17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?

[natina]

Zimmerman Sued for 'Dodging' $66K Bill
Security firm: Trayvon Martin's killer owes us money

An Orlando company is suing George Zimmerman over a partly unpaid security bill following his release from jail on $1 million bail, Fox News reports. Associated Investigative Services Inc. says Zimmerman failed to fully pay $66,000 for 21 days of security, including a "jail escort plan" involving two vehicles, body armor, and a hat-and-glasses disguise. But Zimmerman's lawyer says his client paid quite enough—$40,000—and never signed a contract. Plus Zimmerman was in jail for seven of those 21 days.
But back to the "escort plan": Upon his release, Zimmerman would be given concealed body armor and driven away by an armed guard in a vehicle pre-scanned for GPS tracking devices, reports the Miami Herald. Next he would don a disguise in a tourist resort bathroom and be taken in another vehicle to a "safe house." Bodyguards would look for paparazzi, assailants, and “aerial” and "negative counter surveillance" the whole time. It's unclear whether the plan was carried out, but Trayvon Martin's killer is free on bail and living with his wife somewhere in Seminole County, Fla. (Zimmerman is filing a lawsuit himself—against NBC.)
http://www.newser.com/story/160086/zimmerman-sued-for-dodging-66k-bill.html?utm_source=part&utm_medium=united&utm_campaign=rss_3_2

[giovanni_hotel]

LOL. Would have been cheaper to keep that loser locked up until trial.

[jefferson82]

Theres a lot of very intolerant people on here that think they know all of the details about the case. There is a lot of murkiness to this case and a lot of viewer "detectives" that think they know everything based on biased reporting. MSNBC is a hack channel..nothing serious or real...almost onion news network if it wasn't trying to act real.

[TSLoverIB]

Could not agree more jefferson, yet most of these people no everything about nothing.

Wait until the trial comes to light, the real evidence will come to light.

[giovanni_hotel]

Theres a lot of very intolerant people on here that think they know all of the details about the case. There is a lot of murkiness to this case and a lot of viewer "detectives" that think they know everything based on biased reporting. MSNBC is a hack channel..nothing serious or real...almost onion news network if it wasn't trying to act real.

MSNBC is a real cable news station with real investigative reporters. From a journalistic standpoint, they are 100x better than Faux News.

MSNBC has conservatives on all the time, and former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough hosts a daily morning show where he routinely rips the POTUS and his economic and domestic policies.


I think most people have a firm grip on the basic facts; Zimmerman profiled and stalked this kid, confronted Trayvon after leaving his car, they fought and Zimmerman was getting his ass kicked before Zimmerman shot him to death.

Zimmerman claimed self defense under the SYG law in Florida, except the law doesn't really apply if the 'victim' was initially safe inside his own car.

[fivekatz]

Every one is due their day in court but at a minimum the local LE in Florida did a shameful job in this case in terms of how long it took to even bring charges against the accused.

Lot of ugly over tones in this case and I hate to think it but if the roles had been reversed IMO the African-American kid would have been arrested on the spot for shooting Zimmerman armed with a hoodie and skittles.

MSNBC FWIW does do a lot of op-ed shows but there is little evidence that they tailor their hard news reports with the extreme partisan slant that FUX does. While the op-eds like Ed Schultz, Politics Nation, TRMS are designed to give progressive an echo chamber and I may be subject to bias but I just don't see the Zimmerman shooting in that genre, as much because of how LE handled the case as anything else.

[natina]

Fox News Viewers Believe the Darndest Things, Study Finds


(Dec. 17) -- Fair and balanced ... and factually incorrect?

A newly released study out of the University of Maryland concludes that viewers of the Fox News Channel were "significantly more likely" to believe a host of factually incorrect information than viewers who watched other television news organizations.

Fox is by no means the only media outlet guilty of spreading what the study considers misniformation, but the channel's viewers were found to believe incorrect views on matters of established fact in much higher percentages than those peple who got their news of the world elsewhere.

Those who watched Fox News during the 2010 election cycle were significantly more likely than those who never watched it to believe that ...

... most economists estimate the stimulus caused job losses (12 points more likely).

... most economists have estimated the health care law will worsen the deficit (31 points more likely).

... the economy is getting worse (26 points more likely).

... most scientists do not agree that climate change is occurring (30 points more likely).

... the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts (14 points more likely).

... their own income taxes have gone up (14 points).

... the auto bailout only occurred under Obama (13 points).

... when TARP came up for a vote, most Republicans opposed it (12 points).

... it is not clear that Obama was born in the United States (31 points).

The study found that it wasn't just Republican Fox viewers who were swayed to believe the less-than-accurate information. Democratic viewers of the channel also more likely to believe those things, too.

Surge Desk's calls to the Fox News Channel for comment on the study were not returned.



http://www.aolnews.com/2010/12/17/fox-news-viewers-believe-the-darndest-things-study-finds/

[natina]

FOX NEWS INSIDER: “Stuff Is Just Made Up”

Asked what most viewers and observers of Fox News would be surprised to learn about the controversial cable channel, a former insider from the world of Rupert Murdoch was quick with a response: “I don’t think people would believe it’s as concocted as it is; that stuff is just made up.”

Indeed, a former Fox News employee who recently agreed to talk with Media Matters confirmed what critics have been saying for years about Murdoch’s cable channel. Namely, that Fox News is run as a purely partisan operation, virtually every news story is actively spun by the staff, its primary goal is to prop up Republicans and knock down Democrats, and that staffers at Fox News routinely operate without the slightest regard for fairness or fact checking.

“It is their M.O. to undermine the administration and to undermine Democrats,” says the source. “They’re a propaganda outfit but they call themselves news.”

And that’s the word from inside Fox News.

Note the story here isn’t that Fox News leans right. Everyone knows the channel pushes a conservative-friendly version of the news. Everyone who’s been paying attention has known that since the channel’s inception more than a decade ago. The real story, and the real danger posed by the cable outlet, is that over time Fox News stopped simply leaning to the right and instead became an open and active political player, sort of one-part character assassin and one-part propagandist, depending on which party was in power. And that the operation thrives on fabrications and falsehoods.

[natina]

WARNING! BREAKING NEWS!:exposure to Fox News makes voters stupid, university study finds




exposure to Fox News makes voters stupid, university study finds


http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/16/study-confirms-spin-fox-news-voters-stupid/

The troublesome record of spin by conservative television station Fox News has long been a cause for concern to many Americans, who frequently allege that the nation's most viewed "news" network has the effect of dumbing down voters.

Turns out, they were right.

A University of Maryland study (PDF) published earlier this month found that people in the survey who had the most exposure to Fox News were more likely to believe falsehoods and rumors about national and world affairs when compared to those who paid attention to other news outlets.

In a summary carried by Alternet, the following falsehoods were most relayed by Fox News viewers:

91 percent believed the stimulus legislation lost jobs;

72 percent believed the health reform law will increase the deficit;

72 percent believed the economy is getting worse;

60 percent believed climate change is not occurring;

49 percent believed income taxes have gone up;

63 percent believed the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts;

56 percent believed Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout;

38 percent believed that most Republicans opposed TARP;

63 percent believed Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear).


The poll's findings seem to sync with those of an NBC News survey (PDF) taken during the height of America's health care reform debate, where Fox News viewers were found to be most likely to have believed wildly inaccurate interpretations of the legislation.


Related Link: exposure to Fox News makes voters stupid, university study finds

[natina]

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism



Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or Intelligence quotient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

"Reality is complicated and messy," he told The Huffington Post in an email. "Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/27/intelligence-study-links-prejudice_n_1237796.html

[asic600]

MSNBC may seem left-wing to anyone who watches FAUX news. The fact is, it's centrist while CNN is slightly right of center b/c that's what viewers in the US demand. In terms of "race issues" though, both CNN and MSNBC veer left. Why? B/c that's what THEIR viewers require. If you don't believe me then remember what happened right after the shootings.

All the newspapers and MSNBC and CNN aired pictures of a smiling child and a large fat man. In reality, Trayvon was bigger, more tattooed, more chrome grilled and more "potted up" as FAUX calls it. Zimmerman was the "white man" who in fact was trying to do good for his neighborhood after several robberies by "juveniles" (you're not allowed to say black males in America) over the past few weeks.

Anderson Cooper is a journalist, but when he's not reporting real news, he does episodes where he basically tries to grab ratings. For example, the video they showed of Zimmerman in the police station after the altercation. His head has a little black smudge and AC kept playing that clip over and over, showing the back of his only once, saying, "well...clearly...i...i don't see any wound on the back of his head...i don't see how he could have been in a fight". That's b/c he wasn't showing the back of his head on this grainy black and white video! Of course, the high res picture came out and of course he had a big gash on the back of his head.

I don't wanna take sides here but as crazy and hateful as right wingers in this country are, sometimes the left seems like it's attempting to compensate. Affirmative action anyone?

[natina]

1.)TRAYVON MARTIN did not have a "chrome grill" when pursued by zimmerman.

and what does that have to d with anything?

2.) TRAYVON MARTIN was just a skinny kid and zimmerman out weighted him.



that kid weight 160 pounds and was over 6 feet tall.
meaning he was bean pole skinny,while zimmerman out weight him by 100 lbs or so.

zimmerman has and had a violent and troubled past


SHOCKING VIOLENT/CRIMMINAL HISTORY OF ZIMMERMAN



http://colorlines.com/assets_c/2012/03/gzimmermanpublicrecord-thumb-640xauto-5674.jpg

SHOCKING VIOLENT/CRIMMINAL HISTORY OF ZIMMERMAN


http://www.newsrescue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/zimmerman-arrest-examiner-618x462.jpg

Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, pursued him, frightened him, confronted him then shot him during a struggle, prosecutors alleged Thursday.

That's what the probable-cause affidavit filed Thursday by Special Prosecutor Angela Corey reveals. It is the first look at the criminal case that prosecutors plan to mount against Zimmerman.


