General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsZimmerman Laughs In Court At Deadly Force Testimony
In his trial for the murder of slain teen Trayvon Martin on Wednesday, former neighborhood watchmen George Zimmerman found a moment of levity during testimony about when it was appropriate to use deadly force.
--CLIP
Its imminent injury, Carter explained. Or imminent fear. So the fact alone that there isnt an injury doesnt necessarily mean that the person did not have a real apprehension of fear. The fact that there were injuries have a tendency to show or support that that person had a reasonable apprehension of fear.
You dont have to wait until youre almost dead until you can defend yourself? West asked.
No, I would advise you probably dont do that, Carter replied.
That response prompted several seconds of laughter from the usually-emotionless Zimmerman before he was able to look downward to regain his composure.
MORE...
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/07/03/zimmerman-laughs-in-court-at-deadly-force-testimony/
JustAnotherGen
(31,810 posts)The more I'm convinced that he's going to walk. What would be interesting is to see the faces of the jurors if they caught his smug, snotty, satisfied little chuckle. Snot.
kudzu22
(1,273 posts)The prosecution really stepped in it by letting GZ's coursework in as evidence. It let the defense argue the law in front of the jury. Big mistake by the state.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)and why an armed man who trained in MMA 3x/week and chose to leave his car to chase a teenager was so afraid of him once he caught up with him that he had to kill him.
But only Zimmerman can really explain his feelings leading to the moment that he shot Martin.
The prosecution showed that Zimmerman lied on Hannity when he claimed he never even heard of SYG, when in fact he'd done coursework on it, so not only was aware of the law, but knew the ins and outs of it.
And they made it more likely that Zimmerman will need to take the stand.
I read an article in the Guardian Online at the end of the 1st week that explained why something else the prosecution had done made it more likely Zimmerman would need to take the stand. (Can't remember at the moment, but will try to find it later).
They may be setting up a situation a piece at a time that will pressure Zimmerman onto the stand, where they can take his story apart and expose him one inconsistency and/or lie at a time...
Maximumnegro
(1,134 posts)Zimmerman is Travis Bickle (Taxi Driver).
His behavior this entire time is of a person who not only feels no remorse for what he did but he believes completely what he did was right. Look at the way he interacts with his lawyers, AS IF HE WERE ONE OF THEM. This is why he probably will get away - this kind of sociopath is able to think quickly and be convincing to certain people because they BELIEVE the image of themselves in their head and they lack the same moral filters normal people have. He seems himself as an enforcer and defender. So he can lie better and faster than most, I bet he could lie through a detector in fact. You can see it in his 'creepy' behavior; the way he stares, comports himself, speaks. Reminds me of Tom Cruise when he was on Today Show or Oprah - that creepy scientology vibe of someone who KNOWS their right and believes THEY are the ones here to make a difference.
Look up the Tom Cruise scientology video he did a few years and you'll see another kind of sociopath ("If I see an accident. I HAVE to stop. Because I know I am the ONLY one who can help." He says this over and over.)
These are not your regular weirdos, these are the dangerous ones who unfortunately get away.
Just like Travis Bickle.
JustAnotherGen
(31,810 posts)There's something terribly off about him. But that's just your opinion and mine. I'm sure someone will chime in and say - but you guuuuuuuuuuuys That's not niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice. You can't say anything baaaaaaaaaaad about Zimmerman because he's innocent until proven guilty. Gird your loins Maximum - they're comin' for us.
avebury
(10,952 posts)dmr
(28,347 posts)Usually he just sits there starring off into space, deadpan. Yet, in that Hannity interview he says he has no regrets and this is all "God's plan". And then he smiles? WTF?
Yesterday I saw him walk into court, stick his hand out to shake his lawyers hand, and then winked at him.
WTF was that all about? He's just too comfy-cozy in all this.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)was asked and quippy response was given... yeah, it was pretty funny. despite the nature of the proceedings, there can still be funny moments and sometimes the tension just breaks in this way.
sP
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)join you in being a target in what will probably be a big pile-on later.
I think it's amusing too.
Good thing I'm not a juror. I would probably have laughed at it.
