Skip to comments.The Zimmerman trial is already over
Posted on 07/05/2013 8:05:46 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Prosecutors in the George Zimmerman second degree murder trial have pushed hard on two points as they seek to make their case against him: that the injuries to Zimmerman on the night Trayvon Martin died were insignificant and that he had studied Floridas Stand Your Ground law in a college class in 2010.
To win conviction on second-degree murder, the prosecution has to show that the death was caused by a criminal act demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.
Thats why the prosecutor keeps pushing the claim that Zimmerman profiled Martin because he was black. Meanwhile, the lesser charge of manslaughter generally is a crime that's been committed in the heat of passion, where there is no premeditation. The jury would have to believe Zimmerman lost his temper in shooting Martin.
People can use force to protect themselves when they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to themselves. On this score, the testimony of the Jacksonville medical examiner, Valerie Rao, that Zimmerman injuries were insignificant is largely irrelevant.
A broken nose, a head being slammed into cement, and punches to the face may not have left Zimmerman incapacitated. The important question is whether such an attack with a man on top of him would leave Zimmerman to reasonably believe that there was a threat of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
Much was also made of the class Zimmerman took class at Seminole State College taught by Professor Alexis Carter. The key supposedly was that Zimmerman really did understand Floridas Stand Your Ground law. Prosecutor Richard Mantei told the court that Zimmerman's legal studies would help jurors understand his "state of mind" and "ambitions and frustrations" before the shooting.....
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Don’t forget manslaughter, a lesser included offense..so called experts claiming any trial is over before the jury speaks may get bit in the ass..
What does the law have to do with this trial?
He is going to be convicted and the excuse "He shouldn't have followed him" given even though there is not one single solitary shred of proof GZ ever followed Traydemark.
Remember, he WATCHED Traydemark then drove past him, parked his car and called 911. That is when Traydemark started walking towards him "with his hand in his waist". He then circled GZs car (to see if he was alone) then disappeared. That's when GZ said "These guys always get away"..GZ then ran to see if he could catch up and find Traydemark...You cannot follow someone if you do not know where they are!
The 911 operator then said "we don't need you to do that" in which you hear GZ stop. He then walks to see the name of the street he is on when Traydemark came out of hiding and attacked GZ.
“Many conservative commentators claimed early on that Zimmerman had acted improperly (Mona Charen, Rich Lowry, Heather Mac Donald, Robert VerBruggen, and Gregory Kane). “
Not a commentator of course, but Alan West also jumped on GZ early on and AFAIK has never apologized for it.
I am no coward. I have a high pain threshold. However, when faced with bodily injury when I was doing no wrong, I have no pause in using my weapon. (At least in a vacuum.) Now, with this case, I will analytically assess the pounding I will take. The hood has won in this case. I am willing to go through a lot of pain to not go though what Zimmerman has.
Now if I had my head being punched in the pavement, then my post is completely irrelevant. The next time I get punched I may be dead. I will kill to stay alive. This case has given me pause in standing my ground, literally. I will run away instead of facing the crap that Zimmerman is going through, even though I may be in my right to stand my ground.
There is no freedom and liberty in out nation as long as we have thug underclass that is dealt with in a PC manner.
No more evidence exists for manslaughter than for murder2. Zimmerman’s account holds up when you only look at evidence, not everything including the kitchen sink they are trying to throw at the jury, hoping something sticks. For murder2 or manslaughter there is a no evidence and especially not “beyond reasonable doubt”.
I also understand or have seen repeated that a manslaughter conviction carries a very long prison term as does murder2. Thirty years??
If the state of FL was following the law they never would have charged GZ with a crime much less 2nd degree murder. There is not a shred of evidence.
If someone was on top of me pounding my head and fisting my nose, i sure as hell would shoot.
If the jury uses its common sense re the evidence it will be Not Guilty by a landslide and that is being said before the defense even puts on its case.
Manslaughter would suck too.
Show trial, like the Dreyfuss affair. A member of a protected class gets his head smashed by a member of presumed oppressive class.
A key point that will arise in the defense is only hinted at as of yet.
It’s not only a question of GZ getting his head bashed on the concrete. (And IMHO that’s enough.)
It’s the fact that the kel-tec 9mm with the double-action trigger and no safety would be an immediate deadly weapon in TM’s hand if he got to it first.
Whoever grabs that pistol, can shoot it. No safety, no nothing. Grab that gun, BANG, it’s in a shootable condition. By anybody, right away.
GZ had to use it first, or it would be used against him, if he lost the “MMA wrestling match.” And he was losing the fight, clearly.
It had to be in his mind that if TM got to the gun first, he was dead.
This will be a key point for the defense. It’s why GZ’s lawyer spent so much time discussing the trigger action etc of the kel-tec with the FDLE gun gal. He was setting this up.
