Zimmerman Trial About To Commence

[Jupiter551]

I brought up the allegation from Zimmerman about Trayvon grabbing/struggling for the gun (despite no DNA found) months ago, but I think it becomes particularly troubling when combined with the other lies he's been caught in - on the stand.

1. Claimed to know nothing of Stand Your Ground laws before the night of the shooting. FALSE - a military prosecutor has testified under oath that he taught a college law class on Stand Your Ground and specifically remembers George Zimmerman has his student - because Zimmerman got an 'A', meaning he demonstrated in-depth working knowledge of that and other self-defense laws.

2. Claimed his injuries were consistent with his life being under threat. FALSE - the medical examiner has testified and described Zimmerman's injuries as examined on the night they were created and said the injuries were "very insignificant"

3. Claimed he recieved several lacererations, scratches from Martin. FALSE - lack of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin's fingernails proves that again his story as false and the two did not struggle - at least not in any way resembling Zimmerman's story.

Just too many lies. Innocent people tell the truth and their story is supported by the facts, liars tell a web of lies and trip themselves up, as above. I'm sure more will come.

 

[Just Me]

I brought up the allegation from Zimmerman about Trayvon grabbing/struggling for the gun (despite no DNA found) months ago, but I think it becomes particularly troubling when combined with the other lies he's been caught in - on the stand.

1. Claimed to know nothing of Stand Your Ground laws before the night of the shooting. FALSE - a military prosecutor has testified under oath that he taught a college law class on Stand Your Ground and specifically remembers George Zimmerman has his student - because Zimmerman got an 'A', meaning he demonstrated in-depth working knowledge of that and other self-defense laws.

2. Claimed his injuries were consistent with his life being under threat. FALSE - the medical examiner has testified and described Zimmerman's injuries as examined on the night they were created and said the injuries were "very insignificant"

3. Claimed he recieved several lacererations, scratches from Martin. FALSE - lack of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin's fingernails proves that again his story as false and the two did not struggle - at least not in any way resembling Zimmerman's story.

Just too many lies. Innocent people tell the truth and their story is supported by the facts, liars tell a web of lies and trip themselves up, as above. I'm sure more will come.

George Zimmerman has not been on the stand and most likely will not testify on his own behalf. As in most cases, the defense team would be stupid to put him on the stand. The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

 

[Jupiter551]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

Except in a self-defense claim like this, in which case the burden is on Z to prove he was really in fear for his life etc.

 

[Jupiter551]

I brought up the allegation from Zimmerman about Trayvon grabbing/struggling for the gun (despite no DNA found) months ago, but I think it becomes particularly troubling when combined with the other lies he's been caught in - on the stand.

George Zimmerman has not been on the stand and most likely will not testify on his own behalf. As in most cases, the defense team would be stupid to put him on the stand. The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

Well 6 months (or thereabouts) ago before the trial started, during the pre-trial process, he did take the stand at the bond hearing and was examined by the prosecution (he's under oath)

 

[Bocefish]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

Except in a self-defense claim like this, in which case the burden is on Z to prove he was really in fear for his life etc.

Wrong again. The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was Murder2, which they are epicly failing at. In case you somehow forgot how the justice system works, you are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty, not the other way around.

 

[Jupiter551]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

Except in a self-defense claim like this, in which case the burden is on Z to prove he was really in fear for his life etc.

Wrong again. The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was Murder2, which they are epicly failing at. In case you somehow forgot how the justice system works, you are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty, not the other way around.

Well oops someone better tell the judge, because the Florida District Court has ruled:

The defendant has the burden of presenting sufficient evidence that he acted in self-defense in order to be entitled to a jury instruction on the issue. But the presentation of such evidence does not change the elements of the offense at issue; rather, it merely requires the state to present evidence that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1520091.html

This means that while the prosecution has a burden of proof in a number of respects, the defendant DOES have the burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that he was in fear for his life. How one would do that with absence of DNA evidence, and medical examiner testimony calling his injuries 'very insignificant', heh - who knows?

Considering Zimmerman's story (they struggled, Trayvon grabbed the gun) is now proven by DNA evidence to be impossible, good fkin luck getting people to believe his story.

