OK Randomizers (is that what we are called here?), I have the GZ chat server up and running. http://sun2.highwayusa.com/gzchat/

It is web based and works through my very restrictive firewall at work, so it should work for most people. Let me know if you have any questions.

It seems that nobody wants to start any "Daily Discussion"?



I have provided the venue... but it wont be "Daily Discussion" unless people post things.... DAILY........



I don't want to be the one person who always starts discussion... this place is not "Rumpole's Blog"


But...... in the absence of any other discussion.......Let me get one ball rolling:

Just as a spark... a post from JQ... from one of the Alpha Cretins.. actually speaking about the case (very rare) and the "wealth of evidence" against George.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Well, let's see. Number 1: George's 911 call was actually a NEN call and it is not incriminating evidence. George tells of Trayvon's suspicious behavior and that he looks like he is on drugs or something. Number 2: There is more than one witness that heard the cries for help and saw George on the bottom. Number 3: Where the fight ended up proves Trayvon back tracked to the T. Number 4: George's statements while not verbatum were consistent with him having to use self defense. If this was their evidence, case closed, let's go home.

Not sure what all the DV verbage is about but as I remember it, O'Mara asked Gilbreath if the investigation had turned up anything to refute Zimmerman's statement of self defense and Gilbreath said "No". Is the "NO" the indication that DV writes about that the State has more then "NO"? Isn't it the State's responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt their charges against George are true, which includes proving that the shot was fired with malicious intent when George was being beat up by Martin.

I am still trying to learn my way around and have noticed no replies to my posts so maybe I am doing something wrong.

I looked and haven't seen any. But now you have one!

Make sure you have checked you "user control panel" and have it set up they way you want it.

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!

Justfactsplz - seems pretty simple doesn't it...

Rumpole - I think everyone is looking for something new to discuss, rather than rehashing. Maybe, if the depositions were held on Friday, we will hear something this week...some new motions perhaps.

I have seen your posts, Jordan and some responses to them

A forum tends to progress.... people do not keep going back to quote any individual post.

I know you are used to that... but frankly that blog comment format is a pain to navigate.

A new comment may well appear way back where people were posting 12 hours ago.... surely that is not the ideal way to have an ongoing discussion.

The linear format is (IMO) MUCH superior... you can see what I am posting now in this post... one post back is what was posted a few minutes ago... etc.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

True.... but to keep things ticking over and the "daily discussion" alive... we all need to "fake it" a little

It doesn't hurt to repeat/rephrase points.... just to keep discussion alive.


It gets really boring if it is just me.... or even ME replying to everything else that gets posted. I would rather butt out for a while and see what develops between a selection of people posting.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Justfacts covered it already, but I'll throw in mine too...

1) George's 911 (NEN) call: Pretty much everything in that call works in George's favor. Maybe most importantly, it proves that he did NOT run around the complex chasing Trayvon.

2) "At least one witness...": I'm not even sure what that's referring to. The main witnesses all either partly or strongly support George's claims. Even if we're talking about Crazy Mary, her original statement doesn't hurt George.

3) "Where the fight ended up": Umm... yep. It ended up very near the 'T', just where George says it started, and where Trayvon would have had to RETURNED to. But if they mean it was 30'-40' from the 'T'... um, well. George is punched; he's temporarily blinded and staggers, stumbles, tries to run away; Trayvon follows him, eventually pushing him to the ground. So... 30'-40'?... VERY easy to move that distance.

4) George's statements: Some slight variations, but overall VERY consistent considering the physical and emotional trauma he had just been through, and was STILL going through at the time of the statements.

5) Shell casings: I assume they meant that to being singular... "casing". But yeah, my answer to that is... "So what?" It was found close to where the shot was fired. If it's not precisely where you'd LIKE it to be... too bad. Nobody knows precisely how George and Trayvon were situated exactly at the second the shot was fired, and there are TONS of variables that could determine where that casing wound up. A NON-ISSUE.

6) Trayvon's body: Again, not sure what this is referring to. If it has something to do with the "front to back" trajectory of the bullet, the alignment of the holes in the clothes or whatever.... just... GIVE IT UP! Your goofy theories have been totally debunked.

Indeed, they are; but evidence of what, exactly?

I assume the landscape is "evidence that refutes Zimmerman's self-defense claim", or "evidence that proves Zimmerman was the initial physical aggressor"? If so, in what way does the following evidence apply?



The call ended before the physical altercation.



