State wants answers from Zimmerman

Yep and look at that fresh jacket, not a drop of blood or a grass stain on it. Must be gortex, stain free.

 

I mean technically O'Mara can successfully argue that while George was on the phone with 911, Trayvon indeed did profile George during the standoff when George was in his car and Trayvon was acting like a little disrespectful thug. Trayvon sized him up and profiled him. This is not going to go to trial. I want it to very badly. Its going to be awesome.

 

Exactly and how in the hell was 45% of his head covered in blood, but not one drop got on his jacket, shirt collar, etc.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you ever punched someone repeatedly? Have you ever been punched repeatedly and please don't lie answer the questions honestly.

 

Do you read this stuff before you post it?

- - - Updated - - -

So if you are lying on the ground and I am constantly throwing blows at you where does the ones that miss usually land?

 

Can you show me the statue that claims you can chase after someone which means you are the aggressor, get your ass whooped and then claim self-defense.

Wait didn't Zimmerman exit his vehicle running behind Trayvon or did Trayvon snatch him out?

Hmmmm, now if I am sitting on a jury am I going to buy that? Hell no, because the first thing I am going to ask is didn't Trayvon run away? Yes he did. Next question, Mr. Zimmerman did you exit your vehicle running behind him? Yes, I did. So please explain to me how he stalked you.

 

You do know that stains on Zimms jacket were DNA/blood tested and nine came back positive as being Zimms blood right?

But i guess if your eyes can't see something in a video or picture then it just doesn't exist.

 

Thxs for the info, can you give me a link to this info. I did find alittle info on the subject though:

Interesting reading.

 

Okay, sorry, I misunderstood!

 

None of your business.

So you agree with Roderick's asinine claim that "The forensic evidence states that Trayvon never punched George, or even touched George?" Seriously, he had a likely broken nose and two black eyes, but TM never touched him and the forensic evidence is seriously supposed to support this? Well I guess if you've been punched multiple times in the face I guess that makes you the forensic expert

 

Thanks that pretty much answered that question.

I don't know if he touched him or not. Please post that forensic evidence that proves he repeatedly punched Zimmerman or slammed his head on concrete.

Well its obvious you never been punched in the face or punched anyone els in the face. Its the lack of injuries to Trayvon that makes Zimmerman's story unbelievable to anyone who has actually been in a fight before. You had one poster make the claim that not all of Trayvon's punches connected which means if Zimmerman was laying on his back with his head on the concrete and Trayvon missed his head what would he have hit? The concrete. Now unless Trayvon had hands of stone there is no way in hell his knuckles wouldn't have shown trauma from hitting concrete. If he was slamming Zimmerman's head on the concrete it would mean he would have had to grab his head to do it. So why is it that Zimmerman had no scratches, cuts or bruises around his ears and head from being scratched when Trayvon gripped his head and ears to slam it.

 

So that’s the nose and mouth Trayvon had both his hands wrapped around and pushing down with all his weight, leaving no blood or DNA on his hands……….yea right

 

And then West will ask, was it raining that night? Oh it was? How long was the body laying out in the rain?

 

Ah yes, because personal anecdotes always trump actual forensic science.

So he's got abrasions to his face, a likely broken nose, lacerations to the back of his head, two black eyes, witnesses that saw them struggling including TM on top of GZ and you don't even know if TM touched GZ. Wow. You are so entrenched in your all-out defense of TM that you refuse to even acknowledge the most basic and obvious. Take a step back.

 

Really, let's see the evidence that proves conclusively and beyond a reasonable doubt he did not act in self-defense.

 

Which means the defendant committed the act but had legal reason to do so and in this case to defend oneself from imminent serious bodily harm or death.

Yes how the prosecution proved she did not act in self defense.

And in this case with the affirmative defense they will have to prove Zimmerman was not acting in self defense.

Wrong again, he has not admitted he committed a crime.

Legally wrong again, the state has to prove he was not acting in self-defense. Once an affirmative defense is assert the burden of proof shifts to the prosecution to prove otherwise.

His clothing only confirms the shot was taken with the barrel against the hoody and the gun between 1" - 18" from his body.