 

[Bocefish]

The burden of proof is on the prosecution side in criminal trials.

Except in a self-defense claim like this, in which case the burden is on Z to prove he was really in fear for his life etc.

Wrong again. The state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was Murder2, which they are epicly failing at. In case you somehow forgot how the justice system works, you are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty, not the other way around.

Well oops someone better tell the judge, because the Florida District Court has ruled:

The defendant has the burden of presenting sufficient evidence that he acted in self-defense in order to be entitled to a jury instruction on the issue. But the presentation of such evidence does not change the elements of the offense at issue; rather, it merely requires the state to present evidence that establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defense.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1520091.html

This means that while the prosecution has a burden of proof in a number of respects, the defendant DOES have the burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that he was in fear for his life. How one would do that with absence of DNA evidence, and medical examiner testimony calling his injuries 'very insignificant', heh - who knows?

Considering Zimmerman's story (they struggled, Trayvon grabbed the gun) is now proven by DNA evidence to be impossible, good fkin luck getting people to believe his story.

The defense blew the lack of DNA on the gun thing out of the water. No DNA doesn't mean Trayvon didn't attempt to grab his weapon. All the physical evidence backs up Z's defense story as does all the officer's testimonies and about half of the prosecution's witnesses. The state has epicly failed to make their case and it is their burden to prove the charges they made against the defendant. Z doesn't even have to testify because the prosecution's case is so weak.

 

[Jupiter551]

The defense blew the lack of DNA on the gun thing out of the water. No DNA doesn't mean Trayvon didn't attempt to grab his weapon. All the physical evidence backs up Z's defense story as does all the officer's testimonies and about half of the prosecution's witnesses. The state has epicly failed to make their case and it is their burden to prove the charges they made against the defendant. Z doesn't even have to testify because the prosecution's case is so weak.

That's an extremely generous 'rendition' of the case so far.

 

[Jupiter551]

(SATIRE)

Zimmerman Hopes to Join Fox News after Acquittal

Written by Alex Kuzio July 7th 2013

(Photo Credit: HLN)

SANFORD, Fla. – Accused murderer George Zimmerman—currently on trial for the 2012 killing of teenager Trayvon Martin—is reportedly “pretty sure” he’ll be acquitted of all charges, and has begun making plans for his life after the trial. According to sources, Zimmerman’s top priority is finding gainful employment, and the former neighborhood watchman believes his “particular talents would be very much at home on Fox News.”

“George has heard about Fox’s coverage of his ordeal,” said a source close to Zimmerman who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “They’ve been more—let’s call it understanding—of his predicament than the rest of the media, and he’s really appreciated all their support. Once he’s acquitted of these ridiculous charges, George thinks he’d be a great addition to the Fox News team. Nothing big—maybe he could host a weekend show, like Mike Huckabee.”

Many observers believe that Fox News’s coverage of the Martin case has been biased in favor of Zimmerman, who admits to shooting the unarmed teenager but claims that he did so in self-defense. Fox News anchors and correspondents have zealously defended policies like Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law—which according to Zimmerman’s defense team justified their client’s actions—and Zimmerman reportedly hopes to be a “symbol of what’s possible when good-hearted people are given the freedom to stand up to thugs destroying our neighborhoods.”

According to his older brother Robert, Zimmerman believes that he possesses many qualities that make him perfect for television—like his “stunning good looks and impeccable posture”—and that his worldview will sync up well with the one aggressively promoted by Fox News personalities. “George knows better than anyone what it’s it like to be persecuted and oppressed by politically-correct minorities,” the elder Zimmerman said. “We think he’ll do nicely alongside such luminaries as Sean Hannity and Steve Doocy.”

Fox News executives are reportedly open to working with Zimmerman should he be acquitted, but a network insider granted anonymity to speak candidly told Newslo that they’re actually rooting for his conviction. “If Zimmerman’s found guilty, millions will tune in to watch our correspondents go ballistic with righteous indignation,” the Fox producer said. “If he gets life in prison, forget about it—it’ll be a goddamn ratings gold mine.” http://www.newslo.com/zimmerman-hop...8038728080655_18991_1388541228030405#f9aac8fc

 

[Bocefish]

I have yet to find any legal analysts that feel the state has even come close to making their case.

