Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (2 Viewers)

[jon_mx]

Question: If I'm the judge, I'm thinking to myself, "OK, reasonable doubt has clearly been established here." Can the judge stop the trial at this point?

Or am I overreacting here? I've been trying to watch this as objectively as possible (despite my own strongly subjective bias) and it seems to me as if this witness has provided a reasonable doubt that will be impossible for the prosecution to eliminate. Does anyone disagree with this? If so, please explain.

You are the most fickle easily convinced person I have ever seen here.

In his defense, after hearing this witness, how could anyone not wonder if this trial will be stopped soon?

I think the murder two is all but gone, but I believe there is still more to hash out. If on the jury, I'd still want to hear the evidence around how they met up, because there's still a part of me that keeps thinking, if Zimmerman had done what he was asked and followed the rules of his neighborhood watch, this kid wouldn't be dead today. We lose sight of this fact easily in this case. Zimmerman took a person's life. He may not have meant to, or gotten out of his truck thinking he was going to, but he did.

My take is if Martin did not go off and feel the need to beat up Zimmerman, he would be alive today.

Of course....always the voice of reason there jon.

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

I am not sure what is a hyperbole. His nose was busted in. His lip was bloodied. He had cuts in the back of his head. His eye was swollen. He was screaming for his life for at least 1 minute. You insist on belittling this.

This is a bashed in face I already linked the worst photo of George earlier.....not even close to the same thing. If you can't see the difference, I can't help.

Except for the eye that is swollen closed, i don't see a significant difference. Zimmerman's face was beaten in and would have looked a lot worse if it went on another minute or two.

 

[StrikeS2k]

Question: If I'm the judge, I'm thinking to myself, "OK, reasonable doubt has clearly been established here." Can the judge stop the trial at this point?

Or am I overreacting here? I've been trying to watch this as objectively as possible (despite my own strongly subjective bias) and it seems to me as if this witness has provided a reasonable doubt that will be impossible for the prosecution to eliminate. Does anyone disagree with this? If so, please explain.

You are the most fickle easily convinced person I have ever seen here.

In his defense, after hearing this witness, how could anyone not wonder if this trial will be stopped soon?

I think the murder two is all but gone, but I believe there is still more to hash out. If on the jury, I'd still want to hear the evidence around how they met up, because there's still a part of me that keeps thinking, if Zimmerman had done what he was asked and followed the rules of his neighborhood watch, this kid wouldn't be dead today. We lose sight of this fact easily in this case. Zimmerman took a person's life. He may not have meant to, or gotten out of his truck thinking he was going to, but he did.

My take is if Martin did not go off and feel the need to beat up Zimmerman, he would be alive today.

Of course....always the voice of reason there jon.

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

I am not sure what is a hyperbole. His nose was busted in. His lip was bloodied. He had cuts in the back of his head. His eye was swollen. He was screaming for his life for at least 1 minute. You insist on belittling this.

This is a bashed in face I already linked the worst photo of George earlier.....not even close to the same thing. If you can't see the difference, I can't help.

You realize a term like "beating someone's face in" is subjective. Your definition may not be the same as someone elses. Nor is it black and white. Not all bashed in faces will look as bad as the one you posted (which I didn't look at btw). You're the only one complaining about this.

 

[Rayderr]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

Well, we expect it to be pretty damn serious if the brain is leaking.

 

[Worm]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

He looks beat up. I think you are picking nits here.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

See^... That's what I'm talking about.. The injuries were obviously more than you describe..

BTW, when you get a gash to your scalp, that blood isn't coming from the blood being supplied to your brain..

 

[ATC1]

One thing the Prosecution got was the witness saying he didn't actually see TM punch GZ, thus how can he describe TM action as a "ground and pound"?

Agreed but it seems flimsy, he saw Martin's hand movements, and you have Z's injuries, combined with the fact that it was dark and Martin's back was to him compromising his viewing angle.

Thought the state should have used this to mention that John lied instead of "the feeling the need to clarify" to police about the events.

