Trayvon Martin Case

[3rdnlng]

Can you or anyone else PLEASE tell me how "stand your ground" has anything whatsoever to do with this case?

 

You can't ask Fatty a difficult question. Didn't you know he has a life, let alone a family to take care of, and has no time for difficult questions here at PPP?

[NoSaint]

 

 

I don't disagree that the general public still has its doubts. The reason that it is nearly unanimous here that GZ is innocent, or at least not guilty is that in most cases the people addressing it at PPP are much more knowledgeable than the general public. Every once in awhile someone from the main board will drift down here, see the discussion and call us all nuts. Of course they haven't read an article or watched a report on this case since April of 2012.

 

Well I tend to lean your direction on this story, and agree you guys follow the news a bit closer than most.... Sometimes it turns into 6 guys telling each other how awesome they are and the two that disagree are just dumb, instead of productive conversation. GRANTED, when BFB and bird dog are the intellectual counterpart, its easy to fall into that.

 

Lots of well informed, reasonable folks landing on the other side on this one. I've been following, and enjoying, the debate on some other boards where the opposition is more formidable.

 

With it being a Florida jury, this one could be tough on both sides. Those loons are way unpredictable, and this isn't a black and white (hispanic) case (racial double meaning unintended, despite joke being so easy to slide in)

[3rdnlng]

Well I tend to lean your direction on this story, and agree you guys follow the news a bit closer than most.... Sometimes it turns into 6 guys telling each other how awesome they are and the two that disagree are just dumb, instead of productive conversation. GRANTED, when BFB and bird dog are the intellectual counterpart, its easy to fall into that.

 

Lots of well informed, reasonable folks landing on the other side on this one. I've been following, and enjoying, the debate on some other boards where the opposition is more formidable.

 

With it being a Florida jury, this one could be tough on both sides. Those loons are way unpredictable, and this isn't a black and white (hispanic) case (racial double meaning unintended, despite joke being so easy to slide in)

I started out absolutely neutral as to blame. The media and idiots like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Spike Lee, Frederica Wilson had already proclaimed GZ a cold-blooded killer who chased down the cherubic little boy in that picture. They then doctored tapes and somehow heard words like "coon" that were never said. This board was going at it with those of us urging caution vs. those that believed the media. The media hype just fed it. When the facts started coming out and they colloborated GZ's version most of the people that had believed the media disappeared, but a few of them stayed around to try to save face and opt for changing the law, or reducing the charges to manslaughter.

 

I'd be interested to see rational posts by rational people who don't believe GZ's version. I'm just going by what the facts tell me.

[dayman]

You can't ask Fatty a difficult question. Didn't you know he has a life, let alone a family to take care of, and has no time for difficult questions here at PPP?

 

How is that a difficult question when they waived the hearing?

[3rdnlng]

How is that a difficult question when they waived the hearing?

 

Every question for Fatty is a difficult one.

[TakeYouToTasker]

What we should be taking away from this event is that the "stand your ground" law needs to be tweaked at the very least.

 

Imagine if you were that the opposite of what happened happened. Let say GZ didn't get to his gun in time and TM beet him to death there on the sidewalk. Should TM get off with nothing? after all, he would have been "standing his ground" wouldn't he?

 

Once that fight started who ever ended up killing the other could claim self defense under "stand your ground".

 

The law needs to be tweaked. Not removed, just tweaked.

 

 

 

*beat* not beet. !@#$ you dyslexia. !@#$ you right to hell!

"Beating someone to death" is not self-defense, as it is a prolonged action well exceeding the need to defend oneself, and transitions into assault at the point the attacker is incapacitated.

[....lybob]

"Beating someone to death" is not self-defense, as it is a prolonged action well exceeding the need to defend oneself, and transitions into assault at the point the attacker is incapacitated.

Yeah but if I suspected that someone was armed I'd have to beat/choke that person into unconsciousness and then relieve them of their weapon- their incapacitation is where I'd have to stop I have no right to continue to beat them to intentionally cause their death but there is a good possibility that the injuries I inflict to render them incapacitated could ultimately lead to their death.

[KD in CA]

Yeah but if I suspected that someone was armed I'd have to beat/choke that person into unconsciousness and then relieve them of their weapon- their incapacitation is where I'd have to stop I have no right to continue to beat them to intentionally cause their death but there is a good possibility that the injuries I inflict to render them incapacitated could ultimately lead to their death.

 

Funny how so many 'Trayvon' fan-boys never seen to have this opinion when a cop hits or shoots some low-life POS who's all hopped up on drugs and refusing to comply.

