Skip to comments.Jury weighing Zimmerman's fate asks question about manslaughter option
Posted on 07/13/2013 3:17:06 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
(CNN) -- After more than 12 hours of deliberation, the six women deliberating George Zimmerman's fate asked the court Saturday evening for clarification on the instructions regarding manslaughter, the judge said.
That couldn't have even been a question a few days ago: Judge Debra Nelson ruled Thursday, over the defense's vehement objection, to include manslaughter as an option for jurors, in addition to the second-degree murder charge. Their third option would be to find Zimmerman not guilty.
The question -- which was read out in court, without the jurors present, shortly before 6 p.m. -- was the first posed by the jury since late Friday afternoon, when they requested an inventory of evidence. Afterward, lawyers from both sides approached Nelson's bench; their comments could not be heard.
How long other juries deliberated for in other high-profile cases One of 1,009 fatal shootings in Florida in 2012, Trayvon Martin's death stood out -- the various threads of the story helping to capture the public imagination.
There was, for instance, the fact that an adult had fired on an unarmed teen, soon after police told him not to follow the 17-year-old. And there was the accusation of racial profiling: that Zimmerman -- the son of a Peruvian mother and a white American father, who identifies as Hispanic -- had singled out Martin, at least in part, because the teenager was black.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Where is the evidence that Zimmerman sought out a confronation. I must have missed that.
Defending himself from what exactly? Words? Eyeball-contact? From being "dissed"?
I believe that it was established that the body was left out for three hours. It was raining and the bags that are used for preserving evidence on the hands were not put on the hands. That could have something to do with lack of evidcnce on his hands.
One of Zimmerman’s friends said on Fox that he has the inside track??? on the jury (don’t know if I believe this), and they are 5-1 for acquittal, 1 holdout for manslaughter, thus the question.
It won't make much difference from a sentencing perspective. A manslaughter conviction (with a firearm) is a first degree felony and could garner 30 years with a 9 year + minimum - so it could essentially be a life sentence.
Tha was why the defense made an issue of Trayvon’s hands not being covered to preserve evidence.
Or gotten out of bed??
My concern is what this case means for neighborhood watch in general
It MIGHT mean no neighborhood will be safe from organized thuggery, threats, intimidation, drug sales, open prostitution, and of course, arming yourself in self-defense from all of it.
No, it is one or the other.
The LAW should still be on GZs case on the charge with manslaughter, but sadly I doubt they are going with what the law is.
Not at all.
Actually, during the jury selection process, the prosecution didn’t want one of the female jurors, and the defense objected asking if they could offer one reason why she shouldn’t be seated other than that she was a woman, and the prosecution couldn’t, so she is one of the jurors today. I hope she isn’t the one who wants the manslaughter charge.
I was wondering the same thing. I never did hear an explanation from the defense.
Never mind. I saw the answer several posts ago.
Some of the talking heads have said the judge’s instructions were that they should only consider manslaughter if they agreed he was not guilty of murder.
One of the talking heads on FOX said it could be a “good thing” there are no men on the jury because a man would try to take over and become the head of the jury. With all women, everyone is an equal and women are more detail-oriented than men.
Well, if they are following those directions, then they have to have found him not guilty of murder. but are they following those instructions?
“Reversal on appeal...” My thought also if it goes the way of manslaughter and if there is any “justice” left in the “system.”
The judge misstated the law
See post 45 upthread
No, but the state kept looking for something to get on the woman or her daughter, and some time later the daughter did time for something. I don’t know the details. The woman, mother, who was on trial probably wasn’t the person who did the shooting, and by the time the trial was over, I suspected it was a third party, most likely her son. It was a case of a not so bright young man having a crush on a girl who wasn’t interested. After months of nothing but rejection, the girl invited the young man to her house. Supposedly the mother and daughter tried to tell the young man to leave her alone, and he got outraged. The panicked mother shot him numerous times with a .25 auto.
There is no evidence that he sought a confrontation. I just think, carrying a concealed weapon, he should have stayed in the car and not put himself in that situation. Of course, he has the right to get out of the car and to talk to or get a closer look at whomever he thought looked suspicious, but is that the wise thing to do? IMHO, no.
I’m not sure what that has to do with her instructions that they first have to determine that there is reasonable doubt to murder before considering manslaughter.
In that post is a link to the judge’s instructions.
He got out of the car because 911 wanted a street address. “Around the corner from the club house” wasn’t good enough. He got out to find a street sign.
There is no evidence that Trayvon Martin was doing anything illegal, despite his somewhat checkered youth. (Well, he did nothing illegal until he attacked Zimmerman). My point is: if you have a concealed weapon, you would be wise to exercise extreme caution and to be aware of your surroundings at all times. Getting out of your car while watching/following a suspicious person is not being cautious.
“... soon after police told him not to follow the 17-year-old.”
They did no such thing. Zimmerman never talked to the police. He talked to a civilian 911 dispatcher who works for the city, not for the police.
What did he do that was incautious?
He could have driven a few extra yards and gotten usable results. Hindsight is 20/20. I just think people should learn from this incident that getting out of your while near a suspicious person is probably not the smartest thing to do.
Doesn’t matter - TM attacked GZ. He got more than he bargained for. Thought he was a tough guy. Found out he wasn’t.
