Zimmerman's Prosecutors Withheld Evidence

Quote from bigarrow:

Every decision that we know Zimmerman made was the wrong decision and yet the koolaid drinkers on the right know somehow Zimmerman made all the right decision
More...
Your reading comprehension is like 3rd grade level. We're saying he made LEGAL decisions not necessarily the right ones. There's a difference.
...and of course we have no factual evidence about who started the physical confrontation.
More...
Which is exactly and precisely why Zimmerman should never have been arrested let alone charged. How many times does this need to be explained?
And we know Zimmerman is a liar, he lied to the judge in this case
More...
That would be perjury, not murder.
...yet the clan on here still thinks Zimmerman's story is above question.
More...
Who specifically said that? EVEN if he is lying about who initiated the physical confrontation, without PROOF it was Zimmerman, he should never have been arrested let alone charged to begin with. THAT is what we're saying.
Must be some mighty fine koolaid y'all be drinking there. The kooks you guys rally behind is flat out amazing.
More...
We're rallying behind the law and against politically motivated malicious prosecution of a fellow citizen. How many times does THIS need to be explained?
 
Quote from bigarrow:

You don't know who started the physical confrontation and without that information it's foolish to be in the Zimmerman camp. Zimmerman did not follow dispatchers instructions, fact. Zimmerman lied to the judge. You guys and you koolaid parties.
More...

Actually this case will come down to two factors in front of a jury.

1) Did the prosecution over-charge Zimmerman in pursuing a murder charge? The jury will not be given an option of convicting on lesser charges.

2) Who assaulted who in the confrontation? Can the defense create reasonable doubt to any prosecution assertion that Zimmerman started the assault? Based on the evidence at this point, it is likely that many in a jury will believe that it is likely that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman.

It would be foolish at this point to be in the camp of people who believe that Zimmerman will be convicted of murder. As more & more information comes out this becomes less likely with each passing day.
 
Zimmerman's Lawyers will absolutely have a ton of reasonable doubt. This case is loaded with reasonable doubt. Pretty simple. If the gets an unbiased jury, he walks. He gets a jury that's been watching msm "news" his chances decline. At that point, it's sadly a gamble IMO.
 
Quote from gwb-trading:

Actually this case will come down to two factors in front of a jury.

1) Did the prosecution over-charge Zimmerman in pursuing a murder charge? The jury will not be given an option of convicting on lesser charges.

2) Who assaulted who in the confrontation? Can the defense create reasonable doubt to any prosecution assertion that Zimmerman started the assault? Based on the evidence at this point, it is likely that many in a jury will believe that it is likely that Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman.

It would be foolish at this point to be in the camp of people who believe that Zimmerman will be convicted of murder. As more & more information comes out this becomes less likely with each passing day.
More...
True.

The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. They will have to prove that Zimmerman started the physical altercation which seems to be an impossible task. And, that still wouldn't be enough to prove murder.

The best the prosecutor could hope for is a hung jury with any blacks on the jury voting along racial lines.
 
Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

AFAIK:That's not the crucial factor in whether it's murder or self defense.
More...

In this case and many others it certainly is. Otherwise we would have armed people walking around, assaulting a victim, and then pulling out a gun & shooting the victim when the victim defended themselves.... then claiming it was self-defense.

The self-defense claim only holds when the other party starts the physical confrontation assaulting the gun owner.
 
Las a criminal defendant, he doesn't have to prove anything. However, he's gotta "prove," if you get my drift, that he was attacked by the little thug.
 
Quote from gwb-trading:

In this case and many others it certainly is. Otherwise we would have armed people walking around, assaulting a victim, and then pulling out a gun & shooting the victim when the victim defended themselves.... then claiming it was self-defense.

The self-defense claim only holds when the other party starts the physical confrontation assaulting the gun owner.
More...
No wonder I don't bother to carry a gun.
 
Quote from LEAPup:

Las a criminal defendant, he doesn't have to prove anything. However, he's gotta "prove," if you get my drift, that he was attacked by the little thug.
More...

Or place reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors about any prosecution assertions that he started the physical confrontation with Trayvon.

Something that is pretty easy to do at this point with evidence of injuries to your face & head, and the screaming heard in 911 calls.
 
Quote from bigarrow:

You don't know who started the physical confrontation and without that information it's foolish to be in the Zimmerman camp. Zimmerman did not follow dispatchers instructions, fact. Zimmerman lied to the judge. You guys and you koolaid parties.
More...
I think we have a Darwin award winner right here, guys. What do you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top