[TakeYouToTasker]

Yeah but if I suspected that someone was armed I'd have to beat/choke that person into unconsciousness and then relieve them of their weapon- their incapacitation is where I'd have to stop I have no right to continue to beat them to intentionally cause their death but there is a good possibility that the injuries I inflict to render them incapacitated could ultimately lead to their death.

Which would be fine.

[B-Man]

Florida’s standard jury instruction for murder 2 notes that:

An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:

1. a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
   
   
2. is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
   
   
3. is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.
   
   

 

Notice step 2. Under Florida law the mere fact that an armed man kills another does not prove a “depraved mind” (Poole v. State, Bellamy v. State, and Light v. State). Typically, the prosecution proves “ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent” through evidence of a long-standing grievance or some unusually wrongful or aggressive conduct on the part of the attacker.

 

In this case Zimmerman and Martin did not know each other, so there was no existing grievance. That’s why the prosecution’s narrative claims that Zimmerman “profiled, pursued, and killed” Martin, describing his conduct as that of a racist, “wannabe” cop who ruthlessly pursued the frightened Martin.

Let’s examine the evidentiary basis for both the “racist” and “pursuit” lines of argument.

Zimmerman as Racist

 

Racism and a “depraved mind” are well linked in Florida law. In Hooker v. State , for example, Hooker killed a man while “looking for Mexicans to run out of town”. The appellate court said his racially motivated actions “fell squarely within the statutory definition of second degree murder, … evincing a depraved mind.“

 

This is the real reason why the prosecution and the Martin family either blatantly encouraged or (at minimum) didn’t discourage these now-debunked stories:

• NBC falsely doctored the 911 call to make it look like Zimmerman mentioned Martin’s race to the dispatcher unprompted, when in fact the dispatcher asked him.
  
• CNN claimed George said “f**king coon” on the 911 tape, a horrible racial slur. Tom Owen, an audio forensics expert, confirmed Zimmerman’s claim that he said ‘f***king punks’.
  

 

At the same time, any facts that didn’t fit the “racist” narrative found little mainstream coverage, including:

• Zimmerman and his wife tutored black (and white) children for free on weekends.
  
• Zimmerman partnered with an African-American to open a business in 2004.
  
• When the white son of a local police lieutenant escaped discipline after beating a black man Zimmerman circulated flyers demanding punishment.
  
• The FBI spent months looking for a racial motivation in this killing, but found no evidence to support such a finding.
  

 

Today, 16 months after the shooting, there remains no substantive evidence that Zimmerman is racist.

 

Alternatively, the prosecution can try their hand at proving that Zimmerman engaged in an unrelenting pursuit of his ‘perp’. The only direct evidence of this comes from the testimony of the now legendary Witness #8, who claimed she was on the phone with Martin leading up to the conflict. She recounted how Martin told her he was being followed, how he broke contact, and then was followed yet again. She claimed she could she could overhear Trayvon ask Zimmerman why he was following him, then hear Trayvon getting knocked down. If true, Zimmerman was clearly the aggressor, supporting depraved mind.

 

Unfortunately, witness 8 has proved considerably less honest than the prosecution would hope. She lied under oath about why it took her more than three weeks to come forward (she was not, as she said, in the hospital), she was 18 years old at the time and not 16 as claimed, and although she was presented as Trayvon’s girlfriend she repeatedly misspelled his name.

 

There’s also the fact that she never approached prosecutors, instead being ‘found’ by the family’s lawyer and introduced to the world via an interview published to media outlets—that lawyer has now been ordered deposed.

 

Absent alternative evidence that Zimmerman unrelentingly pursued Martin, the prosecution will have a difficult time claiming an aggressive pursuit as evidence of Zimmerman’s depraved mind.

 

Zimmerman’s Call to 911: Act of a “Depraved Mind”?

 

Perhaps the single most powerful piece of evidence against Zimmerman having acted with a “depraved mind” is his 911 call. Zimmerman made it at the first hint of trouble and stayed on the phone requesting police assistance even after losing sight of Martin.

 

In the dozens of Florida cases I have read that address the issue of a “depraved mind” murder, not one defendant described as possessing a “depraved mind” phoned police immediately prior to the killing and kept them informed in real time as the situation developed.

 

Perhaps new evidence will emerge during the trial. Today, however, there is a lack of substantive evidence of Zimmerman’s “depraved mind”. This makes it is difficult to imagine how any rational jury could conclude that the prosecution has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman is guilty of murder 2.

Manslaughter—The Next Iteration of the Narrative?