It’s really really simple: don’t assault people.
But assume, arguendo that he did get out of his vehicle to see more closely what Martin was up to: How is that a criminal act or an element of a criminal act? How is it an element of manslaughter, even were the judge to get away with injecting manslaughter into the case at the eleventh hour, after the defense had presented its case?
He got out of the car.
Our neighborhood watch never gets out of the car. They call the cops. The only way anyone in our neighborhood watch would get out of the car is to stop an ongoing crime. While Martin may have been acting suspicious, there was no indication of an actual crime going on. So, Zimmerman should have stayed in the car. Some people may disagree and say that Zimmerman was just being proactive, but I am sure that others will learn from this event.
Agreed TM got more than he bargained for. Unfortunately for GZ he has been dragged through the mud and may be unjustly imprisoned for his actions. If he would have stayed in the car this event would likely never have happened.
He was on the way to the store when he saw a person behaving suspiciously. Anyone - neighborhood watch or not - would call it in. GZ called 911. If you watch his reenactment for the Sanford PD he explains why he went down the walkway... he reasoned it would be the street sign the PD would need.
Should he have driven down the sidewalk between the buildings?
Nothing NOTHING justifies TM’s attack.
He never should have got out of bed. It’s far more safe.
The only assumption I make is that Zimmerman got out of the car to get a good address. This was a very dumb idea with a “suspicious person” around. He could have driven a couple of yards further and obtained an adequate address without leaving his car.
As to your second point. Zimmerman had every right to get out of the car for any purpose, but just because you can do something, should you do it? I should be able to walk through South East DC. at night with wads of money hanging out of my pockets, but is that a wise thing to do?
My whole point here is that carrying concealed should make the person carrying be more cautious than normal to avoid confrontations. Zimmerman did not exercise caution and he got into a situation that required him to use justified deadly force. He should not have been charged and should not have spent one day in jail, but this is the sort of trouble you can get into if you put yourself in dangerous situations or you are not aware of your surroundings.
Nothing justifies Martin’s attack. GZ did nothing illegal. However, GZ could be home drinking beer instead of sitting in the courtroom. If you ever volunteer for neighborhood watch and you see something suspicious, I would suggest that you stay in the car. Your decisions and mileage may vary.
This was not your neighborhood.
You made a much more valid point in your previous post. :=D
The link you provided shows that no swab was taken from Trayvon's knuckles. They were left out in the rain (for 3 hours, I think though you can correct me if I'm wrong), giving plenty of opportunity for any VISIBLE blood there might have been on his knuckles and hands to wash off.
Bear in mind that Trayvon Martin's skin was fairly dark. Visually, blood would not show up on his darker skin nearly as easily as it would show up on the hands of a Caucasian person.
I suspect there were traces of blood there that might have been detected with a DNA swab. But since they weren't visible, and since whoever took the swabs wasn't totally on top of his game, those swabs were never taken.
As for Zimmerman's DNA on Martin's clothing, the only place it might show up would have been on Martin's sleeves. Even that seems unlikely, as Zimmerman, even with a broken nose, wasn't bleeding that much. Not from the face, anyway.
I dont doubt Trayvon was beating Zimmerman. But what if Trayvon felt threatened by Zimmerman and was defending himself?
"What if" is the stuff that an acquittal is made of. It's reasonable doubt.
That said, there is no evidence for it.
As I've said before, if Trayvon felt threatened, all he had to do was continue home and go into the apartment. He had a full 4 minutes to cover a pretty short distance.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman pulled a gun on him. If he had, I seriously doubt that Martin would have struck him in the face. If he had attempted to do so, the instant result would have been a gunshot. Even if Martin had landed a punch, we would've had a gunshot early in the encounter. That's not what happened. We had 40 seconds of screaming (which is an eternity) followed by a bang.
Nor is there any evidence that Zimmerman ever struck Martin. No bruises recorded. No evidence of blows. Not to Martin.
Martin's only injuries were a scraped knuckle and a fatal gunshot wound, compared to MANY lacerations on Zimmerman.
All the physical evidence is consistent with Zimmerman's account.
I don’t know. Florida has sinkholes, and you and your bed could fall through one.
GZ reenactment for SPD
Yeah. My neighborhood has had a neighborhood watch for 7 years. We have had no civilian-involved shootings, but a number of break-ins have been prevented. Never did anyone have to get out of the car before the police arrived.
You are free to try something different.
IMHO backwards. Getting out of your car without a gun is being not cautious. Carrying a gun when you get out of the car is being cautious. Z is alive, M was not. No contest on who was criminal and who was not, whatever else has unnecessarily been stirred up. Capisce?
There could be a verdict. Reports are the media have been moved to the first floor of the courthouse. The jury is still there, as are the lawyers and all the court officials.
Looking worse and worse for Zimmerman. There has to be at least one juror who is rejecting self defense. This is sad.
The good news is that it looks as if 2nd degree murder is out.
Good news? He will be killed inside a week of going to prison. The prosecution won.
I would consider myself lucky to have George Zimmerman in my neighborhood because I know he wouldn't just wait in his car, he'd do everything he could to help me.
Emotion is ruling over logic.
Guy did tell them to use emotion as the basis of their decision. They took his advice.
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.