If common sense, or for that matter, the law mattered, Zimmerman would have never been brought to trial. This is to b a Soviet show trial with a verdict of guilty at the finish. it has been ordained from the highest levels. This is a kangaroo court pure and simple.
” even though I may be in my right to stand my ground.”
The “stand your ground” law has never been invoked in this case. The defense argument is pure self defense.
I admit I am guilty of profiling every time I am out and about.
Let’s hope the jury recognizes that and decides accordingly
Zimmerman will go to jail, the mob demands it.
Anyway, if the racebaiters had not jumped on the case, he wouldn't be on trial to begin with, and there wouldn't be any talk of either second degree murder or manslaughter.
Of course the reason that Corey chose second degree murder is that she would have had to get a grand jury to approve a first degree murder charge, and knew she couldn't get that. Second degree was the worst that she could do without a grand jury.
I haven’t had time to follow much of this but anybody thinking he will be acquitted is likely to be surprised...
I’d say the chance of acquittal of all charges (including lesser offenses) is less than 1 in 3..
Exactly. The police on the scene didn’t see fit to even arrest him, but I suppose Traythug’s supporters would say they were all rayciss, too. They’re trying to get things to the point to where no one will dare to defend themselves against the thugocracy, Second Amendment be d*mned. In fact, this tactic will be especially useful in Second Amendment respecting states, because people in states like Illinois have already been stripped of their Second Amendment rights and their guns. It’s the people in states where we still have our guns, who need to be blackmailed into not using them.
I think they should appeal TODAY to force the judge to allow THC usage and Martin Fighting history
Only in America does a thug trying to murder an innocent man get canonized--without even having to perform any miracles. TM's mother has verified in open court that St. Trayvon is in heaven.
A lot speedier than the Catholic Church's approach.
Which is crazy, because statistics show that the protected class inflicts more crime upon the supposed “oppressive” class, than the reverse.
Agree but this the the world we live in.
The law can only do so much..it comes down to the common sense of the folks chosen as a jury..and in most cases that is something both sides avoid like the plague when choosing a jury
Mr. Zimmerman is probably blacker than Mr. Obama.
Unless it is proven that Zimmerman had a depraved mind I dont see how he can be convicted of murder. The state hasn’t proven a “depraved mind”. I don’t see manslaughter either. It appears to be a justifiable use of force, having your head pounded on concrete can cause “great bodily harm” or death.
Fla. Stat. § 782.04(2) Murder. The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Fla. Stat. § 782.03 Excusable homicide.Homicide is excusable when committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent, or by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or upon a sudden combat, without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
Fla. Stat. § 782.07(1) Manslaughter.- The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
Fla. Stat. § 776.012 Use of force in defense of person.A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the others imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013
Pretty ironic that after Martin’s mother’s testimony this afternoon that it was Martin’s voice on the 911 tape calling for help, the prosecution rested and the jurors were given the choice of going home for the week or letting the defense begin its case - they chose to stay, giving Zimmerman’s lawyers the chance to put his mother on the stand - she said it was his voice on the tape, thereby immediately contradicting what was supposed to be a major point of advantage for the prosecutors - when things go right.......
Assuming of course the jury reads the statutes the way we do..
The concept of “jury nullification” is possibly applicable here INO
It's difficult to forget that a Florida jury believed a theory of a murder in which a child was alive one minute, and somehow magically dead sometime later. The last person to have seen her alive was her mother. Her mother hid evidence pertinent to the investigation from the police for months and behaved during the child's disappearance as if she was quite happy that her daughter was dead. Yet the defense actually presented no alternative theory of the crime, they merely insinuated one, and a Florida jury accepted that, even though in introducing the idea that an accidental death had occurred it was incumbent under Florida law for the defense to develop that theory of the crime.
Sorry if some of us are not as sanguine about how this is going to be resolved based on past determinations.
In the instant case, I believe the judge has already committed serious errors, and some of them strike me as reversible. She should have admonished Rachel Jentael on several occasions about her attitude, warned her it was disrespectful to the court, and failing to improve her outlook, held her in contempt. She did not. She repeatedly has cut the defense off during pertinent questioning and allowed an extended presentation of Zimmerman's knowledge of Stand Your Ground, when that evidence was not the least bit relevant to the case. She has also allowed hearsay to be introduced on several occasions, knowing that given the emotional vulnerability of a witness the defense would almost certainly not object. She should never have allowed a running commentary by a forensic examiner who did not even examine Zimmerman. That testimony is completely irrelevant, based on photographs is no better than hearsay, and has nothing to do with his state of mind, which is what the self-defense statute is about.
We should not expect her instructions to the jury to be clear, unbiased, or even professional. She's an Ito-wannabe. Even if Zimmerman is found guilty of manslaughter, this looks to be far from over.
