Started By
Message
re: Zimmerman not guilty
Posted on 7/14/13 at 3:26 am to CHSgc
Posted on 7/14/13 at 3:26 am to CHSgc
Suddenly wheeled around? No. Disappeared for several minutes then returned? Yes.
He had a history of fighting as it is. What makes you think he would hesitate this time?
Zimmerman was 28. Hardly middle aged.
And yes, he left his car, but again that is NOT AGAINST THE LAW. And so many people say he should have listened to the 911 operator, well he DID. They told him to let them know if he does anything else. He watched him. There is NO evidence to suggest he confronted and attacked Martin
He had a history of fighting as it is. What makes you think he would hesitate this time?
Zimmerman was 28. Hardly middle aged.
And yes, he left his car, but again that is NOT AGAINST THE LAW. And so many people say he should have listened to the 911 operator, well he DID. They told him to let them know if he does anything else. He watched him. There is NO evidence to suggest he confronted and attacked Martin
0
Posted on 7/14/13 at 6:13 am to CHSgc
quote:
CHSgc
Could you please tell me what law office you work for, or if you are self employed, just a name please?
I just want to make sure I never hire you for anything, if you are a lawyer, you're a pretty bad one..
Posted on 7/14/13 at 6:58 am to TigerBait2008
O'Mara and West post verdict news conference
If you didn't get to watch the trial, this explains why it should never have went to trial, and if you don't want to watch the full 30 minutes, just watch the last 3 minutes.
If you didn't get to watch the trial, this explains why it should never have went to trial, and if you don't want to watch the full 30 minutes, just watch the last 3 minutes.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 8:09 am to CHSgc
quote:
quote: First of all, your definition of justice is different than that used by our court system. That is the biggest inherent flaw in your post. Second, if Trayvon was using the level of force the defense says he was (and the prosecution offered no proof that he wasn't) then Zimmerman was justified. He could have easily been killed by what he claims Trayvon was doing. I'm an attorney. I'm eager to here a/b what your definition of "justice" is that I misunderstood so egregiously when I took the bar. Consider why Trayvon might've used force. He was confronted, likely in a hostile manner (by an armed civilian), by a person who had an established motive, who was ignoring the advice of professionals. The statutory definition of manslaughter is a PERFECTLY REASONABLE fit for this sort of case.
It is highly disappointing if your statement is true that you're an attorney. You are clearly disregarding the actual facts at presented at trial and condemning a man based on your own prejudices and reliance on media snippets.
The jury heard what happened the night of the crime. It was from an interview of Zimmerman before the media circus began and before Zimmerman was represented by counsel. Zimmerman did not confront Trayvon. Zimmerman was not ignoring the advice of dispatch when Trayvon stopped him. Neither of those things are true and the only way somebody could believe them to be true is if they disregarded the overwhelming evidence at trial. Zimmerman was headed back to his car when he was confronted by Martin. Zimmerman was attacked by Martin. The physical evidence supports Zimmerman's version as well.
I sincerely hope you are lying about being an attorney because any attorney should rely on the evidence presented, not their own personal feelings are misleading CNN tag lines.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 8:24 am to TigerBait2008
Haha 
Posted on 7/14/13 at 8:49 am to TigerBait2008
Damn, we agree. I doubt "evidence" will be presented here. Sounds oddly familiar and appropriate to this conversation.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 9:02 am to CHSgc
"There are numerous theories under which he could conceivably be prosecuted"
Do what? There are numerous "theories" which everybody in the freakin country that could "conceivably be prosecuted"
I'll have talking out yer arse for $1000 Alex.
Do what? There are numerous "theories" which everybody in the freakin country that could "conceivably be prosecuted"
I'll have talking out yer arse for $1000 Alex.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 9:09 am to mwlewis
quote:
I agree with TeLeFaWx.
Feels good, doesn't it?
Posted on 7/14/13 at 9:11 am to wadewilson
quote:
I'm not even teasing you right now, I agree with you.
The first time is the most painful. It gets better, I promise.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 9:56 am to TeLeFaWx
Thas gay, brah
Posted on 7/14/13 at 10:00 am to reservoir_dawg
quote:
Could you please tell me what law office you work for, or if you are self employed, just a name please?
I just want to make sure I never hire you for anything, if you are a lawyer, you're a pretty bad one..
