Replies

That's what pisses me off royally.

If you want to go for the brass ring of murder 2, you can't at the last minute go for the booby prize of manslaughter.

The prosecution never brought this up, so how should the defense "prepare"?

I'm so curious of how things will go down if the jury comes back with manslaughter.

Will GZ have to rot in jail until someone pays the $$$ to get him an appeal?

I wish I was rich.

I'd pay anything to see that GZ stays out of jail until this abortion of a "trial" is thrown out.

With prejudice.

The "judge" is so incompetent, that I don't see how Z wouldn't win.

Plus if I were a plaintiff's attorney, I'd be SALIVATING at bringing lawsuits against ALL media outlets that prejudiced the jury.

The problem with this mess, is that many of us going into this with a layman's understanding of criminal law, or less, sometimes much less. I may be in that category for all I know. I sound off about what tweaks me, but I could be wrong. I don't want mislead others though. That's where my response will focus, on being reasonable about my expectations.

That's what pisses me off royally.
Well, as you have seen, I get upset about some aspects of this case. Then someone who knows more than I comes along and explains, and I have tostep back and realize things may not be quite as they seem.

If you want to go for the brass ring of murder 2, you can't at the last minute go for the booby prize of manslaughter.
I had a discussion with Concience of a Conservative, and I think he raised some important points. You saw what my take was. His take was that there are a number of lesser charges that can be brought under various headings. If you charge someone with a higher crime, you can add in lesser charges. If true, it isn't this judge that is the problem. I could be you and I not understanding how the court works to one degree or another. If he was right, you and I may be over-reacting. I'm not totally convinced he's right, but I believe he probably has a reason for his comments, and it may be that he is an attorney, or simply knows more about the court's inner workings.

The prosecution never brought this up, so how should the defense "prepare"?
Another poster brought up, that he felt the defense was actually arguing against the lesser charges all along, knowing that it was likely the Prosecutor would morph charges and the judge would agree. As much as we might think so, this may be mundane business, exactly how things generally go in these cases.

I'm so curious of how things will go down if the jury comes back with manslaughter.
Well, I'm not going to be happy about it, if they do. I'd imagine those who thought Zimmerman was wrong will be doing back-flips. Others will be angry at what seems like an innocent man being railroaded. I'll be in that group. I do not see criminality in Zimmerman's actions.

Will GZ have to rot in jail until someone pays the $$$ to get him an appeal?
Well, probably so, if convicted. He'll be there until aquited in an appeal, as I understand it. Again, I'm not sure of that, but I believe that to be true.

I wish I was rich.
Well, that makes it unanimous. I wish you were too.

I'd pay anything to see that GZ stays out of jail until this abortion of a "trial" is thrown out.
Just like the other side, I think we need to consider that we may not be happy. This may not go our way.

With prejudice.
Works for me.

The "judge" is so incompetent, that I don't see how Z wouldn't win.
I'm not happy with the judge either. To me it seems she is way off base. Again, it may just be me.

Plus if I were a plaintiff's attorney, I'd be SALIVATING at bringing lawsuits against ALL media outlets that prejudiced the jury.
Well, with the laws governing free speech, that would be a tough win.

I hope I didn't disappoint you with my response. I think the judge has shown poor judgement, but I am not absolutly convinced of it.

Othere who have followed along a log closer than I have may have very good reasons for thinking so.