Legal analyst Dan Abrams wrote of the Zimmerman trial so far:

“I certainly sympathize with the anger and frustration of the Martin family and doubt that a jury will accept the entirety of George Zimmerman’s account as credible … But based on the legal standard and evidence presented by prosecutors it is difficult to see how jurors find proof beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn’t self defense.”

Former prosecutor Elizabeth Parker said to USAToday:

“There are significant weaknesses in the state’s case — most importantly conflicting eyewitness accounts which themselves create reasonable doubt as to what happened that night.”


Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/837465/zimmerm ... GsbpTud.99

 

[Jupiter551]

Most of those the same legal analysts who assured us that Zimmerman wouldn't even be charged. :dontknow:

All that's certain, is that it's not yet over.

 

[Bocefish]

The defense should be resting their case sometime tomorrow before closing arguments begin.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57592866-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-was-on-top-of-zimmerman-when-teen-was-shot-gunshot-wound-expert-testifies/

(CBS/AP) SANFORD, Fla. -- A nationally renowned gunshot wound expert testified Tuesday that Trayvon Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with accused murderer George Zimmerman's story that the teen was on top of him and leaning over when he was shot.

George Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain standing trial in the teen's shooting death, has said Martin attacked him and was on top of him just before the fatal gunshot. Prosecutors have argued Zimmerman profiled the teen and started the confrontation.

Taking the stand for the defense, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, a forensic pathologist, said that Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with the gun's muzzle being against his clothing, which would have been two to four inches away from his body when he was shot.

"If you lean over someone, you notice the clothing tends to fall away from the chest," Di Maio said. "If instead you're lying on your back and someone shoots you, the clothing is going to be against your chest."

Who was the aggressor in the Feb. 26, 2012 altercation in the Sanford, Fla., gated community has been a key issue in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, which is in its eleventh day of testimony.

Di Maio said that Trayvon Martin would have been alive for about one to three minutes following the gunshot wound, but would have been able to move and speak for at least ten to fifteen seconds.

The testimony was a contrast to the remarks of a medical examiner who conducted Martin's autopsy, who said that the teen could have been alive for up to ten minutes after the gunshot. Dr. Shiping Bao also said he didn't believe Martin would have been able to move after receiving the shot.

Prosecutors have said that George Zimmerman told investigators he moved Martin's arms away from his body after the gunshot, although Martin was found with his arms tucked beneath his chest. Answering a question from defense attorney Don West, Di Maio said that someone may be able to move their arms after receiving a similar gunshot.

Zimmerman's injuries indicate "you've had severe force, it's not just like you bumped your head or something like that," Di Maio said.

Zimmerman's injuries were consistent with having his head hit against concrete more than once, Di Maio said. The former neighborhood watch captain said the teen smashed his head into a sidewalk several times before he claimed he acted in self-defense.

The testimony was a contrast to another medical examiner, Dr. Valerie Rao, who testified for prosecutors that Zimmerman had "insignificant" injuries that didn't appear to result from multiple impacts against concrete.

Pointing to photos of Zimmerman's injures, Di Maio also said Zimmerman's nose may have been fractured, an injury he said was consistent with being punched in the nose, as Zimmerman said Martin did.

Di Maio also said it's possible to receive trauma without visible wounds. "You can get severe trauma to the head without external injuries, actually," Di Maio said.

Di Maio also explained that if clothes taken into evidence are wet and packaged in plastic bags, and not paper bags, it can ruin the samples since "bacteria multiplies and you get mold and it stinks to high heaven." Defense attorneys believe DNA evidence found on Martin's hooded sweatshirt and undershirt was degraded since the clothing wasn't packaged properly.

 

[Jupiter551]

^ err, but his argument is that he MAY have had invisible injuries consistent with head trauma? WTF? Invisible injuries? Why not just say that Trayvon pulled out a wand and cast a spell at him?

If that's testimony - invisible injuries, lack of DNA by possibly not packing the evidence correctly...what a paper-thin, story.

