Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike
I gotta back valo here with the Zimmerman story, elements of it are likely true but I'm sure he also exaggerated and omitted a few facts. The truth is always in the middle, and there couldn't be more incentive for him to lie and cover his a$$. Keeping in mind we don't know the whole story definitively the jury made the right call according to the letter of the law. But for someone who was supposedly beat within an inch of his life, the photos of Zimmerman don't look that bad, he apparently didn't even go to the hospital for stitches. Additionally, he killed Martin with one clean shot to the heart, I understand heat of the moment and every thing but couldn't he have shot him in the leg? It would have been easier...
|
People keep saying that. But go home, lie on the ground and have someone straddle your upper body. Its hard if not impossible to shoot someone in the leg. Now have that person bang your head off the ground a few times to disorient you.
If you choose like Valo to not believe the testimony of Zimmerman, that's fine, but the jury that was in the court room looking at the 200 pieces of evidence and all of the testimony believed him to be credible.
I think the difficulty is most of us followed this case from a distance and didn't watch every hour of the trial, all the witnesses etc.
But the jury deliberated for 16 hours and seemed to do a careful and credible job of executing their roles as jurors.
you had a witness that was involved in this case stating that Zimmerman was credible.
We'll never know what happened in the minutes between Zimmerman agreeing to stop pursuit and heading back to his car and the confrontation that occurred between Zimmerman and Martin.
But I guess both sides are going to create theories.
I choose to believe that a jury that was present through the whole trial and thought Zimmerman's story was credible is pretty telling.