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 ...
Yeah, I’ve been saying manslaughter and 5 years to serve. At least that’s probably what it would have been in VA when I was practicing.
No. They do not because Manslaughter is a lesser charge.
Primarily because they didn't bag his hands to protect the evidence. The entire forensic report on Trayvon was a joke.
Reversal on appeal seems utterly remote.
The judge’s instructions to the jury:
“MANSLAUGHTER To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: 1. Trayvon Martin is dead. 2. George Zimmerman intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.”
The judge has misstated the law:
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 other’s 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
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.
http://www.wsbradio.com/news/news/local/document-instructions-george-zimmerman-jury/nYnm3/
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Index&Title_Request=XLVI#TitleXLVI
This entire case is immersed in il-logic.
The football "Offense" was allowed to play with 8 downs; The Refs rigged all the calls; Zim's Defense "team" were undermined and sabotaged before the Game began; And finally The Game Rules changed randomly and illegally.
What "Fix"??
There was a thread in FR yesterday where a lawyer mentioned that the judge had written the instructions for the Manslaughter charge in a confusing way, which did not make clear to the jury that self-defense was also a legitimate defense against Manslaughter. If that is the case, it may be a good sign that the jury is asking for clarification.
IOW, a hung jury.
If not-guilty, massive riots. If 2nd murder, lesser riots. If manslaughter, then massove riots.
If either of the latter two, there is an appeal based upon numerous allegations, biased judge, new charge, etc. If the appeal is granted then more riots.
If remanded back to district court and found not guilty, massive riots. If found 2nd-murder (assuming the manslaughter is not allowed) then lesser riots.
In any case whitey is going pay for this affront on the scantity of the poor Marvins and the blacks in general.
Very possible.
I visualize myself on a jury and either it was a good shoot or it wasn’t.
It’s that simple.
If I were the foreman of the jury I would ask each person “are you convinced beyond all reasonable doubt that he was NOT acting in self defense?”
Any answer to the effect of “I’m just not sure ...” means a verdict of NG.
I’m a defense attorney and that is my analysis.
This is not a complex case.
And no way I would even consider convicting for some lane ass lesser charge if it was self defense.
This case is getting flipped on appeal if he gets convicted in my opinion.
I hope they aren’t thinking of something they saw on a TV show and can’t separate fact from a Hollywood script.
“We don’t need to you do that, sir.”
Not an instruction. More like advice.
The autopsy reported bruised knuckles, but no DNA. I call BS on that doctored report.
Yep. In a just country that would be grounds for reversal on appeal.
When carrying concealed, a person must exercise even more caution than usual. Zimmerman could have avoided the incident by staying in his car. Once attacked, Zimmerman had every right to defend himself. There is no contradiction in my position nor fence sitting. We have a neighborhood watch. They do exactly that — watch. If someone is actively committing a crime and the police are not present, then this watch would do more than that.
As for someone staking out my house, I would call the cops but I would break out my rifle just in case it was necessary. Such a scenario would vary my response depending on the circumstances.
I carry concealed all the time. When I do, I am even more cautious than unusual when dealing with potential problems. I avoid arguments and other potential problems with other people. If Zimmerman had been more cautious, he could have saved himself a lot of trouble. IMHO.
The jury has NO IDE that the Manslaughter charge carries the same sentence as second degree murder!!!
Poor guy. I knew he was going to get hosed when I saw he had an all-woman jury. Go ahead and flame away, and call me names, but women generally tend to take an emotional view of things rather than an objective one. That’s fact. And in some instances that’s a good thing. But not in a legal process where facts and objectivity are to be the determining factor, and emotion is supposed to be left at the door.
I handle civil litigation for the defense. So, the plaintiff is always injured or damaged in some manner (and that can be physically, financially, reputationally, etc.). And, let’s face it, women tend to empathize with someone who has been damaged, and they tend to want to take care of them. Not all women; but most, and that’s all it often takes to lose a defensible case.
“...the US Justice system is a joke...”
Truth be told, it’s never been a justice system. At best, it’s merely a legal system. And a corrupted one, at that.
If he was cold cocked, the parameters change .. the game is real.
Why didn’t Judge Piggy simply provide them with a copy of the statute?
Oh, right...the clear language of that text would have led to an acquittal and the loss of her promotion to a higher court in the federal jurisdiction.
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.