George Zimmerman Trial Live Streaming

[n david]

HE WAS ON DRUGS, moron!

[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

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?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

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, she isn't credible either. She testifies that TM's ear buds dropped to the ground, but they were in his pocket when they found him dead.

No marks or physical proof.

No, TM had no marks to show GZ was attacking him. He sure didn't hit GZ after he was shot. So......self-defense for GZ.

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?

No proof it didn't happen either.

Lots of crime in the area, break-ins in that neighborhood were nothing new, mainly young black men, Florida has highest national rate of crime - GZ is right to be suspicious - it is dark, he doesn't recognize the young man, and it is raining. Bad night to be walking about.

The thing is, you can say that GZ followed or shouldn't have followed, but TM was ahead of him and had plenty of time to go home. It's raining, it's dark and someone spots in him on the complex ground. So, why didn't he go home. Why did he decide to hang back and then attack GZ.

Today, ME says he studied the THC issue and agrees TM had enough in his system to distort his thinking.

[Jermyn Davidson]

I say again, THC doesn't make you violent-- it does the opposite.

By his own words, the 17 year old actually ran away from the defendant at some point, near the beginning of this tragedy.

From listening to the phone call, it is my PERSONAL determination that the defendant is breathing heavy, running, to keep up with the deceased. At this point, he is not doing traditional neighborhood watch, he is chasing.

Even if I was paid security for that rental complex, I wouldn't be instructed to do that. You observe and report, unless it is happening right in front of you.


Also, keep in mind the deceased didn't live there, was only visiting his father.

Also, that area is not exactly "crime-ridden". Burglaries have happened there but that area is not "the bad part of town" either. Sanford does have its bad part of town and this rental complex is not in the bad part of town-- just so you know.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

No, she isn't credible either. She testifies that TM's ear buds dropped to the ground, but they were in his pocket when they found him dead.




Lots of crime in the area, break-ins in that neighborhood were nothing new, mainly young black men,

Well thank you for at least coming right out and acknowledging the place that race does play in this case-- and probably did play in the mind of the defendant.

When this first broke, and I tried to bring this up on here before, I was shouted down by all on AFF that race had nothing to do with this.


Fact of the matter-- it does.

It's a sad reality. It's still wrong.

[J4Truth]

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.

In truth, I can see both scenarios, one with TM confronting and being the aggressor and one with GZ confronting and being the aggressor, but I have to lean towards TM doing the confronting solely because where the fight takes place. If the fight happened halfway between the “T” and where TM was staying then I would feel that GZ did chase, hunt or go after TM. But the fight happens much to close to where GZ is parked then to TM’s house giving that TM ran approximately 3-4 minutes before the fight supposedly happened.

Let me explain. If someone sees someone they’re following or watching run and turn a corner, but the person following or watching only go as far as the corner. And no evidence points to them turning same corner and continue to follow, especially when they have more than enough time to do just that. I’ll conclude that they were following and watching but not truly intent on confronting because I feel a person intent on confronting would have continued down pass the corner. Now after some time the corner becomes the scene of an altercation it’ll seem more plausible that the person came back to the corner and started or initiated the altercation.

It just makes no reasonable sense for TM to still be at the “T” or anywhere near the “T” if he indeed ran from GZ like GZ stated and even RJ stated.

Also why can’t you believe its possible, its sure not out of the realm of possibilities for a 17 year old to do just that, especially if he was bigger or taller than the other person.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by J4Truth

In truth, I can see both scenarios, one with TM confronting and being the aggressor and one with GZ confronting and being the aggressor, but I have to lean towards TM doing the confronting solely because where the fight takes place. If the fight happened halfway between the “T” and where TM was staying then I would feel that GZ did chase, hunt or go after TM. But the fight happens much to close to where GZ is parked then to TM’s house giving that TM ran approximately 3-4 minutes before the fight supposedly happened.

Let me explain. If someone sees someone they’re following or watching run and turn a corner, but the person following or watching only go as far as the corner. And no evidence points to them turning same corner and continue to follow, especially when they have more than enough time to do just that. I’ll conclude that they were following and watching but not truly intent on confronting because I feel a person intent on confronting would have continued down pass the corner. Now after some time the corner becomes the scene of an altercation it’ll seem more plausible that the person came back to the corner and started or initiated the altercation.

It just makes no reasonable sense for TM to still be at the “T” or anywhere near the “T” if he indeed ran from GZ like GZ stated and even RJ stated.

Also why can’t you believe its possible, its sure not out of the realm of possibilities for a 17 year old to do just that, especially if he was bigger or taller than the other person.

Very logical - Thank you!