 

[Bocefish]

^ err, but his argument is that he MAY have had invisible injuries consistent with head trauma? WTF? Invisible injuries? Why not just say that Trayvon pulled out a wand and cast a spell at him?

If that's testimony - invisible injuries, lack of DNA by possibly not packing the evidence correctly...what a paper-thin, story.

Ever heard of a concussion without visible external injuries?

"You can get severe trauma to the head without external injuries, actually," Di Maio said.

Some people will believe whatever they want regardless of the overwhelming evidence that there is not only reasonable doubt, but a good probability he believed he was in danger of severe injury or death before firing. Which is why the Sanford PD and BSO released the following: http://www.sheriff.org/assets/attachmen ... -audio.flv

 

[Just Me]

The defense should be resting their case sometime tomorrow before closing arguments begin.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57592866-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-was-on-top-of-zimmerman-when-teen-was-shot-gunshot-wound-expert-testifies/

(CBS/AP) SANFORD, Fla. -- A nationally renowned gunshot wound expert testified Tuesday that Trayvon Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with accused murderer George Zimmerman's story that the teen was on top of him and leaning over when he was shot.

If this witness is reputable and unimpeachable, I think we can say the prosecution has no chance at a conviction now.

 

[Jupiter551]

If this witness is reputable and unimpeachable, I think we can say the prosecution has no chance at a conviction now.

Since opinion of his guilt is still sharply divided I'm not sure why anyone would be convinced the jury have made up their mind.

 

[Nordling]

If that's the case, that Zimmerman shot Trayvon while Trayvon was straddling him, then why wasn't Zimmerman covered in tons of Trayvon's blood? Gravity works quite well on liquids.

 

[Bocefish]

If that's the case, that Zimmerman shot Trayvon while Trayvon was straddling him, then why wasn't Zimmerman covered in tons of Trayvon's blood? Gravity works quite well on liquids.

If the force of the shot alone didn't knock Trayvon off, Z probably shoved Trayvon the rest of the way off him. It's not as if he laid there with Trayvon on top of him bleeding out. It also takes a while to soak through layers without pressure behind it.

ETA: I vaguely recall Z saying Trayvon sat straight up after the shot and said "you got me" or something to that affect before falling off him. It's in the transcripts somewhere. Anyhow, after the shot, Trayvon only remained on top for a few seconds at most IIRC.

 

[Bocefish]

The defense should be resting their case sometime tomorrow before closing arguments begin.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57592866-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-was-on-top-of-zimmerman-when-teen-was-shot-gunshot-wound-expert-testifies/

(CBS/AP) SANFORD, Fla. -- A nationally renowned gunshot wound expert testified Tuesday that Trayvon Martin's gunshot wound was consistent with accused murderer George Zimmerman's story that the teen was on top of him and leaning over when he was shot.

If this witness is reputable and unimpeachable, I think we can say the prosecution has no chance at a conviction now.

He's supposedly the best there is in his field with 40+ years experience and literally wrote the books (8 or so) on how to properly do autopsies, examinations, etc..

 

[Nordling]

If that's the case, that Zimmerman shot Trayvon while Trayvon was straddling him, then why wasn't Zimmerman covered in tons of Trayvon's blood? Gravity works quite well on liquids.

If the force of the shot alone didn't knock Trayvon off, Z probably shoved Trayvon the rest of the way off him. It's not as if he laid there with Trayvon on top of him bleeding out. It also takes a while to soak through layers without pressure behind it.

ETA: I vaguely recall Z saying Trayvon sat straight up after the shot and said "you got me" or something to that affect before falling off him. It's in the transcripts somewhere. Anyhow, after the shot, Trayvon only remained on top for a few seconds at most IIRC.

If you shoot someone sitting on you in the chest, blood isn't likely to SEEP out; it's more than likely to literally flood out like old faithful almost instantly. It just pisses me off that the prosecutor didn't ask.

 

[bawksy]

I don't know about that. It's quite possible that the blood pumped into his open lungs instead. Think about it. He likely wasn't perfectly horizontally on top of Trayvon. He was either sitting upright or forward at an angle. Thus gravity would pull blood down into his body cavity, and not necessarily though the entry or exit wound which may have already closed up some due to elastic skin and muscle tissue.