Thought defense could have asked John if the velocity of the downward arm swings were quick as in a punching fashion or did the arms stay down as if holding GZ down.

Where's the lie?

They did try to insinuate that he lied btw.. The word lying was even used..

I know - I'm asking what did they think he lied about.

They tried to used added words in later interviews as inconsistencies, or lies, to disprove his testimony.. He added the term "ground£" to his second interview.

Wasn't sure if there was something else aside from that - he's been consistent that it appeared Martin was hitting Zimmerman - calling it as throw blows or ground and pound - the result is the same.

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

 

[jon_mx]

One thing the Prosecution got was the witness saying he didn't actually see TM punch GZ, thus how can he describe TM action as a "ground and pound"?

Agreed but it seems flimsy, he saw Martin's hand movements, and you have Z's injuries, combined with the fact that it was dark and Martin's back was to him compromising his viewing angle.

Thought the state should have used this to mention that John lied instead of "the feeling the need to clarify" to police about the events.

Thought defense could have asked John if the velocity of the downward arm swings were quick as in a punching fashion or did the arms stay down as if holding GZ down.

Where's the lie?

They did try to insinuate that he lied btw.. The word lying was even used..

I know - I'm asking what did they think he lied about.

They tried to used added words in later interviews as inconsistencies, or lies, to disprove his testimony.. He added the term "ground£" to his second interview.

Wasn't sure if there was something else aside from that - he's been consistent that it appeared Martin was hitting Zimmerman - calling it as throw blows or ground and pound - the result is the same.

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I think it was because his view was from behind, so he saw the swinging, but not the actual contact.

 

[jon_mx]

Except for the eye that is swollen closed, i don't see a significant difference. Zimmerman's face was beaten in and would have looked a lot worse if it went on another minute or two.

Can you show me this? I've never seen an eye swollen closed in any Zimmerman pic so far..

I was referencing The Commish's picture of what a real beating in face looks like, not Zimmermans

 

[jamny]

One thing the Prosecution got was the witness saying he didn't actually see TM punch GZ, thus how can he describe TM action as a "ground and pound"?

Agreed but it seems flimsy, he saw Martin's hand movements, and you have Z's injuries, combined with the fact that it was dark and Martin's back was to him compromising his viewing angle.

Thought the state should have used this to mention that John lied instead of "the feeling the need to clarify" to police about the events.

Thought defense could have asked John if the velocity of the downward arm swings were quick as in a punching fashion or did the arms stay down as if holding GZ down.

Where's the lie?

They did try to insinuate that he lied btw.. The word lying was even used..

I know - I'm asking what did they think he lied about.

They tried to used added words in later interviews as inconsistencies, or lies, to disprove his testimony.. He added the term "ground£" to his second interview.

Wasn't sure if there was something else aside from that - he's been consistent that it appeared Martin was hitting Zimmerman - calling it as throw blows or ground and pound - the result is the same.

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I think what he's saying is he saw the punches being thrown but not the actual contact. He's just being specific.

 

[ATC1]

This is a bashed in face I already linked the worst photo of George earlier.....not even close to the same thing. If you can't see the difference, I can't help.

You realize a term like "beating someone's face in" is subjective. Your definition may not be the same as someone elses. Nor is it black and white. Not all bashed in faces will look as bad as the one you posted (which I didn't look at btw). You're the only one complaining about this.

True, plus.

"Doctor, isn't it true that when punched in the face, one person can swell up more than another person?"

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I disagree... You don't have to see flesh connect to see someone on top of someone else doing ground&pound.. You couldn't have expected him to get the angle of this fight that you'd get watching an MMA match on television, but he described what he saw.. That's not lying..

 

[jon_mx]

I thought the prosecution looked horrible when it used the word liar when questioning John. He had no basis for it, especially considering how understanding he was with Didi's ever changing story.

 

[jon_mx]

At least the black girl on the HLN panel insists that we still don't know it was not Martin screaming for his life as he has Zimmerman pinned down whaling on his face. Pure gold.

