itsrequired
New Member
So do you really think the state wanted to put an expert on the stand to say that it was Martin screaming in the background because they felt he was screaming help while he was beating Zimmerman?
In the matter of George Zimmerman
- Thread starter Lurk
- Start date
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
Who is yelling is in question, that Zimmerman was on top at one point really isn't. Some of the witnesses and Zimmerman say that he was on top at one point.
itsrequired
New Member
So you think the state concedes that it was Martin beating Zimmerman? Okay. You really believe that? I know that state hasn't proven that, but it was definately their theory.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
There are a lot of reasons that Martin may have been yelling for help.
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
I think you have the names confused.
In any case, I believe the states argument is that Martin was on top of Zimmerman at one point and it was the other way around at another. Zimmerman's story is the same.
I did not watch the opening statements, but from the trial it seems that the state is saying Martin was on top when he was shot.
And in fact it has been admitted that Zimmerman was beat to chit, while Martin had two wounds: abrasions on his knuckles and the bullet hole.
I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out.
What will take a genius to figure out, though, is what the heck the medical Examiner, currently under cross examination, is talking about. The dude is a loon, and is doing nothing but killing any chance the prosecution had in this case. The state sure screwed up here.
And in fact it has been admitted that Zimmerman was beat to chit, while Martin had two wounds: abrasions on his knuckles and the bullet hole.
I don't think it takes a genius to figure that out.
Martin's mom as a witness was pure emotion, nothing else - no facts, no evidence. Just emotion.
I hope the jury will decipher fact and reasonable doubt from pure emotion.
bcp
In My Opinion
Maybe he was hoping his posse was close enough by to come help beat the hell out of some cracker.
bcp
In My Opinion
Yes, some white ass cracker with a hispanic accent.. or something like that.
itsrequired
New Member
No, I'm pretty sure I got it right. You believe the state concedes that it was Martin beating Zimmerman? Okay. You really believe that? I know that state hasn't proven that, but it was definately their theory.
You want us to believe that the state knows Martin attacked and beat Zimmerman, yet they think because Zimmerman followed Martin the beating was justified and Martin could not claim self defense? Is that summing your opinion up?
Midnightrider
Well-Known Member
There is a difference between being on top and beating. There is also a difference between beating and attacking.
The state has not conceded that Martin attacked anyone. At least not that I have seen. Again, I didn't hear the opening statements, but it is pretty clear the states case relies on Zimmerman not being protected by self defense if he is following someone.
I don't know why they would even call her because she is NOT a witness. The defense attorney should have blocked that.
PsyOps
Pixelated
Because she reviewed evidence and would be considered an expert in terms of identifying the voice on the tape.
The voice, the screams, sounds on the tape - unidentifiable.
PsyOps
Pixelated
You do know the defense probably call the parents of Zimmerman to the stand to do the same thing?
The witness, Good, described what Martin was doing to Zimmerman's face as "ground and pound, MMA style".
Is that "beating" or "attacking"?
aps45819
24/7 Single Dad
The state called a witness that said Martin was on top of Z beating him "MMA style"