Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I honestly don't think Serino nor Singleton fully bought that it was Zimmerman who was yelling for help in the first place, especially given the inconsistency of the "smothering" story. I also don't think Zimmerman ever anticipated that the yells for help would be captured on a 911 call, which probably made him believe that he could get away with claiming right off the bat that it was he who was doing the yelling in the absence of eye-witnesses who could confirm otherwise. So when faced with the actual recording of the call, Zimmerman was at a loss to explain where the yells came from. And while the capias narrative reflected a presumption of Zimmerman's truthfulness regarding the yelling claim in absence of any direct evidence to the contrary (at that point), it is certainly a claim subject to challenge at trial.
I agree. Also, the more I hear about Zimmerman's various statements, plus his dishonesty about finances, the more I'm thinking this guy really just might be a pathological liar.
Great clip. It's clear that Zimmerman was instantly struck by the absurdity of his initial claim that he fell back into the grass right after being struck by Martin at the T juncture. The user brings up some really good points in his other vids as well. I'm especially struck by the glaring discrepancy between the reason Zimmerman gave for exiting the truck in the re-enactment and what was actually said during the 911 call. I really hope Zimmerman takes the stand if this goes to trial.
I don't usually respond to people who type like 2 year olds, but I'll make an exception.
Jurors don't talk during trials.
I don't have a keyboard the type I can use other than one finger not that I should have to explain but sorry sir u wud b wrong on that Now the law may have changed I don't know but yes we cud and did ask questions of the witnesses. Now you can b juvenile like u just were and say I am a liar but u would b wrong. Now I don't care to connect that strong a dot with that specific trial but you are joining the ranks of a cple of other know it alls here if ur calling me a liar. And u wud b wrong 2xah
I honestly don't think Serino nor Singleton fully bought that it was Zimmerman who was yelling for help in the first place, especially given the inconsistency of the "smothering" story. I also don't think Zimmerman ever anticipated that the yells for help would be captured on a 911 call, which probably made him believe that he could get away with claiming right off the bat that it was he who was doing the yelling in the absence of eye-witnesses who could confirm otherwise. So when faced with the actual recording of the call, Zimmerman was at a loss to explain where the yells came from. And while the capias narrative reflected a presumption of Zimmerman's truthfulness regarding the yelling claim in absence of any direct evidence to the contrary (at that point), it is certainly a claim subject to challenge at trial.
The best Corey could do in her probable cause affidavit in April was to say Mrs. Martin id'd the voice as tm's.
Serino didn't have to say that gz was 'frantically yelling' for help if he did not believe it to be true. He easily could have worded the capias as 'a voice' or 'Zimmerman claimed.'
imo, the cops did buy that he was yelling for help, and that's part of why they didn't buy the smothering story.
I don't usually respond to people who type like 2 year olds, but I'll make an exception.
Jurors don't talk during trials.
I actually think u thought I was talking to u with the response u have here though I don't know how u cud have made that mistake in the context it was written but I forward accept your apology.
I don't have a keyboard the type I can use other than one finger not that I should have to explain but sorry sir u wud b wrong on that Now the law may have changed I don't know but yes we cud and did ask questions of the witnesses. Now you can b juvenile like u just were and say I am a liar but u would b wrong. Now I don't care to connect that strong a dot with that specific trial but you are joining the ranks of a cple of other know it alls here if ur calling me a liar. And u wud b wrong 2xah
Lord, buy a keyboard. They're only $10.
And btw, I'm not the one who called you a liar. You might try keeping posters straight. I've never been on a jury where jurors spoke with defendants or witnesses. Not a chance. Not even if we met them in the hall during breaks or at the beginning or end or each day, or lunch, or anytime, not a chance, period.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
