|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 11 2013 00:17 dotHead wrote:
So I have mostly just been listening to the trial audio, and not watching the video. OMG KEVIN COSTNER is working for the prosecution. I literally ran to my television to look and see if it was him haha.
is he a good lawyer?
I don't understand why the defense got this witness. His recent comment about the flashlight is kinda in contradiction to their medical examiner from yesterday and this guy doesn't have experience infront of a jury.
|
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
|
On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
I'm walking around with two deadly weapons of mass destruction. I call them my fists.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about.
|
This has got to set a record for most male on male mounting in a single trial since... (I'm a better person now so I won't make this joke in poor taste.)
|
On July 11 2013 00:29 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
I'm walking around with two deadly weapons of mass destruction. I call them my fists.
Thats a fair point, essentially we are all armed if a flashlight is considered a striking weapon.
|
On July 11 2013 00:21 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:17 dotHead wrote:
So I have mostly just been listening to the trial audio, and not watching the video. OMG KEVIN COSTNER is working for the prosecution. I literally ran to my television to look and see if it was him haha. is he a good lawyer? I don't understand why the defense got this witness. His recent comment about the flashlight is kinda in contradiction to their medical examiner from yesterday and this guy doesn't have experience infront of a jury.
....
........
...........
*Lifts up the rock you are hiding under*
Costner is an actor homie. He's saying the prosecutor sounds like a famous actor.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 11 2013 00:42 Dosey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:21 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:17 dotHead wrote:
So I have mostly just been listening to the trial audio, and not watching the video. OMG KEVIN COSTNER is working for the prosecution. I literally ran to my television to look and see if it was him haha. is he a good lawyer? I don't understand why the defense got this witness. His recent comment about the flashlight is kinda in contradiction to their medical examiner from yesterday and this guy doesn't have experience infront of a jury. .... ........ ........... *Lifts up the rock you are hiding under* Costner is an actor homie. He's saying the prosecutor sounds like a famous actor.
I don't watch much TV shows anymore so I'm not familiar with actors and such. lol I see, guess that explains his comment.
|
On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches?
There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby?
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 11 2013 00:50 GreenGringo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches? There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby?
hey now, take it easy(at bolded). I know it seems far-fetched but if Zimmerman had the struggle with Trayvon near a tree, it's possible he hit or rather scratched his head against the tree trunk. Having said that, they wouldn't explain his other injuries such as the fractured nose etc... The prosecution is trying to disprove Good's account of what happened as well as try to make the argument that Trayvon might have tried to move back and leave the situation when he saw the gun. Basically, multiple fronts because they don't have much working for them.
|
On July 11 2013 00:11 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:09 Sjokola wrote:
Is the defence doing a good job discrediting this witness? you mean prosecution?
Yes fuck, of course I do.
Edit: I want to clarify I do not mean Yes, (you) fuck, of course I do.
It didn't sound very nice 
|
On July 11 2013 00:50 GreenGringo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches? There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby?
I'm surprised they haven't come up with the theory that a meteor could have fallen out of the sky and struck Zimmerman in the face and Trayvon was just a concerned citizen trying to see if he was alright, only for Zimmerman to panic and shoot him for no reason.
|
On July 11 2013 00:55 BigFan wrote:
The prosecution is trying to disprove Good's account of what happened as well as try to make the argument that Trayvon might have tried to move back and leave the situation when he saw the gun. Basically, multiple fronts because they don't have much working for them. Well, my point was that they have no intention of disproving it, because they know they can't do that. They seem to think it's enough to merely present a possible scenario. In every other context, such a strategy by the prosecution would get the case thrown out by the judge.
|
On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about.
Those tree branches fucked him up pretty damn good if that was the case......LOL
It's obvious that a drug ridden teen was the one that was dealing all of the damage a tree branch could not do that much damage and if it was capable of doing that much damage there would be blood all over it.