The account is strikingly similar to the story that Trayvon's parents, the family's attorneys and civil-rights leaders have told for weeks — that Trayvon was an innocent victim hunted down and killed because he was black.

Herr found the affidavit legally sufficient to establish probable cause and ordered Zimmerman to appear for arraignment — when defendants formally enter a plea — on May 29 before Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler.

But the probable-cause affidavit, prepared by two investigators in her office, spelled out the bare bones of her case.

To Trayvon, it says, Zimmerman was a scary man, following him for some unknown reason. To Zimmerman, Trayvon was someone who was about to commit a crime, "a f------ punk," the affidavit said.

The affidavit offered evidence the state's position on three key points:

•"Zimmerman confronted Martin," it says, an apparent contradiction of Zimmerman's version of events.

•The state will argue that the voice heard crying for help in the background of one 911 call is Trayvon's. According to the affidavit, Trayvon's mother listened to the recording and identified the voice as her son's.

•State investigators will rely on the testimony of a friend of Trayvon's who told them she talked to the teenager on the phone in the lead-up to the shooting and heard the confrontation.

Based on the description, she appears to be the girl described by Martin family attorneys as his girlfriend.

When interviewed by state investigators, "The witness advised that Martin was scared because he was being followed through the complex by an unknown male and didn't know why," the affidavit said.

Trayvon tried to run home, the affidavit says, but Zimmerman ignored the advice of a police dispatcher and continued pursuing him on foot.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-12/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-charged-jail-20120412_1_face-murder-charges-today-show-accident


http://www.newsrescue.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/zimmerman-arrest-examiner-618x462.jpg
http://colorlines.com/assets_c/2012/03/gzimmermanpublicrecord-thumb-640xauto-5674.jpg

[natina]

Zimmerman psychologically wanna be cop profile: He’s like so many other utterly unaccomplished males

Trayvon Martin, White Denial and the Unacceptable Burden of Blackness in America

By now, you probably know the shameful details, but they are worth repeating, in any event.
On the evening of February 26, George Zimmerman, a self-appointed “neighborhood watch captain” in an Orlando suburb, shot and killed 17-year old Trayvon Martin.
Because Martin was black.
And no, don’t even think of rolling your eyes at the suggestion. That is what happened, just as surely as so many might well be loathe to admit it.
Oh sure, he denies such a motivation, as does his family, but the details of the incident, now emerging from that evening leave very little question about it.
This was not, as we too often hear in the wake of such incidents, “a tragedy.”
This was not, as some would have it, “a terrible accident.”
It was murder, plain and simple. And it would be called such by everyone in a nation that had any commitment to honest language, which, sadly, would pretty much rule out the one in which Martin’s life began and ended, and in which Zimmerman continues to operate as a free man, unarrested by the police.
Trayvon Martin is dead because George Zimmerman believed his neighborhood needed and deserved to be protected from young black men, who could not possibly belong there, in his estimation. Never mind that Martin was in the community with his father, visiting friends. Never mind that Martin was armed only with Skittles and iced tea, while Zimmerman carried a loaded weapon.
Zimmerman, who has a history of aggressive behavior (including assaulting an officer a few years ago), appears to have something of a Dirty Harry syndrome about him. He is someone described by his own neighbors as overzealous, motivated by an obsessive desire to guard the perimeter of his community and pose as a crime-fighting hero to those around him. It doesn’t take much imagination to size up Zimmerman psychologically. He’s like so many other utterly unaccomplished males who fantasize about being a badass law officer, met one, you’ve met them all: a wannabe somebody

http://www.timwise.org/2012/03/trayvon-martin-white-denial-and-the-unacceptable-burden-of-blackness-in-america/

[natina]

the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .

the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.



911 call records george Zimmermans's desire to DETAIN Travyon martin.


ZIMMMERMAN STATED "they always get away" argument for racial profiling



http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...rvers-say?lite (http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...rvers-say?lite)





Criminally Negligent Homicide







(or "depraved indifference") in the language of the indictment for second degree murder.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...oAT_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...oAT_story.html)



What this means is that the state is not attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully murdered Trayvon Martin.



Instead they will set out to prove that zimmerman by going after Trayvon with a loaded gun:



-- even after he had been reminded not to by the 911 operator



-- despite the proper protocals for any neighborhood watch program



-- despite zimmerman's own training in law enforcement





Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life.



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.







In the absence of any eyewitness who had a clear view of the start of the fight,



or the firing of the gun.



Florida authorities wisely avoided the pitfalls of attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully shot Trayvon in a situation where he had other options.



If the Jury believes that Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation where he might well use his gun...







then he's guilty under the law.

[eccentricBlue]

Your posts bore me.

[yodajazz]

MSNBC may seem left-wing to anyone who watches FAUX news. The fact is, it's centrist while CNN is slightly right of center b/c that's what viewers in the US demand. In terms of "race issues" though, both CNN and MSNBC veer left. Why? B/c that's what THEIR viewers require. If you don't believe me then remember what happened right after the shootings.

All the newspapers and MSNBC and CNN aired pictures of a smiling child and a large fat man. In reality, Trayvon was bigger, more tattooed, more chrome grilled and more "potted up" as FAUX calls it. Zimmerman was the "white man" who in fact was trying to do good for his neighborhood after several robberies by "juveniles" (you're not allowed to say black males in America) over the past few weeks.

Anderson Cooper is a journalist, but when he's not reporting real news, he does episodes where he basically tries to grab ratings. For example, the video they showed of Zimmerman in the police station after the altercation. His head has a little black smudge and AC kept playing that clip over and over, showing the back of his only once, saying, "well...clearly...i...i don't see any wound on the back of his head...i don't see how he could have been in a fight". That's b/c he wasn't showing the back of his head on this grainy black and white video! Of course, the high res picture came out and of course he had a big gash on the back of his head.

I don't wanna take sides here but as crazy and hateful as right wingers in this country are, sometimes the left seems like it's attempting to compensate. Affirmative action anyone?

Sure Zimmerman could have been trying to do good. However, he could get several years in jail if he was not, or hiding criminal negligence. So he has an possible incentive to lie. Someone died, and many people want to know if it was justified. The public has a right to know. The real public outcry was that his story was not questioned thoroughly enough. A trial does not guarantee justice, but it improves the odds greatly. significantly.

[natina]

suck some dick while reading my post!

you dick lubber! :iagree::salad:fuckin::wiggle::party::jerkoff


Your posts bore me.

[natina]

trayvon martin should not have died!

trayvon martin should not have died!

but it was zimmerman who had issues with him being in that complex.

it was zimmerman who frighten/scared trayvon martin so that that he ran away.

THE CRAZY THING NOW IS THAT WE KNOW THAT TRAYVON MARTIN WAS RUNNING AWAY FROM ZIMMERMAN AND WAS FRIGHTEN, zimmerman DECIDES BECAUSE OF THE CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE CHARGE TO CHANGE HIS STORY NOW AND SAY THAT TRAYVON MARTIN WAS NOT RUNNING AWAY BUT SKIPPING.

zimmerman went from ,Trayvon Martin running away to not remembering if he was running away during the bail revocation hearing and now during the media tour with fox/hannity that TRAYVON MARTIN WAS SKIPPING AWAY.

the prosecution and trayvon martins family attorney calls this the ZIMMERMAN GIFT.

video talks about new evidence & zimmermans gift to the DA and MARTIN FAMILY

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justice/florida-zimmerman-interview/index.html


http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

GZ started the confrontation by STALKING/PURSUEING AN UN ARMED TEENAGER WITH A LOAD 9MM PISTOL

the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .

the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.



911 call records george Zimmermans's desire to DETAIN Travyon martin.


ZIMMMERMAN STATED "they always get away" argument for racial profiling



http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite


zimmerman already fucked up that when he said he was pursuing trayvon martin then on on tv interview he says trayvon was skipping away but in court he testified under oath that he did not remember if trayvon was running away from him.

the WEB OF LIES IS GONNA CATCH YA!

Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility.

important read more;
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

[asic600]

if trayvon martin were not on pot, if he hadn't had numerous altercations in his lifetime, I would believe he was an innocent. He was high for weeks (his parents didn't care) and he liked talking smack and talking about how he got into this fight or that on facebook. That tells me he was most likely a typical, rowdy little hoodlum. Get over this bullcrap.

In mississippi a black guy was run over by a white kid on pot, who saw his face and just ran him the hell over. That was 7 months ago. This black guy was like 70 and just doing his morning walk. Ya'll don't talk about this b/c it's not as "newsworthy" as a young hoodlum getting killed, which you can spin as "an innocent little baby deprived of life before he ever got to become a dentist". Focus on the real hate crimes instead of standing up for a criminal who got what was coming to em.

[bobvela]

MSNBC is a real cable news station with real investigative reporters. From a journalistic standpoint, they are 100x better than Faux News.

Emphasis mine

Years ago, I was at a historical site and related homes and the guide several times refered to several 'fox' aspects of a given wall, or the 'fox' floor which was installed in 1963 to look like the original.

When the tour was over, my dad pulled the guide aside to say "I think you've been pronouncing an important word wrong... it's French, it's not pronounced 'fox', it's pronounced 'faux' "... he even spelled it out for clarity, the guide laughed a bit and said that in her decade or so of giving the same tour almost every day during the non-winter season, he was the first to correct her, and that she would verify the pronunciation that he had suggested.

What I described above happened above happened maybe 15 years ago... I say this because anytime I hear someone mention 'Faux' News these days... I have to laugh at their clear ignorance or utter stupidity of the language they use.

Ditto goes for you giovanni_hotel. Any time I hear such an non-cleaver mispronunciation, it is clear from the start the quality of ones arguments.

[Willie Escalade]

I'm pretty sure they all know its pronounced "fo".

Maybe everyone should call them "Fakes News"...

[trish]

As long as we're discussing language, what is a non-cleaver mispronunciation? Also, why does your Dad feel the word "faux" is an important one? Very funny story. If true, you'll never hear it on Faux News.