It isn’t George Zimmerman who is on trial. It is the women on that jury who are on trial. If there is one honest and decent person on that jury this case is over. But just as there were not 10 righteous people in Sodom, there may not be 1 honest person on that jury. That’s what is so scary. That’s why the depravity of the culture and the lies of the media are so dangerous to us all.
Maybe it is not P.C. to say so, but as far as I am concerned, ‘profiling’ is just another term for ‘common sense’.
It's an all woman jury so...
It’s an emotional case, and the prosecution is playing to the jurors’ emotions, not reason. Keep in mind these jurors are uninformed women chosen for being uninformed, and any legal statues are Greek to them. Certainly a lot will depend on the judge’s instructions to the jury, and the best we can hope for, in my view, would be a hung jury with one or two of these women having clear minds and not allowing themselves to be swayed by the emotional arguments of others.
I was on a mock jury organized by a pharmaceutical firm in preparation for a trial, where the firm was accused of contributing to the death of an AIDS patient, a heterosexual man (as far as we could tell), who was cavalier about observing the required drug regimen, using the drug which has kept many other AIDS patients, including some famous ones, alive for years. A loss would have been devastating for this firm’s big business selling this drug, so they organized this mock jury, actually two or three juries composed of a cross section of residents of the county where the actual trial would take place.
It was done by a usual marketing firm that paid each of us a couple of hundred, and filmed and recorded the proceedings, which included actors or perhaps actual attorneys presenting to us both sides of the case. What happened later at the actual trial I haven’t checked.
Anyway, a father and husband was dead, the family heartbroken, broke, a tragedy, and the women on my mock jury, except the one Indian with a post-graduate degree, all emotional and irrational (some of the men, too), when it was quite clear that the plaintiff, that is the dead man’s family, didn’t have a case.
If I had been Zimmerman and my chamber was loaded I would have emptied it in the thug. Martin was on dope and these thugs go crazy on dope. That the sorry ass judge would not allow the jury to know Martin was on dope and this could have contributed to his attacking Zimmerman is to me grounds to have a conviction overturned if that’s what happens. And I would bet a dollar to a donut that Dr. Yong Ho told the worthless prosecutor about the dope yesterday, then covered for the crooked bastard when he testified today. When Don West asked him did he talk about marijuana at yesterday’s meeting he said “no can remember”. West should have said “well I find that hard to believe that you can’t remember something that happened yesterday”. But he let the evasive liar off the hook.
This wasn’t even a stand your ground case, it’s a self defense case.
he couldn’t get away because he got sucker punched and then the guy got on top of him and started whaling away.
I suspect that an all woman jury will want to get it right to prove that they can do so without a man in their midst.
I think in another time that particular “crime” would have been known as employing wisdom and common sense.
I can’t believe how many people are confidently predicting acquittal. Then again, Romney supporters were also pretty confident. People are slow to realize what has happened over the last 20 or so years. A system/society with Barack Obama sitting at its pinnacle is certainly capable of convicting a man without evidence.
When you place elected or not elected corrupt and incompetent people in office such as Angela Corey and others higher up or lower down, injustice happens.
Both her and her boss, the governor, are Republicans.
Actually, Zimmerman first sees Martin standing in front of a house that had been robbed previously. He then drives forward and parks at the clubhouse.
Martin rather than walking in the opposite direction which was a shorter route to his father's house, actually FOLLOWED Zimmerman and passed behind him as he sat parked at the clubhouse.
Martin then cuts right down another street. Zimmerman backs out from the clubhouse and takes the right to see where Martin is going. He then parks his truck on this street a little further down. From his truck he sees Martin heading down the sidewalk that goes in between the two lines of condos.
Zimmerman loses sight of Martin. Had Martin continued in that direction he would have arrived at his father's house. INSTEAD, Martin doubles back and it is at this time that he circles Zimmerman's truck as he has his hand in his waistband. He then walks away and disappears. . .a third chance to head home.
It was at this time Zimmerman leaves the truck to see if he can see where Martin was headed and to find a street sign to better direct the police to his location. When he is told "he doesn't need to do that" he returns to his truck and before he returns Martin appears and jumps him.
In fact, from this perspective, it was Martin that was stalking Zimmerman and he had three separate opportunities to just go home.
I’ve heard that the neighborhood dispatcher was repeatedly asking Zim for an address. Hence Zim’s wanderings beyond his veh.
GOPe doesn’t work, apparently.
Justice does not seem to have much of anything to do with anything in this country anymore.
The law, who uses it and what they want have everything to do with what is wrong with this country.
The law will probably convict Zimmerman.
Justice would probably set Zimmerman free.
Justice is peaking out from under her blindfold to see who is asking for her consideration.