Trayvon Martin Case

[boyst]

http://legalinsurrec...man-case//#more

that brings up a lot of great points. But folks at my work. Mostly lower class black folk are entirely confused by why I believe Zimmerman will not be found guilty. They assume I think he was right to do it, and Martin was deserving...not that Zimmerman was simply in his right to defend himself.

[3rdnlng]

that brings up a lot of great points. But folks at my work. Mostly lower class black folk are entirely confused by why I believe Zimmerman will not be found guilty. They assume I think he was right to do it, and Martin was deserving...not that Zimmerman was simply in his right to defend himself.

 

We've talked work before, so I pretty much know the mentality of who your production workers are. You'll be blue in the face and still not convincing them that Trayvon was no different than them---held down by the people in authority or exploited by the "man".

[Doc]

http://legalinsurrec...man-case//#more

Wait, Bill Belichick is black?

 

And I seriously hope that if Zimmerman is found not guilty, this doesn't turn into another Rodney King episode.

[Joe Miner]

that brings up a lot of great points. But folks at my work. Mostly lower class black folk are entirely confused by why I believe Zimmerman will not be found guilty. They assume I think he was right to do it, and Martin was deserving...not that Zimmerman was simply in his right to defend himself.

 

I don't think there's any way Zimmerman doesn't get convicted of something.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Joe Miner

[KD in CA]

I don't think there's any way Zimmerman doesn't get convicted of something.

And no matter what he gets convicted of, the angry left will still amp up their 'outrage' for all to see.

[Joe Miner]

And no matter what he gets convicted of, the angry left will still amp up their 'outrage' for all to see.

 

I'm curious to see if there will be riots.

[B-Man]

I don't think there's any way Zimmerman doesn't get convicted of something.

 

Well, he's on trial for Second degree Murder...........................they either convict him of that or not.

 

They just can't change in the middle..........................

 

 

or am I being naive ?

 

.

[Joe Miner]

Well, he's on trial for Second degree Murder...........................they either convict him of that or not.

 

They just can't change in the middle..........................

 

 

or am I being naive ?

 

.

 

I'm not a legal expert, but I think 2nd degree sometimes comes with the option of Manslaughter. Either way, I think he gets convicted.

 

At some point in history, I assume the truth was what actually happen.

 

Then the truth changed to what you can prove.

 

Now it's what you get people to agree is fair based on emotion.

[Fan in San Diego]

I'm no legal expert but I think he lost his right to the stand your ground defense when he followed TM after being told by the police to not follow and stay in your car.

[Jauronimo]

I'm no legal expert but I think he lost his right to the stand your ground defense when he followed TM after being told by the police to not follow and stay in your car.

Told by a 911 dispatcher not by the police. And if Zimm's version of events are true, it likely wouldn't matter if he had chased Trayvon.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Jauronimo

[3rdnlng]

I'm no legal expert but I think he lost his right to the stand your ground defense when he followed TM after being told by the police to not follow and stay in your car.

 

 

He was not told to stay in his car. When GZ stated that he was following TM by foot the dispatcher said something along the lines of "you don't have to do that". Besides the injuries to GZ that back up his version of events, the fact that the altercation happened back near where GZ's car was parked is damning for the prosecution's case, further backing up GZ's story which makes it likely that TM would have to have followed him, thus making him the possible aggressor.

 

I believe we are on the 92nd page of this thread. Please people, if you haven't been following the case in any detail and are still commenting on the bs that was put out a year or so ago, do yourself a favor and refrain from saying anything more. Your silly ass misinformed comments have already been refuted here, many, many times. If I sound a little harsh it's because periodically someone from the Wall invariably ventures down here with no knowledge of the case and starts crying skittles, cherubic Trayvon along with cold blooded killer GZ and coon. When they see their opinions get shredded here they just disappear, never taking their medicine like a man.

[B-Man]

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-trial-liveday-1-live-opening-statements-theories-of-the-case//#more

 

1st day update: by Andrew Branca

 

There were three aspects of the State’s opening statement that I found particularly remarkable.

 

First, that it was State Attorney Guy who made the opening, rather than his boss, de la Rionda, or for that matter his boss–the special prosecutor actually appointed by the Florida governor to bring this to trial, Angela Corey. (Both de la Rionda and Corey were present in the court room.)

Second, the brevity of Guy’s comments–from start to finish his opening remarks took a mere 30 minutes. Given that the vital strategic importance of the opening statement, the State’s relative “freedom of action” at this stage of the proceeding, and the fact that this is a murder in the second degree case of national prominence and in which the State has surely invested well in excess of a million dollars, a 30 minute opening seems a rather modest effort.

