State v Zimmerman

[Seth]

The state has some points in the summary: it's clear that Z saw himself as an active peace keeper, not the"eyes" of a neighborhood watch.

Each and every citizen in this country has an absolute constitutional right to be an armed killer; er, um I mean a vigilante, no, that's not it; an "active peace keeper." Ah, I mean a right to pontificate from an armchair.

FIFY

This message was brought to you from the "SethoMaticLazyBoy" armchair company
as recommended by wannabe cops and dispatchers. Available in sizes Colorado king size to fat bastard super arse from all right thinking retailers.

Go fuck yourself.

[Seth]

The aggressive actions of the self appointed peace keeper led to the conflict. No gun, no conflict. A streetwise kid can sense these very quickly.

Ah, now "streetwise kids" have supernatural mental powers.

Shut the fuck up.

[Seth]

Man oh man, Zimmerman is a free man. This is absolutely blatant judicial misconduct prejudicial against the defendant and reversible error.

This seals it. Even if the jury convicts Zimmerman will appeal and hopefully have the verdict thrown out for judicial misconduct.

Bizarre outburst against Zimmerman suggests prejudice

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
July 11, 2013

Speculation is raging that the judge in the George Zimmerman case could have been put under pressure by the Obama administration after she staged a bizarre outburst during which she interrogated Zimmerman while repeatedly silencing his lawyers.

The hostile exchange began when Judge Debra Nelson asked Zimmerman if he planned to testify.

Essentially, Judge Nelson told Zimmerman he had the “absolute right to remain silent” but then proceeded to demand he answer her questions interrogation-style while silencing his lawyers.

Defense attorney Don West twice objected to Nelson’s interrogation, prompting the judge to raised her voice and exclaim, “Your objection is overruled!” in a manner more befitting of an angry parent lecturing a child than a legal professional.

Both of Zimmerman’s lawyers appeared shocked as attorney Mark O’Mara asked under his breath, “what is going on?”

Several legal experts and observers said the outburst was unprecedented.

“I have never seen that in more than 30 years of court reporting,” tweeted journalist Kathi Belich.

Former Senatorial candidate Richard Rivette also expressed his shock at the judge’s behavior.

“This judge is an idiot. I spent five years investigating high profile capital cases defending people from the death penalty, and worked for the Federal judiciary as an independent investigator on other cases. No judge ever inquires as to whether a defendant will testify until the entire defense case is presented. If the defense rests and does not call the defendant then the judge knows there will be no testimony. If the defense calls the defendant then that’s when the judge finds out. They have to get through the entire case first. To see if it is valid after prosecution cross-examines their witnesses and experts as to whether a defendant SHOULD testify, which is decided in private not in public, and NOT on the record. By doing this, the judge has undermined a portion of Zimmerman’s credibility. He looks like he is waffling and this is normal judge/defendant questioning, which it is NOT,” said Rivette.

Respondents to the story at the National Review Online also expressed their view that Zimmerman was being railroaded.

“A fix is in from the administration to find Zimmerman guilty regardless of what it takes,” commented one.

“By demanding that Zimmerman respond to a question, after she has assured him that he has the right to remain silent, she is undermining his right to remain silent and making it appear as though he and his attorneys are not firm in their convictions. This judge is shameless,” added another.

[Warren Dew]

Man oh man, Zimmerman is a free man. This is absolutely blatant judicial misconduct prejudicial against the defendant and reversible error.

This was done in front of the jury?

[Tero]

No, the jury was out. They would never hear Zimmerman. The news cameras in the court was probably a bad idea. In the movies they do this in the judge's chambers.

[Tero]

The judge doesn't seem entirely fair and unbiased. That's the largest point I see.

We are allowed to see every bit of "character evidence" against Zimmerman, but almost every time some Trayvon character evidence comes out, its inadmissible.

This is what the gun fanatics are telling us. Elsewhere. I think there is some reasoning here. Trayvon is not on trial. However, Zimmerman is still alive, and if he sees the case going against him and there is something presented he does not agree with, he could have testified. Martin did not have a chance to present his side of the story as witness.

[Coito ergo sum]

The aggressive actions of the self appointed peace keeper led to the conflict. No gun, no conflict. A streetwise kid can sense these very quickly.

Ah, now "streetwise kids" have supernatural mental powers.

Shut the fuck up.

