1) Playing cop or whatever you want to call it. He was the head of the watch program and his job was to observe and report what he saw as suspicious. His suspicious and yours are obviously different.
2) Walking down the street? You are distorting the facts. He was wearing a dark hoodie standing in the yard of a neighbor. It was a kid not familiar to GZ. To him, he may have thought he was a burglar.
3) No, a fight starts because TM physically attacked him. That's how the physical fight started. He was the aggressor and you can't deny it. If the defense can show GZ felt his life was in danger, case closed.
I will admit that I have not followed the trial at all, but will you show me the testimony that proves this? I was under the assumption that no one actually saw the fight start which is one reason why Zimmerman will probably be found innocent since no one actually knows who was in fact the aggressor and who actually started the fight. I have seen you say this many times, so please show me the testimony that backs this up. I did nt realize there was a witness that actually saw the fight start.
I mean Wabash you are right that nobody saw the altercation start. That is a fact. One can only assume however that this is the way it happened because of the following:
1) TM says to GZ "Do you have a problem."
2) GZ had multiple injuries including a broken nose. One usually doesn't have a broken nose if they are the aggressor IMO.
3) TM had zero injuries but marks on his knuckles from what looks like an attack with his hands of some sort.
4) A witness verifies when he went outside TM was straddled on top of GZ punching him in the head.
Now, again, nobody saw the fight start and that is a fact but one can deduce when you put all of this together what happened out there in the courtyard.
Do you just make this shit up out of thin air? Nowhere does anyone say Martin charged zimmerman and physically attacked him first. You say a lot of stuff happened that didn't. Start checking your facts. We all have opinions on what we think may have happened but that doesn't make them facts. The only facts we know are zimmerman followed him, a fight happened and he killed martin.
The clear evidence shows what happened and who attacked who that night.
Let me ask you this Vit. In your honest opinion, do you think GZ walked up, confronted TM and attacked a nice young defenseless kid? Do you think GZ physically attacked TM first?
Just would like to honestly hear your opinion.
After mounds of testimony, witness statements, evidence and in depth analysis on this case I don't see how anyone could have the opinion that GZ physically attacked TM first.
Is it just that people want so badly to believe a black man was innocently killed without provocation for whatever reason? I look at these kinds of cases with an open mind because I could care less the outcome or who was at fault and it's so clear to me who attacked who. Am I the only one that sees it?
Is it just that people want so badly to believe a black man was innocently killed without provocation for whatever reason? I look at these kinds of cases with an open mind because I could care less the outcome or who was at fault and it's so clear to me who attacked who. Am I the only one that sees it?
My opinion is martin probably hit first...however if someone was following me like zimmerman was...I may have punched him also. Listen to the 911 tape again...zimmerman was in pursuit of martin. Do you think that maybe martin felt threatened by zimmerman and hit him...that's also reasonable. Does he deserve to die for that? Zimmerman is responsible for this...is just a matter of what degree. The guy has clearly lied several timess about what happened.
My opinion is martin probably hit first...however if someone was following me like zimmerman was...I may have punched him also. Listen to the 911 tape again...zimmerman was in pursuit of martin. Do you think that maybe martin felt threatened by zimmerman and hit him...that's also reasonable. Does he deserve to die for that? Zimmerman is responsible for this...is just a matter of what degree. The guy has clearly lied several timess about what happened.
Just watched the GZ interview with Hannity for the 1st time. Let me first say I hate Hannity yet I was impressed with the interview he conducted. GZ seemed full of shit to me, and I think some of it has now been proven to be just that... shit. How can people say the prosecution has no case? The guy has been caught in multiple lies now. His line "it was all god's plan" is the most ridiculous line all time. The fact he kept calling Hannity "sir" was really creepy. Bottom line the guy creeps me out and IMO only a creepy guy can do what he did... he deserves whatever comes to him.
A guy follows you in a well lit neighborhood and you turn around and ask him if he has a problem. No problem, I get it. The guy tells you he has no problem with you at all.
Why in the world would your next action to be to hit the guy? Why not ask him then why he's following you? Doesn't that seem logical to you?
Does he deserve to die for that? You keep leaving out the most important part Vit. He was on top of the guy, had him pinned down, was punching him, trying to cover his face and had his arms pinned. Why do you leave that part out each time you post?
If GZ felt his life was in danger while TM was on top of him for just one second then he had every right to shoot him.
It doesn't matter if you or I would've felt our life was in danger. Our opinions don't mean shit. The case comes down to what GZ felt that night and if you think (like you said) that TM attacked him first, if he felt his life was in danger, the case is over.
