "Yes, to clarify."