[eccentricBlue]

MSNBC, CNN FOX, 2, 4, 5, 7, 11 (nightly news)... All of it is trash. Propaganda spun in the direction of each channels political agenda. Journalism is so blatantly bias today it doesn't matter what side your on. If you outright dismiss one channel while proping another up on a pedestal you only come off sounding like a hack or drone.

We need to be critical of the news and question the information fed to us. If we do not examine both sides responsibly we just end up feeding the hysteria delivered on a daily basis.

So the next time you turn on the "news" and see them reporting on the latest reality show I hope you realize that that station is just blowing smoke up your ass and not reporting and real news.

[jamesedwards]

America is a wacky place. You'll notice in the recent senseless crime that happened here in Charlotte, the suspects race is never mentioned by the news media. Ever. Yet a family man is shot in the face, almost killed and his life is turned upside down. For those that are wondering, no petitions are being circulated that the young suspect be brought to justice. No famous religious leaders are beseeching the community that the suspect be turned in, so that the bad apple can be taken out of the community, no reward. Now, if that cab driver had killed the suspect in self defense....


http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Police-continue-searching-for-suspect-who-shot-cab-driver-in-the-face-142221795.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/03/10/3087332/suspect-in-cab-driver-shooting.html

http://charlotte.news14.com/content/top_stories/654860/charlotte-police-search-for-suspect-in-2011-cab-driver-shooting

iN NC it's like African americans don't even wanna stand up for rights they are still in that Jim Crow stage, they act like they are scare as shit!!!

[jamesedwards]

suck some dick while reading my post!

you dick lubber! :iagree::salad:fuckin::wiggle::party::jerkoff

LOL hahah :dead: Now that's cute.

I wanna get a big dick TGirl mad so she can tell me "JAMES SUCK MY COCK YOU BITCH" lol I will have my head between her legs sucking her dick faster than two hams fighting for space in a honey suckle oven lol

[jefferson82]

Im not understanding what someone being safe and in there car has to do with any of this. If somebody got out in the road in my house and said what are you doin i couldnt just go over and start hitting them. Also i wouldnt run when somebody was askin me what i was doin i would just say get outta here or ill call the cops on you. Im not sayin this wasnt a tragedy and i dont think that zimmerman was smart when he got out of his car and im also not sayin that i know every detail of the case but if you just put together those 'basic' facts showing all sides theres not an obvious outcome in a trial or just in really what happened.

[jefferson82]

Ignore that last post as in what it was referencing...the post i was replyin to was about a week ago...lol. My bad.

[giovanni_hotel]

You can't compare any national network or cable news network to Faux News. They exist in their own separate hell of what actual journalism does NOT look like.
Faux News is the propaganda apparatus of the GOP and right wing. They don't just have a difference of opinion on matters, Faux News has a different set of facts than the rest of us are working from.

It's been studied and polled that if you watch Faux News exclusively, you are going to be misinformed about most news related issues.

[natina]

No deposition for lawyer in Trayvon Martin case

Lawyers for George Zimmerman, charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death of an unarmed teenager, wanted to question attorney Benjamin Crump about a phone conversation he says he had with the victim's girlfriend.


SANFORD, Fla. (http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?form=MSNNDL&q=Sanford, Florida, United States) — Lawyers for neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman will not be allowed to question an attorney for the parents of slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, a judge said Friday.
Lawyers for Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in Martin's shooting death, wanted to question attorney Benjamin Crump. The outspoken attorney has said he talked to Martin's girlfriend and she was on the phone with Martin in the minutes before Zimmerman shot the unarmed teenager to death on the night of Feb. 26, 2012.
Zimmerman has pleaded not guilty. He has said Martin punched him, they fought and he shot Martin in self-defense.
Zimmerman's attorneys wanted to question Crump in part to ask him about specifics on the circumstances surrounding his recording of the girlfriend, who was identified as witness eight in court.
Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson said Crump didn't have relevant information and questioning him would violate attorney-client privilege.
Nelson also said the defense team has had 10 months to interview the witness and she, not Crump, is the only one who could provide testimony about the phone call.
Crump's attorney, Bruce Blackwell, called the motion "a side show" by the defense. Crump did not attend the hearing.
Don West, an attorney representing Zimmerman, said Crump misrepresented the woman's age as 16 when she was 18.
"She has been cloaked in mystery since the beginning of this," West said.
Also, the judge denied a request to release the addresses of Martin's parents, girlfriend and other witnesses. However, the judge said the defense could ask them for their address during depositions. The state had withheld the addresses to protect the witnesses from public scrutiny.
Following the hearing, defense attorney Mark O'Mara said Zimmerman has talked to him about the one-year anniversary of the shooting.
"He is sorry but every time we say he's sorry and traumatized by Trayvon's death, they say we're being insensitive to the Martin family," O'Mara said. "It's been a traumatic year for both parties. The anniversary will be a sign that this has been a long, long year with no resolution."


http://news.msn.com/us/no-deposition-for-lawyer-in-trayvon-martin-case

[natina]

Zimmerman Stuns Court, Waives Right to 'Stand Your Ground' Hearing in Trayvon Martin Case


George Zimmerman's attorneys stunned court observers Tuesday when they waived their client's right to a "Stand Your Ground" hearing slated for April that might have led to a dismissal of the charges in the shooting death of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin a year ago.
However, the defense lawyers didn't say whether they would waive the immunity hearing outright. They left open the possibility for that hearing to be rolled into Zimmerman's second degree murder trial. Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain in his Florida subdivision, shot and killed the teen, who was visiting a house in the area.
The move allows the defense more time to prepare for the trial this summer, but also raises the stakes.
Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law entitles a person to use deadly force if he believes his life is threatened, and absolves them of an obligation to retreat from a confrontation, even if retreat is possible.
In recent weeks, the Zimmerman defense has suffered several legal setbacks. Judge Debra Nelson has ruled in favor of the state that Zimmerman's bail conditions should not be loosened, and that Trayvon Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump was not required to sit for a deposition about his interactions with the state's most important witness, a young woman who was the last known person to speak with Trayvon Martin before his death on February 26 2012.
It was the defense's legal maneuvering which put Judge Nelson on the bench in this murder trial. Last summer Zimmerman's team successfully argued that the previous judge, Kenneth Lester, was unfit to preside over the trial after a caustic bail ruling where he blasted Zimmerman for misleading the court about his financial situation.
Zimmerman contends that he shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin after the teen confronted him as he walked to his father's girlfriend's house. Were Judge Nelson to have accepted his account under Stand Your Ground, all criminal proceedings would have immediately stopped, and Zimmerman would have walked free.
But another unfavorable ruling by Nelson could have been interpreted by jurors as a sign of guilt. Waiving the hearing could also prevent the prosecution from picking apart Zimmerman's testimony.
Before the April hearing was waived, Zimmerman's defense set out to attack the credibility of witness 8, arguably the key witness in the upcoming trial.
Defense attorney Donald West asked the court for more information about the allegedly false account she gave attorneys. According to records obtained by ABC News she was on the phone with Martin as his confrontation with Zimmerman began. She claims he told her that he was scared of a strange man following him.
The state admitted that witness 8 lied when she stated that she did not attend Martin's funeral because of a medical issue and that there are no medical records to support that claim. The defense wanted Nelson to question prosecutors about how they first learned that this claim was not true, but Nelson refused.
The defense also asked for law enforecement biographies of both Zimmerman and Martin, in particular Martin's social media history. "It's time and money to get some of the information here and we are running out of both," said West.
In an earlier hearing the judge ruled that Zimmerman's defense could subpoena Martin's social media history but the undertaking is timely and expensive. Authorities agreed to hand over the documents to the judge so that she could review them and determine if the defense should have them.

http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-stand-ground-hearing-trayvon-162305101--abc-news-topstories.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-trayvon-martin-case/story?id=18656568

[explorerchick]

I find it ridiculous how they were calling Zimmerman a "white" guy just because they knew it would make black people more angry than if they said "hispanic" which he was. The reverse racism crap has really gotten out of control. If you're black you're allowed to say whatever you want about white people as far as the media is concerned and get off scot-free, however, if you're white and make any type of comment (derogatory or not) about black people then you're a "racist", and get slammed. Ridiculous. If they want racism stamped out than stop allowing it.

[natina]

zimmerman ancestry is from PERU

PERUVIANS are european


The problem arises because people refer to

hispanics as "the 4th race" when in fact they are a hybrid of the three fundamental races.

But the point with language is that words mean what people mean by them and not a textbook or scientific definition. And in that sense, most people see enough commonality among enough hispanics for the word to have common currency.

So, they become a de facto race.


hispanic's have origin from spain


there are a mix with white,native american,african



Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race

well many african americans have IRISH,scotis,native american,french and spanish roots

Think of the Whitest person you know:Now think of the darkest person you know:
http://www.africandna.com/history.aspx

Think of the Whitest person you know: someone with blond hair, blue eyes and almost translucent skin, not a drop of Black ancestry in them. Now think of the darkest person you know: someone richly endowed with traditional African features, not even a drop of White ancestry in their past. Well, guess what? Scientists now trace the origins of both of these people-and of all human beings who have ever walked the face of the earth-to Black Africa, to the region around what is now Ethiopia. As Spencer Wells, the director of National Geographic's massive Genographic Project, puts it: "Our species evolved in Africa, and a subset of Africans left that continent around 50,000 years ago to populate the rest of the world. Our earliest ancestors probably looked very much like modern Africans."
This would have been news to "Bull" Connor and Orval Faubus and countless other racists from our past. It is also news to most of our White

Program: Black in Latin America
Episode: Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race
Professor Gates explores the almost unknown history their significant black populations: the two countries together received far more slaves than did the United States.
• Visit the Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race webpage

http://video.pbs.org/video/1915580662/



I find it ridiculous how they were calling Zimmerman a "white" guy just because they knew it would make black people more angry than if they said "hispanic" which he was. The reverse racism crap has really gotten out of control. If you're black you're allowed to say whatever you want about white people as far as the media is concerned and get off scot-free, however, if you're white and make any type of comment (derogatory or not) about black people then you're a "racist", and get slammed. Ridiculous. If they want racism stamped out than stop allowing it.