 

[Bocefish]

If that's the case, that Zimmerman shot Trayvon while Trayvon was straddling him, then why wasn't Zimmerman covered in tons of Trayvon's blood? Gravity works quite well on liquids.

If the force of the shot alone didn't knock Trayvon off, Z probably shoved Trayvon the rest of the way off him. It's not as if he laid there with Trayvon on top of him bleeding out. It also takes a while to soak through layers without pressure behind it.

ETA: I vaguely recall Z saying Trayvon sat straight up after the shot and said "you got me" or something to that affect before falling off him. It's in the transcripts somewhere. Anyhow, after the shot, Trayvon only remained on top for a few seconds at most IIRC.

If you shoot someone sitting on you in the chest, blood isn't likely to SEEP out; it's more than likely to literally flood out like old faithful almost instantly. It just pisses me off that the prosecutor didn't ask.

I think you've watched too many TV shows with fake blood packs exploding.

Here's TM's sweatshirt that was under his outer hoodie sweatshirt

 

[Nordling]

I don't know about that. It's quite possible that the blood pumped into his open lungs instead. Think about it. He likely wasn't perfectly horizontally on top of Trayvon. He was either sitting upright or forward at an angle. Thus gravity would pull blood down into his body cavity, and not necessarily though the entry or exit wound which may have already closed up some due to elastic skin and muscle tissue.

You may be right, although I'd suggest that would make it more difficult for his alleged last words, "you got me!" I just wish the question was asked...the folks who did the autopsy would be in a better position than us speculating.

 

[bawksy]

I meant Trayvon on top of Zimmerman but you get what I mean. Yes, blood in the lungs would have made speech harder. Perhaps only one lung was filling with blood. Who knows.

 

[Nordling]

If that's the case, that Zimmerman shot Trayvon while Trayvon was straddling him, then why wasn't Zimmerman covered in tons of Trayvon's blood? Gravity works quite well on liquids.

If the force of the shot alone didn't knock Trayvon off, Z probably shoved Trayvon the rest of the way off him. It's not as if he laid there with Trayvon on top of him bleeding out. It also takes a while to soak through layers without pressure behind it.

ETA: I vaguely recall Z saying Trayvon sat straight up after the shot and said "you got me" or something to that affect before falling off him. It's in the transcripts somewhere. Anyhow, after the shot, Trayvon only remained on top for a few seconds at most IIRC.

If you shoot someone sitting on you in the chest, blood isn't likely to SEEP out; it's more than likely to literally flood out like old faithful almost instantly. It just pisses me off that the prosecutor didn't ask.

I think you've watched too many TV shows with fake blood packs exploding.

Here's TM's sweatshirt that was under his outer hoodie sweatshirt

Good, although that still doesn't show how much blood, if any, spewed out; it just shows a large stain where blood soaked into his shirt.

 

[Nordling]

I meant Trayvon on top of Zimmerman but you get what I mean. Yes, blood in the lungs would have made speech harder. Perhaps only one lung was filling with blood. Who knows.

Not to mention it seems an unlikely thing to say suddenly after a mortal wound. I doubt I'd say something that personal in that case, I'd probably say what I said when I rolled my Renault at 60MPH-- "shit!"

 

[Bocefish]

I don't know about that. It's quite possible that the blood pumped into his open lungs instead. Think about it. He likely wasn't perfectly horizontally on top of Trayvon. He was either sitting upright or forward at an angle. Thus gravity would pull blood down into his body cavity, and not necessarily though the entry or exit wound which may have already closed up some due to elastic skin and muscle tissue.

You may be right, although I'd suggest that would make it more difficult for his alleged last words, "you got me!" I just wish the question was asked...the folks who did the autopsy would be in a better position than us speculating.

The human body has a minimum reserve of about 10-15 seconds of oxygen in the brain, so even though he was shot in the heart he could till speak and move for a short amount of time.

