State v Zimmerman

[Tero]

Ostermann was on stand today
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/48187259/ns/u ... e_monitor/

If the Z story is scripted, Ostermann helped Z write the story.

[mistermack]

He was never short of advice, with a father who is a retired magistrate-judge.

He knew what to say, before he even pulled the trigger. His ambition was to be a cop.

[Coito ergo sum]

I've seen people with very serious wounds, still fighting, and certainly not screaming like Zimmerman did.

Nobody except the anti-gun folks have made the claim that Zimmerman was some sort of tough guy or wannabe tough guy. He certainly hasn't claimed to be such. And, owning/carrying a gun isn't necessarily an indicator that a person thinks they are a hot shot or a great fighter. Lots of tiny people carry them precisely because they are not tough, and precisely because the gun is a "great equalizer."

It's perfectly obvious he knew what he intended to do, and was just preparing his excuse.

Based on what? On what objective, demonstrated facts do you conclude that it is "perfectly obvious he knew what he intended to do..."?

He thought he was going to kill a thief, and that he would be a hero, and nobody would care about the victim.

Lethal injection is the reward he SHOULD be getting.

On what basis do you say this? Unjustifiably killing a thief is a murder, and people do go to prison for life sentences for doing so. Zimmerman knew that, and he had also reported other thieves in the past that he might have killed. In the present case, the 911 tape reveals that when told not to follow Martin, Zimmerman actually did obey the 911 dispatcher. It was much later that a second encounter occurred, which is when the shooting occurred.

[Coito ergo sum]

Ostermann was on stand today
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/48187259/ns/u ... e_monitor/

If the Z story is scripted, Ostermann helped Z write the story.

Well, "if" the Z story is scripted, then Z is guilty of providing false information to law enforcement, and if Ostermann helped Z concoct a false narrative then Ostermann is going out on a pretty flimsy limb for no apparent benefit to himself. Why in the world would Ostermann stick his neck out for friendship? I don't have a friend close enough to warrant assisting in obstructing justice, lying to police officers, manufacturing false evidence, and other such offenses. Do you? Is there some reason to believe Ostermann is lying?

From the article --

An aspiring police officer, Mr. Zimmerman has been accused by prosecutors of play-acting as a police officer the night he pursued, shot and killed Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla. after pegging him as a suspicious young black man roving the neighborhood.

Well,

1. he has not been accused by prosecutors of "play acting as a police officer."
2. There has been no allegation that race was a factor in Hispanic Zimmerman's decision-making.
3. The police testimony was that Martin's behavior as reported by Zimmerman would warrant a call to the police, so if what Zimmerman described Martin doing was true, then Martin WAS behaving suspiciously.

The case turned national when police initially chose to believe the neighborhood watchman’s self-defense claims, leaving a special state prosecutor to instead level murder charges 44 days later.

Yes, because the police had other evidence which corroborated Zimmerman's claim of self-defense. And, the special prosecutor was brought in due to political pressure, which is general improper, absent a showing that the local police were racially motivated or otherwise not properly exercising their discretion.

[Tero]

Ostermann could be involved if he is also of this "these punks always get away" mind set.

[Coito ergo sum]

Ostermann could be involved if he is also of this "these punks always get away" mind set.

He could be involved even if he is not of that mindset.

It's possible the trial judge himself has been coaching Zimmerman and all the prosecution witnesses in order to skew the case for the defense. Might have taken money to do it. Zimmerman may well be a master of disguise too, and he could in reality be a 98 pound woman with large breasts named Fiona.

[Coito ergo sum]

SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- A pathologist hired by the defense says George Zimmerman's account of how he fatally shot Trayvon Martin is consistent with the forensic evidence.

Dr. Vincent Di Maio testified Tuesday that the trajectory of the bullet and gun powder on Martin's body support Zimmerman's version that Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired his gun into Martin's chest.

Di Maio says the gun's muzzle was against Martin's clothing and anywhere from two to four inches from Martin's skin.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-10-15-15

Prosecution has a serious problem here. This may well be the nail in the prosecution's case. At this point, if this expert testimony goes unrebutted, there is no way to reasonably convict Zimmerman. Even if the testimony is rebutted, if it's just a battle of the experts, then there is no real way to convict him either. The prosecution has to destroy this expert, and show unequivocally that the opposite is the truth. Very very very difficult.