[explorerchick]

zimmerman ancestry is from PERU

PERUVIANS are european


The problem arises because people refer to

hispanics as "the 4th race" when in fact they are a hybrid of the three fundamental races.

But the point with language is that words mean what people mean by them and not a textbook or scientific definition. And in that sense, most people see enough commonality among enough hispanics for the word to have common currency.

So, they become a de facto race.


hispanic's have origin from spain


there are a mix with white,native american,african



Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race

well many african americans have IRISH,scotis,native american,french and spanish roots

Think of the Whitest person you know:Now think of the darkest person you know:
http://www.africandna.com/history.aspx

Think of the Whitest person you know: someone with blond hair, blue eyes and almost translucent skin, not a drop of Black ancestry in them. Now think of the darkest person you know: someone richly endowed with traditional African features, not even a drop of White ancestry in their past. Well, guess what? Scientists now trace the origins of both of these people-and of all human beings who have ever walked the face of the earth-to Black Africa, to the region around what is now Ethiopia. As Spencer Wells, the director of National Geographic's massive Genographic Project, puts it: "Our species evolved in Africa, and a subset of Africans left that continent around 50,000 years ago to populate the rest of the world. Our earliest ancestors probably looked very much like modern Africans."
This would have been news to "Bull" Connor and Orval Faubus and countless other racists from our past. It is also news to most of our White

Program: Black in Latin America
Episode: Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race
Professor Gates explores the almost unknown history their significant black populations: the two countries together received far more slaves than did the United States.
• Visit the Mexico & Peru: A Hidden Race webpage

http://video.pbs.org/video/1915580662/

First of all Peruvians aren't European. Peru isn't even in Europe, for pete's sake and they AREN'T white. They may have white in them but so do a lot of black people in the United States. The problem arises when you try to justify racism against white people because it's becoming accepted as the norm, which is a load of crap. The fact is the guy didn't look white, it was a tactic to enrage people even further at the prospects of a "white" man killing a "black" kid.

[natina]

THE THREAD TOPIC IS below


THE THREAD TOPIC IS below



White Pride and Other Delusions:


Reflections on the Rage of the Uninformed


By Tim Wise




"The price the white American paid for his ticket was to become white...This incredibly limited, not to say dimwitted ambition has choked many a human being to death here: and this, I contend, is because the white American has never accepted the real reasons for his journey. I know very well that my ancestors had no desire to come to this place: but neither did the ancestors of the people who became white and who require of my captivity a song. They require of me a song less to celebrate my captivity than to justify their own."


James Baldwin, "The Price of the Ticket," 1985


It seems like every week I get an e-mail from someone demanding to know why there's no White History Month, or White Entertainment Television, or why whites aren't allowed to have organizations to defend "our" interests, the way people of color are, without being thought of as racists. One of these internet missives, which has been making the rounds lately on MySpace and other popular networking sites, implies that whites are somehow oppressed because we can't get away with calling people of color any number of racial slurs (a litany of which the author then proceeds to recite, almost gleefully), while persons of color presumably call us names like "cracker," "honky," or "hillbilly" all the time.


The e-mail goes on to express anger over, among other things, Martin Luther King Jr. day, and Yom HaShoah (Holocaust Remembrance day in Israel), as if these were holidays that discriminated against whites. It then laments that white pride is seen as racist, but for people of color to feel and show pride in their group is seen as normal, natural, and even healthy.


The Reverse Racism Ruse (Or How to Ignore Power, History and Logic)


That so many people find this kind of argumentation persuasive would be humorous were it not so dangerous, and so indicative of the way in which our nation has yet to come to grips with its racist history. Had we honestly confronted racism as an issue, past and present, it is unlikely that such positions would make sense to anyone.


http://www.timwise.org/2007/05/on-white-pride-and-other-delusions-reflections-on-the-rage-of-the-uninformed/


Tim Wise on White Privilege (Teaser)
http://redroom.com/member/tim-wise/media/videos/tim-wise-on-white-privilege-teaser



Tim Wise on the Creation of Whiteness (Clip)
http://redroom.com/member/tim-wise/media/videos/tim-wise-on-the-creation-of-whiteness-clip



Tim Wise on the "Dominant Historical Narrative"
http://redroom.com/member/tim-wise/media/videos/tim-wise-on-the-dominant-historical-narrative




THE THREAD TOPIC IS below


THE THREAD TOPIC IS below


THE THREAD TOPIC IS below


THE THREAD TOPIC IS below




Zimmerman Stuns Court, Waives Right to 'Stand Your Ground' Hearing in Trayvon Martin Case


George Zimmerman's attorneys stunned court observers Tuesday when they waived their client's right to a "Stand Your Ground" hearing slated for April that might have led to a dismissal of the charges in the shooting death of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin a year ago.
However, the defense lawyers didn't say whether they would waive the immunity hearing outright. They left open the possibility for that hearing to be rolled into Zimmerman's second degree murder trial. Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain in his Florida subdivision, shot and killed the teen, who was visiting a house in the area.
The move allows the defense more time to prepare for the trial this summer, but also raises the stakes.
Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law entitles a person to use deadly force if he believes his life is threatened, and absolves them of an obligation to retreat from a confrontation, even if retreat is possible.
In recent weeks, the Zimmerman defense has suffered several legal setbacks. Judge Debra Nelson has ruled in favor of the state that Zimmerman's bail conditions should not be loosened, and that Trayvon Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump was not required to sit for a deposition about his interactions with the state's most important witness, a young woman who was the last known person to speak with Trayvon Martin before his death on February 26 2012.
It was the defense's legal maneuvering which put Judge Nelson on the bench in this murder trial. Last summer Zimmerman's team successfully argued that the previous judge, Kenneth Lester, was unfit to preside over the trial after a caustic bail ruling where he blasted Zimmerman for misleading the court about his financial situation.
Zimmerman contends that he shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin after the teen confronted him as he walked to his father's girlfriend's house. Were Judge Nelson to have accepted his account under Stand Your Ground, all criminal proceedings would have immediately stopped, and Zimmerman would have walked free.
But another unfavorable ruling by Nelson could have been interpreted by jurors as a sign of guilt. Waiving the hearing could also prevent the prosecution from picking apart Zimmerman's testimony.
Before the April hearing was waived, Zimmerman's defense set out to attack the credibility of witness 8, arguably the key witness in the upcoming trial.
Defense attorney Donald West asked the court for more information about the allegedly false account she gave attorneys. According to records obtained by ABC News she was on the phone with Martin as his confrontation with Zimmerman began. She claims he told her that he was scared of a strange man following him.
The state admitted that witness 8 lied when she stated that she did not attend Martin's funeral because of a medical issue and that there are no medical records to support that claim. The defense wanted Nelson to question prosecutors about how they first learned that this claim was not true, but Nelson refused.
The defense also asked for law enforecement biographies of both Zimmerman and Martin, in particular Martin's social media history. "It's time and money to get some of the information here and we are running out of both," said West.
In an earlier hearing the judge ruled that Zimmerman's defense could subpoena Martin's social media history but the undertaking is timely and expensive. Authorities agreed to hand over the documents to the judge so that she could review them and determine if the defense should have them.

http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-stand-ground-hearing-trayvon-162305101--abc-news-topstories.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-trayvon-martin-case/story?id=18656568

[explorerchick]

THE THREAD TOPIC IS below
Yeah I guess it's easier to ignore the fact that you were trying to justify racism and failed miserably than take it head on. I think you've shown my point pretty clearly.

[natina]

he thinks/feels that he is whit although he does not deny his Peru ancestry.

therefore he is white.

[explorerchick]

he thinks/feels that he is whit although he does not deny his Peru ancestry.

therefore he is white.
Oh, right, so he says he's Peruvian, which isn't white, but at the same time claims he's white. Ah ok got it.

[explorerchick]

So maybe I should say/feel that I'm African-American so I can say whatever type of comments I want about any race I want and not get slammed by the media, seems fair enough right?

[tragicomedy]

he thinks/feels that he is whit although he does not deny his Peru ancestry.

therefore he is white.

He said he isn't White and so did his family on numerous occasions.

The whole case seems to be falling apart against him.


We'll see if he is convicted in a civil court because the predictions that he would be acquitted seem to be coming true.

I don't know if American civil courts will take self defence into account when/if a wrongful death case comes to civil court, but if it does, he'll win there too.

[natina]

that CALLS FOR WILD SPECULATION.



civil cases have a lower burden of proof and are much easier to get a monetary conviction.

[tragicomedy]

that CALLS FOR WILD SPECULATION.



civil cases have a lower burden of proof and are much easier to get a monetary conviction.

That's why I said I don't know if they'll accept his self defence claim. As it stands he may not have encountered this young person if he had not attempted to leave his truck in order to see the street sign.


Though it will be hard to call it wrongful death if it is shown that he was being attacked.

The only witness saying that she/he heard Zimmerman initiate contact has now been shown to be a liar.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-zimmerman-witness-8-medical-records-20130305,0,129597.story
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2013/03/george-zimmerman-star-witness-bombshell-major-defense-shift.html

[natina]

BUT ZIMMERMAN IS A LIAR


George Zimmerman Will Not Tell The Truth




George Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to His Honor, the Court, or the public. When Zimmerman took the witness stand at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing, he lied under oath in two forms: acts of omission and blatant falsehoods.


Zimmerman took the stand to make a self-serving statement in the cloak of an apology, but the message’s audience was for the media and a candid public, not the parents of the slain Trayvon Martin. It should be noted that O’Mara allowed this disrespectful action to be undertaken and His Honor did not stop it, either.

