George Zimmerman has a problem with the truth. He doesn't seem to understand that he just can't talk his way out of this predicament; the predicament in which he killed a man in cold blood on a rainy night in February.
Forensics experts tested the gun Zimmerman used to take young Trayvon Martin's life, and found absolutely no traces of DNA on it anywhere. None, nada, zilch. Scientists tested the gun in an attempt to corroborate a story in which Zimmerman alleged that Martin was on top of him, beating his head against the sidewalk and then reached around and grabbed his gun before Zimmerman was able to wrangle it away.
The results prove that Trayvon's hands never touched the weapon. It also proves that the weapon wasn't anywhere near the victim at the time it was discharged, completely blowing Zimmerman's story away (figuratively speaking).
Zimmerman has done nothing since the shooting but try his best to capitalize on it. He created a website asking for donations. He lied to a court about not having any money. His own father, a former judge, started a website to support his son, portraying Martin as a young black thug.
Zimmerman even had an interview with Sean Hannity, who has been one of his most vocal supporters, in which he claimed his total and complete innocence, and that it was "God's will" that he killed the young high school student. His story has been full of holes since Day 1, and the fact that the DNA results directly conflict his story that Martin reached for his gun while sitting on top of him, beating him.
The more truth more likely sounds like this: Zimmerman ran after Martin, pinned him down, and Martin probably fought back by hitting him. Who wouldn't fight back, right? Zimmerman, as he sat on top of Martin, pulled out his gun and shot him.
Why is this scenario more likely? Well, for one, it would have been nearly impossible for George Zimmerman to get his gun out of his holster if he were the one being pinned down. Two military men re-enacted the scene as he described and concluded that there was no way it could have happened that way. Secondly, it is far more easy to pull out a gun when you're on top of someone than if you're pinned down. Witnesses also saw the two men in this position, but couldn't say for sure who was on top of whom.
So, Zimmerman is obviously lying, but that conclusion must also be made by a jury in a court of law. A guilty verdict can't come soon enough for this guy.
©2012 Reno Berkeley for Gather News. Berkeley can be found on Tumblr, Google+, and Facebook.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 26
Trayvon Martin. No amount of legal semantics could change that.
"What Zimmerman told his father - Robert Zimmerman, George’s father, said that George was walking back to his truck when Trayvon appeared from behind. Trayvon punched George in the nose and slammed his head into the sidewalk, he said. When George tried to move away from the pavement onto the grass, the gun inside his waistband became visible. Mr. Zimmerman said that George believes Trayvon saw the pistol and said, “You are going to die tonight.†Moments later, George pulled out his pistol and shot Trayvon in the chest."
What a sad that I fear will be used as fodder in the up coming elections.
It would also appear from the many times he called in reports of suspicious people in the area, he was building up to the unfortunate event which occurred. He repeatedly reported incidents to the police and nothing came of his reporting. To him, he was a police officer himself and should not have his reports ignored and that dismissal of his reports was getting to him mentally.
I believe that it came down to Mr. Zimmerman reasoning, that if the police refuse to do their job, then I will have no alternative, but to take action myself. Which when he did, his actions had the tragic result of a teenager loosing his life.
If my assumptions are correct, then hopefully justice will be rendered by a jury of his peers.
The original judge recused himself after Mr. Zimmermans' attorney claimed biased on the part of the judge. He did so to assure that Mr. Zimmerman received a fair and just trial, nothing more, nothing less. The attorney for Mr. Zimmerman cited the judges' admonishment of Mr. Zimmerman for lying and presenting false testimony to the court in order to avoid having to pay a bond in order to attain a release, as reason for asking for a change in judgeship for the trial.
The judge had been present evidence that Mr. Zimmerman had amassed over 200 thousand dollars in gifted donations, although Mr. Zimmerman was claiming to be destitue. Additionally, he had a fraudulent second U.S. passport in his possession. (the frist passport having been surrendered at his bond hearing before the same judge)
If supporters of Mr. Zimmerman want to believe that the judge was biased in his admonishment of Mr. Zimmerman, no one nor any amount of debating the issue is going to change their minds. However, if a person actually feels that there was bias on the part of the judge, then, I would ask only one question, {i.e.} After finding out that Mr. Zimmerman had lied to him during the bond hearing along with the fact that Mr. Zimmerman had obtained a second passport, how should the judge have responded to Mr.Zimmerman at his second bond hearing ???
Remember, the judge had the descretion to revoke Mr.Zimmermans' bond altogether and send him to jail to await his trial. He also had the discretion to hold Mr. Zimmerman in contempt of court and thereby place additional charges against Mr. Zimmerman. Further, the judge had the discretion to turn Mr. zimmerman over to the Federal authorities for having a second passport in his possession. An act which have meant that Mr. Zimmerman would be facing additional charges under/by the federal government.
In view of the judge choosing to admonish Mr. Zimmerman for committing fraud on the court, instead of taking the much much much harsher stance which was at his discretion, I think Mr. Zimmerman was a very lucky man to have had that judge to face for his deceitful, dishonest and fraudulent criminal actions and should be extremely thankful to the judge and the American judicial system.
Can you provide a link to the video of the so-called "military men" reenacting this event? I could use a good laugh. Thanks in advance.
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/18526
Also, if Zimmerman had shot him in the way he said he did, he would have had to shoot him in a straight line, both hands holding the weapon steady. That is the coroner's conclusion. The angle at which Trayvon was shot clearly indicates Zimmerman was not telling the truth.
A coroners forensic examination and it's findings are sometimes more important than an eye witness, since an eye witnesses can be mistaken, but science rarely is.
It would appear that in this instance, the coroner found evidence in the form of the angle of bullet entry wound, which may dispute Mr. Zimmermans' account of where he was, relative to where Trayvon Martin would have had to have been when the fatal shot was fired.
As a professed Christian, I would have thought that you would have been interested in justice for the victim, as opposed to questioning or finding fault with information and facts related to the case which has been released by the prosecutors thus far.
If you have any remaining doubt, the Duval Count State Attorneys' Office released 300 pages in July of documented evidence related on the Zimmerman Case. You might try doing a little internet research to find the answers you are seeking.
How about, just justice?
Well Scott, since you are a Prog one thing we know about you is that you have no clue as to what a Christian stands for, so your trying to project upon me what A Christian should be concerned with, is hollow.
As an American however I think the rights of the individual is paramount.
Where I have looked at the evidence and have NOT seen a guilty man as of yet, You Progs however declared the man guilty even before the investigation was concluded.
Even though you try to discount the eye witnesses...The eye witness still holds great sway in our judicial system unless entirely discredited...Which has NOT happened as of yet.
Difference between you and I is that I do not declare a person guilty before the jury has it's say and you had Zimmerman declared guilty on day one....You are the lynch mobs of today you don't need the facts to determine a man guilty!