But then, I'm one of those sick bastards who, if someone cracks a joke at a wake or funeral...with a dead person right there...I'll laugh.
It's happened lots of times.
Back in 2005, just hours after my MIL passed away in my living room and the family was waiting for the funeral home guys to arrive, we found ourselves laughing like hell at a few things.
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)No sign of any remorse or the tiniest bit of sadness that he took a life. Piece of shit.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)You dont have to wait until youre almost dead until you can defend yourself."
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)threatened him or struck him first. Absent some surprise witness, I don't think that the State can prove that and if they did have such a witness, I would have expected them to have brought that witness into court by now.
Myrina
(12,296 posts).... approaching him in the dark sounds pretty threatening to me, if I'm 17.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)Pursuing him, following him, confronting him... none of this is illegal here in Florida! He's not being tried for any of the above. He's saying SELF-DEFENSE. Now how does anyone define self-defense for another person.
I'm still very, very wary that this POS is going to walk! So sorry.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)so again we come full circle: Did Zimmerman verbally threaten Martin or hit Martin, which would need to be proven or did Martin strike Zimmerman.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)scared.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)he has to prove to the jury he was in reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm.
The prosecution has to prove that Zimmerman was not in reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm or that Zimmerman threatened Martin or attacked Martin first.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)TM could only use deadly force "but only IF you can prove Zimmerman threatened him or struck him first" but all Zimmy needed was "reasonable fear of death or grave bodily harm".
ETA, those are your quotes, from posts in this subthread.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)stronger testimony then I have seen so far, Zimmerman had reason to be in fear of death or grave bodily harm.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)of death or bodily harm.
Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Both had the right to be there that night
Both had the right to speak with the other
Neither had the right to strike the other without cause and following someone is not cause
There is no evidence that Martin was aware of the gun until moments before it was fired or that Zimmerman verbally threatened him or struck him.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,810 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)The simplest explanation is usually the right one and conspiracy theory like speculation that Zimmerman inflicted the wounds himself or had the police inflict them is not the simplest explanation.
What would change your mind that Zimmerman is guilty?
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)be as he says or could have been kick back from shooting his gun. I do not think he did it to himself or had the police do it either. I think they tussled and he continued to over react as he did from the beginning.
You are right, the simplest is often the right one. But he has proven himself to be a liar and there are so many inconsistencies in what he claims that picking and choosing which are true is not possible.
What would change my mind is a reputable eye witness or video.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Lurks Often
(5,455 posts)Reliable testimony that the gunshot was fired from a distance
I won't make a judgment based on an absence of evidence such as DNA or inconclusive and/or contradicting testimony from "amateur" witnesses*
There may be some other reasons as well that I haven't thought of.
*An amateur witness would be any of the neighbors, regardless of who's testimony it supports.
DearAbby
(12,461 posts)To Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman was acting like he was up to no good, suspiciously. First following by car, then on foot. Martin didn't need injuries to feel threatened. Zimmerman lied to him about having no Problem, when asked "Do you have a problem with me?"
onehandle
(51,122 posts)Remember, first thing you do is go up to the biggest, scariest prisoner you find, and kick his ass.
Wait.... You don't have your gun.
Wait... He's African-American.
Yeah... That's going to hurt.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)laugh.
NOT HIM.
JustAnotherGen
(31,810 posts)If he's convicted of anything - that's when I'll laugh. And only then.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)Maybe not. I will just be happy he won't kill any more kids.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)No matter what facial expressions or emotions he shows, people are going to find fault with it.
No emotion = coldhearted bastard
Smile or laughter = smug, coldhearted, no regrets asshole
I imagine if he sat there crying, people would accuse him crying crocodile tears.
So it's not about the emotion as much as it is about him.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"So it's not about the emotion as much as it is about him...."
Tends to happen when one commits perjury for lying under oath about the family's financial status during a court hearing. I'd hardly expect anyone to allow me the benefit of a doubt had I done that...
premium
(3,731 posts)why single just him out?