He already had brain damage from the drugs that he had been doing (dex I believe is the name of the drug...I know someone that died from it at age 18).
|
New favorite quote "May I use your doll for a moment" - O'mara
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 11 2013 00:55 Sjokola wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:11 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:09 Sjokola wrote:
Is the defence doing a good job discrediting this witness? you mean prosecution? Yes fuck, of course I do.
ya, I figured as much. The guy lacks testifying experience infront of a jury and it shows when he hesitates and such. Having said that, he's been doing better since my last comment about his performance.
On July 11 2013 00:56 Dosey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:50 GreenGringo wrote:On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches? There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby? I'm surprised they haven't come up with the theory that a meteor could have fallen out of the sky and struck Zimmerman in the face and Trayvon was just a concerned citizen trying to see if he was alright, only for Zimmerman to panic and shoot him for no reason.
lols. I doubt they'll go to that extreme of a theory 
On July 11 2013 00:59 GreenGringo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:55 BigFan wrote:
The prosecution is trying to disprove Good's account of what happened as well as try to make the argument that Trayvon might have tried to move back and leave the situation when he saw the gun. Basically, multiple fronts because they don't have much working for them. Well, my point was that they have no intention of disproving it, because they know they can't do that. They seem to think it's enough to merely present a possible scenario. In every other context, such a strategy by the prosecution would get the case thrown out by the judge.
ya true. That would work for the defense and not used by the prosecution. They don't have much going for them.
On July 11 2013 00:59 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Those tree branches fucked him up pretty damn good if that was the case......LOL It's obvious that a drug ridden teen was the one that was dealing all of the damage a tree branch could not do that much damage and if it was capable of doing that much damage there would be blood all over it. He already had brain damage from the drugs that he had been doing (dex I believe is the name of the drug...I know someone that died from it at age 18).
I wouldn't say obvious, but the evidence points more to it than anything else imo. I believe the drug was THC but they only found low amounts in his body and we can't say that he's had brain damage already, speculation imo.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
|
On July 11 2013 01:00 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:55 Sjokola wrote:On July 11 2013 00:11 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:09 Sjokola wrote:
Is the defence doing a good job discrediting this witness? you mean prosecution? Yes fuck, of course I do. ya, I figured as much. The guy lacks testifying experience infront of a jury and it shows when he hesitates and such. Having said that, he's been doing better since my last comment about his performance. Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:56 Dosey wrote:On July 11 2013 00:50 GreenGringo wrote:On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches? There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby? I'm surprised they haven't come up with the theory that a meteor could have fallen out of the sky and struck Zimmerman in the face and Trayvon was just a concerned citizen trying to see if he was alright, only for Zimmerman to panic and shoot him for no reason. lols. I doubt they'll go to that extreme of a theory Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:59 GreenGringo wrote:On July 11 2013 00:55 BigFan wrote:
The prosecution is trying to disprove Good's account of what happened as well as try to make the argument that Trayvon might have tried to move back and leave the situation when he saw the gun. Basically, multiple fronts because they don't have much working for them. Well, my point was that they have no intention of disproving it, because they know they can't do that. They seem to think it's enough to merely present a possible scenario. In every other context, such a strategy by the prosecution would get the case thrown out by the judge. ya true. That would work for the defense and not used by the prosecution. They don't have much going for them. Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:59 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Those tree branches fucked him up pretty damn good if that was the case......LOL It's obvious that a drug ridden teen was the one that was dealing all of the damage a tree branch could not do that much damage and if it was capable of doing that much damage there would be blood all over it. He already had brain damage from the drugs that he had been doing (dex I believe is the name of the drug...I know someone that died from it at age 18). I wouldn't say obvious, but the evidence points more to it than anything else imo. I believe the drug was THC but they only found low amounts in his body and we can't say that he's had brain damage already, speculation imo.
