George Zimmerman Trial Live Streaming

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

PO we will hear from Sabrina again Omera was setting her up..thats why she was subject to recall..

Yea, waiting on that one. Being in the Mayor's office has the impression of pushing the racial narrative. You know the mayor, more than likely, spoke with Al Sharpton. Hmmmm, that makes me wonder if in that photo with Al Sharpton and TM's dad, if the Mayor is present? I'll have to check that out.

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

Omera took it easy on her this first time, but when she comes back there will be more evidence against what she said and Omera will not be nice again..

Yes, he had to do that today, her first time on the stand.

Originally Posted by KWSS1976

After listening again to TM brother on the stand I did not realize how bad Omera was making him stumble over himself...Man he was horrible...

Yea, the guy was totally scripted. And I find it hard to believe that you hear your brother scream, you say you are not sure, but LATER, after all the hoopla, you change your story. He would have been in the doghouse if he stuck to his original story.

O'Mara is going to depose Crump to show he lead DeeDee into her answers and I am sure he was involved with this brother as well.

[J4Truth]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

David, How does the Defense explain the 50 foot fight scene? GZ says he is sucker-punched and fell at the T, but body is 50 yards further down. Was there an explanation for that? That's the only question that I have.

I did hear O'Mara's closing arguments talk about being pushed back, but I never heard complete wording on the issue. That is a big question all over the Internet. The people are not getting that settled in their minds. I can't really answer to it.

I can't answer to what the defense argued concerning it but I can see it.

My sister had asked a similar question. Fights are fluid and not really static. Some people can get into a fight or struggle and see where it started and where it ended up and not really know how it got from point A to point B.

Now GZ said he was hit at the “T” and back pedaled or stumbled trying to get away as TM kept coming at him. (per the reenactment video) Also IIRC there’s a witness that said something about them being in a standing positions and seeing something like flailing arms. So when someone is advancing and swinging or throwing punches the less willing participant would back pedal and flail their arms in an attempt to fend off the blows. I’ve seen this happen in several fights. That maneuver alone could make a fight travel quite a distance. Then the aggressor ends up grabbing the person as they continue to try to ward off the blows, all the while the fight is still moving. Then they get pulled to the ground and get mounted. Then another struggle happens where one is swinging down while the other is either trying to grab, block, flail and whatever they could to fend off blows. This is all possible with the picture GZ and other witnesses portray.

Also my guess is they probably rolled or tussled because in a street fight I don’t see the person being able to mount the whole fight; they get thrown off at times or at least partways off as the fight sometimes moves around on the ground. The aggressor usually will nearly always have the upper hand though, until the other person turn the tide by getting out of defensive retreat mode and get into fight mode.

[Pressing-On]

Plausible assessment, J4Truth. It's just that he never described the fight in that way.

I agree with you here - "Some people can get into a fight or struggle and see where it started and where it ended up and not really know how it got from point A to point B."

Serino testified he believed GZ was telling the truth, I feel he was as well. Maybe a little embellishment, but overall truthful.

Now, the Defense is going to pound the Prosecution next week and I look forward to that. I have believed all along the Prosecution had no case, and now they are going to put the monkey on the Jury's back They get off scot-free with all their corruption, lies and coverups. It happens all over America every day of the week.

If the Prosecution can bring something more substantial to prove GZ's guilt, I will turn on a dime. Thus far, their case is weak and riddled with incompetent witnesses who have no credibility.

Today, TM's mother and TM's step-brother were lying through their teeth. And the jury gets to think about, over the weekend, the testimony of GZ's mother and Uncle.

Coming back to add that I am only interested in this case as it entails racism, gun-control and self-defense. The racism part is the worst of it.

[Pressing-On]

I thought I would verify something that was bothering me. It proved to be true concerning TM's mother and step-brother.

O'Mara puts the date of the first hearing of the 911 tape to be March 16, with the Mayor.

There are NO law enforcement present.

I wondered if the Mayor had met up with Al Sharpton. Yes, he did. They planned a public rally and appeared before the public pledging justice on March 22.

So, in the Mayor's office, more than viewing a 911 call, they planned to push the racist meme.



http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/201...ial-prosecutor

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by n david

HE WAS ON DRUGS, moron!

Marijuana doesn't make you violent. In fact, it does the opposite.

Besides, the amount in his system was minimal, not even enough for a DUI.


I wish the defense would put GZ on the stand so that he can ask the basic questions:

1) Did you approach Martin or did Martin approach you?

GZ: He approached me.

2) When exactly did he circle your car and walk off into the distance-- before or after your phone calls to the police dept.?

GZ: (I don't know what he'd say.)