 

Why charge murder 2 on such little evidence of a “depraved mind”? Perhaps the prosecution believed more damning evidence would be found, or they hoped that the murder charge would lead to a plea bargain or compromise jury verdict on manslaughter. In Florida manslaughter is a lesser included offense to murder 2, and the jury will certainly have the manslaughter instruction to consider in their deliberations. .

 

Indeed, unless new and revelatory evidence emerges of Zimmerman’s “depraved mind”, I anticipate that the prosecution’s narrative to re-center on manslaughter as their most likely “win” in this case. We’ll discuss how manslaughter differs from murder 2, and how such a shift might play out in this trial, in a future post.

Andrew F. Branca is a MA lawyer with a long-standing interest in the law of self defense. He authored the seminal book “The Law of Self Defense”

 

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/getting-to-murder-2-finding-george-zimmermans-depraved-mind//#more

[B-Man]

Zimmerman Prosecution’s Voice Expert admits: “This is not really good evidence”

 

 

.

[B-Man]

 

Playing the race card in the Zimmerman case to the bitter end

 

If you have been following Andrew Branca’s excellent coverage of the jury selection in the George Zimmerman case, you know that many of the prospective jurors were aware of race being injected into the case by the media and others.

 

Those initial media and activist narratives — such as that Zimmerman suggested to the 911 operator that Martin was suspicious because black or that Zimmerman used the term “coon” to describe Martin — have been completely and thoroughly debunked. Yet those narratives live on.

 

{snip}

 

Now you can add another bit of irresponsible rhetoric from Benjamin Crump, one of the Martin family’s attorneys. I previously have documented the irresponsible media conduct by Crump with regard to supposed evidence in the case, From seeking justice to obstructing justice.

 

Now Crump has done it again, this time claiming that acquittal of Zimmerman may cause future shootings of black youth:

Here’s the full quote from The Root (emphasis added):

TR:

Are there broader legal implications to the case that aren’t being discussed?

BC:

Yes, absolutely. And it’s troubling. The larger issue is the precedent that a potential acquittal of George Zimmerman would set. It would show how far this country still has to go with respect to offering equal protection under the law regardless of race.

If Zimmerman gets off, it will tell other deranged minds and trigger-happy police officers that they can kill black and brown boys with impunity.

 

It is very clear from this case — and American history in general — that if it had been a black man who had tracked and killed a white child, no defense would be sufficient. That man would be in jail and likely facing the death penalty. George Zimmerman is every parent’s worst nightmare. A self-proclaimed vigilante, on prescription drugs, taunting and tracking a child in the dark.

 

 

No, if Zimmerman is acquitted it will mean that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s the standard to which all prosecutions are held, regardless of the race of the defendant or the victim.

 

By injecting racial politics into the case, Crump is attempting to deprive Zimmerman of the right to a fair trial.

 

Having listened to much of the jury voir dire, and having read Andrew Branca’s coverage, I have my doubts whether George Zimmerman can get a fair trial.

 

Zimmerman’s attorneys will need to do a thorough job continuing to vet potential jurors. As the racial heat likely will be turned up by outside agitators, the Judge was wise to sequester the jury.

Edited June 16, 2013 by B-Man

[Rob's House]

I wonder if this !@#$ rag considered the contrapositive of this equation. What effect might it have on others to know that you're no longer allowed to defend yourself from an attacker repeatedly beating you about the head if the attacker is black.

 

I know the race baiters have this garbage coded in their DNA and can't help but stir racial **** whenever and wherever the possibility of doing such exists, but on the whole this case I believe will prove counter-productive. Why? Because no one outside the circle of pu$$ies that see racism everywhere they can, really believes this is a racial incident. Most people see this for what it is - an opportunity to exploit a situation for personal and/or political gain.

 

I generally turn a deaf ear to cries of racism because in my life, for every legitimate claim of racism I've heard there have been a dozen bogus claims before it. I'm not alone on this. This kind of sentiment has no real value besides creating strife and resentment between races; and it's of the variety that leads to violence rather than harmony.

 

And anyone who speaks of "black and brown" people is a blow hard d-bag who should do the world a favor and die.

[Jauronimo]

Another white-hispanic allegedly shot and killed a black man execution style and there are have been zero marches and zero cries of racism. Are skittles and iced tea the determining factor, or are hoodies the attention getter?

 

http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/22638740/2013/06/19/investigation-involving-pats-te-hernandez-ruled-a-homicide

[KD in CA]

I wonder if this !@#$ rag considered the contrapositive of this equation. What effect might it have on others to know that you're no longer allowed to defend yourself from an attacker repeatedly beating you about the head if the attacker is black.

