Trayvon Martin Trial

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
What are the chances obamao gives zimmerman a pardon if convicted? LOLOL[/quote]

That would so comical. His life would last as long as a quick breath. Not even sure who would kill him first people who hate Obama or people that support Tray. It would look like that Movie “Warriors” or “It’s a Mad Mad Mad World”
[/quote]

I’m pretty sure if obamao said zim was cool, he’d probably be in a JayZ video and sitting next to anderson or wolfe on cnn. [/quote]

Hahhahahahahahahha, man Jay Z isn’t even putting Obama on speed dial anymore hahahahah

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
What are the chances obamao gives zimmerman a pardon if convicted? LOLOL[/quote]

That would so comical. His life would last as long as a quick breath. Not even sure who would kill him first people who hate Obama or people that support Tray. It would look like that Movie “Warriors” or “It’s a Mad Mad Mad World”
[/quote]

It would be more like Malcolm X.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
What are the chances obamao gives zimmerman a pardon if convicted? LOLOL[/quote]

That would so comical. His life would last as long as a quick breath. Not even sure who would kill him first people who hate Obama or people that support Tray. It would look like that Movie “Warriors” or “It’s a Mad Mad Mad World”
[/quote]

It would be more like Malcolm X. [/quote]

The Running Man with Arnold Schwarzenegger.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
What are the chances obamao gives zimmerman a pardon if convicted? LOLOL[/quote]

That would so comical. His life would last as long as a quick breath. Not even sure who would kill him first people who hate Obama or people that support Tray. It would look like that Movie “Warriors” or “It’s a Mad Mad Mad World”
[/quote]

It would be more like Malcolm X. [/quote]

ummmmmmm, the end part because that was only one dude and no way. It would be a mob scene. People would kill him that could care less about Tray just to piss off Obama.

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:
What are the chances obamao gives zimmerman a pardon if convicted? LOLOL[/quote]

That would so comical. His life would last as long as a quick breath. Not even sure who would kill him first people who hate Obama or people that support Tray. It would look like that Movie “Warriors” or “It’s a Mad Mad Mad World”
[/quote]

It would be more like Malcolm X. [/quote]

The Running Man with Arnold Schwarzenegger.[/quote]

hahahahahahaha, yeahhhhh I can’t see Zimm in those tights. hahahahahahah

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

So, how many jurors are there… IIRC 6 and 3 alternates? So 6 of his peers will be deciding his fate. Is it best out of 6, or do they all have to agree on it? And then there’s the wildcard, the judge’s instructions on how to interpret the law. I think it’ll be cut 'n dry here unless there are distinctions to be made for a lesser charge. Some of the judge’s instructions can in effect hamstring a jury.

Rob[/quote]

Vote has to be unanimous for murder of any degree, and in fact I think manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide as well. Further they cannot look to convict for a lesser charge–prosecution’s ridiculous grandstand idea to go after murder 2 killed the chance that they could have got a lesser charge to stick in trial. They should have played it smart if they wanted to win, but once the trial started they were stuck with an unprovable murder 2 charge.[/quote]

The prosecution has entered a motion for lesser charges, which the judge has to rule on by today. The defense is sticking to murder 2 or aquittal.

The prosecution is perversely trying to salvage some “justice” out of this debacle.

Rob[/quote]

Guess i was wrong. I was pretty sure you had to stick to the charges you brought to trial.

The prosecution did damage to their chance of convicting zimmerman on manslaughter by going thru the whole trial after murder 2. If they had spent the whole trial going “you don’t need to pay attention to the defense’s xyz to prove manslaughter, only murder” they could have constantly had the lower burden of proof in front of the jury reminding them day in and day out. As it is the defense was able to spend the whole trial doing just the opposite because the DA doesn’t have shit for a murder 2 charge. Like it or not, those kinds of things stay with a jury after the recent change here to include a manslaughter charge.

That being said, i still wouldn’t want to be zimmerman now with the decidedly greater possibility the jury might be able to find manslaughter appropriate. Rude surprise for the team.

Well, i would never want to be zimmerman at all, but you know what i meant.