Cirque du So-What
(25,927 posts)Definitely not normal affect for an individual in that situation - and neither is unabashed support for this scum buzzard what I would consider normal affect.
premium
(3,731 posts)IMO, and just who is expressing unabashed support for Zimmerman?
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)many people in the courtroom laughed. His tone was "I can't believe you just asked that".
Crepuscular
(1,057 posts)Carter's response simply agreed with the premise that the defense had been building on in their cross, that a person does not have to sustain injuries in order to be able to legitimately use deadly force in self defense, a concept that was confirmed by Carter's testimony! His tone indicated, "Yeah, it would be pretty stupid to expect people to have to wait until they were mortally wounded before they could respond". Carter was a plus for the defense, as most of the prosecution witness's have been.
RedCappedBandit
(5,514 posts)Jessy169
(602 posts)Crepuscular
(1,057 posts)It made me chuckle, too and I'd bet that there were even some smiles at the prosecutors table.
The Prosecution made another blunder by putting Carter on the stand, it allowed the defense to thoroughly go through grounds for self defense instead of having the court be the ones to instruct the jury. The fact that the prosecution witness, who was African American, was cordial to Zimmerman and said "Hi George" certainly benefits the defense. The repeated objections by the prosecutor did nothing but cause the questions that West was asking to be re-phrased and only served to focus attention on what Carter was saying, which was basically re-enforcing the idea that deadly force is an acceptable response in a self defense situation. Don't know what the prosecution was thinking by calling this witness.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)with the Captain. The prosecution should have gone there before cross, IMO.
HipChick
(25,485 posts)moondust
(19,972 posts)"It felt like my head was going to explode."
That is blunt force trauma. A head CT or MRI is definitely indicated to diagnose any potential intracranial hemorrhaging, possibly leading to death.
Why did neither George nor the EMT insist on a head CT after that kind of life-threatening injury?
Because it didn't happen and therefore he didn't mention it to the EMT? :smirk:
premium
(3,731 posts)all that's required is that a person has a reasonable fear of great bodily injury or death, IOW, you don't have to wait to get your ass beaten to believe that your life is in danger.
moondust
(19,972 posts)I'm talking about the period AFTER an altercation occurred. Theory and actual events are two completely different things.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)The witness was making that statement in jest.
Inkfreak
(1,695 posts)You're emotionally involved in a murder case in another state that'll have no real bearing on everyday life for most Americans.
Only if you buy into the media & others bullshit that this case deserves our rapt attention. And that somehow this is a Left vs Right scenario.
Only if, like me, you enjoy reading the vast amount of snarky back & forth in the dozens of threads about this trial. It's a nice break from the Snowden: Love/Hate threads.
EdwardSmith74
(282 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)Didn't you say yesterday that he had to be drugged because he was comatose?
Yes you did.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3149885
EdwardSmith74
(282 posts)He just doesn't seem to be taking any of this seriously. He killed an unarmed kid. I think that's pretty serious.
premium
(3,731 posts)no lawyer is going to allow his client to come into court drugged out, and he does seem to be taking this trial seriously.
But, if it makes you feel better, keep believing that.
EdwardSmith74
(282 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)and my observations have been of a very attentive, serious, G. Zimmerman.
EdwardSmith74
(282 posts)you know, remember the OJ trial? It just seems like a repeat. Still, I'll defer to your judgement on the drug thing, but the snickering was still inappropriate.
premium
(3,731 posts)I'm retired FLEO and I've always been fascinated by these types of trials.
As far as the snickering, I'm not going to judge him by what the rest of the people in the courtroom were doing.
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)He laughed with just about everyone else in the court. If a juror were on tape laughing, as I am sure some did, would you say they weren't taking their job serious. Many people in the court got a short chuckle out of it.
HeroInAHalfShell
(330 posts)HeroInAHalfShell
(330 posts)from the responses below everyone laughed at the question. even posters here!
I think you are stretching a little far to make him look bad..
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)Makes him look pretty bad by himself. God they really dropped the ball here.
lpbk2713
(42,753 posts)Perhaps Zimmy has seen them too and overconfidence is setting in?
life long demo
(1,113 posts)no redeeming values whatsoever.