Yeah, but two "expert witness voice recognition guys" said it was Trayvon's.

Won't the trial be televised from Florida? (don't they show them?)

Wow, that move by Trayvon's father sounds like it came rIght out of Sharpton's play book.

But they don't say what "intermediate" range is. Not touching skin or clothes?

On the one hand, I have read that there may have been some inconsistencies in Zimmerman's story. On the other hand, your article says Zimmerman passed a lie detector test.

"The police conducted a lie-detection procedure, known as voice stress analysis, on Mr. Zimmerman that he passed, and they had him re-enact the encounter with Mr. Martin back at the Retreat the day after the shooting."

I assumed that the powder burns on the skin and clothes meant that the shot was fired from just a few inches. I thought the article I posted said it was extremely close range. I will have to go back and find the article.

I found the article. Here is what it says:

"How close, asked the judge, was the gun to the victim when it was fired?"

"So close, said Gilbreath, that there were burns on Trayvon's sweat shirt and skin."

I would think that means that the gun was within a few inches of Martin.

http://southflorida.sun-sentinel.com...3.story?page=2

Then, too, there is this

"One witness, though, provided information to the police that corroborated Mr. Zimmerman’s account of the struggle, according to a law enforcement official."

and this

"He was handcuffed and taken into “investigative detention” at Sanford police headquarters, where he was read his Miranda rights and answered questions without a lawyer present. Investigators described him as unhesitatingly cooperative."

Interesting.

Thanks for the link, GPK.

Rupert, lie detector tests are not admissible in court, because they are incredibly inaccurate. All they do is measure levels of stress. Ted Bundy passed a lie detector with flying colors. I don't even know why they're still administered.

http://www.jacksonvillecriminaldefen...t_results.html

(I am not comparing Zimmerman to Ted Bundy; I'm just citing him as someone who was later convicted of having committed a horrific crime but passed the polygraph test as an example of why the polygraph tests are not useful)

That NYTimes article makes me despair for law enforcement in Sanford. They really come across like the Keystone Kops.

"The gunshot wound entrance was from a bullet fired from "intermediate range," or two-to-four inches, "a soot ring abrasion and a two-inch by two-inch area of stippling" on his body."

In addition, the article says that Martin had an abrasion on his knuckle.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...152333240.html

Yes, you are correct. Lie detectors tests are not admissible in court and they are not 100% accurate. However, they are pretty accurate. The research shows they are accurate around 80-90% of the time. That is why law-enforcement uses them all the time. They aren't a sure thing but they work very well.

How are they going to find a jury for this trial? It'll be like OJ all over again if they let these leaks keep happening. ABC has to own somebody somewhere!

Not guilty. Certainly not guilty M2.

Those two so-called "expert witness voice recognition guys" were obviously talking out of their asses because the FBI had the actual tapes and could not determine whose voice it was. I can guarantee you that the FBI has much more sophisticated equipment too.

I think the 2nd degree murder charge can still be thrown out by the judge at the next hearing. If there is a "stand your ground" pre-trial hearing, it is even possible the judge could throw out all the charges. For that to happen, "Zimmerman must prove: that he was not engaged in unlawful activity, that he was attacked in a place he had a right to be and that he reasonably believed his life and safety were in danger. He cannot, however, be justified in using deadly force if he provoked the altercation, unless he was attacked with more force than he initiated."

The burden is actually on the defendant to show that the stand your ground law applies. They don't need to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt". They only need to prove it by a "preponderance of the evidence", meaning that it is more likely than not.

Evidence Backs Up Zimmerman's Version of Shooting:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/cops-witnes...2#.T7XMkuhYsrU


http://www.thesmokinggun.com/buster/...witness-758903

There is no argument there. We know that if Zimmerman didn't get out of his car and follow Martin that the incident wouldn't have happened. But that is irrelevant in terms of the law. If a woman goes over to a stranger's apartment and gets raped, sure it is true that the rape was ultimately avoidable if the woman would have used better judgement and not gone to a stranger's apartment. That may be true but it is totally irrelevant in terms of the law. A woman's bad judgement doesn't make it legal for a guy to rape her. Zimmerman did not engage in any unlawful behavior. It is not a crime to follow someone. It is not a crime to carry a gun in Florida if you have a permit. Zimmerman used bad judgement but he didn't break any laws.

Zimmerman was doing a very aggressive version of neighborhood watch. It wasn't very smart but it wasn't a crime.

The incident was ultimately avoidable if Martin would have called the police about a suspicious person following him. You can't take the law into your own hands and physically assault a person just because you are pissed that they were following you for a little while.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/d...icle-1.1080161

Actually, according to the laws of Florida, if Martin thought he was in danger, he had every right to assault Zimmerman.

http://globalgrind.com/news/trayvon-...-death-details

Martin described Zimmerman as "crazy" and "creepy."

If I was alone and saw a crazy creepy man following me, I would certainly think I was in danger.