 

[bawksy]

Any blood that would have "spewed" out would have had to pass through organs, muscle, skin, and then two probably-no-longer-perfectly-aligned fabric garments separated at least 4 inches from his body. He could have had a quart of blood burst out and his inner sweater could have prevented all of it from dripping down to his outer shirt for quite a while. The bullet hole through the fabric, like with skin, would have closed up slightly as soon as the bullet passed through, making it nearly impossible for blood to "squirt" out. By the time the blood dripped its way through through the misaligned, partially closed holes in both garments, he had probably rolled off of George.

 

[Bocefish]

Seeing as how he was shot in the heart and the heart muscles pumping blood were immediately disabled, there probably wasn't any "spewing" and the majority of blood pooled up inside the body at whatever points were lowest.

 

[bawksy]

Two things have been proven in the trial so far.

One is that witness testimony is completely unreliable. You've had some people 100% certain that Trayvon's voice is on the tape, and others who are 100% certain George's voice is on the tape. Some people say George was on top, some people say Trayvon was on top. So I say all witness testimony in the case should be completely disregarded, including the testimony of George Zimmerman, who not only has self-serving interest, but also has not been completely honest in the past.

So the other thing that has been proven with actual physical evidence is that Trayvon was winning the fight against George. Trayvon has been proven to be on top, at least when he was shot. George had serious fight wounds (like his fucked up face), Trayvon did not.

Now, before any one brings up the armed versus unarmed bullshit, I would like to remind everyone that unarmed people are ABSOLUTELY lethal. You do not need a weapon to beat someone to death. Recently a guy in my state was charged with murder because he started a simple bar brawl, punched a guy in the head, who hours later died of brain bleeding.

So, looking at ONLY the physical evidence that George was getting his ass kicked, it is a reasonable conclusion that George Zimmerman felt he was in imminent danger of further serious injury or death inflicted by Trayvon Martin. In that situation, deadly force, even imbalanced (ie armed versus unarmed) deadly force is legal and justified. This reasonable justification of self defense puts the burden on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self defense was not allowed.


Now, even with Trayvon winning the fight, George could still be guilty of murder (unable to use the self defense defense) if one of the following was provable BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT:
1) He stalked Trayvon Martin with murderous intent (ie, purposely putting himself in a situation with the intent of using deadly force, like, hey, let's go rile up some niggers so one of them attacks me and I can have an excuse for shooting him!)
or
2) He initiated the fight AND Trayvon had a reasonable belief that his life was in danger, justifying Trayvon using lethal force (smashing George's head into the pavement).


Note on #2 - You can actually start a fight and still be able to claim self defense, if you break off the fight or attempt to flee and the original victim still threatens you with lethal force. Think of a situation where you punch a guy and then quickly run away. He isn't allowed to shoot you in the back, because you are no longer a threat and he is no longer in danger. If he's shooting at you and you run into a dead end and have no choice but to turn around and shoot back, you are justified in doing so (although you may still be guilty of the initial assault and battery... and perhaps, in some states, felony murder?).

Here have been some arguments on why #1 should apply:
- George may have been a racist, or at least, didn't like that fucking punks always got away. Well, in the USA, being a racist isn't illegal. I don't care if stand on the street with an "I HATE NIGGERS" sign like Bruce Willis in Die Hard 3, it still does not justify someone using physical violence against me. It's also not justification for violence that you may have improperly racially profiled someone. Being a racist is not, by itself, murderous intent.
-George may have disregarded a suggestion from a police dispatcher to not follow Trayvon Martin. This is not illegal, and does not justify violence. It does not constitute murderous intent.
-George could have stayed in the car and avoided a confrontation. True, but getting out of the car was not illegal, and did not justify violence. There is no proof that George left the vehicle with murderous intent.

As for #2, it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman initiated the fight or otherwise threatened Trayvon Martin's life.


What it boils down to is that George Zimmerman made a series of bad decisions that night, but none of those bad decisions were illegal decisions. The only evidence of an illegal act that night is that of Trayvon Martin's physical attack on George Zimmerman. If you have an opinion otherwise, those opinions do not equate to evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, which is what is required to convict somebody of 2nd degree murder.

George Zimmerman should walk.