The faux apology given to turn the tide of negative media attention:
O'MARA: You advised me that you wanted to make a short statement, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Correct.
ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am. And I did not know if he was armed or not.
O'MARA: Nothing further, your honor.
George Zimmerman took the stand and performed for the media. The narrative was starting to change and the fickle media started pretending as if both the dead, unarmed minor, Trayvon Martin, and his confessed killer, George Zimmerman, were victims. This is absolutely incorrect. Man profiled, stalked, chased, and ultimately killed the minor. Those are the facts. Furthermore, Zimmerman lied on the stand about how old he thought Trayvon Martin was. When the non-emergency dispatcher asked how old Zimmerman thought the supposedly “suspicious guy” was, Zimmerman said “late teens.” 17 would classify as late teens. Let’s let that percolate into our collective conscience for a moment. A 28-year-old adult male tells the dispatcher that he believes a minor is indeed a minor and he stills exits his vehicle, with gun holstered, to chase after the “fucking punk” who would not get away. I can’t speak for Angela B. Corey, but when I heard this, I thought for sure any doubt about her over-charging Zimmerman went away.


State’s Attorney asking what took so long for the faux apology:
DE LA RIONDA: I'm sorry, sir, you're not really addressing that to the court. You're doing it here to the victim's family, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: They are here in the court, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: I understand. But I thought you were going to address Your Honor, Judge Lester, not -- so that's really addressed to the family and where the media happens to be, correct, Mr. Zimmerman?
ZIMMERMAN: No, to the mother and the father.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And tell me, after you committed this crime and you spoke to the police, did you ever make that statement to the police, sir? That you were sorry for what you've done or their loss?
ZIMMERMAN: No sir.
DE LA RIONDA: You never stated that, did you?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember what I said. I believe I did say that.
DE LA RIONDA: You told that to the police?
ZIMMERMAN: In one of the statements, I said that I felt sorry for the family.
DE LA RIONDA: You did?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: So that would be recorded because all those conversations were recorded, right?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And you're sure you said that?
ZIMMERMAN: I'm fairly certain.
DE LA RIONDA: And so which officer did you tell that to? You made five statements I believe, total.
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, all the names run together.
DE LA RIONDA: And do you remember if it was a male or a female?
ZIMMERMAN: There were both males and females.
DE LA RIONDA: At the time you made that statement that you were sorry?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And let me make sure the record's clear, you stated exactly what to those detectives?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember exactly what -- verbatim.
DE LA RIONDA: But you're saying you expressed concern for the loss of Mr. Martin, or that you had shot Mr. Martin, that you actually felt sorry for him?
ZIMMERMAN: I felt sorry that they lost their child, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: And so you told detectives that you wanted them to convey that to the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't know if they were detectives or not.
DE LA RIONDA: Officers, I apologize.
ZIMMERMAN: I didn't know if they were going to convey it or not. I just made the statement.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And then you said that you called them or you left a message for them to tell them that?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait 50 something days to tell them -- that is, the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't understand the question, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait so long to tell Mr. Martin and the victim's mother, the father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them?
ZIMMERMAN: I was told not to communicate with them.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. So even through your attorney, you didn't ask to do it right away? Your former attorneys or anything.
ZIMMERMAN: I did ask them to express that to them. And they said that they were going to.
Zimmerman isn’t a very good liar, or at least he isn’t a believable one. When De La Rionda asked if he expressed the same sentiment to the police that he was expressing 50+ days later in His Honor’s Court, he said, “no.” Then he says he did express the sentiment. When De La Rionda asked who he told that too, he resorts back to the tried and the true, “I don’t know/I can’t remember” line that he used when he was questioned by Serino. I’ll get to that in a moment. I’m sure it’s not going to come as a surprise, but I’ve listened to everything that was released by George Zimmerman Legal Case, and I can tell you all that he never expressed remorse, contrition, or anything resembling sorrow for killing an unarmed minor. Before the stress test, he does ask a female police officer if she slept well, and he does ask her if she has “ever had to kill anybody,” as if trying to draw some parallels between the murder of Trayvon Martin and her job as a trained law enforcement agent. She seemed a bit perplexed/annoyed to me and answered “no/nope.” Real law enforcement agents are trained to use deadly force as a last resort, not a first option. So this is lie #2 given by George Zimmerman at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing.


George Zimmerman perjuring himself under oath about what was said to Serino/others:
DE LA RIONDA: But before you committed this crime on February 26th, you were arrested -- I'm sorry, not arrested. You were questioned that day, right, February 26th?
ZIMMERMAN: That evening into the 27th.
DE LA RIONDA: And then the following morning. Is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And the following evening, too. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. Would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times?
ZIMMERMAN: I remember giving three statements, yes sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"?
O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.
JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.
DE LA RIONDA: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"?
JUDGE LESTER: I'm going to grant his motion at this time.
O'MARA: Thank you, your honor.
DE LA RIONDA: Would you agree you changed your story as it went along?
ZIMMERMAN: Absolutely not.
Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility
important read more;
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

[yourdaddy]

You can't trust thugs or their people to tell the damn truth. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/06/teenage-witness-in-trayvon-martin-case-admits-misrepresented-herself/?test=latestnews

[robertlouis]

I'm amazed that this thread remains in the general discussion slot rather than moving over to politics where it so obviously belongs. Mods?

[giovanni_hotel]

You can't trust thugs or their people to tell the damn truth. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/06/teenage-witness-in-trayvon-martin-case-admits-misrepresented-herself/?test=latestnews


Doesn't matter. Phone records confirm she was on the phone with Trayvon when he was being followed that night and before the altercation with Zimmerman.

Her lying about being sick in the hospital and unable to attend Martin's funeral is problematic , but I'm sure the prosecution will explain it away that she was scared to be seen in public.

[jefferson82]

Robertlouis, sir, you are correct!!!!

[Willie Escalade]

I'm amazed that this thread remains in the general discussion slot rather than moving over to politics where it so obviously belongs. Mods?

I think Seanchai wanted to leave it here...especially since he's the OP...

[doctor screw]

I love how people on this board mock a murder victim.......but are enraged on the Eva Lin attack thread

WOW

I guess they're pieces of shit everywhere,even the LGBT community

[Willie Escalade]

I see the thread was moved...and since far less folks come to this section, this thread most likely will fall into obscurity.

[yodajazz]

First of all Peruvians aren't European. Peru isn't even in Europe, for pete's sake and they AREN'T white. They may have white in them but so do a lot of black people in the United States. The problem arises when you try to justify racism against white people because it's becoming accepted as the norm, which is a load of crap. The fact is the guy didn't look white, it was a tactic to enrage people even further at the prospects of a "white" man killing a "black" kid.
How is this racism against Whites, when you a dead Black teenager with no criminal record, and the person who admits to killing him gives inconsistent explanations? Ah, poor White/Hispanic folks. They have to go on trial for killing someone. What's this country coming to, when you cant just assume that every Black, person is a blood thirsty killer? This racism against White people has just got to stop!

But seriously, when I was a young man, I used to enjoy driving through affluent neighborhoods, looking at the nice houses, and dreaming of having a good life. I didnt know that Black people, only look at nice things, so they can figure out how to steal things. This is the basic assumption of Zimmerman, no matter what his heritage. If Zimmerman was Martian, and killed someone without adequete reason, it would still be the same. They have a justice system to determine the truth. Clothing makers made something called a hoodie. But Black people, only wear them to commit crimes, even if it is raining. All other races, wear them for innocent reasons, I guess. Dentists invented gold teeth. But Black people only have gold teeth, if they plan on pursing a criminal career. But I'm a little off topic. Ah, poor White people. Some people remember the 50th anniversary of four girls killed in a church bombing coming up this year. But it really was an accident, as the bomb was meant to kill adults meeting, later to campaign for equal rights. Ah poor White people! They may just have to grant the ideal of the US Constitution to everyone; Life, and Liberty. What's this nation coming to?

[yodajazz]

You can't trust thugs or their people to tell the damn truth. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/06/teenage-witness-in-trayvon-martin-case-admits-misrepresented-herself/?test=latestnews

We put labels on people, such as "thugs" to take away their humanity. It's ok to kill thugs, I guess. I believe that Trayvonn Martin was a human being. Once, in my late teens, I was jumped. Then someone else jumped me a couple days after that when they noticed the bruises, from the first incident. I guess they took me for an easy mark. Right after that I adopted the look, of a group a people that were known to be tough. I was never bothered again. I even remembered, seeing some people cross over the street, to seemingly avoid walking past me. I was not a 'thug'. I went to graduate from college, and have lend a criminal free life, outside of traffic infractions. People should not have to die because of the way they look. There is a difference, a teen being photographed raising his index finger, and someone capable of murder. Would a reasonable person feel fear if someone was following them at night? Young people are sometimes 'jacked' even for candy, let alone other more very serious scenarios. It's all about granting human status for all humans. The assumption that Martin was a criminal, is the reason he is not alive today. But humans today have rights to a justice system, to determine if they have treated justly. Martin's parents deserve to have a closer version of what truly happened to their son.

I want to know that I can walk to a store, and not be assumed to be a criminal. I walk for exercise sometimes. I want to know that my own life means something to the greater society. I am not a thug, I am a human being.

[trish]

yodajazz's post just reminded me of this opinion piece in today's nyt:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/opinion/coates-the-good-racist-people.html?smid=pl-share

[Prospero]

Excellent post Yoda

[yourdaddy]

want to know that I can walk to a store, and not be assumed to be a criminal. I walk for exercise sometimes. I want to know that my own life means something to the greater society. I am not a thug, I am a human being.

Then tell your thug friends to start acting like human beings.

[Stavros]

Frankly, yourdaddy, your post is so far removed from the tone and meaning of YodaJazz's post it is embarrassing.

