Posted on 07/05/2013 5:55:22 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
The prosecution rested their second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman today and his legal team immediately asked the judge throw out all charges, arguing that the state had failed to present evidence he murdered Trayvon Martin.
The judge swiftly rejected the argument, but not before both sides made emotional legal arguments that are usually reserved for summations at the end of a trial.
In an impassioned plea, Zimmerman's defense attorney Mark O'Mara stated that the state did not produce direct or circumstantial evidence that Zimmerman acted with "ill-will or spite," the Florida requirements for second degree murder.
"There is not a scintilla of evidence to support that," O'Mara said referring to the implication that Zimmerman acted out of "ill will and spite."
"He has the undeniable injuries that reference nothing other than an attack by Trayvon Martin," O'Mara said.
"You cannot look at that picture of my client's nose and say he wasn't beaten in the face," he said. O'Mara said the court would draw a similar conclusion by looking at the photos showing the back of Zimmerman's bloody head.....
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Where in the heck is that in Fla. Law?
And that, I think, may have opened the door for the defense to examine her as to a possible ulterior motive for lying about her identification of the voice as being Martin's.
(Just sayin')
Good strategery.
Fine, except that they presented zero physical evidence or eyewitness testimony to that effect.
The NSA and IRS will make sure they return the proper verdict.
I’m not sure how this person became a judge. This is quite scary. Affirmative action at a judiciary level?
The defense attorney was correct to bring the motion, but the judge was correct to dismiss it. Prosecution has presented enough evidence that the trial should be decided by the jury.
The dear judge already got the word. The bosses at FoxNews, CNN, and MSLSD need the trial to go on until Egypt, Benghazi, Snowdon, NSA, etc. have a chance to die down. Things were getting a little too hot and this trial is a nice summer change of pace. Let it play out and by the time the riots are over, who will care about anything that happened way back last September?
...while one with an IQ of 50 could be said to be less unintelligent than one with an IQ of 70.”
Wouldn’t a person with an IQ of 50 be MORE unintelligent [less knowledgeable] than one with an IQ of 70?
What “interfering” do you mean? This article describes a motion brought at the proper time and adjudicated.
This was exactly the same reasoning by Justice Breyer in discussing Koran-burning, i.e. violence creates exceptions to constitutional protections. This particular "school of legal thought" will not end well.
Not quite right. The ruling was that the defense could not ask that witness about it at that time. It might yet come up but I am not sure if the “door” has been “opened” already, or can be opened in the process of the defense case.
I don’t think George’s statement “he might be high or something” is enough.
The defense will call their own medical expert — the one who literally wrote the book that “I know nothing” Bao consulted for his own testimony today. His interpretation of the M.E.’s report, which is in evidence, might be the stuff.
Please describe the "facts" presented by the State vs. the elements of Murder2.
I believe that Zimmerman's only hope for not being killed in prison by black inmates during his first month there is total isolation from the rest of the inmates for the entire long prison term that the obviously biased judge will no doubt lay on him when he's convicted. IMHO this trial has been preordained from day one to punish Zimmerman and whites in general whether he's guilty of a crime or not.
If anyone thought that prior to the time when Civil Rights laws were enacted white "justice" was actually white IN-justice in many if not all criminal cases involving blacks, (and as a native-born small town southernor who was born and raised during that time I admit that it often was) then they must now admit that the worm has turned, the shoe is on the other foot, and any other "old saying" that I can remember now applies in reverse to the current situation.
What “valid point of law,” required a judge to take something out of the juries hands.
You're a big boy, I'm sure that you're familiar with the evidence the prosecution has presented. Besides, I really don't feel like doing homework on a Friday night by typing up all those points.
I'm not saying that Zimmerman is likely to get convicted based on that evidence, nor am I saying that I personally believe Zimmerman to be guilty. I'm saying that for any motion to dismiss criminal charges at the end of the prosecution's case-in-chief, the prosecution's evidence is looked at in the light most favorable to the prosecution. Further, there is a presumption that the judge should rule on the law, but the jury should be the trier-in-fact.
Here's the applicable case law...
The evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the State, with the State being entitled to every reasonable inference of fact arising from the evidence. See State v. Brown, 310 N.C. 563 (1984); State v. Easterling, 300 N.C. 594 (1980). This is true even if that same evidence also would support reasonable inferences of the defendant’s innocence. State v. Scott, 356 N.C. 591 (2002). Discrepancies and contradictions, even in the State’s evidence, are for the jury to resolve and do not warrant a dismissal. State v. Henderson, 276 N.C. 430 (1970). The ultimate question for the trial judge is “whether a reasonable inference of defendant’s guilt may be drawn from the circumstances.” State v. Lee, 348 N.C. 474, 488 (1998).
“Well, there’s an avenue for investigation before the Jury. “
Err, nope. The judge ruled that the Toxicology Report would not be entered into evidence. Even though Zimmerman said Martin looked/acted like he was on drugs, and the Tox Report showed he had THC in his system.
Can’t be getting any dirt on the sainted victim, now.
Seems IMHO that a reasonable person as Judge would dismiss. The State has shown nothing beyond a reasonable doubt.
Did St. Tray have the Skittles and Tea on him when he was offed?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.