There is one key piece that I should mention.
Zuperman said "
they always get away" in his dispatch recording.
"They" = "fvcking *****"?
That implies Z. thought Martin had just committed a crime and/or he was going to stop Martin.
Zero authorization.. zero training, zero legal right... At this point he is violating Martin's rights. He needs to pay for that, starting there is a good point. Understanding Martin's position requires asking oneself what one would do under similar circumstances. If you were packing and you noticed Zimmer following you, then he confronted you and treated you like you were a **** and an asshole.. what would you do? Tell him to fvck off? Draw on him? Ask him why he is following you? Run away?
That's one of the few things prosecution could make hay over. The other would be the apparent lack of injury in the police station video.
Whatever injuries he received, they certainly dont look life threatening. Also: The LEAD investigator wanted to arrest dimmer.. that speaks more volumes than denial can rebut.
But that could easily be mullified by a doctors testimony, the medical reports, officer's testimony.
Still, very little evidence that Zuperman intended to harm Martin.
I dont see that at all. I see a deliberate, concerted effort to confront a person he had no right to confront. While he carried a concealed weapon.
BTW, you don't now that Zuperman was menacing. You reveal your bias.
Look at the facts. The kid told he girlfriend someone was following him. You know what dimmer said. "assholes, *****, always get away" etc. You need to imagine what this means to the demeanor of dimmer when he confronted Martin. No nice face, no nice attitude no nice words. That matters man. To a kid who had no idea who this aggressive prejudiced and angry asshole was.
But I do see this as possible:
"he acted out knowing he could shoot someone if he cornered them and they fought back for 'their ground'... "
Zimmerman in fact could be the type that would relish the attention. There are people like that and he was known as a neighborhood protector. If that's true he picked the wrong guy. But there's no proof of that.
Again, who has a history of violence> Martin? NO!!!!! Zimmer? YES!
Of course Zimmer might have cried. He killed someone who was only walking home. I'd cry too. But if I was attacked I sure as hell wouldn't expect to go to prison, no matter what I may have said to the kid.
Well, saying the kid attacked him makes no sense, not in circumstance or evidence. Could have happened(I think we will find out) but it doesnt fit at all to any reasonable review..
The guy with a history of violence and altercation is just to be believed? Despite alarming, clear evidence of motive, bias and intent and history? I cannot not imagine crying over the death of someone who was trying to kill me. WhyTF would I apologize? Makes no sense.