[fred41]

yodajazz's post just reminded me of this opinion piece in today's nyt:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/opinion/coates-the-good-racist-people.html?smid=pl-share

Damn, I remember when that was in the papers. All I could think was - "It's Forest Whitaker...are you serious??!!". He has a tremendous body of work...he's my age (old).and he looks my age...he's Forest Whitaker...it's Chelsea...what the fuck??!!..It's Forest Whitaker...he could buy that store..how do you not recognize him - he's got that eye...it's fucking Ghost Dog!!!

He handled it with an AMAZING amount of grace and class...it seems he cared a lot more about the employee than perhaps I would have...

Listen,when I was young (young...he's not young)...I had experiences like that...(I was even accused of the same thing...the difference being I had a broken bottle held to my throat by one of the owners of the store - a stoned biker...lol)..but i looked like shit and hung out with shit...

..he just looks like Forest Whitaker.
Christ.

[trish]

Now I've got an urge to see BIRD again.

[Willie Escalade]

You can't trust thugs or their people to tell the damn truth. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/06/teenage-witness-in-trayvon-martin-case-admits-misrepresented-herself/?test=latestnews
This is definitely true...those thugs at Fox News are some serious liars...:whistle:

[natina]

YODAJAZZ & TRISH MADE SOME GOOD POST.

I WAS TRYING TO GET BACK ON SUBJECT WITH zimmerman having NO SYG HEARING.


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/opinion/coates-the-good-racist-people.html?smid=pl-share



We put labels on people, such as "thugs" to take away their humanity. It's ok to kill thugs, I guess. I believe that Trayvonn Martin was a human being. Once, in my late teens, I was jumped. Then someone else jumped me a couple days after that when they noticed the bruises, from the first incident. I guess they took me for an easy mark. Right after that I adopted the look, of a group a people that were known to be tough. I was never bothered again. I even remembered, seeing some people cross over the street, to seemingly avoid walking past me. I was not a 'thug'. I went to graduate from college, and have lend a criminal free life, outside of traffic infractions. People should not have to die because of the way they look. There is a difference, a teen being photographed raising his index finger, and someone capable of murder. Would a reasonable person feel fear if someone was following them at night? Young people are sometimes 'jacked' even for candy, let alone other more very serious scenarios. It's all about granting human status for all humans. The assumption that Martin was a criminal, is the reason he is not alive today. But humans today have rights to a justice system, to determine if they have treated justly. Martin's parents deserve to have a closer version of what truly happened to their son.

I want to know that I can walk to a store, and not be assumed to be a criminal. I walk for exercise sometimes. I want to know that my own life means something to the greater society. I am not a thug, I am a human being.



yodajazz's post just reminded me of this opinion piece in today's nyt:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/opinion/coates-the-good-racist-people.html?smid=pl-share


BUT ZIMMERMAN IS A LIAR


George Zimmerman Will Not Tell The Truth




George Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to His Honor, the Court, or the public. When Zimmerman took the witness stand at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing, he lied under oath in two forms: acts of omission and blatant falsehoods.


Zimmerman took the stand to make a self-serving statement in the cloak of an apology, but the message’s audience was for the media and a candid public, not the parents of the slain Trayvon Martin. It should be noted that O’Mara allowed this disrespectful action to be undertaken and His Honor did not stop it, either.

The faux apology given to turn the tide of negative media attention:
O'MARA: You advised me that you wanted to make a short statement, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Correct.
ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am. And I did not know if he was armed or not.
O'MARA: Nothing further, your honor.
George Zimmerman took the stand and performed for the media. The narrative was starting to change and the fickle media started pretending as if both the dead, unarmed minor, Trayvon Martin, and his confessed killer, George Zimmerman, were victims. This is absolutely incorrect. Man profiled, stalked, chased, and ultimately killed the minor. Those are the facts. Furthermore, Zimmerman lied on the stand about how old he thought Trayvon Martin was. When the non-emergency dispatcher asked how old Zimmerman thought the supposedly “suspicious guy” was, Zimmerman said “late teens.” 17 would classify as late teens. Let’s let that percolate into our collective conscience for a moment. A 28-year-old adult male tells the dispatcher that he believes a minor is indeed a minor and he stills exits his vehicle, with gun holstered, to chase after the “fucking punk” who would not get away. I can’t speak for Angela B. Corey, but when I heard this, I thought for sure any doubt about her over-charging Zimmerman went away.

State’s Attorney asking what took so long for the faux apology:
DE LA RIONDA: I'm sorry, sir, you're not really addressing that to the court. You're doing it here to the victim's family, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: They are here in the court, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: I understand. But I thought you were going to address Your Honor, Judge Lester, not -- so that's really addressed to the family and where the media happens to be, correct, Mr. Zimmerman?
ZIMMERMAN: No, to the mother and the father.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And tell me, after you committed this crime and you spoke to the police, did you ever make that statement to the police, sir? That you were sorry for what you've done or their loss?
ZIMMERMAN: No sir.
DE LA RIONDA: You never stated that, did you?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember what I said. I believe I did say that.
DE LA RIONDA: You told that to the police?
ZIMMERMAN: In one of the statements, I said that I felt sorry for the family.
DE LA RIONDA: You did?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: So that would be recorded because all those conversations were recorded, right?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And you're sure you said that?
ZIMMERMAN: I'm fairly certain.
DE LA RIONDA: And so which officer did you tell that to? You made five statements I believe, total.
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir, I'm sorry, all the names run together.
DE LA RIONDA: And do you remember if it was a male or a female?
ZIMMERMAN: There were both males and females.
DE LA RIONDA: At the time you made that statement that you were sorry?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And let me make sure the record's clear, you stated exactly what to those detectives?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't remember exactly what -- verbatim.
DE LA RIONDA: But you're saying you expressed concern for the loss of Mr. Martin, or that you had shot Mr. Martin, that you actually felt sorry for him?
ZIMMERMAN: I felt sorry that they lost their child, yes.
DE LA RIONDA: And so you told detectives that you wanted them to convey that to the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't know if they were detectives or not.
DE LA RIONDA: Officers, I apologize.
ZIMMERMAN: I didn't know if they were going to convey it or not. I just made the statement.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. And then you said that you called them or you left a message for them to tell them that?
ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait 50 something days to tell them -- that is, the parents?
ZIMMERMAN: I don't understand the question, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you wait so long to tell Mr. Martin and the victim's mother, the father and mother, why did you wait so long to tell them?
ZIMMERMAN: I was told not to communicate with them.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. So even through your attorney, you didn't ask to do it right away? Your former attorneys or anything.
ZIMMERMAN: I did ask them to express that to them. And they said that they were going to.
Zimmerman isn’t a very good liar, or at least he isn’t a believable one. When De La Rionda asked if he expressed the same sentiment to the police that he was expressing 50+ days later in His Honor’s Court, he said, “no.” Then he says he did express the sentiment. When De La Rionda asked who he told that too, he resorts back to the tried and the true, “I don’t know/I can’t remember” line that he used when he was questioned by Serino. I’ll get to that in a moment. I’m sure it’s not going to come as a surprise, but I’ve listened to everything that was released by George Zimmerman Legal Case, and I can tell you all that he never expressed remorse, contrition, or anything resembling sorrow for killing an unarmed minor. Before the stress test, he does ask a female police officer if she slept well, and he does ask her if she has “ever had to kill anybody,” as if trying to draw some parallels between the murder of Trayvon Martin and her job as a trained law enforcement agent. She seemed a bit perplexed/annoyed to me and answered “no/nope.” Real law enforcement agents are trained to use deadly force as a last resort, not a first option. So this is lie #2 given by George Zimmerman at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing.

George Zimmerman perjuring himself under oath about what was said to Serino/others:
DE LA RIONDA: But before you committed this crime on February 26th, you were arrested -- I'm sorry, not arrested. You were questioned that day, right, February 26th?
ZIMMERMAN: That evening into the 27th.
DE LA RIONDA: And then the following morning. Is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And the following evening, too. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, sir.
DE LA RIONDA: Ok. Would it be fair to say you were questioned about four or five times?
ZIMMERMAN: I remember giving three statements, yes sir.
DE LA RIONDA: And isn't it true that in some of those statement when you were confronted about your inconsistencies, you started "I don't remember"?
O'MARA: Outside the scope of direct examination. I will object your honor.
JUDGE LESTER: We'll give you a little bit of leeway. Not a whole lot but a little bit here, ok.
DE LA RIONDA: Isn't it true that when you were questioned about the contradictions in your statements that the police didn't believe it, that you would say "I don't remember"?
JUDGE LESTER: I'm going to grant his motion at this time.
O'MARA: Thank you, your honor.
DE LA RIONDA: Would you agree you changed your story as it went along?
ZIMMERMAN: Absolutely not.
Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility
important read more;
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html


Zimmerman Stuns Court, Waives Right to 'Stand Your Ground' Hearing in Trayvon Martin Case


