State v Zimmerman

[Sean Hayden]

Where is the aggression in getting out of your car to chase someone you find suspicious while armed?

Well, in the pursuit with the knowledge that you possess the means to kill. Even without the gun, getting out of your car to chase someone down because you find them suspicious is aggression.

[Tero]

I think we need a law that forbids you to interact, even speak to, anyone while carrying your concealed weapon. You will communicate by texting.

What if one is carrying it unconcealed?

Not a problem, unless it's a lady 22, Nancy Reagan special.

[Coito ergo sum]

Where is the aggression in getting out of your car to chase someone you find suspicious while armed?

M was already running -- BEFORE Zimmerman exited his truck. M was, in a few seconds, gone from sight.

Well, in the pursuit with the knowledge that you possess the means to kill. Even without the gun, getting out of your car to chase someone down because you find them suspicious is aggression.

Martin does not know Zimmerman has the gun, so Martin did not think Zimmerman had that means.

Is it aggression to attack someone, knock them to the ground, and bang their head into the pavement?

[Sean Hayden]

Is it aggression to attack someone, knock them to the ground, and bang their head into the pavement?

You bet it is and we've already covered that point.

Do you think that Z's behavior is acceptable because ultimately he used deadly force to prevent injury to himself? Or do his actions prior to that point suggest he did something which should be punishable?


edit: see punish as something he should be prosecuted for

[laklak]

Pure political theater.

I agree. The cops are bracing for trouble all over the state, regardless of the verdict. As for Zimmerman, his life isn't worth a plugged fucking nickel once this is over, again regardless of verdict. I'm locked and loaded.

[FBM]

Whatever the verdict turns out to be, I hope the jury isn't tipped by concerns over public sentiment and potential reactions. That would be just a 'mob rules' state.

[Coito ergo sum]

Is it aggression to attack someone, knock them to the ground, and bang their head into the pavement?

You bet it is and we've already covered that point.

Do you think that Z's behavior is acceptable because ultimately he used deadly force to prevent injury to himself?

His behavior was silly and strange. However, once he was attacked, he had a right to self defense.

Or do his actions prior to that point suggest he did something which should be punishable?

Based on the evidence presented thus far -- and even based solely on the evidence presented by the prosecution in this case - Zimmerman did not do anything that ought to be punished (particularly via a murder conviction). Remember, the case is a murder case, not a case of "is there anything we don't like about his behavior?"

edit: see punish as something he should be prosecuted for

Well, prosecutorial discretion is broad, and if the prosecutor thinks they have probable cause to move forward and if this is the kind of case they would normally initiate a prosecution for, then by all means, prosecute away. However, if this is a case where the prosecution honestly did not think they had probable cause to move forward and/or where they thought the evidence showed a solid self defense claim, then I think it is improper for political pressure to be exercised to force a prosecution to move forward.

Do you think there is reasonable doubt as to whether Zimmerman is guilty of murder? If so, why?

[Coito ergo sum]

Pure political theater.

I agree. The cops are bracing for trouble all over the state, regardless of the verdict. As for Zimmerman, his life isn't worth a plugged fucking nickel once this is over, again regardless of verdict. I'm locked and loaded.

Once Zimmerman has been acquitted, he will have opportunities for book and movie deals which could set him up for life. Were I him, I'd cut my deals, make a nice nest egg and move somewhere obscure.

[Tero]

....and change my name to Andy Kaufman. See earlier picture.

[Coito ergo sum]

....and change my name to Andy Kaufman. See earlier picture.

'
Honestly, I don't think he'll have that much of a problem.

I don't think there will be riots if he is acquitted.

[Collector1337]

Seth is correct. The cops were actually right by not charging him the first time. They only did after the fact because of all the outrage.

He will be found not guilty. Because... he's innocent and the cops knew this from the get go.

Now on top of it, he should be able to sue for all his legal fees and lost wages.

[laklak]

Unfortunately he can't sue if the prosecution had enough evidence to bring charges, the state is indemnified from civil suit unless the plaintiff can show the state acted illegally. If he could prove he was arrested and charged without probable cause he would have a case, but I'd imagine the county prosecutors dotted every I and crossed every T. They knew from the outset this would be a shitstorm.

[Coito ergo sum]

Now on top of it, he should be able to sue for all his legal fees and lost wages.

He can sue, but he'll lose. The prosecutors are entitled to various types of "immunity" from suit, particular "absolute immunity"afforded to prosecutors acting in the course of their duties as a prosecutor. In this case, Zimmerman bringing a suit against the prosecution or the State of Florida would be thrown out on a motion to dismiss in short order.

In this case, the prosecution could make out a case of probable cause, and in fact the trial judge in this case made probable cause determination already. So, unless the prosecutor is guilty of presenting false evidence or something, I am not sure what the problem is.

Where I side with the pro-Martin folks is that I do not see a monumental injustice in the fact that the case is going to court and he is being tried. That's what the system is for. He is accused of a crime and the jury decides. We don't and can't have a system that only puts the guilty on trial. That sort of begs the question.

[Gallstones]

Oops.

http://www.bob-owens.com/2013/07/disord ... man-trial/

The State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman took a turn for the absurd late Tuesday evening, as defense attorney Don West got in a heated conversation with Judge Deborah Nelson, just before 10:oo PM, after Nelson seemed to sound her intend to block testimony and evidence recovered from deleted messages on Trayvon Martin’s cell phone.

A forensic expert discovered more than 600 items on Trayvon’s cell phone, including texts and photos between Trayvon and other people, with specific references to criminal activity, particularly fighting, drugs, and firearms.

What was interesting is that everyone in the courtroom seemed to have a very specific idea of who that “someone” who deleted the evidence was, but were very careful not to say who.

The forensic expert, Conner, testified that he recovered multiple conversations between Trayvon Martin and specific family members and friends (Levondrea, “Diamond,” which is one of Rachel Jeantel’s names, etc) discussing multi-round street fights and schoolyard fights in which Trayvon Martin had participated. Martin’s half-brother, Demetrius Martin, even asked Trayvon when he would teach Demetrious how to fight like him. Everyone in Trayvon Martin’s family seemed to know Trayvon was a street fighter.

...
This is important to the video we are about to see, so make sure you grasp the following:

Trayvon Martin’s phone was password-protected. The password-protection comes on automatically after being left unattended for a certain amount of time.
The “stealth” app designed to further conceal Trayvon’s conversations about weapons, fighting, drugs, and pornography had an additional layer of password-protection. He had to log into the phone first, and then to this app, to access these conversations or delete them.
There were thousands of messages, texts, photos, tweets, Facebook posts and other bits of evidence in Trayvon’s particular, tortured form of Black Vernacular English (BVE) that correspond across thousands of messages. The 600 deleted-but-recovered messages referring to his criminal behavior were in this same uniquely identifying syntax.
People who participated in these conversations are all documented by screen name, real name, phone number, social media personas, etc. They are all easily identified and deposed, if the defense is given time to do so.
The State hid this evidence until right before the beginning of the trial, when the Prosecution’s Wesley White came forward to present testimony the State was hiding and may have destroyed evidence, meaning the defense has had no time to recover this data and depose every witness as they should be able to do, as a basic matter of giving Zimmerman a constitutionally fair trial.

Attorneys v Judge


Richard Connor (expert) testimony.

[Coito ergo sum]

The conduct of the prosecutors in this case is shameful. I am disgusted by them.