<p>^Agree that GZ probably showed Trayvon the gun. I find the screams very telling. The experts aren’t allowed to testify about who screamed but I think the haunting sound of those screams is as if Trayvon knew he was about to die.</p>
<p>I had the same impression JAMCAFE, sounded like someone wildly terrified they are going to be shot.</p>
<p>heard GZ refute that Trayvon ran, in the Hannity interview, he then stated that he could tell Trayvon wasn’t running out of fear. I do hope the prosecution addresses these inconsistencies.</p>
<p><This morning I came out of a Big 5 Sporting Goods Store with a visitor/friend of mine from Ethiopia. He looked at the gun section, and asked if they were toys. “No,” I said, “Real.” “Really?” “Really.”</p>
<p>Now, every store we go into - drug store, Home Depot, grocery, he asks me if they sell guns there, too. He is fascinated…and appalled></p>
<p>Who gives a crap?</p>
<p>How on earth did we get from Florida to Ethiopia?</p>
<p>ETA: Nvm figured it out :rolleyes:</p>
<p>The lead investigator in the case said there were no major inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s account of the events.</p>
<p>Zimmerman’s father was a magistrate so he was probably familiar with the legal system. If he thought he had done something criminal, he probably would have lawyered up and not cooperated with the police.</p>
<p>“Just so you can be sure, “militia” quite literally meant every man willing to fight if needed. It takes a language expert to know the meanings of words 200 years ago, but I’ve read it several times and it’s consistent with many written works of the founders. The militia refers to teens to able bodied older men. There was no standing army in those days.”</p>
<p>Yes, and I am sure you have a wonderful new meaning for “well-regulated”. 
Of course, if I take your meaning, it means that teens and older men are to be “well-regulated” by their “free state” ALL the time. (But I don’t think the Founding Fathers were fascists.)</p>
<p>The jury decides whether or not there are inconsistencies, base don the facts before them</p>
<p>They hear GZ on tape saying something like “oh ***** he’s running”</p>
<p>They have Rachel’s testimony that she told TM to run</p>
<p>They have the testimony of neighbors that they heard men running.</p>
<p>And they have GZ saying both: TM ran, he didn’t run, he ran but GZ could tell he wasn’t afraid, etc. </p>
<p>I’m pretty sure they will see it as an inconstancy. By itself it might be a minor discrepancy, but it goes to the heart of GZ’s credibility as to who started the confrontation. For every inconsistency in GZ’s statements, the jury has to look at whether GZ has a specific motivation to lie, and what that motivation might be. </p>
<p>I expect the prosecution to argue that GZ knew that if he admitted that he ran after TM, it would negate a claim of self-defense-- and that GZ not only lied about the running, but also lied about TM accosting him and punching him in the nose immediately. (An account that is also undermined by what the neighbors heard going on).</p>
<p>So GZ ran after him. What did he expect to do when he caught him - ask for his high school ID? I can’t see that any of the rest of it makes any difference. The neighborhood watch ran after a guy who was armed with skittles and a can of tea (after being told not to by police) and shot him. </p>
<p>I can’t see how GZ’s account matters.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not new - quite old actually 
[Meaning</a> of the phrase “well-regulated”](<a href=“http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm]Meaning”>http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm)</p>
<p>Yes, and it was regulated by…
(Of course, that’s why we no longer live in a free state…)</p>
<p>“It referred to the property of something being in proper working order.” I looked under my bed for the militia that is in proper working order, but all I could find was a bunch of bellybutton lint.</p>
<p>You don’t have to agree with their intentions, but they are made very clear by their other written works and they didn’t limit ownership of guns. You see this all basically boils down to how to stop crime, some want to limit tools used in crimes, and others would impose harsher penalties to deter crime. They were the latter type. </p>
<p>They were the furthest thing from fascists, they were closer to libertarians by today’s standards. You have it completely backwards. Fascism exists when there is almost complete control of the people by the state via regulations/laws/rules. They gave control to the people instead of the government. Socialism is closer to fascism, as is a democracy more so than a republic. History is awesome!</p>
<p>Here you are: [The</a> Political Compass](<a href=“http://politicalcompass.org/]The”>http://politicalcompass.org/) ;-)</p>
<p>Given that this is a college-oriented web site, I’d just point out that it everything that is printed on the internet is not authoritative. If you want to know what “well-regulated” means, then citing to random web sites is not the way to find out. </p>
<p>Here’s a law review article on the subject. - <a href=“http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4021[/url]”>http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4021</a></p>
<p>Sample quote from article:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The article points out that firearm ownership was heavily regulated after passage of the 2nd amendment:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the screams are most likely those of Zimmerman. The screams are consistent with someone being beaten up and crying for help. Martin did not have markings consistent with having the crap beaten out of him that would force him to scream and scream for many seconds. Zimmerman has markings of being losing a fight badly.</p>
<p>Zimmerman does not recognize the screams and that is not surprising because not many people have heard themselves scream. In addition, the scream are transmitted over a telephone that is a distance from the screams and then recorded. </p>
<p>Zimmerman’s father may testify that the screams are Zimmermans. I heard a talking head say that Martin’s mother will testify the screams are Martin’s but I doubt she knows any more than Zimmerman’s father. In addition, how can Martin’s mother testify? She has been in the courtroom the entire time. Wouldn’t she have been excluded from the courtroom if she were going to testify?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Listening to the tape of the screams has been the hardest part for me.</p>
<p>It sounds to me like someone begging for his life. The screams do not punctuate the silence and start and stop like they are in reaction to blows, but rather sound like a continuous wail. The high pitch and occasional “squeak” of the voice sounds like that of someone who has only recently gone through puberty, not a grown man. Of course, the tap could be inconclusive and I don’t see the point of both parties’ parents testifying. I thought it might be interesting to hear GZ try to imitate that scream, but of course he could get enough coaching to sound convincing.</p>
<p>I think it has been well-established by now that GZ’s injuries do not look like those of someone “losing a fight badly.”</p>
<p>I always thought that the screams were Trayvon’s, but the testimony that he was on top of Zimmerman was convincing to me and the screams do appear to say “get off” so I’ve moved over toe believing that it was Zimmerman screaming.</p>
<p>my compliments to zooser. I cannot agree the scream was gz at this time, as I am still on the fence, but I applaud the idea that she has heard(more) evidence and now has changer her opinion on this one point.</p>
<p>I hadn’t heard the words “get off” when listening to the screams…will listen again. curious, was that presented at the trial?</p>
<p>Wasn’t it Ms. Jeantel who said that’s what she heard? I believed that, as well as the testimony that it was Trayvon Martin on top. Othes may, of course, view these things differently and I welcome their views.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As to physical fighting, Zimmerman has a broken bloody nose, Martin does not. Zimmerman has bruising to several placed on the back and sides of his head, Martin does not. Zimmerman has at least two cuts to the back of his head, Martin does not. Good testified that Zimmerman looked like he got his butt kicked. I think it is well established that Zimmerman got his butt kicked by Martin as to the fighting part.</p>
<p>Yes, I realize Martin has a bullet wound and Zimmerman does not, but that was not part of the physical fighting.</p>
<p>looks like judge will allow gz’s school records to come in. Does that mean tm’s school records can too?</p>