Shot for getting skittles

Supposition.

No it doesn't state that. There is no requirement to retreat if you are attacked. No where in the law.

The only time under Florida law you would have to retreat or make a good faith effort to retreat before using deadly force to defend yourself is if YOU are the one that starts the physical confrontation.

"After he was cleaned up by fire/rescue"???
yet they took no pics of his injuries either...

So you're telling us there's no evidence of a fight because EMS professionals pretty much destroyed it.

No, Zimmerman already satisfied the "vigilante justice" quotient.

Idiot.

you really haven't got anything besides that and your own racism in this issue, have you?

More fuel to the fire:

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...cation-expert-reasonable-scientific-certainty

You're not worth anything else at this point. You can go back to living in your pot fantasy world and the rest of us will get on with reality.

Idiot.

heh-that's the most validating thing I've heard today.

Thanks, muffin head.

You're welcome.

Idiot.

According to these experts, an 18th Century schoolteacher who was murdered by her brother over a small financial matter.

So you don't find it odd that there was no photographic record taken of Zimmerman's injuries despite those being the basis of his self defense claim?

Nothing questionable at all?

Call me an idiot some more if it gets your rocks off. But do me the courtesy of telling me why this isn't significant.

Perhaps someone who can form sentences can do this for in your place? I won't mind as I know stringing more than four words together gives you a nosebleed.

No, it's not questionable at all, since any photos the cops took at the crime scene wouldn't be released.

I call you idiot because of the idiotic things you write:

"So you don't find it odd that there was no photographic record taken of Zimmerman's injuries despite those being the basis of his self defense claim?"

A non-idiot person would say "I want to see the photos of Zimmerman if any were taken". You on the other hand have already decided, without confirmation of even a news story, that no photos were taken of Zimmerman.

Even if there are no photos, and that would be a big black eye on the police, you have the police, Fire Rescue, and the doctor who treated Zimmerman for his nose that can testify to a fight.

Idiot.

If it can be conclusively proven that Zimmerman wasn't the one screaming for help, I'd expect to see an arrest warrant. That completely wrecks his story.

We've got witnesses pointing at both sides. Knowing Zimmerman was lying in addition to the sworn affadavit by the detective would sure make not arresting him an even larger political issues than it is.

Actually, it's from the Orlando Sentinel.

Wise words.


Rex Murphy: The tale of Trayvon Martin is a tragedy turned into a race parable

how about mentioned as being in existence?

Why?

What good does it do?

The report and all the pictures if any will be released at a trial if there is one or when the case is declared justified and closed.

Why is it so hard for people to understand that they're going to make any case to the grand jury? Releasing information does nothing but taint the jury pool and harm the prosecution.

It is ironic that those who have a hard on to see a noose around his guy's neck with an incomplete evidence picture would be their own worst enemies were they in charge.

The jury pool is tainted already. In fact the actions of the parents and the media have hurt his chances for a fair trial.

Personally I don't think they will indict him on any charges because we've not yet seen any action on the State Attorney's part to charge him. If there was something they wouldn't already made the arrest.

Right now what is holding things up is that the State Attorney who took over is going over things with a fine tooth comb (and I can't blame her for doing so) to make sure everything has been double and triple checked.

She will tell the Grand Jury that in her opinion it's a justified shoot and the Grand Jury will vote to not charge.

That's what I think will happen.

What's hilarious is these same people you talk about often bemoan and complain about government abuses, some valid some not, yet want the government to violate the rights of one person they think, with no actual evidence to back their arguments, did something wrong. They want to just skip steps in the process and declare him guilty!

I can only imagine that this was at best something he should have removed himself from commenting on and at worst an attempt to use this event to "rally the troops".

The "if he'd had a son" comment was a very poor thing to add. Was he not thinking of the implications of the comment or was he?

On another front, why is the media allowed to manipulate the tapes as they did if there were no malice?

Get ready for the riots gang, it's going to be a torchfest no matter which way this goes.

Where does this "Martin is supposedly "walking fast" towards home" come from? This is conjecture. We don't know anything.

We only have Zimmerman's word that he was walking back to his vehicle - a man who may well be lying to avoid charges of murder.

How the two could have met where they did is possible in any number of scenarios, making either one the aggressor, and none we will ever know as the truth.

What we do know is that Martin had every legal right to be walking in circles in that neighborhood.

We know Zimmerman considered him 'suspicious'.

Nothing Martin did at the store, nor anything he had on his person indicated he was doing anything illegal.

And, yet, he's dead.

We have witnesses also saying they heard Trayvon screaming. When witness testimony is contradictory, the court will take "voice analysts" into account.

Yes, they are wise words. You should take note.

If there is a case and the scream came into it the State Attorney would bring in the witnesses and experts saying it was Martin and the defense no doubt would bring in its own experts and witnesses saying it was Zimmerman.

The jury will then decide who they believe.

There is no such thing as "when witness testimony is contradictory, the court will take "voice analysts" into account" as if neither side wouldn't be allowed to use such voice analysts if all the witnesses agreed on something.

And there's nothing stopping the prosecution from bringing in voice analysts.

I just said that numbnuts.

The phone call with his girlfriend.

What is interesting is why Martin was not moving towards home.

We better find out whether or not this was self defense.

After I said it, numbnuts.

No numbnuts.

This is what you said:

"We have witnesses also saying they heard Trayvon screaming. When witness testimony is contradictory, the court will take "voice analysts" into account."

The COURT doesn't take anything into account when witness testimony is contradictory.

That is a job for a JURY.

I wonder if they will be able to use the cell phones to determine where ZImmerman and Martin were at various points.