Quote:
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.
Quote:
|
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.
Quote:
|
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.
Threaded Mode