LOL, I wouldn't sweat it, you couldn't afford me.
quote:
The jury heard what happened the night of the crime. It was from an interview of Zimmerman before the media circus began and before Zimmerman was represented by counsel. Zimmerman did not confront Trayvon. Zimmerman was not ignoring the advice of dispatch when Trayvon stopped him. Neither of those things are true and the only way somebody could believe them to be true is if they disregarded the overwhelming evidence at trial. Zimmerman was headed back to his car when he was confronted by Martin. Zimmerman was attacked by Martin. The physical evidence supports Zimmerman's version as well.
Most of this is circumstantial. The real issue (as I understand it, and I've freely admitted I didn't follow this trial all that closely) is whether he was privileged to use deadly force. As I've noted, under the general common law, I don't think he was (and whether you disagree or not it's certainly a question for a jury). Under FLA law, there is a laxer statutory standard, and the jury probably reached the correct result. I'm not going to cheer a standard, though, that results in a verdict like this. It seems to me, and many others, an egregious miscarriage of justice.
quote:
I sincerely hope you are lying about being an attorney because any attorney should rely on the evidence presented, not their own personal feelings are misleading CNN tag lines.
No, at trial a jury should rely on evidence presented. An attorney should make a case. Now when deciding whether to bring the case to trial the attorney should assess the evidence and probability of a conviction. Given what we're dealing w/ here, there was a political side to it, too. In the absence of witnesses, and using the FLA statute as a guideline, the case didn't have the greatest chance of success: especially if the strategy from Day 1 was not to put GZ on the stand. But I don't think you can fault the prosecution for pressing charges (nor would any judge uphold any sort of claim of a frivolous suit by the defense).
This post was edited on 7/14/13 at 10:02 am
Posted on 7/14/13 at 10:07 am to CHSgc
quote:
An attorney should make a case
quote:
But I don't think you can fault the prosecution for pressing charges
The State should seek the truth. It's clear from the presentations in the trial, lack of discovery, and press conferences, they did not.
This post was edited on 7/14/13 at 10:08 am
Posted on 7/14/13 at 10:12 am to Alahunter
quote:
The State should seek the truth. It's clear from the presentations in the trial, lack of discovery, and press conferences, they did not.
The truth is sussed out in the trial. That's the purpose of advocacy. It's definitely NOT the state's role to be impartial.
And I should point out that under FLA law it's VERY difficult to figure out the truth in a situation like this. In most states, the burden of proving self-defense is on the defense. In FLA, it's the opposite: the state has to prove its absence beyond a reasonable doubt. That's insane. And it's how you get a crazy result like GZ not even having to testify to prove his innocence after shooting and killing someone.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:08 am to CHSgc
It is always the states burden to prove guilt. To say someone has a burden to prove they are innocent is not only absurd, it goes against everything concerning Constitutional Rights and the rights of an individual. It is sad that a supposed educated person cant grasp that.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:13 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:It makes me feel a little dirty but I dont think I hate it.
Feels good, doesn't it?
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:14 am to CHSgc
quote:
LOL, I wouldn't sweat it, you couldn't afford me.
Wow. Douche achievement unlocked.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:16 am to mwlewis
So far I've agreed with Telefawx AND TB2008. That's my cue to leave the thread
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:22 am to CHSgc
quote:
It's definitely NOT the state's role to be impartial.
quote:
And it's how you get a crazy result like GZ not even having to testify to prove his innocence after shooting and killing someone.
Ho lee shite.
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:27 am to Robot Santa
quote:
And it's how you get a crazy result like GZ not even having to testify to prove his innocence after shooting and killing someone.
I don't believe what I just saw
Why on earth would you EVER willingly put a defendant on the stand plus it's not the defendant job to prove he is innocent
Posted on 7/14/13 at 11:29 am to Alahunter
quote:
It is always the states burden to prove guilt. To say someone has a burden to prove they are innocent is not only absurd, it goes against everything concerning Constitutional Rights and the rights of an individual. It is sad that a supposed educated person cant grasp that.
You're confusing things. It's up to the state to prove at the outset, yes. The state in this instance chose to go w/ 2nd degree murder which was an overreach, in my opinion, yet the jury did ask for clarification on manslaughter and it was available. As the defense, you can assert a defense of self-defense so long as you meet the elements for that defense. When you assert that privilege, however, it is usually up to you to prove that you were in fact acting in self-defense. In FLA, however, it is up to the prosecution. That is different from how most states do things, and its different from the common law. It creates a perverse incentive whereby if you're in an altercation w/ no witnesses your greatest chance at coming out clean is to kill the other party.
Page 14 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News