I have no reason to wonder why he won't have them entered into the proceeding.

I will not address such stupid questions.

And will have no bearing on the trial.

Which have what to do with the trial?

Please cite the evidence you are talking about that proves that at the moment the shot was fire Zimmerman was not acting in self defense.

 

No it makes perfect sense and is perfectly reasonable.

It fits your claim that any adult who let a 17 year get the best of him was some kinda of wimp and that a 17 year could not kill an adult with his bare hands.

Those were fallacious statements as this case shows. And both 17 year olds were athletes and Martin had trained in fighting and knew how to throw a punch. That the 17 is asserted to have merely been larger has not bearing on anything, if the ref weighs 140 lb. and the 17 weighs 150 lb. he is larger isn't he?

And unsourced unsubstantiated assertion and nothing more, give us the weight of each person, their height. Although it doesn't matter, a flyweight could knock you out with one punch or even kill you with his barehands.

Who said he was quite a bit heavier and so what? Your previous claims were made solely on the basis of age are you withdraw that claim now?

No it is not backed up, what proof did the story provide, the police merely said he was larger, who quantified it and on what evidence?

What does that prove as to what happened initially. He wasn't shot until 40 seconds later are you now trying to claim that for 40 seconds during the fight Zimmerman had the gun in his hand? Did witness 6 report a gun in his hand? What evidence do you have, not your suppositions.

I have nothing to show although I repeated do, burden of proof is to prove with conclusive evidence Zimmerman was not acting in self defense. So far you have offered nothing.

You have been cited previous incidents so don't be a coward and continue to run from all of them.

 

OMara hasn't been able to come up with ANY evidence that Trayvon was a trained fighter in the past year. Do YOU have evidence?

 

The holes line up and do not disprove Zimmerman's statement but according to whom are you talking about. What forensic expert has come up with this conclusion? And quote the exact statement from Zimmerman to which you are referring.

ME8 stain A which matched Zimmerman was found on the sleeve or cuff of Trayvon's shirt..............so what?

 

Would you prefer "practiced" he was a MMA afficionato who practiced it? I believe we have a film somewhere of him doing so? If not I will withdraw the claim. The fact remains his family termed him an athlete didn't they.

 

OMara hasn't come up with ANY evidence that Trayvon was an MMA expert or practiced it either.

Trayvon hadn't played football since the Optimist league in the 8th grade.

He was a growing, skinny, string bean of a boy.. who was not yet shaving.

Pity he encountered an idiot like George who couldn't identify himself as NW.

 

Didn't say expert.

So he wasn't the nice high school athlete that was being reported?

5' 11' and 158lb is not so skinny and not string bean.

Avg. for males

16 - 17 years old 67 - 70 inches 130 - 150 lbs

 

I have sons and brothers who grew tall .. 6'4" and more.. At 17 they were still growing like mad.. eating everything that they could and not yet shaving.

Ignorance about the growth of teens is fairly universal for non parents or short people... but you can take it to any pediatrician.

- - - Updated - - -

I have sons and brothers who grew tall .. 6'4" and more.. At 17 they were still growing like mad.. eating everything that they could and not yet shaving.

Ignorance about the growth of teens is fairly universal for non parents or short people... but you can take it to any pediatrician.

 

And when George was arrested he had all of two quarters ($0.50) on his person and no credit card and he shot Trayvon with Shelly's gun which makes me believe that either:


1)One of the residents called George and told him about Trayvon and George was in such a hurry that he mistook Shelly's gun for his( they are identical)


2) Or he followed Trayvon from his sister's apartment complex and stopped at home to get his gun and in a hurry to make sure Trayvon didn't get too far ahead of him he grabbed Shelly's gun by mistake.


Either way adding the fact that he didn't have any money on his person to the fact that he had Shelly's gun proves he was in a hurry but not to go to Target.

 

67-70 inches is 5'7-5'10 and if you've seen any full body pictures of Trayvon he was a stringbean.

Heck when I graduated high school I was 6'2 and 150lbs soaking wet, but try to ignore facts all you want they aren't going away unlike George who will get to take a nice long vacation behind some nice iron bars for 35 years to life.