But sir, you're not telling the jury that it was impossible for a meteorite, we call them meteorites when they pass through earth's amtosphere, you're not telling the jury it was impossible for a meteorite to have fallen from the sky and hit the defendant, Mr. Zimmerman, before he shot Trayvon Martin directly in the chest on that fateful night during which trayvon bought skittles.
|
On July 11 2013 01:00 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:55 Sjokola wrote:On July 11 2013 00:11 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:09 Sjokola wrote:
Is the defence doing a good job discrediting this witness? you mean prosecution? Yes fuck, of course I do. ya, I figured as much. The guy lacks testifying experience infront of a jury and it shows when he hesitates and such. Having said that, he's been doing better since my last comment about his performance. Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:56 Dosey wrote:On July 11 2013 00:50 GreenGringo wrote:On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Injuries front and back from tree branches? There isn't any evidence to support this theory. Why is the prosecution allowed to dream up all these far-fetched theories without the case being thrown out? Is "innocent until proven guilty" to be made subject to the whim of the black lobby? I'm surprised they haven't come up with the theory that a meteor could have fallen out of the sky and struck Zimmerman in the face and Trayvon was just a concerned citizen trying to see if he was alright, only for Zimmerman to panic and shoot him for no reason. lols. I doubt they'll go to that extreme of a theory Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:59 GreenGringo wrote:On July 11 2013 00:55 BigFan wrote:
The prosecution is trying to disprove Good's account of what happened as well as try to make the argument that Trayvon might have tried to move back and leave the situation when he saw the gun. Basically, multiple fronts because they don't have much working for them. Well, my point was that they have no intention of disproving it, because they know they can't do that. They seem to think it's enough to merely present a possible scenario. In every other context, such a strategy by the prosecution would get the case thrown out by the judge. ya true. That would work for the defense and not used by the prosecution. They don't have much going for them. Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:59 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Those tree branches fucked him up pretty damn good if that was the case......LOL It's obvious that a drug ridden teen was the one that was dealing all of the damage a tree branch could not do that much damage and if it was capable of doing that much damage there would be blood all over it. He already had brain damage from the drugs that he had been doing (dex I believe is the name of the drug...I know someone that died from it at age 18). I wouldn't say obvious, but the evidence points more to it than anything else imo. I believe the drug was THC but they only found low amounts in his body and we can't say that he's had brain damage already, speculation imo.
For perspective the levels of "THC" were so minuscule it would take more than 10x that amount to even test positive on a drug test, for some tests it would take more than 25x more.
|
On July 11 2013 00:59 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2013 00:30 BigFan wrote:On July 11 2013 00:25 dotHead wrote:
I don't understand the reference to the flashlight as being a "Weapon" or "Striking weapon", couldn't anything be considered a weapon if you attack someone with it? I mean. Isn't it silly to say, "He was carrying around a dangerous weapon", and be referencing car keys, a spoon, or even a flashlight. That would mean we are all walking around armed to the teeth.
Since yesterday, they have been trying to show that maybe Zimmerman hit his head and such with tree branches. I think they want to try and raise a point that his injuries were from a struggle and not necessary that Trayvon was punching him to disprove the self-defense claim. The placement of where the gun is and slidding down and such is interesting though. Brings up more points to think about. Those tree branches fucked him up pretty damn good if that was the case......LOL It's obvious that a drug ridden teen was the one that was dealing all of the damage a tree branch could not do that much damage and if it was capable of doing that much damage there would be blood all over it. He already had brain damage from the drugs that he had been doing (dex I believe is the name of the drug...I know someone that died from it at age 18).
Brain damage from the drugs he'd been doing? Debatable. Dying from a dextromethorphan overdose results from oxygen deprivation in most cases since your body forgets to breathe, and you are basically in a coma, so you couldn't 'wake up' even if you wanted to. If you took a dose high enough to actually damage your gray matter, you'd die from oxygen deprivation first.
The presence of THC and a past history of dex abuse does not turn people into violent criminals, though it does look bad in court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
