General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Zimmerman Trial: The Scream [View all]Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)I'm not in denial of anything. You seem totally convinced that the small cuts MUST have occurred with Martin on top of Zimmerman, on the concrete. I accept that as a possibility, but you are trying to claim that it has to be. The person in denial here is you. You are convinced that he is innocent. All I claim to know is that Zimmerman has said that he followed Martin, confronted him, and then shot him to death. Is he guilty of murder? I don't know, that is for the jury to decide. But you are convinced that he is innocent, and are living in a fantasy land where your version HAD to be the way it happened. That places the burden of proof on you.
I again ask, where is your proof? You have offered nothing other than it would be a simple explanation. The concept that the cuts must have come from concrete, because Zimmerman was on his back, because he had cuts on his head is a circle that does not hold up. Possibly, they did find Zimmerman's blood on the concrete and haven't released that info. Until they do, the cuts mean nothing. Things very well may have occurred they way you want it to be, but unless you have something more that you are holding back, you are just blowing smoke.