Actually, I'm surprised to hear him described as streetwise now, since along he was an innocent young boy who just wanted skittles to munch on while watching reruns of Star Trek...

[Coito ergo sum]

Man oh man, Zimmerman is a free man. This is absolutely blatant judicial misconduct prejudicial against the defendant and reversible error.

This was done in front of the jury?

At first I was sure the judge would never say that in front of the jury, but I heard something on the radio yesterday that led me to believe the judge did it in front of the jury. I am not positive, though. If it was in front of the jury, the judge has a problem.

There is no reason for the judge to even ask that question, whether the jury is there or not. The judge doesn't control the order of witnesses, and if the defense rests then the judge knows the defendant is not going to testify. The judge's conduct there is rather bizarre.

[Coito ergo sum]

No, the jury was out. They would never hear Zimmerman. The news cameras in the court was probably a bad idea. In the movies they do this in the judge's chambers.

In real life, they just don't do it. There is no reason for the judge to need to know, and putting the defendant on the spot can only be prejudicial.

[Coito ergo sum]

The judge doesn't seem entirely fair and unbiased. That's the largest point I see.

We are allowed to see every bit of "character evidence" against Zimmerman, but almost every time some Trayvon character evidence comes out, its inadmissible.

This is what the gun fanatics are telling us. Elsewhere. I think there is some reasoning here. Trayvon is not on trial. However, Zimmerman is still alive, and if he sees the case going against him and there is something presented he does not agree with, he could have testified. Martin did not have a chance to present his side of the story as witness.

It's not about what he agrees or does not agree with. It's about what is relevant and probative and what is not relevant or probative. He does not have to testify.

This is what the anti-Zimmerman folks sound like:



We just KNOW that Zimmerman was hopped up wannabe cop who wanted to kill himself a negra. We just KNOW it! You know how "these people" are!

[Tyrannical]

No, the jury was out. They would never hear Zimmerman. The news cameras in the court was probably a bad idea. In the movies they do this in the judge's chambers.

I think the cameras are a good idea because it keeps the totality of the legal case in the public eye. It's like the opposite of a star chamber, a sunlight chamber

[FBM]

For anyone interested.

[Tero]

The judge doesn't seem entirely fair and unbiased. That's the largest point I see.

We are allowed to see every bit of "character evidence" against Zimmerman, but almost every time some Trayvon character evidence comes out, its inadmissible.

This is what the gun fanatics are telling us. Elsewhere. I think there is some reasoning here. Trayvon is not on trial. However, Zimmerman is still alive, and if he sees the case going against him and there is something presented he does not agree with, he could have testified. Martin did not have a chance to present his side of the story as witness.

It's not about what he agrees or does not agree with. It's about what is relevant and probative and what is not relevant or probative. He does not have to testify.

We just KNOW that Zimmerman was hopped up wannabe cop who wanted to kill himself a negra. We just KNOW it! You know how "these people" are!

Hey, we libruls is all niggerz. And we wear hoodies and walk in the rain. Not like those sensible gun carriers in their big SUVs.

[Coito ergo sum]

The judge doesn't seem entirely fair and unbiased. That's the largest point I see.

We are allowed to see every bit of "character evidence" against Zimmerman, but almost every time some Trayvon character evidence comes out, its inadmissible.

This is what the gun fanatics are telling us. Elsewhere. I think there is some reasoning here. Trayvon is not on trial. However, Zimmerman is still alive, and if he sees the case going against him and there is something presented he does not agree with, he could have testified. Martin did not have a chance to present his side of the story as witness.

It's not about what he agrees or does not agree with. It's about what is relevant and probative and what is not relevant or probative. He does not have to testify.

We just KNOW that Zimmerman was hopped up wannabe cop who wanted to kill himself a negra. We just KNOW it! You know how "these people" are!

Hey, we libruls is all niggerz. And we wear hoodies and walk in the rain. Not like those sensible gun carriers in their big SUVs.

You do realize that you are basing your opinion on stereotypes, don't you? My position on this one is the "liberal" position, and yours is is the conservative "hang em high" view of it. String 'em up! We KNOW he's guilty. Doesn't matter what the fancy lawyers in their suits present as "evidence."

[Coito ergo sum]

http://www.mediaite.com/columnists/geor ... ents-live/

What's the verdict on Mark O'Meara's suit? Looks a tad ill-fitting, and I'm never a fan of paisley ties.