3) Do you really want the court to believe that you wanted to be a police officer, took college courses related to that field, went through the classes to be certified to carry your weapon concealed in public, but you never heard of the "Stand Your Ground Law" until after this tragedy?

GZ: Yes, I never heard of it, until after that tragic night.


He's lying on question 3, but he probably isn't the only person lying in this trial.

I think the whole trial is a mockery of justice and even if the defendant gets by this time, the defendant won't get away with what he did and what he's doing now-- unless somehow he repents.


He KNOWS he started the altercation in the first place.
Neither a "self-defense" plea or the SYG law covers the aggressor.

An acquittal in this case will have very far reaching legal consequences.

[Jermyn Davidson]

You guys can say what you want, but there isn't anyway that I will believe that Martin confronted the defendant first-- making the 17 year old really the one who was defending himself, initially.

That is where I believe the crime was committed in this case.

As far as admitting the files of this juvenile, it shouldn't happen. After all, he is still a juvenile and juveniles are not judged under the same weight as an adult for obvious reasons.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Marijuana doesn't make you violent. In fact, it does the opposite.

Besides, the amount in his system was minimal, not even enough for a DUI.


I wish the defense would put GZ on the stand so that he can ask the basic questions:

1) Did you approach Martin or did Martin approach you?

GZ: He approached me.

2) When exactly did he circle your car and walk off into the distance-- before or after your phone calls to the police dept.?

GZ: (I don't know what he'd say.)

3) Do you really want the court to believe that you wanted to be a police officer, took college courses related to that field, went through the classes to be certified to carry your weapon concealed in public, but you never heard of the "Stand Your Ground Law" until after this tragedy?

GZ: Yes, I never heard of it, until after that tragic night.


He's lying on question 3, but he probably isn't the only person lying in this trial.

I think the whole trial is a mockery of justice and even if the defendant gets by this time, the defendant won't get away with what he did and what he's doing now-- unless somehow he repents.


He KNOWS he started the altercation in the first place.
Neither a "self-defense" plea or the SYG law covers the aggressor.

An acquittal in this case will have very far reaching legal consequences.

You obviously are not following the case. The teachers that testified said that GZ was wanting to study to be a Prosecutor, not a cop. The HO wanted to outfit GZ with a uniform and car, for his neighborhood watch business, and he declined the offer.

When GZ's life was comprised, he then is on self-defense. And as the Defense stated in closing arguments today - "We have the injuries to prove our client was sucker punched." That means he is now in self-defense mode and should be acquitted.

I will say that anyone or group that threatens to riot are a bunch of barbaric people, and need to be shot.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

You guys can say what you want, but there isn't anyway that I will believe that Martin confronted the defendant first-- making the 17 year old really the one who was defending himself, initially.

That is where I believe the crime was committed in this case.

As far as admitting the files of this juvenile, it shouldn't happen. After all, he is still a juvenile and juveniles are not judged under the same weight as an adult for obvious reasons.

Tell me, aside from the gun shot wound, what marks did TM have to prove he was hit or sucker punched?

Juveniles are tried as adults every day, and you know that, Jermyn.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Tell me, aside from the gun shot wound, what marks did TM have to prove he was hit or sucker punched?

Juveniles are tried as adults every day, and you know that, Jermyn.

Sure, when the juvenile has done something wrong enough to be tried as an adult. In this case, the juvenile is dead.

We have the testimony of the girl he was on the phone with-- but I know she doesn't appear to be credible.

No marks or physical proof.

No proof of the deceased walking around the defendant's car either. If that happened, when did it happen, and why was it not mentioned in the phone call to the police?

[J4Truth]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Plausible assessment, J4Truth. It's just that he never described the fight in that way.

I agree with you here - "Some people can get into a fight or struggle and see where it started and where it ended up and not really know how it got from point A to point B."

Serino testified he believed GZ was telling the truth, I feel he was as well. Maybe a little embellishment, but overall truthful.

Now, the Defense is going to pound the Prosecution next week and I look forward to that. I have believed all along the Prosecution had no case, and now they are going to put the monkey on the Jury's back They get off scot-free with all their corruption, lies and coverups. It happens all over America every day of the week.

If the Prosecution can bring something more substantial to prove GZ's guilt, I will turn on a dime. Thus far, their case is weak and riddled with incompetent witnesses who have no credibility.

Today, TM's mother and TM's step-brother were lying through their teeth. And the jury gets to think about, over the weekend, the testimony of GZ's mother and Uncle.

Coming back to add that I am only interested in this case as it entails racism, gun-control and self-defense. The racism part is the worst of it.

I think in the reenactment he describe something about stumbling and trying to fend off TM advancing on him and then getting pulled to the ground. That's where I got the first half of the explanation from and I think that kind of movement could make a struggle travel a bit before it actually get to the ground.