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]Aragorn wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

So, how many jurors are there… IIRC 6 and 3 alternates? So 6 of his peers will be deciding his fate. Is it best out of 6, or do they all have to agree on it? And then there’s the wildcard, the judge’s instructions on how to interpret the law. I think it’ll be cut 'n dry here unless there are distinctions to be made for a lesser charge. Some of the judge’s instructions can in effect hamstring a jury.

Rob[/quote]

Vote has to be unanimous for murder of any degree, and in fact I think manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide as well. Further they cannot look to convict for a lesser charge–prosecution’s ridiculous grandstand idea to go after murder 2 killed the chance that they could have got a lesser charge to stick in trial. They should have played it smart if they wanted to win, but once the trial started they were stuck with an unprovable murder 2 charge.[/quote]

The prosecution has entered a motion for lesser charges, which the judge has to rule on by today. The defense is sticking to murder 2 or aquittal.

The prosecution is perversely trying to salvage some “justice” out of this debacle.

Rob[/quote]

Guess i was wrong. I was pretty sure you had to stick to the charges you brought to trial.

The prosecution did damage to their chance of convicting zimmerman on manslaughter by going thru the whole trial after murder 2. If they had spent the whole trial going “you don’t need to pay attention to the defense’s xyz to prove manslaughter, only murder” they could have constantly had the lower burden of proof in front of the jury reminding them day in and day out. As it is the defense was able to spend the whole trial doing just the opposite because the DA doesn’t have shit for a murder 2 charge. Like it or not, those kinds of things stay with a jury after the recent change here to include a manslaughter charge.

That being said, i still wouldn’t want to be zimmerman now with the decidedly greater possibility the jury might be able to find manslaughter appropriate. Rude surprise for the team.

Well, i would never want to be zimmerman at all, but you know what i meant.[/quote]

Either side can enter a request for other charges at any time. Yeah, 2nd degree murder was a stretch for the prosecution from day 1 with a weak case. But they were shooting for the stars. At the last second, they entered the manslaughter option.

So that’s how it goes to the jury. I’d have to see how the judge instructs the jury on the interpretation of the new charge, it could easily go either way. I give 60-40 odds for a manslaughter conviction.

Rob

the defense still has a number of tricks up there sleeve… Zimmerman won’t be convicted of anything

So what lesson you all should be learning from this is… there is no such thing as a fair trial. If people want YOU to be convicted, they will find a way to do it. There is no law-abiding system.

Welcome to reality.

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…[/quote]

being “white” is the new black
calling someone a “creepy ass cracker” is perfectly acceptable
having your nails did for court is more important than being able to speak or read
if you’re dead son becomes famous, trade mark his name and make that paper
avoid everything in florida that isnt a beach, or Gatorland.

[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
the defense still has a number of tricks up there sleeve… Zimmerman won’t be convicted of anything[/quote]

They’re in closing arguments and the prosecution’s circus side-show act was yesterday. Today the defense presents theirs and there really should be no surprises or tricks. It’s all about how they present it and what the jury believes is right.

The judge still has to instruct the jury on how to interpret the law on each charge scenario.

Rob

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…[/quote]

being “white” is the new black
calling someone a “creepy ass cracker” is perfectly acceptable
having your nails did for court is more important than being able to speak or read
if you’re dead son becomes famous, trade mark his name and make that paper
avoid everything in florida that isnt a beach, or Gatorland. [/quote]

Not sure when Cracker became a curse? I mean hell Ritz Crackers, Cracker barrel, soup and Crackers. Is it really something you convict a person for if so then Ritz owes some white dudes a lot of cash.

But the fat chick was a sad display.

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is… there is no such thing as a fair trial. If people want YOU to be convicted, they will find a way to do it. There is no law-abiding system.

Welcome to reality.[/quote]

The deal cost the Sanford police chief his job a year ago, he was doing good police work but the powers that be ousted him. The city caved into a lot of media pressure, not a good thing.

At the last minute, the prosecution enters the motion for other charges, everyone knew this was coming. Ultimately, it comes down to 6 jurors who will decide, they are all women, if they’re all cycling at the time or going menopausal, anything is on the table.

Rob

12 Jul 2013

Judge In Zimmerman Case Pressured by Obama Administration?

Bizarre outburst by Judge Nelson against Zimmerman suggests Prejudice.

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones

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 Nelsons 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 Zimmermans 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.