Looks like this will be an acquittal, or at least should be an acquittal.

[Warren Dew]

SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- A pathologist hired by the defense says George Zimmerman's account of how he fatally shot Trayvon Martin is consistent with the forensic evidence.

Dr. Vincent Di Maio testified Tuesday that the trajectory of the bullet and gun powder on Martin's body support Zimmerman's version that Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired his gun into Martin's chest.

Di Maio says the gun's muzzle was against Martin's clothing and anywhere from two to four inches from Martin's skin.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-10-15-15

Prosecution has a serious problem here. This may well be the nail in the prosecution's case. At this point, if this expert testimony goes unrebutted, there is no way to reasonably convict Zimmerman. Even if the testimony is rebutted, if it's just a battle of the experts, then there is no real way to convict him either. The prosecution has to destroy this expert, and show unequivocally that the opposite is the truth. Very very very difficult.

Looks like this will be an acquittal, or at least should be an acquittal.

The prosecution's only hope is an irrational jury.

Fortunately for the prosecution, and unfortunately for Zimmerman, that's quite common.

[laklak]

Yeah, if it's decided on the evidence presented he'll walk. I don't understand the prosecution, why would they enter the videos of Zimmerman explaining his actions to the police? That's equivalent to allowing him to testify without cross examination, not even a first year law student would do that. Then they brought in witnesses who fucking knew Zimmerman and liked him - as prosecution witnesses! They couldn't counter the 5 witnesses that claim it's Zimmerman's voice on the 911 tape, and the defense even got the father to admit he couldn't tell whose voice it was. They're either monumentally incompetent or they don't want to win this.

[Warren Dew]

Yeah, if it's decided on the evidence presented he'll walk. I don't understand the prosecution, why would they enter the videos of Zimmerman explaining his actions to the police? That's equivalent to allowing him to testify without cross examination, not even a first year law student would do that. Then they brought in witnesses who fucking knew Zimmerman and liked him - as prosecution witnesses! They couldn't counter the 5 witnesses that claim it's Zimmerman's voice on the 911 tape, and the defense even got the father to admit he couldn't tell whose voice it was. They're either monumentally incompetent or they don't want to win this.

Or, the facts are against them so they have no real evidence to present, but they're prosecuting for political reasons anyway.

[Tero]

Maybe the state had no plan to convict Z? Only to show that the facts were presented to a jury and there was a trial.

Not sure who that message would go to, or who would be happy that the "truth" is out. There is never going to be a truth as the victim is dead. Had he survived, it would only be T vs Z, nobody else was there when the shot was fired.

Yes, victim. The guy not holding a gun is always the victim.

[Collector1337]

The guy not holding a gun is always the victim.

Wrong.

How about when Osama was shot? Was he the "victim" and the Navy Seal the "murderer?"

[Tero]

Yes, Osama was the victim of a gun shot. He should have been fed to the sharks alive.

[mistermack]

I've seen people with very serious wounds, still fighting, and certainly not screaming like Zimmerman did.

Nobody except the anti-gun folks have made the claim that Zimmerman was some sort of tough guy or wannabe tough guy. He certainly hasn't claimed to be such.

He's an ex doorman bouncer for organised illegal parties. You won't find many of them screaming their heads off, when struggling with an unarmed kid half their age. Especially when he had a gun in his pocket. He was screaming to set up his excuse to kill. Anyone with half a brain should see that.

You just keep on with these dumb posts, I'm sorry I bothered reading one.

[Collector1337]

I've seen people with very serious wounds, still fighting, and certainly not screaming like Zimmerman did.

Nobody except the anti-gun folks have made the claim that Zimmerman was some sort of tough guy or wannabe tough guy. He certainly hasn't claimed to be such.

He's an ex doorman bouncer for organised illegal parties. You won't find many of them screaming their heads off, when struggling with an unarmed kid half their age. Especially when he had a gun in his pocket. He was screaming to set up his excuse to kill. Anyone with half a brain should see that.

You just keep on with these dumb posts, I'm sorry I bothered reading one.

You think Zimmerman is some kind of tough guy. That's hilarious.