July 8, 201313 yr So do you convict soley on the grounds he is a liar? No. I just feel his account of the events is sketchy and if he's lied before then it probably isn't his first lie. If he is going to lie to get his bail reduced it seems logical to me that he would lie to the police about how the events of that night played out.
July 8, 201313 yr No. I just feel his account of the events is sketchy and if he's lied before then it probably isn't his first lie. If he is going to lie to get his bail reduced it seems logical to me that he would lie to the police about how the events of that night played out. Possible. This would put the responsibility of finding evidence his story doesn't add up in the lap of the prosecution. It would not surprise me if GZ is found Not Guilty not due to his being innocent, but possibly because there isn't enough evidence to prove him guilty if that makes sense.
July 8, 201313 yr Possible. This would put the responsibility of finding evidence his story doesn't add up in the lap of the prosecution. It would not surprise me if GZ is found Not Guilty not due to his being innocent, but possibly because there isn't enough evidence to prove him guilty if that makes sense. I feel like that is highly likely. If I was a juror I'd have a hard time convicting of murder. It will be interesting to see how the 6 mothers rule.
July 8, 201313 yr I have been reading up and in Florida the prosecution can ask for a lesser charge if they fail to prove all of the murder charge criteria. They can still maybe get a manslaughter or murder III despite them not attempting to convict him for that.
July 8, 201313 yr No. I just feel his account of the events is sketchy and if he's lied before then it probably isn't his first lie. If he is going to lie to get his bail reduced it seems logical to me that he would lie to the police about how the events of that night played out. I agree with what your saying about once a liar always a liar...he does seem sketchy. But there hasn't been any testimony that really differs with his accounts to the police that night of what happened. He gave those statements not know what witnesses may or may not have seen. The witness testimony when pieced together is very similar to his account of the event.
July 8, 201313 yr He hasn't even testified has he? Based on what's been presented so far he isn't guilty of murder IMO. It's now legal to follow suspicious people around and chase them through the streets. Once you finally catch them or they get tired of running and turn to defend themselves without a weapon, you can then pull out your CDW and shoot them dead. GZ should have simply left the police work to the police. Now if the verdict is Not Guilty, that police force will really have to do some work because of one over zealous neighborhood watchdog. (Observe and report does not mean pursue)
July 8, 201313 yr It's now legal to follow suspicious people around and chase them through the streets. You could argue that it was legal beforehand. Not a wise thing to do but legal. Once you finally catch them or they get tired of running and turn to defend themselves without a weapon, you can then pull out your CDW and shoot them dead. Had TM survived the shooting and wanted to claim he was tired of running so he decided to defend himself by beating his pursuer, I would think most jurors would be pretty skeptical that a 17 year old could not out run a middle aged man who looks to be a little overweight. I know most 17 year olds could outrun me.
July 8, 201313 yr It's now legal to follow suspicious people around and chase them through the streets. Once you finally catch them or they get tired of running and turn to defend themselves without a weapon, you can then pull out your CDW and shoot them dead. GZ should have simply left the police work to the police. Now if the verdict is Not Guilty, that police force will really have to do some work because of one over zealous neighborhood watchdog. (Observe and report does not mean pursue) Have they proven in court that he continued to follow Martin after he was asked not to? And it's not as simple as how you are putting it. The evidence certainly suggests your theory of what happened is wrong.
July 8, 201313 yr Have they proven in court that he continued to follow Martin after he was asked not to? And it's not as simple as how you are putting it. The evidence certainly suggests your theory of what happened is wrong. If it's proven that he was told to not follow the person, return to your car and wait for the police, then it should be simple. If not proven, then GZ skates.
July 8, 201313 yr If it's proven that he was told to not follow the person, return to your car and wait for the police, then it should be simple. If not proven, then GZ skates. Fan, while we all agree he should have listened to the dispatcher the fact that he did not is irrelevant when it comes to the argument of self-defense.
July 8, 201313 yr If it's proven that he was told to not follow the person, return to your car and wait for the police, then it should be simple. If not proven, then GZ skates. It's already been covered that the dispatcher told him that. A dispatcher can not give lawful orders. He gave him a "suggestion".
July 8, 201313 yr My whole point in that is why should I believe the story of a proven liar? Hasn't everyone lied before? Even you I bet have lied before...,,,,just saying
July 8, 201313 yr Hasn't everyone lied before? Even you I bet have lied before...,,,,just saying I'm not the defendant in a murder trial but I bet if I was and it was proven that I had lied I bet my integrity would be called into question and then Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would have to come to my defense. I haven't lied since I was kid. I find honesty way more entertaining.
July 8, 201313 yr It's already been covered that the dispatcher told him that. A dispatcher can not give lawful orders. He gave him a "suggestion". Even if a police officer told him to stay in his truck it doesn't negate his argument of self-defense.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.