 

[ATC1]

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I think what he's saying is he saw the punches being thrown but not the actual contact. He's just being specific.

Right, I'm just saying that is the only thing the state got from their witness this morning, and it's what I think they brought him on the stand in the first place. They wanted the last shot at John to question his credibility.

I did not watch the entire thing this morning. Did the State ask John what he would consider his definition of ground and pound to be? Or maybe getting an MMA definition of what ground and pound is?

Wiki:

Ground-and-pound is a strategy consisting of taking an opponent to the ground using a takedown or throw, obtaining a top, or dominant grappling position, and then striking the opponent, primarily with fists and elbow

"We have established you could not hear the strikes, and now you say you never actually saw TM strike GZ?" "No, then wouldn't your statement that TM used ground and pound be considered a lie then?"

 

[Carolina Hustler]

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I think what he's saying is he saw the punches being thrown but not the actual contact. He's just being specific.

Right, I'm just saying that is the only thing the state got from their witness this morning, and it's what I think they brought him on the stand in the first place. They wanted the last shot at John to question his credibility.

I did not watch the entire thing this morning. Did the State ask John what he would consider his definition of ground and pound to be? Or maybe getting an MMA definition of what ground and pound is?

Wiki:

Ground-and-pound is a strategy consisting of taking an opponent to the ground using a takedown or throw, obtaining a top, or dominant grappling position, and then striking the opponent, primarily with fists and elbow

"We have established you could not hear the strikes, and now you say you never actually saw TM strike GZ?" "No, then wouldn't your statement that TM used ground and pound be considered a lie then?"

He never said Trayvon used ground and pound, he described how it looked...

 

[StrikeS2k]

I did not watch the entire thing this morning. Did the State ask John what he would consider his definition of ground and pound would be? Or maybe getting an MMA definition of what ground and pound is?

The defense asked him. He said something along the lines of "it was when you were on top of someone with a chance to rain down blows on them, while the person on the bottom still has a chance to escape or fight from the bottom."

I thought he gave a little too much credit to the ability of the person on bottom to engage but it was a reasonable definition. The defense lawyer then followed up with "which position would be the dominant position" and the response was "the top position."

 

[Witz]

The only thing I would not like about the defense this morning is that it ended with the witness saying he did not actually see TM punch GZ. In previous testamony given by John, punching would have to be involved in TM using the MMA move ground and pound. Thus, he lied because he did not actually see TM punching GZ.

I think what he's saying is he saw the punches being thrown but not the actual contact. He's just being specific.

Right, I'm just saying that is the only thing the state got from their witness this morning, and it's what I think they brought him on the stand in the first place. They wanted the last shot at John to question his credibility.

I did not watch the entire thing this morning. Did the State ask John what he would consider his definition of ground and pound to be? Or maybe getting an MMA definition of what ground and pound is?

Wiki:

Ground-and-pound is a strategy consisting of taking an opponent to the ground using a takedown or throw, obtaining a top, or dominant grappling position, and then striking the opponent, primarily with fists and elbow

"We have established you could not hear the strikes, and now you say you never actually saw TM strike GZ?" "No, then wouldn't your statement that TM used ground and pound be considered a lie then?"

Seeing Zimmerman on the ground and Martin on top of him throwing what appeared to be punches going in the downward motion, followed by actually seeing Zimmermans face within a minute or so afterwards when he was right there - one can actually draw that conclusion safely.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I did not watch the entire thing this morning. Did the State ask John what he would consider his definition of ground and pound would be? Or maybe getting an MMA definition of what ground and pound is?

The defense asked him. He said something along the lines of "it was when you were on top of someone with a chance to rain down blows on them, while the person on the bottom still has a chance to escape or fight from the bottom."

I thought he gave a little too much credit to the ability of the person on bottom to engage but it was a reasonable definition. The defense lawyer then followed up with "which position would be the dominant position" and the response was "the top position."

I agree, I think he went too far in some instances to be neutral.. That being one of them.. Obviously you don't get yourself into that bottom position willingly or with the intent to fight from that position.. When you're in that position typically you're doing everything you can to get out of it.. Your average person, untrained in grappling, wrestling, mma, is not going to be effective from that position..

