• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Defense wants anonymous jury; state wants to question Shellie

She was present with other witnesses when George rambled on about killing his perp. Anything said in the presence of other witnesses is not protected by husband-wife privilege in the state of Florida.

then why don't they just get any of those "other witnesses" to testify? seems like, if that was the case, they wouldn't need to ask her anything
 
You got that right....

IMO, it's from whatever indivudal(s) are claiming that Shellie (and others) were witnesses to the klling. So, while we don't agree on where this craziness is originating from, at least we both agree that there is craziness.
 
IMO, it's from whatever indivudal(s) are claiming that Shellie (and others) were witnesses to the klling. So, while we don't agree on where this craziness is originating from, at least we both agree that there is craziness.

No one has claimed that Shelie was a witness to the shooting..

Its an adversarial proposition, Buck.

And, I think the prosecution wants to know what happened that Sunday evening before the shooting.... and how Shelie came to pick up the SUV if George left the keys in the car and the other set at the T.

The police didn't impound or inspect the SUV.. Shelie just drove it away.

Not to be too contrary.. but I never had more than two sets of car keys.
 
then why don't they just get any of those "other witnesses" to testify? seems like, if that was the case, they wouldn't need to ask her anything

Who said they won't have other witnesses testify?

Are you seriously in the dark about why they are going after Shellie Zimmerman:lol:

The state is attacking George Zimmerman's heart and soul, his love, his wife. Cold-blooded.

Angela Corey: I got ice in my veins, blood in my eyes, hate in my heart...

This is what Angela Corey does. We all knew this would happen when she took over.

Zimmerman will fall, one way or another.

Deal with it.
 
The police didn't impound or inspect the SUV.. Shelie just drove it away.

Not to be too contrary.. but I never had more than two sets of car keys.

Ugh.. I keep getting sucked in... Not to be contrary, but the keys being in the car is based on your misunderstanding of what George actually stated. Shellie wasn't their, except for in the fevered minds of a few.
 
Ugh.. I keep getting sucked in... Not to be contrary, but the keys being in the car is based on your misunderstanding of what George actually stated. Shellie wasn't their, except for in the fevered minds of a few.

Listen to the NEN tape .. and pay special attention to the part when George seems so distracted.

George says that "they" always went to the Target to buy groceries on Sunday after they "mentored" the kids.

I don't know what "mentored" means. He's too stupid to tutor anyone.. so was he taking them to ball games when he couldn't even pay his rent?????
 
Listen to the NEN tape .. and pay special attention to the part when George seems so distracted.

Why do't you? Place the statement in context of the entire conversation and determine what he actually stated, not what you want him to have stated.
 
Why do't you? Place the statement in context of the entire conversation and determine what he actually stated, not what you want him to have stated.

buck is correct sharon. post for us the text you are referring to, so that we can see for ourselves what you have 'found'
 
Why do't you? Place the statement in context of the entire conversation and determine what he actually stated, not what you want him to have stated.

true, so true. I wish all of the Traybots would focus on what actually happened or what can prove to have happened instead of making up **** that they think or wish to have happened.
 
Why do't you? Place the statement in context of the entire conversation and determine what he actually stated, not what you want him to have stated.

In the first place you have NOT been "sucked in".. Listen to the NEN call yourself.. at one point George seems to drift off like he is distracted. I don't know that that means..

Something is very off.. and Shelie knows what it is.

The clear expression of George's anger so early in the NEN call means something was wrong.

Having been evicted three times and on unemployment.. they may NOT have been on their way to Target.. and they may have quarreled that afternoon.
 
In the first place you have NOT been "sucked in".. Listen to the NEN call yourself.. at one point George seems to drift off like he is distracted. I don't know that that means..

Something is very off.. and Shelie knows what it is.

The clear expression of George's anger so early in the NEN call means something was wrong.

Having been evicted three times and on unemployment.. they may NOT have been on their way to Target.. and they may have quarreled that afternoon.

c'mon sharon, do something different and post something meaningful
share with us the text of that conversation you are referring to
so we can read it for ourselves rather than take your opinion of what was expressed
 
buck is correct sharon. post for us the text you are referring to, so that we can see for ourselves what you have 'found'

Just listen to the NEN tape and make up your own mind.
 
In the first place you have NOT been "sucked in".. Listen to the NEN call yourself.. at one point George seems to drift off like he is distracted. I don't know that that means..

Something is very off.. and Shelie knows what it is.

The clear expression of George's anger so early in the NEN call means something was wrong.

Having been evicted three times and on unemployment.. they may NOT have been on their way to Target.. and they may have quarreled that afternoon.


Or maybe, Z ate re-fried beans with a slice of coconut custard pie and Shelie forgot to buy toilet paper

Any thoughts on my theory?
 
Just listen to the NEN tape and make up your own mind.

we have..and we have. since you obviously are getting something different from the tape. why don't you post the relevent text from the NEN tape and tell us what YOU think it means
 
Just listen to the NEN tape and make up your own mind.

why do you keep running away when someone asks you to post factual information?
all you offer are opinion without any facts to support them
your very weird opinion are of no interest - UNLESS you offer something to back them up
 
Or maybe, Z ate re-fried beans with a slice of coconut custard pie and Shelie forgot to buy toilet paper

Any thoughts on my theory?

GZ was out casing houses to break into and got pissed because Trayvon was trying to muscle in on his territory
 
george was out looking to buy a dime bag
he and martin had a dispute about the weight and martin struck him
we now know the rest
 
why do you keep running away when someone asks you to post factual information?
all you offer are opinion without any facts to support them
your very weird opinion are of no interest - UNLESS you offer something to back them up

Oh for God's sake .. the NEN tape is readily available. You are such a victim and at such a disadvantage.

Listen to the tape... the jury will.
 
Oh for God's sake .. the NEN tape is readily available. You are such a victim and at such a disadvantage.

Listen to the tape... the jury will.

for our sake offer us something factual for a change sharon
show us the text
point out what you believe to be incriminating
or quit wasting bandwidth with your insipid, unfounded posts
 
for our sake offer us something factual for a change sharon
show us the text
point out what you believe to be incriminating
or quit wasting bandwidth with your insipid, unfounded posts

Listen to it yourself and quit being such a baby.
 
george was out looking to buy a dime bag
he and martin had a dispute about the weight and martin struck him
we now know the rest

actually, since there is around 25-50 dollars missing from what Trayvon supposedly had that night, I think it was the other way around. Georgie boy was selling, Trayvon was buying and got pissed because he thought George shorted him ( or maybe the baggy had too many stems) and attacked him.
 
Listen to it yourself and quit being such a baby.

we have. you are the one claiming there is something there that the rest of us didn't hear. stop being a retard and tell us what you THINK is on the tape.
 
actually, since there is around 25-50 dollars missing from what Trayvon supposedly had that night, I think it was the other way around. Georgie boy was selling, Trayvon was buying and got pissed because he thought George shorted him ( or maybe the baggy had too many stems) and attacked him.

Trayvon had $50 and had spent about $8.. Rumors won't suffice.
 
Trayvon had $50 and had spent about $8.. Rumors won't suffice.

so, martin had $92 remaining from the $100 his dad said he gave him before leaving
 
Trayvon had $50 and had spent about $8.. Rumors won't suffice.

trayvon's dad claims to have given him between $75 and $100 before he left. trayvon had $41 and change in his pocket after the shooting. assuming that he spent 5-6 buck on skittles and tea, there is between 25 and 50 bucks missing.

but hey, if you want to call Trayvon's dad a liar...fine by me. he was already a cheater, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he was also a liar.
 
Back
Top Bottom