Skip to main content

View Diary: Trayvon and George: True or False Test (81 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  again, even if jewelry (0+ / 0-)

    was from theft or receiving stolen goods WHAT does it have to do with his propensity toward violence?
    Just to try your scenario on, are you saying that "see GZ's assumption  TM was a thief might have been right after all!"?

    My guess is you are not. Somehow you are saying that the possibility he was a thief ties into his likelyhood that he GZ story of being attacked for "no reason" by TM is (more) true?

    The defense, some say, leaked all the background on TM. It was well discussed in public. When you say "it was not discussed", do you mean at the trial?

    I think it was barred from being discussed at trial iirc because TM is not on trial (though sometimes it seems he was), GZ was. It was deemed as not relevant. I think also this is why GZ record of violence (as far as I know) wasn't discussed at trial.

    GZ record of physical confrontations and violence that required police involvement multiple times is directly related to the charges.

    GZ, today, would not argue that he was RIGHT in his initial assessment of TM as out that night for the purpose of breaking in to homes. It was discovered he went out to get a snack...he was caught by a security camera buying that snack...the snack was found next to his dead body. He was expected back at home to watch the all Star game with his younger stepbrother. It is clear GZ was WRONG about TM that night in his assuming TM was guilty of something that night.

    TM was not chased (however briefly) by GZ and the police were not called by GZ because of anything TM had done before that night.

    TM pot smoking or suspensions for skipping school or even the jewelry are not related to what happened that night. I admit any evidence of him being violent on an instigator of fights IS evidence for GZ.

    But GZ direct history of physically loosing his cool...being that he is on trial exactly for  extremely important. To not allow that in-which they didn't as far as I know--is stunning.

    They should have allowed in history of violence of both of them.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site