17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?

[buttslinger]

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else.
Winston Churchill

[natina]

the most damaging evidence to zimmerman is when he takes the stand

George Zimmerman Will Not Tell The Truth


George Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to His Honor, the Court, or the public. When Zimmerman took the witness stand at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing, he lied under oath in two forms: acts of omission and blatant falsehoods.


Zimmerman took the stand to make a self-serving statement in the cloak of an apology, but the message’s audience was for the media and a candid public, not the parents of the slain Trayvon Martin. It should be noted that O’Mara allowed this disrespectful action to be undertaken and His Honor did not stop it, either.

The faux apology given to turn the tide of negative media attention:

O'MARA: You advised me that you wanted to make a short statement, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Correct.
ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am. And I did not know if he was armed or not.
O'MARA: Nothing further, your honor.

George Zimmerman took the stand and performed for the media. The narrative was starting to change and the fickle media started pretending as if both the dead, unarmed minor, Trayvon Martin, and his confessed killer, George Zimmerman, were victims. This is absolutely incorrect. Man profiled, stalked, chased, and ultimately killed the minor. Those are the facts. Furthermore, Zimmerman lied on the stand about how old he thought Trayvon Martin was. When the non-emergency dispatcher asked how old Zimmerman thought the supposedly “suspicious guy” was, Zimmerman said “late teens.” 17 would classify as late teens. Let’s let that percolate into our collective conscience for a moment. A 28-year-old adult male tells the dispatcher that he believes a minor is indeed a minor and he stills exits his vehicle, with gun holstered, to chase after the “fucking punk” who would not get away. I can’t speak for Angela B. Corey, but when I heard this, I thought for sure any doubt about her over-charging Zimmerman went away.

State’s Attorney asking what took so long for the faux apology:

DE LA RIONDA: I'm sorry, sir, you're not really addressing that to the court. You're doing it here to the victim's family, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: They are here in the court, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: I understand. But I thought you were going to address Your Honor, Judge Lester, not -- so that's really addressed to the family and where the media happens to be, correct, Mr. Zimmerman?
ZIMMERMAN: No, to the mother and the father.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And tell me, after you committed this crime and you spoke to the police, did you ever make that statement to the police, sir? That you were sorry for what you've done or their loss?
ZIMMERMAN: No sir.
DE LA RIONDA: You never stated that, did you?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember what I said. I believe I did say that.
DE LA RIONDA: You told that to the police?
ZIMMERMAN: In one of the statements, I said that I felt sorry for the family.
DE LA RIONDA: You did?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: So that would be recorded because all those conversations were recorded, right?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And you're sure you said that?
ZIMMERMAN: I'm fairly certain.
DE LA RIONDA: And so which officer did you tell that to? You made five statements I believe, total.
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, all the names run together.
DE LA RIONDA: And do you remember if it was a male or a female?
ZIMMERMAN: There were both males and females.
DE LA RIONDA: At the time you made that statement that you were sorry?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And let me make sure the record's clear, you stated exactly what to those detectives?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember exactly what -- verbatim.
DE LA RIONDA: But you're saying you expressed concern for the loss of Mr. Martin, or that you had shot Mr. Martin, that you actually felt sorry for him?
ZIMMERMAN: I felt sorry that they lost their child, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: And so you told detectives that you wanted them to convey that to the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't know if they were detectives or not.
DE LA RIONDA: Officers, I apologize.
ZIMMERMAN: I didn't know if they were going to convey it or not. I just made the statement.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And then you said that you called them or you left a message for them to tell them that?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait 50 something days to tell them -- that is, the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't understand the question, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait so long to tell Mr. Martin and the victim's mother, the father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them?
ZIMMERMAN: I was told not to communicate with them.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. So even through your attorney, you didn't ask to do it right away? Your former attorneys or anything.
ZIMMERMAN: I did ask them to express that to them. And they said that they were going to.

Zimmerman isn’t a very good liar, or at least he isn’t a believable one. When De La Rionda asked if he expressed the same sentiment to the police that he was expressing 50+ days later in His Honor’s Court, he said, “no.” Then he says he did express the sentiment. When De La Rionda asked who he told that too, he resorts back to the tried and the true, “I don’t know/I can’t remember” line that he used when he was questioned by Serino. I’ll get to that in a moment. I’m sure it’s not going to come as a surprise, but I’ve listened to everything that was released by George Zimmerman Legal Case, and I can tell you all that he never expressed remorse, contrition, or anything resembling sorrow for killing an unarmed minor. Before the stress test, he does ask a female police officer if she slept well, and he does ask her if she has “ever had to kill anybody,” as if trying to draw some parallels between the murder of Trayvon Martin and her job as a trained law enforcement agent. She seemed a bit perplexed/annoyed to me and answered “no/nope.” Real law enforcement agents are trained to use deadly force as a last resort, not a first option. So this is lie #2 given by George Zimmerman at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing.