But I guess it's ok to take the law into your own hands and murder a person just because you are pissed that he is kicking the **** out of you in a fist fight? This is a case of two men both "standing their ground." Trayvon felt as threatened or more so than Z; after all, he wasn't armed. Z had the ace of trumps up his sleeve, and he played it.

I believe he beats Murder 2, but is found guilty of a lesser charge.

It depends what happened. If Zimmerman was coming towards Martin in a threatening way, then Martin probably did have a right to defend himself under the stand your ground law. But Zimmerman claims he was walking back to his car when he was attacked from behind. If that is the way it went down, then Martin was not justified in assaulting Zimmerman.

Since there are no witnesses who saw how the fight started, we will never know for sure what happened. If there is no evidence that contradicts Zimmerman's version of how the fight started, then I think he has to be found not guilty. If he was attacked from behind and knocked to the ground and then is being badly beaten on the ground, I think he has a right to use deadly force under the law.

I think to find him guilty (of even manslaughter), the prosecution will need to poke some major holes in Zimmerman's story. If the incident happened the way Zimmerman claims, I don't think there is any case against him. If the prosecution has some evidence to show that Zimmerman's story is probably false, then the prosecution may have a chance to get some type of conviction.

Unless the prosecution has an ace up their sleeve, I think it would be hard to find 12 jurors to find him guilty. I think you will probably get a hung jury. It seems very unlikely that you're going to get 12 people to agree either way (guilty or not guilty).

Based on the evidence we have right now, it seems like about half of us would find him guilty and half would find him not guilty. I think that is what the polls show too. If you get a jury that is representative of the general public, it will probably be a hung jury.

You never know for sure what is going to happen. The prosecution could have some more evidence that we haven't seen yet. And even if they don't, you still never know for sure what a jury is going to decide. We have had some strange decisions by juries over the years such as the Casey Anthony verdict and cases like that.

Ten killed and 43 wounded in Chicago THIS WEEKEND!

Reportedly half of the victims and all of the culprits wore hoodies.

Is Jessie still in Sanford FL?

New pics and info on Trayvon.
 

Stuff you won't see in the liberal media...The whole truth is in this new email I just received from my right wingnut buddy...and you know what gold teeth and tats mean..;)



The TRUTH will be known - unfortunately you won't hear it from president OBAMA,the good rev.Jessie Jackson,Al Sharpton,Jeremiah Wright or the news media.
More recent photos of Trayvon Martin, gold teeth, tats, 175 lbs, 6’ 2”.









More...

continued..
 

. "there are two sides to every story" .we don't always get the truth from the media.
television news...newspapers...magazines...radio...all continue to show 12 year old
Trayvon...NOT 17 year old Trayvon...they continue to show the 5 year old picture
BECAUSE it helps to cement in your mind the little, cute, hoodie wearing youngster
who was stalked by this monster.
In reality.."little Trayvon"...at the time of his death...stood almost 6'2" tall...weighed 175
muscular pounds...had numerous run ins with authorities (both at school and
local police)...had been stopped and almost arrested two days before his death
for...smacking a bus driver in the face...because the driver refused to let him ride
for free...he was released because the driver was told not to press charges by the
bus company and to continue on his route.
When "little Trayvon" was suspended at school...it was not only because he tried to
bring a little marijuana in with him...he was in possession of wedding rings and other
jewelry...watches etc. that he said he "found" along with a large screwdriver...while on
the way to school that day...the jewelry was turned over to the Police by the school.
I am not trying to say this was a good shooting...I am not trying to say this kid
deserved to die..no schit.I am saying...the media in the USA is controlled by liberals who
twist and distort what you see and hear in order for you to see things their way.
Not a single paper has printed RECENT photos of this kid...because...it would not
keep you interest in this case... Not a single paper will admit that this kid was a
marijuana dealer...his friends on facebook all say he had the "best plants"...not a single paper
will show you any of his recent photos where he shows off a mouthful of gold teeth....all
of his tattoos...not a single paper will tell the news like it really is....and NOT how they
want you to think it is...Fox will

President King The Afro Americans Chozen One Obama...looked at the FIVE year old photo the media chose to show the
Nation...and said..."If I had a son...he would look like Trayvon"
So from that comment...should I assume you did not bother to look for the facts in this
shooting..or should I assume you want a son who is a 17 year old drug dealing, gold
teeth wearing thug whose name on one of his facebook profiles was "wild nigga"
...who 'finds" jewelry and burglary tools on the way to school ?

A fair and impartial news media in the USA ? One that does not follow the liberal
agenda? Is NOT looking to further divide this already fractured Nation?


Never trust the news media for anything.especially Fox

If I had a son . . . he coulda sold me weed.

zimmerman has had his bond revoked. must report within 48 hours to jail.

Has two passports...just in case..:)

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...tin-case?lite/

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmem...in.php?ref=fpa

Somehow I doubt Mr. Zimmerman's future career options will include "Super Spy." ;)

someone was watching too many movies i'd guess. dumbasses