George Zimmerman's attorneys stunned court observers Tuesday when they waived their client's right to a "Stand Your Ground" hearing slated for April that might have led to a dismissal of the charges in the shooting death of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin a year ago.
However, the defense lawyers didn't say whether they would waive the immunity hearing outright. They left open the possibility for that hearing to be rolled into Zimmerman's second degree murder trial. Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch captain in his Florida subdivision, shot and killed the teen, who was visiting a house in the area.
The move allows the defense more time to prepare for the trial this summer, but also raises the stakes.
Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law entitles a person to use deadly force if he believes his life is threatened, and absolves them of an obligation to retreat from a confrontation, even if retreat is possible.
In recent weeks, the Zimmerman defense has suffered several legal setbacks. Judge Debra Nelson has ruled in favor of the state that Zimmerman's bail conditions should not be loosened, and that Trayvon Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump was not required to sit for a deposition about his interactions with the state's most important witness, a young woman who was the last known person to speak with Trayvon Martin before his death on February 26 2012.
It was the defense's legal maneuvering which put Judge Nelson on the bench in this murder trial. Last summer Zimmerman's team successfully argued that the previous judge, Kenneth Lester, was unfit to preside over the trial after a caustic bail ruling where he blasted Zimmerman for misleading the court about his financial situation.
Zimmerman contends that he shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin after the teen confronted him as he walked to his father's girlfriend's house. Were Judge Nelson to have accepted his account under Stand Your Ground, all criminal proceedings would have immediately stopped, and Zimmerman would have walked free.
But another unfavorable ruling by Nelson could have been interpreted by jurors as a sign of guilt. Waiving the hearing could also prevent the prosecution from picking apart Zimmerman's testimony.
Before the April hearing was waived, Zimmerman's defense set out to attack the credibility of witness 8, arguably the key witness in the upcoming trial.
Defense attorney Donald West asked the court for more information about the allegedly false account she gave attorneys. According to records obtained by ABC News she was on the phone with Martin as his confrontation with Zimmerman began. She claims he told her that he was scared of a strange man following him.
The state admitted that witness 8 lied when she stated that she did not attend Martin's funeral because of a medical issue and that there are no medical records to support that claim. The defense wanted Nelson to question prosecutors about how they first learned that this claim was not true, but Nelson refused.
The defense also asked for law enforecement biographies of both Zimmerman and Martin, in particular Martin's social media history. "It's time and money to get some of the information here and we are running out of both," said West.
In an earlier hearing the judge ruled that Zimmerman's defense could subpoena Martin's social media history but the undertaking is timely and expensive. Authorities agreed to hand over the documents to the judge so that she could review them and determine if the defense should have them.

http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-stand-ground-hearing-trayvon-162305101--abc-news-topstories.html

http://abcnews.go.com/US/zimmerman-stuns-court-waives-trayvon-martin-case/story?id=18656568

[robertlouis]

I see the thread was moved...and since far less folks come to this section, this thread most likely will fall into obscurity.

That wasn't my intention in suggesting it should be moved, Willie. It just stuck out like the proverbial sore thumb in the threads in General Discussion.

I guess if anything I was hoping that the debate might become more serious and mature. But who am I kidding? This is HA after all! :hide-1:

[natina]

Trayvon Martin’s family settles wrongful death lawsuit with Sanford, Florida, homeowner’s association

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943#ixzz2PiiyAIbl

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943

[natina]

Zimmerman's Mom: This Is an Injustice

Alleged killer's mother speaks out on the anniversary of arrest


How would you feel about the Trayvon Martin case if you were George Zimmerman's mother? Well, judging by the open letter she published on Real Clear Politics (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/11/a_letter_of_gratitude_from_gladys_zimmerman_117911 .html) to mark the anniversary of his arrest, pretty angry. "April 11, 2012 will be forever remembered by the Zimmerman family as the day the justice system failed us as Americans," Gladys Zimmerman writes, complaining that an innocent man was arrested "solely to placate the masses."
Zimmerman says there's a "vast amount of information and evidence" to support George's self-defense claim that the media, intent on forwarding a false narrative, refuses to publish. "When George was incarcerated, the food he bought was considered 'news,' the snacks he ate and even the undergarments he purchased were fodder for even more 'news reports,'" she complains. Now, the media is silent. Still, she thanks those who have stood by her son. "Stay vigilant," she tells them. "Stay focused on facts and evidence, stay focused on prayer." Click for her full column (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/11/a_letter_of_gratitude_from_gladys_zimmerman_117911 .html)


http://www.newser.com/story/166076/zimmermans-mom-this-is-an-injustice.html

[Willie Escalade]

To Mrs Zimmerman I say...

[natina]

Cop Axed Over Trayvon Shooting Targets

Martin family decries 'reprehensible' behavior

Newser) – A Florida cop is out of a job following the less-than-brilliant decision to bring targets with Trayvon Martin's image to on-duty shooting practice. As CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/13/us/florida-trayvon-martin-targets/) reports, Sgt. Ron King of the Port Canaveral Police Department brought a couple of the targets—which he apparently purchased online—to an April 4 training session and offered them to fellow officers, who declined. He was fired Friday after an internal review; a Canaveral Port Authority spokesman calls King's action "unacceptable," and says an apology to Trayvon's family is in the works. "Whether his act was hatred or stupidity, none is tolerable," he tells WFTV (http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/port-canaveral-police-sergeant-fired-trayvon-marti/nXLdC/).
The Martin family is unamused, and issued this statement via their lawyer: "It is absolutely reprehensible that a high-ranking member of the Port Canaveral Police, sworn to protect and serve Floridians, would use the image of a dead child as target practice. Such a deliberate and depraved indifference to this grieving family is unacceptable." King had a little more than two years on the force; he has seven days to appeal.

http://www.newser.com/story/166204/fla-cop-axed-over-trayvon-shooting-targets.html


Trayvon Martin’s family settles wrongful death lawsuit with Sanford, Florida, homeowner’s association



http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-death-civil-case-housing-complex-settled-1-million-article-1.1308943[/quote]

[natina]

Zimmerman to Argue Self-Defense, Not ‘Stand Your Ground’

SANFORD, Fla. (CNN) — George Zimmerman, set to stand trial in the 2012 shooting death of teenager Trayvon Martin, on Tuesday waived his right to a “stand your ground” pretrial immunity hearing.

Zimmerman’s attorneys have decided they will try this as a self-defense case.

Florida’s deadly force law, also called “stand your ground,” was passed in 2005.

It allows people to meet “force with force” if they believe they or someone else is in danger of being seriously harmed by an assailant. Under the law, a person can use deadly force anywhere as long as he is not engaged in an unlawful activity; is being attacked in a place he has a right to be; and reasonably believes that his life and safety are in danger as a result of an overt act or perceived threat committed by someone else.

In a pretrial immunity hearing, a judge would have ruled whether Zimmerman’s actions were protected under the “stand your ground” law; a ruling in favor of the defendant would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed.

Martin was shot and killed on February 26, 2012, while returning from a nearby convenience store to his father’s fiancée’s house in a gated community in Sanford, Florida.

Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain, acknowledged that he shot the unarmed 17-year-old, but said Martin physically attacked him and he fired in self-defense.

Initially, no charges were pursued, and the case soon became the center of a national controversy.

Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder on April 11, 2012.

During Tuesday’s motions hearing, Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O’Mara told the judge there was nothing in the law that required the immunity hearing to take place before Zimmerman’s trial.
O’Mara said the hearing could be requested after the defense has presented its case, but “we’d much rather have the jury address the issue of criminal liability or lack thereof.”

After the motions hearing ended, prosecutors and defense attorneys were to meet in private with the judge to discuss jury issues for the June 10 trial.




http://ktla.com/2013/04/30/zimmerman-to-argue-self-defense-not-stand-your-ground/#axzz2S232O994

[natina]

Zimmerman gambles by waiving 'stand your ground' hearing before trial.


By choosing not to invoke the Florida law known as “stand your ground” before his trial, George Zimmerman took a gamble — passing up the chance to have a judge dismiss his second-degree murder charge before it ever gets before a jury.

His lawyers said they want a jury to decide the case, concerning the shooting death of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin last year, because it has taken on enormous national significance.

But one legal expert said the move was carefully calibrated in another way, too.

Under the law, which broadens the right to self-defense for people who feel threatened outside their homes, a defendant can ask the judge to grant criminal immunity before a case goes to trial. Zimmerman had that chance Tuesday and declined it.

The risk in pursuing immunity at this point, NBC News legal analyst Kendall Coffey said, is that Zimmerman could have lost before the judge, creating a strike against him in the minds of potential jurors who are following the case. And in the Trayvon Martin case, which goes to trial June 10, finding an impartial jury will be a monumental task as it is.

Zimmerman’s lawyers said it could take as long as three weeks.

“There would be considerable risk that, no matter how you tried to deal with it during jury selection, you’d get some jurors that would know that the judge had already rejected the self-defense claim,” said Coffey, a former federal prosecutor.

The decision not to ask for an immunity hearing, which Zimmerman announced while standing in a Sanford, Fla., courtroom and answering Judge Debra Nelson in a soft-spoken voice, applies only before trial.Coffey still expects “stand your ground” to be the linchpin of Zimmerman’s defense once the trial begins.

The law says people do not have to retreat if they believe they are in imminent danger of being killed or badly injured outside their homes.


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/30/17987796-zimmerman-gambles-by-waiving-stand-your-ground-hearing-before-trial?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2

[yodajazz]

I questioned whether or not he could have won the case under stand your ground, anyway, since he admitted to the dispatcher by phone that he was getting out of his vehicle and following Martin on foot. Lots of people forget that Martin was a human being. If so, it would be reasonable that he would feel fear for someone following him at night. So then it would be reasonable that he could have felt in danger and fought Zimmerman, not as an attacker but self defense. In fact the "Stand your ground" law, could be used on behalf of Martin.

And if Zimmerman is innocent, that means that I could take a class, and then be able to follow women walking at night, while I am armed. They also could be planning to break into homes. I could expect them to have provide identifying information, etc. Thanks for the update Natina.

[trish]

In fact the "Stand your ground" law, could be used on behalf of Martin. But only if he had survived. The Stand-Your-Ground laws are only available to the survivors of a violent dispute, which is a deep flaw in the concept of these kinds of laws. They are of more use to drug dealers and perpetrators of violence, who always claim self-defense, than to the average citizen.

[natina]

THE zimmerman MURDER TRIAL BEGINS

George Zimmerman Trial: Possible Testimony From Voice Recognition Expert Challenged

SANFORD, Fla. -- Former neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is questioning the expected use of a voice recognition expert at his murder trial next month.

Zimmerman's attorney filed a motion made public Monday asking for a hearing to determine whether testimony from the expert would be allowed.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for fatally shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year in a gated community in Sanford during a struggle. Zimmerman is pleading not guilty.

Neighbors called 911 during the struggle and cries of help can be heard on the calls. Martin's family claims the voice is that of the South Florida teen.

Zimmerman's father has said in court he believes the cries are from his son.