 

I know the race baiters have this garbage coded in their DNA and can't help but stir racial **** whenever and wherever the possibility of doing such exists, but on the whole this case I believe will prove counter-productive. Why? Because no one outside the circle of pu$$ies that see racism everywhere they can, really believes this is a racial incident. Most people see this for what it is - an opportunity to exploit a situation for personal and/or political gain.

 

I generally turn a deaf ear to cries of racism because in my life, for every legitimate claim of racism I've heard there have been a dozen bogus claims before it. I'm not alone on this. This kind of sentiment has no real value besides creating strife and resentment between races; and it's of the variety that leads to violence rather than harmony.

 

And anyone who speaks of "black and brown" people is a blow hard d-bag who should do the world a favor and die.

As the kids would say, this post is full of win. Especially the last line.

 

Another white-hispanic allegedly shot and killed a black man execution style and there are have been zero marches and zero cries of racism. Are skittles and iced tea the determining factor, or are hoodies the attention getter?

 

http://www.myfoxbost...uled-a-homicide

[B-Man]

Another white-hispanic allegedly shot and killed a black man execution style and there are have been zero marches and zero cries of racism. Are skittles and iced tea the determining factor, or are hoodies the attention getter?

 

http://www.myfoxbost...uled-a-homicide

 

 

 

Day 8 end-of-day wrap-up

 

Zimmerman Jury Selection Profiles- “Top 40″ Advanced to Next Round

 

.

[IDBillzFan]

An all-woman jury.

 

Six women. Asked to make a unanimous decision. While being sequestered.

 

I hope one of Reginald Rose's kids is paying attention.

[B-Man]

The New York Times Admits Its Reporting on the Trayvon Martin Case Has Been Fundamentally Wrong.

 

 

The Trayvon coverage was all about energizing black/liberal turnout and calling Republicans racist before the 2012 elections.

[Doc]

Zimmerman Prosecution’s Voice Expert admits: “This is not really good evidence”

And as a result, no audio testimony will be allowed.

[B-Man]

The race issue in the George Zimmerman shooting of Trayvon Martin has been pushed early and often.

 

We’ve covered the false accusations that Zimmerman called Trayvon Martin a “coon” on the initial 911 call, and that Zimmerman suggested that Martin was suspicious because black (that was an NBC editing fabrication).

 

The entire focus on a “hoodie” was a concoction of activists trying to portray a racial angle, and gullible students fell for it around the country:

The hoodie has become the symbol of protests regarding the shooting of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman.

From images of former Michigan Gov.

Jennifer Granholm

wearing a hoodie, to the “

million hoodie march

,” to Havard law students wearing hoodies with a sign “

Do we look suspicious?

,” to Congressman

Bobby Rush

appearing on the House floor in a hoodie, the hoodie has come to symbolize alleged racial profiling by Zimmerman which led to the shooting.

The symbolism is powerful, and addresses wider concerns about racial profiling

and

actual use

of hoodies by gangs and

criminals

of many races.

But as relates to the Zimmerman-Martin case, the hoodie at best is speculative symbolism, not based on any known facts connected to the shooting. While Martin was wearing a hoodie that night, there is nothing other than surmise to suggest that Martin was considered suspicious by Zimmerman for that reason.

In the 911 call (

audio

,

transcript

) in which Zimmerman reported a suspicious person, the clothing Trayvon was wearing was not initially mentioned …

A hoodie was mentioned but only in response to questioning by the dispatcher as to what the suspicious person was wearing

 

There is no evidence that George Zimmerman is racist and strong evidence to the contrary. The media ignores Zimmerman’s own mixed-race background when discussing racial aspects of the case.

 

{snip}

 

We will find out in a few weeks how the jury rules. But based on what we know, I don’t think anyone with credibility can rule out a not guilty verdict. Perhaps there is evidence we have not heard (I’m waiting to find out about bullet trajectory and whether it jives with Zimmerman’s account), but based on what we have heard a not guilty verdict seems like a distinct possibility.

 

A significant portion of the community is ill-prepared for a not guilty verdict, because for over a year they have been subjected to a steady stream agitation portraying the case as race-based.

 

Here’s a tweet I saved as the jury selection of 5 white women and 1 Hispanic woman was seated on Thursday.

bPositive @bPositive_

 

The Black & Latino communities are represented by 1/2 of a juror on the #GeorgeZimmerman jury.

4:13 PM - 21 Jun 2013

 

 

 

With the evidence not seeming to be as conclusive as public opinion in the Martin case, this is being set up for a major blow-up, in which expectations and agitation confront the legal rights of the accused.

 

 

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/saturday-night-card-games-predictive-powers-on-display-in-the-zimmerman-case//#more