Witness to what, exactly? Every witness saw either Zimmerman on bottom, or Martin on top, or both. No witness saw the start of the physical altercation.



The fight ended up some 35 feet away from where Zimmerman says that he was when accosted by Martin - and also, from where the fight actually started, as evidenced by the debris field.

(This is probably a good place to mention the witness who saw a "shadow" running north through the dog walk. Who could that even possibly be?)



All such statements are consistent that Martin was the initial physical aggressor, and that Zimmerman acted in self-defense.



Casings? Plural?

In fact: only one, single shell casing. Might that be significant?



You mean, the body that showed absolutely no signs of sustaining any physical aggression from Zimmerman? That body?



Conveniently, we have Gilbreath's actual words, on record, from the bond hearing.

Regarding evidence that Zimmerman confronted Martin:



Regarding the supposed "voice experts":



Here's an interesting one, where even the biased, now-recused Judge Lester is forced to recognize that the PCA argues facts not in evidence:



And here's a little gem, that gives context to DataVenia's original comment. Note, however, that the question is specifically in the context of evidence to support the assertion that Zimmerman was following Martin. (And as a reminder: following someone is not unlawful, does not meet the threshold of "initial physical aggressor", and does not deprive Zimmerman of the right to use force - even deadly force - in self-defense.)



And now for the money shot: evidence regarding who was the initial physical aggressor:



And further, regarding evidence that refutes Zimmerman's two claims: 1) that he turned to return to his car, and 2) that Martin was the initial physical aggressor:



To add insult to injury, after telling BDLR that Zimmerman's account was not consistent with his injuries, we get this:



See the rest of the transcript for more of Gilbreath's hilarious attempts to deflect from the fact that the State has no evidence whatsoever. But I would be remiss if I didn't bring up this example that the State wasn't interested in finding any exculpatory evidence to exonerate Zimmerman - such as, you know, the medical records that corroborated Zimmerman's account:



So, what say you, DataVenia?



You first, eh?

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

Hey Rumpole, I know you and I had some similar bets with DMan about a couple of issues. But I don't remember if you bet him about the Dee Dee depo? I'm thinking we may have not taken all possibilities into account, since the original bet was simply a Yes or No proposition. She'll either show up or she won't. But later a lot of people realized there was a third possibility: That she shows up, with a lawyer, and proceeds to do nothing but Take da Fif!... one after another after another. I guess technically that still gives DMan the win, but yeah... it would be JUST on a technicality! ;)

You have to keep track of your own Gambling habit Jello

I am sweet with Dman... I was ready to concede and give him an e-cake because there is no Immunity hearing.. we are going to trial.

But I made him an offer he can't refuse

He had to pay me an e-cake to open Registration "After Hours" so he could get in to RT


I was trying to butt out of discussion... but CHIP pulled me back in

Excellent work, as always Chip. I am always impressed when you take the time to go through a cretin post point by point.

DV may even respond.... she/he does not know when to stop digging.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!

Since it's St Paddy's Day.......

Zimmerman: Scheme Team - Irish Side Step

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

At least no immunity hearing in April, that's true. But... "we are going to trial". Are we? I'm still not completely ready to concede that. Depending on what happened at the depos, and what "bombshells" may be dropped in the near future, I can still see the State going "Lemme outta here!"

My reply was in green to Jello's post.

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!

Ejarra -- "The fact that the arms were not where George said that they were. He said that he spread them apart and held him down like that. They were not found in that position."

Actually, do you remember that really grainy picture of Trayvon that was "accidentally" released? It's very hard to figure out what you're even looking at, but once you see it, you see it. To me, it very much appears that Trayvon's arm IS out to his side. You can't see the other arm, wherever it might be, because of the darkness. But when it came out, I mentioned it over on TalkLeft. Jeralynn told me she didn't see it, but assured me that she wasn't saying I was lying, just that SHE couldn't see what I was claiming to see. So I sent her a couple PMs trying to describe it. After a couple back and forths she finally wrote back and said (paraphrasing), "Hey! I finally see what you're talking about." So yeah, despite the one police report that says Trayvon's arms were underneath him, that picture seems to prove they (at least one of them) were NOT... just as George claims.

I remember that picture. In fact, while I was replying I was thinking about it. My recollection was that he had one arm was down along his side. John, W6, said they look like they were in a swimming position; from what I remember.

_________________
No matter how many times a lie is repeated, it will never become the TRUTH!