State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

and there is every likelihood that this will end up as yet another American embarrassment

This trial, in an open courtroom, will not only not be an "American embarrassment", the gavel to gavel TV coverage of the entire trial will allow the world to see just how openly our trial process operates--and that's something Americans should be very proud of.

2 Replies

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

Doesn't seem fair - that judgment seems to bend toward Trayvon. What if he had a propensity to fight?

So what if he did?

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Lash wrote:

Doesn't seem fair - that judgment seems to bend toward Trayvon. What if he had a propensity to fight?

So what if he did?

if the authorities resist the truth comming out then they are not interested in justice, their mission is something else.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

if the authorities resist the truth comming out then they are not interested in justice, their mission is something else.

That's what US authorities do all the time, Hawk. You know that!

You also know that they are not interested in justice. Why you folks keep on with this charade is perplexing because y'all clearly point up that you aren't interested in justice either.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
if the authorities resist the truth comming out then they are not interested in justice, their mission is something else.

That's what US authorities do all the time, Hawk. You know that!

You also know that they are not interested in justice. Why you folks keep on with this charade is perplexing because y'all clearly point up that you aren't interested in justice either.

yes, I know. We are talking here how the past and alleged bad state of mind of the one labeled "abuser" is allowed in a trial but the same is not true of the one labeled "victim"...the deck is stacked against the accused BY THE STATE. but this happens all the time, there are now long lists of evidence that the law does not allow into the courtroom because those who wrote the laws think that this evidence is usually going to be on the side of the accused, thus gets in the way of what the state wants, which is ringing up their man. the American government through the treatment of its citizens in the criminal "justice" system has shown very clearly that its priority is getting what they want, that they dont give a fig about justice, though the propaganda machine runs full tilt with an alternate message, which most people buy.

Quote:

Americans are ******* STUPID!

George Carlin

0 Replies

@firefly,

Quote:

and there is every likelihood that this will end up as yet another American embarrassment

firefly wrote:

This trial, in an open courtroom, will not only not be an "American embarrassment",
the gavel to gavel TV coverage of the entire trial will allow the world to see just how openly our trial process operates--and

that's something Americans should be very proud of.

Standing for the proposition
that if u kill a predator that is beating your head against the street,
then THAT is what u have to look forward to, so don't fight back?? ??

I just hope that he will make enuf
from his forthcoming book n movie
to make it all worthwhile.

David

0 Replies

The proposition that Ziummerman is standing for, David, it that, when you accost a kid who isn't doing anything illegal, because you have completely mistaken preconceived biases, and when that kid, in fear for his life, reacts against your attack, then somehow you're entitled to decide you're now in fear for yhour life, from his completely justified reaction, and in Florida you can kill him with impunity. If anyuone was a predator, it was Zimmerman.

3 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Let me get this straight. “Stand Your Ground” laws don't apply to Blacks.

Trayvon Martin was followed, approached, questioned, who knows what else by a guy with a gun and he then wouldn't be allowed to stand his ground?

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

The proposition that Ziummerman is standing for, David, it that, when you accost a kid who isn't doing anything illegal, because you have completely mistaken preconceived biases, and when that kid, in fear for his life, reacts against your attack, then somehow you're entitled to decide you're now in fear for yhour life, from his completely justified reaction, and in Florida you can kill him with impunity. If anyuone was a predator, it was Zimmerman.

Your reasoning is very poor.
Anyone, including Zimmy, has a Constitutional Right (free speech)
to address himself to anyone else in the street.
That is not a provocation to violence.
Your implication that it is, makes no sense.
When decedent began his violence,
Zimmy was rightfully entitled to nullify that violence
and to end that attack as soon as possible.

" He who hesitates is lost."

The naborhood is safer now.

David

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Quote:

The proposition that Ziummerman is standing for, David, it that, when you accost a kid who isn't doing anything illegal, because you have completely mistaken preconceived biases, and when that kid, in fear for his life, reacts against your attack, then somehow you're entitled to decide you're now in fear for yhour life, from his completely justified reaction, and in Florida you can kill him with impunity. .....

Worst possible case, Zimmerman might have asked the kid what he was doing.

You're claiming that trying to kill Zimmerman was a "completely justified reaction(TM)" to being asked what he was doing???????