In your average street fight, that is the end of the fight for you..

 

[ArbyMelt]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

I've not been watching the news, but if what I gather from this thread is correct, if all the major news outlets are covering the case, and they seem biased towards the prosecution, and some still pushing the racial narrative, I think for the average racially sensitive viewer, they will be aggravated by a not guilty verdict.. If the news is telling you he looks guilty, but he is set free, there will be some outrage, because the folks looking for a guilty verdict will assume the justice system let them down here..

Will that translate into riots? Who knows, but it could. I think it depends on how much more of that Martin Family lawyer we see, and what the public gets from the NAACP, and other similar groups..

 

[Todem]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

That is the million dollar question.

And it is a shame we always come to this. Here we are in 2013 a black president in his second term....and this is crap we are still worrying about.

A bunch of low life thugs (black and white mind you) using a trial as an excuse to go out and loot and burn their own neighborhoods down. I can assure you all those rioting animals are not concerned with Trayvon Martin's death.

It is merely an excuse to be violent.

Sad. But again...not surprising.

Normal people do not do these things. The animals of our society (cough Aaron Hernandez..cough) resort to violence to express their discontent or anger with a situation.

 

[timschochet]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

I've not been watching the news, but if what I gather from this thread is correct, if all the major news outlets are covering the case, and they seem biased towards the prosecution, and some still pushing the racial narrative, I think for the average racially sensitive viewer, they will be aggravated by a not guilty verdict.. If the news is telling you he looks guilty, but he is set free, there will be some outrage, because the folks looking for a guilty verdict will assume the justice system let them down here..Will that translate into riots? Who knows, but it could. I think it depends on how much more of that Martin Family lawyer we see, and what the public gets from the NAACP, and other similar groups..

Are you suggesting the NAACP encourages rioting?

 

[Clifford]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

 

[Godsbrother]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

There will definitely be riots. Just an excuse to steal stuff though... I am taking this 60" TV to protest racism in America

ETA: I hate the new board

 

[Carolina Hustler]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

I've not been watching the news, but if what I gather from this thread is correct, if all the major news outlets are covering the case, and they seem biased towards the prosecution, and some still pushing the racial narrative, I think for the average racially sensitive viewer, they will be aggravated by a not guilty verdict.. If the news is telling you he looks guilty, but he is set free, there will be some outrage, because the folks looking for a guilty verdict will assume the justice system let them down here..Will that translate into riots? Who knows, but it could. I think it depends on how much more of that Martin Family lawyer we see, and what the public gets from the NAACP, and other similar groups..

Are you suggesting the NAACP encourages rioting?

Are you insinuating that is what I said?

 

[Todem]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie

Her testimony was taking from what she heard (maybe) over the phone. She was not an eye witness.

Both have no reason to lie. It is about the better evidence. I will take an eye witness account over someone talking over a cell phone with no idea of what is really going on.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

Obviously we can't know for certain, but I think she's a liar.. She was asked what she heard on numerous occasions.. And she never provided that detail, the only real detail that can be considered a death blow to the defense.. And it only came up after the prosecution met with her and the Martin family at the Martin families house with the Martin family lawyer, and Trayvon's mother sitting right beside her..

 

[The Commish]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

This was determined before the trial even started.

 

[D-Day]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

There will be rioting if acquitted. There will be rioting if convicted.

 

[The Commish]

You realize a term like "beating someone's face in" is subjective. Your definition may not be the same as someone elses. Nor is it black and white. Not all bashed in faces will look as bad as the one you posted (which I didn't look at btw). You're the only one complaining about this.

Of course I realize this. It's easy enough to just say he had a broken and bloody nose and be done with it. That's what it was, yet we get the drama queen description that his face was "beaten in"...it's just not necessary. This kind of crap happens all the time and it's annoying. Don't really care if I'm the only one complaining about him...it just means everyone else is better at ignoring him than I am.

