Breaking News: George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty!

[timmah]

enditall727 said:

timmah said:

enditall727 said:

Tell me when i said that i wanted the jury to do that.

 

I said that this was what i thought happened and that we could only go by speculation of who really started the scuffle. She said she heard "TRAYVON" say it and i would believe her because she knows his voice and was talking to him. I would also believe someone who talk and knew personally than voice experts who didn't know Trayvon.

 

That reasonable doubt on this part seems to be more of you just reaching lol

Pschologically speaking, she's going to have a built-in bias to see Trayvon in the best light since he's her friend, so she's going to believe that he wasn't the agressor based on that bias. Because of this, she's less credible on this front in a court of law than a voice expert in the mind of a jury. There are very clear arguments to be made that she couldn't have identified the voice 100% over a cell phone, especially since trained experts could not, there's really no qustion about that. I understand why YOU came to that conclusion, and you're entitled to your opinion for sure, but that's not how it works in a trial. Please go and do a little reading about how our justice system works in relation to reasonable doubt, it might help you to understand why the jury could not convict Zimmerman.

I knew it Lol

 

I knew you were going to do it 

 

We must disregard everything that might even remotely make Trayvons side look even remotely justifiable and take Zimmermans words as gospel even though he is known to have backtracked his story lol

 

Good day, sir

Are you really going to blatently misrepresent what I'm saying? Really? I never said or insinuated anything of the sort. You have quite a habit of jumping to rash conclusions. I was simply explaining why there was reasonable doubt, and why her story cannot be considered as 100% fact by the jury, it has to be weighed along with other evidence and testimony. It's a simple matter of how a court of law is supposed to work, and how the jury is supposed to view testimony and evidence in total. I fully believe that she is confident that she heard Trayvon, I don't think she's lying about that, but you have to at least try to understand why a jury cannot take the testimony of one individual as gospel and decide the whole case on that, especially when there are so many what-ifs and seeming contradictions from other witnesses. The evidence and all the testimonies in total left reasonable doubt, so the jury could not convict. I'm at a loss as to why you can't grasp this simple concept. Maybe if she was the only witness and there were no physical evidence presented you'd have a point, that's not the case.