Judge Nelson also ruled this week that Trayvon Martin’s text messages,
which showed that Martin had been involved in fights before and was
trying to buy or sell a gun, cannot be shown to the jury, which some
suggested was another indication of an anti-Zimmerman bias.

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is… there is no such thing as a fair trial. If people want YOU to be convicted, they will find a way to do it. There is no law-abiding system.

Welcome to reality.[/quote]

The deal cost the Sanford police chief his job a year ago, he was doing good police work but the powers that be ousted him. The city caved into a lot of media pressure, not a good thing.

At the last minute, the prosecution enters the motion for other charges, everyone knew this was coming. Ultimately, it comes down to 6 jurors who will decide, they are all women, if they’re all cycling at the time or going menopausal, anything is on the table.

Rob[/quote]

I’m shocked they can change shit up at the end of a trial. Is that a normal practice? I thought they did not Prove murder. I mean dumbass yes, left the house with the hope of killing someone naaaa

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is… there is no such thing as a fair trial. If people want YOU to be convicted, they will find a way to do it. There is no law-abiding system.

Welcome to reality.[/quote]

The deal cost the Sanford police chief his job a year ago, he was doing good police work but the powers that be ousted him. The city caved into a lot of media pressure, not a good thing.

At the last minute, the prosecution enters the motion for other charges, everyone knew this was coming. Ultimately, it comes down to 6 jurors who will decide, they are all women, if they’re all cycling at the time or going menopausal, anything is on the table.

Rob[/quote]

I’m shocked they can change shit up at the end of a trial. Is that a normal practice? I thought they did not Prove murder. I mean dumbass yes, left the house with the hope of killing someone naaaa
[/quote]

Either side can enter motions for other charges at any time during the trial. Aggravated assault was talked about, which could have been a lock for the prosection. I don’t see why it wasn’t ponied up to the court. From day 1, murder-2 was a pipe dream. Manslaughter, maybe easier but it still has a lot of things associated with it that the case has to meet for a fair conviction. In the end, the jury can flip a coin or do rock-paper-scissors for any charge, the judge may not like it, but its a possibility and it’ll stick.

Rob

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…
[/quote]
A gun might make up for a lack of balls but not for a lack brains.

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is… there is no such thing as a fair trial. If people want YOU to be convicted, they will find a way to do it. There is no law-abiding system.

Welcome to reality.[/quote]

The deal cost the Sanford police chief his job a year ago, he was doing good police work but the powers that be ousted him. The city caved into a lot of media pressure, not a good thing.

At the last minute, the prosecution enters the motion for other charges, everyone knew this was coming. Ultimately, it comes down to 6 jurors who will decide, they are all women, if they’re all cycling at the time or going menopausal, anything is on the table.

Rob[/quote]

I’m shocked they can change shit up at the end of a trial. Is that a normal practice? I thought they did not Prove murder. I mean dumbass yes, left the house with the hope of killing someone naaaa
[/quote]

Either side can enter motions for other charges at any time during the trial. Aggravated assault was talked about, which could have been a lock for the prosection. I don’t see why it wasn’t ponied up to the court. From day 1, murder-2 was a pipe dream. Manslaughter, maybe easier but it still has a lot of things associated with it that the case has to meet for a fair conviction. In the end, the jury can flip a coin or do rock-paper-scissors for any charge, the judge may not like it, but its a possibility and it’ll stick.

Rob[/quote]
Are such mid-trial changes unique to Florida? I never heard of such a thing.[/quote]

I believe that the practice is widespread in the justice community. When a case is not going to plan, the defense or prosecution may bid to enter another charge. One that may have a better change at salvaging a difficult case.

Rob

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…
[/quote]
A gun might make up for a lack of balls but not for a lack brains. [/quote]

The more I look at Zimmerman, the more I don’t like him and what he did. Was he part vigilante? Maybe so, but hard to prove in court.

If you own a firearm, it becomes your responsibility to know the laws that go with it. This includes walking around as an HOA neighborhood watch representative.

The HOA is on the hook for what he did, I believe they may have settled with the Martin family. Will the HOA go after Zimmerman at the end of everything? Probably. Will the Martin family sue for wrongful death? Very likely.

Rob