 

[The Commish]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

Well, we expect it to be pretty damn serious if the brain is leaking.

Now THAT would be a bashed in head!

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

I think the jury will take into account how each witness presented themselves, their demeanor, bias, and consistency as well as the content of their testimony. I would have to think John's testimony who didn't seem to show any bias would be taken more seriously than DiDi's.

 

[The Commish]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

See^... That's what I'm talking about.. The injuries were obviously more than you describe..

BTW, when you get a gash to your scalp, that blood isn't coming from the blood being supplied to your brain..

These are what I'm going by and I KNEW as soon as I hit post that someone would make the brain supply comment Doesn't matter...I just need to do a better job at ignoring the nonsense.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

You claim to have no horse in this race, but you are constantly putting out the pro-Martin spin. You can play a lot of what if scenerios. They both did actions which lead to this tragedy. IMHO, Martin confronting Zimmerman is the most logical conclusion that can be drawn.

These discussions aren't either/or. Because I am poking at the theories presented by the pro Zimmerman guys doesn't mean I'm pro Martin.

Well looks like we sorted that out.

 

[Worm]

Latest prosecution witness testifies that GZ said 'I was defending myself and shot him'.

 

[Joe McGee]

Beating someone's face in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Getting out of a truck

would you stop with the "beating his face in" crap....they hyperbole is nauseating and unnecessary.

You describing it as a couple nicks and scratches is just as bad..

He had several scratches....there were no deep gashes like his brain was getting ready to ooze out of his skull. There's a good amount of blood, but given the reality that we have more blood sent to our brains than any other organ, what do we expect?

See^... That's what I'm talking about.. The injuries were obviously more than you describe..

BTW, when you get a gash to your scalp, that blood isn't coming from the blood being supplied to your brain..

These are what I'm going by and I KNEW as soon as I hit post that someone would make the brain supply comment Doesn't matter...I just need to do a better job at ignoring the nonsense.

Yes, please ignore and stop posting your nonsense in this thread.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I found this one funny Sorry if you don't agree

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Defense showing pictures of the body? Is that smart for them?

 

[The Commish]

I found this one funny Sorry if you don't agree

That's pretty funny And I'd agree...if it were split, he's on his way to an acquittal.

 

[Rayderr]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

My brother in law (black) pretty much insinuated that there would be when the jury was announced. Even more troubling were the comments from his friends (also black) basically saying that either way ZImmerman will be dead. Either he gets convicted and killed in prison, or he gets off and gets killed by someone(s) upset with the verdict. Not very comforting thoughts.

 

[Slapdash]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

This was determined before the trial even started.

Yep

 

[jonessed]

It sure looks like he will be acquitted (outside chance of mansalughter) .... so if he is acquitted, will there be riots? will the riots be worse than Rodney King?

There will be riots no matter what the jury decides.

 

[worrierking]

I don't know about any of the rest of you, but my brain is definitely in second place among my organs when it comes to amount of blood it receives.

 

[UCFOleboy]

What is first place?

 

[eurotrashman]

So I guess everyone saying this is a slam-dunk acquittal considers the girlfriend's testimony a lie?

Obviously we can't know for certain, but I think she's a liar.

well that settles it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jonessed]

Even the CNN subtitles on the screen are biased.

After all this testimony, it says "Witness not sure who was yelling for help"

Earlier, they incorrectly had "Lighter skin person was the one throwing punches".

When will they stop?

Bigger riot = more coverage.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Was the fight on the grass or concrete? Body in the grass.

 

[kentric]

Was the fight on the grass or concrete? Body in the grass.

According to John, they started on the grass, moved over to partially being on the concrete. They subsequently ended up on the grass only.

 

[kentric]

The Prosecuting Attorney on now (the younger one) sounds like some movie actor. Not sure which one though. Guy from SNL maybe.

ETA: Got it. Norm Macdonald

 

[jon_mx]

The Prosecuting Attorney on now (the younger one) sounds like some movie actor. Not sure which one though. Guy from SNL maybe.

The drama queen from the opening statement?