 

Third, the almost complete absence of evidentiary basis for the State’s opening. Attorney Guy opened by quoting Zimmerman’s brief cursing on the non-emergency call, placing considerable emphasis on this as evidence of an “evil mind”, and then went on to rely far more on dramatic intonations than on actual facts in evidence. Even worse from the State’s perspective, many of the facts he did mention would seem favorable to the defense–for example, that there had been a recent surge in crime in Zimmerman’s neighborhood.

 

Many other facts seemed an effort to shock the jury, but were of little or no relevancy to guilt. He repeatedly referenced the fact that Zimmerman’s handgun was loaded to its normal capacity, as if this showed some evil intent. In fact, every Sheriff’s deputy in that court room has his sidearm loaded in exactly the same manner, as intended in the gun’s design. Similarly, he kept referring to the handgun as a “semi-automatic,” which it certainly is, but he may as well have been referring to its color or barrel length for all the relevancy it has to whether Zimmerman acted in lawful self-defense or committed murder in the second degree.

 

There also seemed to be an almost desperate effort to recast marginally interpretable pieces of evidence as instances of Zimmerman lying outright to the police and others. Guy mentioned, for example, that Zimmerman claimed Martin attacked him “right after” the end of Zimmerman’s non-emergency call to police. Guy almost seemed to shout, “Ah-HAH!” with a pointed finger in the air when he informed the jury that in fact a whole two minutes had lapsed between the end of the call and the start of the confrontation.

 

In summary, the State’s opening remarks seem to me to be a very weak effort, indeed.

 

 

 

In contrast, Attorney West appears almost Terminator-like in his presentation of the defense’s theory of the case, their compelling narrative of George Zimmerman’s innocence, the desperate fight for his life, the final instant when only his gun could save him, and George barely surviving, bloody and staggering, his brush with death.

 

West rolled out exhibit after exhibit, including Google map images of the housing complex generally and the scene of the conflict in particular.

 

He played both Zimmerman’s non-emergency call to police as well as Witness #11′s 911 call, both their full-length and in a step-by-step fashion, comparing each portion to a timeline of events. The recordings made clear that the “cursing” so strongly emphasized by the State was said in a tone of exasperation, not hatred.

 

He described how Zimmerman carried his gun loaded in the completely ordinary fashion, as he’d been taught by a friend who has long been a Federal law enforcement officer.

 

He placed the expected witness testimony in context, emphasizing the portions of that evidence that were consistent with George’s absence of either guilt or a depraved mind, and explaining why some testimony that suggested guilt would be shown to be impossible given the facts (for example, one witness claims that Zimmerman shot Martin in the back, but forensics clearly shows Martin was only shot once in the chest).

 

After 90 minutes of this West seemed prepared to continue indefinitely, but the Court called a lunch recess at 12:30. When the Court returns at 1:30PM West will resume his opening statement, and I would not be at all surprised if he continued for an additional 90 minutes.

 

.

[Chef Jim]

I'm curious to see if there will be riots.

 

There will be.

[Jauronimo]

There will be.

Of course there will be. Rioting is a time honored tradition. How else will the poor and oppressed seize the attention of the ruling class and prove who-f$cking-knows to god-only-knows-who as they by burn down their own neighborhood and steal each others ****, leaving themselves far worse off than before?

[Just Jack]

I'm curious to see if there will be riots.

There will be.

Of course there will be. Rioting is a time honored tradition. How else will the poor and oppressed seize the attention of the ruling class and prove who-f$cking-knows to god-only-knows-who as they by burn down their own neighborhood and steal each others ****, leaving themselves far worse off than before?

 

I could use a new TV, about 50-55 inches, if anyone wants to pick one up for me. I'll pay for shipping and give you a couple hundred for your trouble. But I won't bail you out.

[Jauronimo]

I could use a new TV, about 50-55 inches, if anyone wants to pick one up for me. I'll pay for shipping and give you a couple hundred for your trouble. But I won't bail you out.

As it is written, let he who is without 55" high definition flat screen television cast the first brick.

[Rob's House]

I'm no legal expert but I think he lost his right to the stand your ground defense when he followed TM after being told by the police to not follow and stay in your car.

 

Stand your ground defense has nothing to do with this case.

[dayman]

Saw some clips of opening arguments on the news just now. George's lawyer has a good approach/demeanor. Looked good for him imo...based on what very little I just saw.

[3rdnlng]

Saw some clips of opening arguments on the news just now. George's lawyer has a good approach/demeanor. Looked good for him imo...based on what very little I just saw.

 

Here's another man's opinion, down near the end of the article:

 

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-24-09-54-13

[dayman]

Here's another man's opinion, down near the end of the article:

 

http://hosted.ap.org...-06-24-09-54-13

 

That was clumsy and a stupid risk but all in all I liked what I saw from his opening (they did not show the knock-knock joke lol). Obviously if he wanted to make the point that after all that jury selection business they just wanted a fair jury that doesn't think they know Zimmerman from the media....he could have done it better. But all in all...to me his style is the perfect counter to what the prosecution will bring.