Witness testifies Trayvon was a racist

the jury has to decide IF his nose was broken, Originally Posted by CJ7

No, the jury doesn't. There will be no question asking if his nose was broken.

So what are you saying? that because he called him names in a phone call it was o.k. to track him down and shoot him? Originally Posted by BigLouie

There are probably only a couple of people in the world who think that is what happened.

You are one of them. I have excluded hysterical "Nancy Grace"!

WTF is the other one. You keep good company!

No, the jury doesn't. There will be no question asking if his nose was broken. Originally Posted by LexusLover

I agreed the jury doesn't get questioned ... the nose isn't on trial LOL .. they've already heard testimony and looked at the before and after pics, that factors in on their decision, along with the other lies you seem to think he'll possibly face perjury charges for

Regardless of what options the judge gives the jury, the concept of reasonable doubt is still in affect. There is swore testimony that Zimmerman was getting beat up, and pictures to back it up.

Even the most ardent supporters for the prosecution have to admit that there is already plenty reasonable doubt raised, and the defense hasn't even presented it's case.

The only thing hat will keep the judge from giving a directed verdict of not guilty will be her fear of repricusions from the poverty pimps, race baiters, and polititians.

Even if the jury does convict, there is no way that the conviction will stand under appeal. If it were allowed too, our entire judicial system based on the reasonable doubt premis would be made a mockery of. Originally Posted by Jackie S

You are mixing up 2nd degree murder with manslaughter. They require different burdens of proof. You can not scare someone into fighting you and then claim self defense. While it can not be proven that Zimmerman started the fight, it damn sure can be proven that he could have avoided the fight. Zimmerman brought this upon himself and for that, I have no pity for him. This was not done on Zimmerman's private property but on public property. He stalked him, after being instructed not to.


I will now define "culpable negligence" for you. Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence. But culpable negligence is more than a failure to use ordinary care toward others. In order for negligence to be culpable, it must be gross and flagrant. Culpable negligence is a course of conduct showing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects, or such an entire want of care as to raise a presumption of a conscious indifference to consequences, or which shows wantonness or recklessness, or a grossly careless disregard for the safety and welfare of the public, or such an indifference to the rights of others as is equivalent to an intentional violation of such rights.
The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=manslau...qs=n&sk=&ghc=1

The reason Zimmerman was instructed NOT to follow Martin was because of this very law. That is why IMHO he will be found guilty. Some of you folks are getting hung up on this 2nd degree crap. Zim man is going down for manslaughter. IMHO. and that in fact will be the correct conviction.

... along with the other lies you seem to think he'll possibly face perjury charges for Originally Posted by CJ7

Another trial, another jury. I don't know what "other lies" you reference, but I don't think it is debatable (from what he has admitted) that he lied about funds for bail money ... his wife too. At the moment I don't know if that comes out if he takes the stand in Florida .. i.e. that he lied about the bail funds.

The bottom line the Jury doesn't decide if his nose was broken to give him "self defense"! That's not Florida law and that won't be in the jury charge on self-defense ... also in Florida the State must prove by beyond a reasonable doubt that he was NOT defending himself. He just has to show a prima facie case, which he has through the State's own witnesses ... were they lying?

FYI: Where is the "negligence" for a "manslaughter" conviction?

Good, who had perhaps the best view of the struggle between Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, said it appeared one person was striking the other while straddling him "MMA-style."
However, Good also said he did not see anyone's head being slammed into the concrete sidewalk, which Zimmerman has said Martin did to him.
Good initially testified that it appeared "there were strikes being thrown, punches being thrown," but during detailed questioning Friday, he said he saw only "downward" arm movements being made.
Zimmerman has claimed that he fatally shot 17-year-old Martin last year in self-defense as the teen was banging his head into the concrete sidewalk behind the townhomes in a gated community.
But under prosecution questioning, Good said he never saw anyone being attacked that way during the fight between Zimmerman and Martin.
"I couldn't see that," Good said moments later while being cross-examined.


how bout that IB? Originally Posted by CJ7

The pictures taken by the neighbor, Manolo, the night of the incident provide all of the evidence that is necessary to substantiate Zimmerman's claim that Martin was beating his head against concrete, CBJ7, unless, of course, you're still ignorantly arguing Zimmerman's wounds were self inflicted.



Regarding Zimmerman's nose, the PA, Folgate, testified: "I would say likely broken, it's hard to say definitively." ....

In his final questions for Folgate, O'Mara asked her whether Zimmerman's life may have been in danger.

"Medically speaking, would you agree that whatever he did to stop the attack allowed him to survive it?" asked O'Mara.

"It could have, potentially, yeah. It depends on the amount of trauma he was sustaining at the time," said Folgate.

"So, stopping the attack is what allowed him to survive it, would you agree?" asked O'Mara.

"It could have, yes," said Folgate.

Wrong, IB Lying & Crying has been a "complete liar and idiot" since childhood. Originally Posted by bigtex

Okay, jackass, now prove Folgate didn't say what is posted above and documented in the court transcript and call it it a lie. Your pathetic, ad hominem attacks to discredit others only show you to be the lying, hypocritcal jackass you are, BigKoTex.

THAT'S RIGHT, LITTLE TWAT!!

Keep replying to me. That way you miss all those responses from YssupRider and BigTex and CJ7 and others.