George Zimmerman perjuring himself under oath about what was said to Serino/others:

DE LA RIONDA: But before you committed this crime on February 26th, you were arrested -- I'm sorry, not arrested. You were questioned that day, right, February 26th?
ZIMMERMAN: That evening into the 27th.
DE LA RIONDA: And then the following morning. Is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And the following evening, too. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. Would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times?
ZIMMERMAN: I remember giving three statements, yes sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"?
O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.
JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.
DE LA RIONDA: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"?
JUDGE LESTER: I'm going to grant his motion at this time.
O'MARA: Thank you, your honor.
DE LA RIONDA: Would you agree you changed your story as it went along?
ZIMMERMAN: Absolutely not.

Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility.
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot...ell-truth.html

[natina]

Zimmerman Defense Witnesses Undercut Defense On Cross-Examination At Second Bond Hearing
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot...-undercut.html

Character & Credibility: The Zimmerman Family
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot...an-family.html

George Zimmerman Will Not Tell The Truth

http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot...ell-truth.html

[SFTB]

Plenty of people against the whole "stand your ground" issue. This week we see a situation in FL that shows the other side. Two 19 year olds decide to pull an armed robbery on an internet cafe. Internet cafes are actually small gambling halls, so there is a bit of cash on hand. A 71 year old patron with a legal firearm and a carry and conceal permit shoots them both. I open the floor to social commentary...I'll start with the sad fact that the article reads, "charges unlikely against man who shot robbers" That is some sad shit, not "senior saves the day" or "hero stands up to masked armed robbers"
Article:
http://www.ocala.com/article/2012071...CLES/120719790

[GroobySteven]

It doesn't show the other side at all. There was no "stand your ground" and it's a bit decrepit to try and make this anything other than what it is.
Luckily this guy was a good shot (did it say if he was ex-military or law enforcement) to be able to shoot them both without injury to others or himself.
I've just watched the video - what did he shoot them with, a potatoe gun???

I think it's lucky the way the old guy is waving that thing around and shooting and running, that he didn't accidentally hit someone. If he'd shot me or mine, even by accident, I'd be mighty pissed off at him. He made the choice to shoot.

[SFTB]

It doesn't show the other side at all. There was no "stand your ground" and it's a bit decrepit to try and make this anything other than what it is.
Luckily this guy was a good shot (did it say if he was ex-military or law enforcement) to be able to shoot them both without injury to others or himself.
I've just watched the video - what did he shoot them with, a potatoe gun???

I think it's lucky the way the old guy is waving that thing around and shooting and running, that he didn't accidentally hit someone. If he'd shot me or mine, even by accident, I'd be mighty pissed off at him. He made the choice to shoot.

This is a better video. I guess its a matter of opinion. Legally armed senior stops 2 thugs from robbing 30 people. One of which was waviing a gun in peoples faces while the other smashed the place up with a baseball bat. Would you also be pissed if you or yours were shot by the robbers?

[GroobySteven]

This is a better video. I guess its a matter of opinion. Legally armed senior stops 2 thugs from robbing 30 people. One of which was waviing a gun in peoples faces while the other smashed the place up with a baseball bat. Would you also be pissed if you or yours were shot by the robbers?

Absolutely I would have been. And if I was carrying a gun and those two cunts came in, I'd probably have done the same as he. Nevertheless, it does look a little precarious. Either way, this isn't relevant to the "stand your ground" issue elsewhere.

[GroobySteven]

How did he go from 71 to 63?

You can't seriously call a kid Dwayne can you?

[SFTB]

Either way, this isn't relevant to the "stand your ground" issue elsewhere.

In my op I used the word issue, I guess I should have written statute. But I think if you read it again, you can catch the gist of what I wrote. Planty of people against stand your ground, this is an example of where it is not only valid, but worked.

[Donkey]

Although "stand your ground" is likely to not be needed, the idea of using deadly force to defend yourself against a physical attack also worked in the Trayvon case. I fail to see how it's the "other side of the coin."