This message was self-deleted by its author

[Vattel]

136. I am afraid I have to disagree with almost everything you said.

"There is no proof that Martin approached Zimmerman's car."

My reply: There is evidence, namely, Zimmerman told the police dispatcher that Martin was approaching him. There is a recording of that. Why would Zimmerman have lied about that?

"'Martin was into fighting.' 'Martin had plenty of time to get to his house while Zimmerman talked to the police dispatcher, but he didn't end up very far from Zimmerman.' Now who's speculating?"

My reply: I am not speculating. In case you didn't notice, there is evidence that Martin was into fighting. And it has been clearly established that Martin had plenty of time to reach home.

"'Jaentel's interview with the state attorney reveals her to be willing to lie on behalf of Martin.' Seriously? Care to share the quote?"

My reply: You should listen to the whole interview, but here is a quote: Jaentel said "yeah" in response to the state attorney's asking her if Martin said that the guy [i.e., Zimmerman] was coming at him like he was going to hit him. She withdrew the claim after being reminded that she was not supposed to lie. It was really funny.

"Zimmerman has been caught in a string of lies all intended to make him look like the victim, when in fact he stalked and killed an unarmed teenager."

My reply: You assume that they are lies as opposed to inaccuracies one might expect when someone describes a traumatic event of the sort in question. LEOs know that people never get everything accurate in such circumstances. That being said, Zimmerman's story seems to me to be too perfect, and that makes me suspicious that he might be lying. Again, I am not saying that there is no evidence of Zimmerman's guilt. I am only saying that there is reasonable doubt.

Zimmerman made 5 911 calls that we know were to report "suspicious" black males. That is not speculation. That is a fact. We don't know what the other 45 911 calls were."

My reply: Excuse him for trying to prevent crime in his neighborhood. Not even evidence of racism let alone evidence that he murdered Martin.

"Zimmerman trained in MMM 3x/week for a year. That is a fact."

My reply: And his trainer said he had no athletic ability and hadn't even learned to throw a punch.

"Zimmerman's lawyers knowingly violated sequestration rules and brought contaminated witnesses to testify. That is a fact.
Zimmerman's own wife won't or can't testify on his behalf. That is a fact."

My reply: Neither of these "facts" are evidence of Zimmerman's guilt.

"Zimmerman has a history of assault against weaker opponents. That is a fact."

My reply: Not a fact. Only disputed claims.