Just think about ALL those posters getting the last word in on you. Too many go back and find them all now, eh?

Post a review. Of a woman. If you have the money. Tranny fucker.

And you're still a "catcher". Originally Posted by ExNYer

Your "modus operandi" is still showing, you ignorant, bigoted and lying Yankee jackass.

well that's about as thoughtful a response as we could possibly expect from the TWAT OF THE YEAR!

Hiding again, eh, Corpy?

Do your part for America! Urge IBSyndrome (aka "Corpy") to post a link to my original Dipshit of the Year poll and admit his blatant lies to the posters of ECCIE.

Tick, tock, Corpy! Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

It's more "thoughtful" and substantive than anything your dumb-fuck golem ass posts, you dumb-fuck golem jackass. That's why your dumb-fuck golem ass was elected to be:

he wont take the stand .. the question marks beside his credibility remain in the mind of the jury

The reason Zimmerman was instructed NOT to follow Martin was because of this very law. Originally Posted by WTF

Is that what the dispatcher told you? Or are you just reading minds again?

You are mixing up 2nd degree murder with manslaughter. They require different burdens of proof. Originally Posted by WTF

The ONLY burden of proof for the State is ... "beyond a reasonable doubt"!

You are so full of shit ... you can't buy diapers big enough!

The State in Florida has to prove he DID NOT act in self-defense by that burden of proof. He only has to make a prima facie case, which the State has done for him with her own witnesses.

Go polish some golf balls.

Is that what the dispatcher told you? Or are you just reading minds again? Originally Posted by LexusLover

Logic would dictate that is the reason all are told not to follow.

That just might be the reason why they are instructed not to carry a firearm...in these nieghborhood watch shindigs.

Why then don't You tell us why that it is standard protocol to tell neighborhood watch groups not to follow on foot? Is it because something good might happen?

Martin was living in that neighborhood too.

Should we all start following each other with loaded guns?

How would you feel if some stranger with a loaded gun started following you around?

Is that the new standard? Follow someone around and if they fear for their life and try and protect themself, shoot them dead. Tell your side of the story and walk?

Zimmerman will be convicted of manslaughter, mark my words. He could have prevented this tragedy from happening. Originally Posted by WTF

TM did not know he had a gun. GZ had a CHL. Concealed. Do you know what that means?

You are correct that GZ could have prevented this from happening. He could have stayed home and not tried to protect his neighborhood. Hell, if he had decided to patrol 5 minutes later their paths may have never crossed. TM just as easily could have prevented this from happening by walking away from the "creepy ass cracker". Instead he decided the best course of action was to beat the shit out of a "creepy ass cracker" and he set in motion the drawing of a gun and his death.

From all reports that I have heard TM was the one to escalate this to physical violence and in doing so he is the one responsible for his own death. Just because someone is following you does not give you the right to beat their ass. I'm stunned at the amount of leeway you want to give TM and yet have absolutely zero tolerance for GZ who was trying to protect his neighborhood.

The ONLY burden of proof for the State is ... "beyond a reasonable doubt"!

You are so full of shit ... you can't buy diapers big enough!

The State in Florida has to prove he DID NOT act in self-defense by that burden of proof. He only has to make a prima facie case, which the State has done for him with her own witnesses.

Go polish some golf balls. Originally Posted by LexusLover

For second degree murder.

You are mixing apples with Tea.

Zimmerman will be convicted or plead to manslaughter.

Your "modus operandi" is still showing, you ignorant, bigoted and lying Yankee jackass. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

THAT'S RIGHT, LITTLE TWAT!!

Keep replying to me. That way you miss all those responses from YssupRider and BigTex and CJ7 and others.

Just think about ALL those posters getting the last word in on you. Too many go back and find them all now, eh?

Post a review. Of a woman. If you have the money. Tranny fucker.

And you're still a "catcher".

. I'm stunned at the amount of leeway you want to give TM and yet have absolutely zero tolerance for GZ who was trying to protect his neighborhood. Originally Posted by Budman

I have given GZ plenty of leeway. No 2nd degree murder.

Manslaughter for the Zim man.

Had he followed instruction by not carrying a weapon or not following Martin, then this would not have happened. That is a manslaughter conviction in my book.

TM did not know he had a gun. GZ had a CHL. Concealed. Do you know what that means?

You are correct that GZ could have prevented this from happening. He could have stayed home and not tried to protect his neighborhood. Hell, if he had decided to patrol 5 minutes later their paths may have never crossed. TM just as easily could have prevented this from happening by walking away from the "creepy ass cracker". Instead he decided the best course of action was to beat the shit out of a "creepy ass cracker" and he set in motion the drawing of a gun and his death.

From all reports that I have heard TM was the one to escalate this to physical violence and in doing so he is the one responsible for his own death. Just because someone is following you does not give you the right to beat their ass. I'm stunned at the amount of leeway you want to give TM and yet have absolutely zero tolerance for GZ who was trying to protect his neighborhood. Originally Posted by Budman

he wasn't on patrol Bud, he was returning home from running an errand, he called the cops then he took the cops place before they could get there... so all the reports you have read are incorrect ... did you read the testimony of the witness under oath, that walked out his back door and standing 15 feet away told the two to break it up, then testify he didn't see anyone getting their head slammed into the concrete ????