Again that's the worst possible case. Every believable account of what happened so far has indicated that Zimmerman was walking back to his vehicle when the kid attacked him.

Notice that the logs from the local cell phone towers could validate this question and there's something wrong with the fact that those logs are not in evidence. I assume the state doesn't want them in evidence.

Oh, yeah, wouldn't want to forget that the kid was

"UNARMED(TM)"

would we?

As if there was such a thing as an MMA fighter being unarmed... Do you haave any idea what MMA fighting is?

I mean, for that matter, Jack Johnson, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano and Bruce Lee all had seventeenth birthdays: Do you really think any of those guys would have needed any sort of a weapon to kill George Zimmerman on any of their seventeenth birthdays?

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out at trial.

You're such a kill-joy! Why wait and see when we can try the case right here on A2K?

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

This trial, in an open courtroom, will not only not be an "American embarrassment", the gavel to gavel TV coverage of the entire trial will allow the world to see just how openly our trial process operates--and that's something Americans should be very proud of.

Uh . . . how much time of your life have you spent outside the USA looking in? And how did the people who lived there react to the coverage of US events that they saw there? Just curious.

0 Replies

Have all you lawyers considered what it will mean if Zimmerman is not convicted. It means any idiot with a gun can shoot anyone and than claim that they feared for their life. It will be legalizing murder.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

Have all you lawyers considered what it will mean if Zimmerman is not convicted. It means any idiot with a gun can shoot anyone and than claim that they feared for their life. It will be legalizing murder.

zimmerman must be handled with the laws that were on the books that day, to do anything else would be to abuse him. the state of Florida should send zimmerman on his way and then get down to debating their law.

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

Quote:

Have all you lawyers considered what it will mean if Zimmerman is not convicted.

It will mean that we are all still equal under the law, i.e. that we don't have any class or group of people who we can't legally touch even when one of them is trying to kill us.

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

We only have Zimmerman's word that it went down like he said it did. We will have to wait for the trail to learn if the evidence bears out his version of events. DNA and the autopsy report would have to prove his version of events because there was no witnesses other than those two, one of whom, obviously is dead.

So far, it looks the DNA evidence does not bear out his version of events. At the least his claims seem to be an exaggeration.

The following is biased, however, it does have the links to the DNA report and the autopsy report.

DNA Report does NOT support Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon Martin caused his injuries

1 Reply

@revelette,

revelette wrote:

DNA and the autopsy report would have to prove his version of events

No it wouldn't, because Zimmerman is presumed innocent until proven guilty --- proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, that is. As far as criminal procedure is concerned, Zimmerman has nothing to prove. The prosecution does. If the DNA and the autopsy fail to prove Zimmerman's version of events but also fail to prove it false, then Zimmerman walks.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

That's not quite accurate. My understanding is that Zimmerman is pleading self defense, which is an affirmative defense. He must convince a jury that his actions were justified.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

That's not quite accurate. My understanding is that Zimmerman is pleading self defense, which is an affirmative defense. He must convince a jury that his actions were justified.

That simply should not be difficult.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ap_george_zimmerman_kb_121204_wblog.jpg

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Quote:

If the DNA and the autopsy fail to prove Zimmerman's version of events but also fail to prove it false, then Zimmerman walks.

If the DNA and autopsy evidence fail to support Zimmerman's version of events it does bring his credibility, in general, into question. And, if other evidence similarly chips away at his credibility, that is going to affect the jury.

Yes, he's innocent until proved guilty, innocent of second degree murder, or manslaughter. He's not innocent of killing Trayvon Martin. He's admitted to that. The only thing the prosecution has to poke holes in is his contention that this killing was justifiable self-defense under Florida law--and they have to convince a jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that his actions better conform to second degree murder, or manslaughter, as those crimes are defined by Florida law.

It's unfortunate that the voice recordings of the cries for help can't clearly determine which of the two was screaming for help. That would be very useful evidence for the jury. Right now, the prosecution expert says it was Martin, but the defense expert says the voice can't be definitively identified. So this evidence might not be admissible at trial. I don't think there was a final ruling on that yet.

Well, they're on their way to round 2 of the jury selection. They have a pool of 40 that they will now question more closely to try to make some selections. They need 6 for the jury, with 4 alternates. And the jury will be sequestered during the trial.

1 Reply

State pushes to keep Trayvon Martin's past out of George Zimmerman trial

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know