Zimmerman's attorney says jurors could be confused by a voice expert's testimony.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/george-zimmerman-trial-voice-recognition_n_3225598.html?utm_hp_ref=trayvon-martin

[yodajazz]

Whose voice it is is not that important. Zimmerman created a situation, by following someone at night with his gun, which caused an unnecessary death. I am assuming that Martin was a human being, who could reasonably feel fear, of someone following him. Zimmerman was not following Neighborhood Watch guidelines by carrying a pistol. His reason for being out there was to 'watch', not pursue. And he was thus advised by dispatch. Someone died. Why was he out of his vehicle? This is strong evidence that he created a situation, for which he should be held accountable.

One of our city's kidnap victims was like three years older, when she was kidnapped, than was Martin when he died. It was reasonable Martin could have felt fear. Having a gold tooth, or being photographed with a raised middle finger, does not have any bearing on whether a person feels fear.

[natina]

well its important because out of the blue zimmerman claims martin jumped

him and that he did not pursue or stalk martin. the new twist is zimmerman went on the talk show round and changed his story to martin was skipping and not running away from him.

his story has changed multiple times




EXHIBIT #1
zimmerman is a proven liar

help help help!

zimmerman lies to police saying he was the one hollering and screaming for help not knowing that the screams would be forensically analysis and he would be found to be a lie

your voice is as UNIQUE AS A FINGER PRINT.

voice identification NOW IS JUST LIKE FINGER PRINTS thats how terroist or potential terroist are caught now .

USING FORENSIC VOICE ANALYSIS.

*ZIMMERMAN LIED,TRAYVONS LAST WORDS WAS" HELP"!

*ZIMMERMAN SAID TRAYVONS LAST WORDS WAS "YOU GOT ME"

TRAYVON MARTIN ORIGINAL 911 CALL ENHANCED VERSION! (Screams) Last word (HELP) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYxJieDtLo0&feature=related)



Expert Voice Analysists Say Screams are NOT zimmerman

Owen Forensic Services LLC they have newer technology thats used by the CIA AND OTHER GOVERMENT AGEN

Tom Owen, of Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence
Owen Forensic Services LLC they have newer technology thats used by the CIA AND OTHER GOVERMENT AGENCIES IN TERROIST CASES.its been used in murder trials successfully.

THE FBI does not have the state of the art voice analysis technology ZIMM LIED!

*two forensic voice identification experts

*"The tests concluded that it's not the voice of Mr. Zimmerman," Tom Owen, of Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence

*Asked if he thought such tests would be admissible in court, Owen said "yes" and noted he had recently used similar testing in testimony at a Connecticut murder case that involved 911 call.

information leaked that the voice forensically tested.

Zimmerman lied claiming he was the one hollering for help a witness collaborated it then...


after information leaked that the voice forensically analyzed and it wasnt Zimmerman hollering for help the witness took back there story that it Zimmerman hollering for help Zimmerman caught in a lie cause he did not know the incident was being recorded on 911 tapes


* ZIMMERMAN IS A LIER
* ZIMMERMAN LIED ABOUT CRYING FOR HELP
** ZIMMERMAN LIED ABOUT CRYING FOR HELP HE DID NOT KNOW THE INCIDENT WAS BEING RECORDED

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-911-call-screams-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say


EXHIBIT #2

video talks about new evidence & zimmermans gift to the DA and MARTIN FAMILY

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justice/florida-zimmerman-interview/index.html


http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html


VOICES ARE LIKE FINGER PRINT,UNIQUE SAYS OWEN

Trayvon Martin case 911 call: Screams not George Zimmerman's, 2 experts say


The voice heard crying for help on a 911 call just before Trayvon Martin was shot to death was not that of George Zimmerman, according to two forensic voice identification experts, one of whom told MSNBC on Sunday that he believes the evidence is strong enough to use in court.

"The tests concluded that it's not the voice of Mr. Zimmerman," Tom Owen, of Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, told MSNBC.
Asked if he thought such tests would be admissible in court, Owen said "yes" and noted he had recently used similar testing in testimony at a Connecticut murder case that involved 911 call.




The voice heard crying for help on a 911 call just before Trayvon Martin was shot to death was not that of George Zimmerman, according to two forensic voice identification experts, one of whom told MSNBC on Sunday that he believes the evidence is strong enough to use in court.

"The tests concluded that it's not the voice of Mr. Zimmerman," Tom Owen, of Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, told MSNBC.
Asked if he thought such tests would be admissible in court, Owen said "yes" and noted he had recently used similar testing in testimony at a Connecticut murder case that involved 911 call.
The conclusions of Owen and another audio expert were first reported by the Orlando Sentinel on Saturday.
Zimmerman told police that he screamed for help during his confrontation with Martin, 17. He claims the shooting was self-defense.
The 911 call, reposted in this YouTube clip, came on the night of Feb. 26 from a woman who reported someone crying out for help in a gated community in Sanford, Fla.
In the recording of her phone call, panicked cries and a gunshot are heard.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-911-call-screams-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say



EXHIBIT #3


Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation



http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html





the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .


the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).




He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.




911 call records george Zimmermans's desire to DETAIN Travyon martin.



ZIMMMERMAN STATED "they always get away" argument for racial profiling




http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite






Criminally Negligent Homicide








(or "depraved indifference") in the language of the indictment for second degree murder.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html




What this means is that the state is not attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully murdered Trayvon Martin.




Instead they will set out to prove that zimmerman by going after Trayvon with a loaded gun:




-- even after he had been reminded not to by the 911 operator




-- despite the proper protocals for any neighborhood watch program




-- despite zimmerman's own training in law enforcement






Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life.




He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.








In the absence of any eyewitness who had a clear view of the start of the fight,




or the firing of the gun.




Florida authorities wisely avoided the pitfalls of attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully shot Trayvon in a situation where he had other options.




If the Jury believes that Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation where he might well use his gun...








then he's guilty under the law.

EXHIBIT #4

now zimmerman claims trayvon was skipping & not running away from him.

he also claims he was not following trayvon.

the DA says that zimmermans story is changing as he tells it


http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justice/florida-zimmerman-interview/index.html

Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility.

important read more;
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

[buttslinger]

If you want to identify someone's sins, see who they point their finger at.

There used to be a joke in Washington DC-
APB: Black Male, late teens, early twenties......

It is a fact of life that somebody like Trayvon is a lot more likely to be involved in crime than a girl, or an old person.

If Zimmerman had had any real training, or had been judged by a higher up in a Police Academy, he never would have gotten caught up in the bullshit macho Fox News justice system, he would at worst have stopped a suspicious looking character, talked to him, and said goodnight.

If I were Zimmerman, I'd be lying my ass off too! You can bet his lawyer has told him to expect a long stretch in the slammer, the truth is not going to set him free.

[yodajazz]

Natina, I was basically arguing points of Exhibit 3". That's the closest to my view. And to think, there are people out there, who didn't think this matter should come to a trial.

[natina]

Latest Disturbing Trayvon Story Not Actually True

Martin did not film friends beating up a homeless guy


(Newser) – George Zimmerman's legal team has been digging up some less-than-flattering background information (http://www.newser.com/story/168441/trayvons-texts-reveal-fistfights-eerie-warning.html) about Trayvon Martin—but one story that made the rounds Friday, involving Martin allegedly recording his friends while they attacked a homeless man, turns out not to be true. Daily Intel (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/trayvon-didnt-film-friends-beating-a-man.html) explains what happened:

Zimmerman's defense initially thought it had a video of Trayvon doing just that, but it had not released the video yet. The Orlando Sentinel (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:TqQGK1mGVy4J:www.orlandosentinel.co m/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-trayvon-martin-fight-video-20130531,0,7127296.story+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us), anticipating the video's release, prepared a story describing the video. Then that story was accidentally posted Friday, before the video had been released.



The Sentinel story was quickly removed when the error was realized, but a cached version started getting attention.
Zimmerman's defense team then released a statement explaining what the video actually shows: "Trayvon Martin, along with a buddy, was videotaping two homeless guys fighting each other over a bike."
The Sentinel (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-trayvon-martin-fight-video-20130602,0,6996223.story) then published a story explaining the correct sequence of events, noting that Trayvon simply happened upon the two homeless men.
Seeing as the judge ruled evidence like this video will only be allowed at trial (http://www.newser.com/story/168626/zimmerman-team-cant-talk-up-trayvon-pot-use-judge.html) if the defense can authenticate it, Adam Martin writes (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/06/trayvon-didnt-film-friends-beating-a-man.html), "They'll have to do a better job with that than they have so far."

http://www.newser.com/story/168911/latest-disturbing-trayvon-story-not-actually-true.html

[yodajazz]

Put out a sensational story, that is a lie. Not as many people will get the admission that the story was wrong, because that is not as sensational. Accidentally posted? Yeah, right. Yet they try to discredit the major living witness, the girlfriend, saying she lied about her age. I don't even know the circumstances. I know that many teens lie about their age, for various reasons. Thanks for the info, Natina.

[natina]

JURY selection begins


George Zimmerman trial: Day 4 of jury selection in Trayvon Martin shooting


No jurors have been seated yet for high-profile Zimmerman trial


SANFORD — A middle-aged housewife in a hot-pink jacket — a prospective juror in the George Zimmerman trial — bluntly told attorneys Thursday that she believes he is innocent and that Trayvon Martin, the teenager he shot, was a troubled young man looking for a fight.
"I know his family loved him," said the woman. "He probably just started going with the wrong crowd. They probably didn't know about it."


She then gave a recitation of some of the most reputation-damaging things found on Trayvon's cellphone: a photo of a semiautomatic handgun; one of growing marijuana plants; a text he sent, describing a fight in which he took part.
"He was learning to become a street fighter," the woman said, and the night he was shot, "it seems to me that he's looking for someone to fight ... I think George was just trying to protect his neighborhood."
Trayvon's parents were sitting across the courtroom about 40 feet away. They left the courthouse at the end of the day without commenting.

There is little chance the woman, publicly identified only as E-81, will be on the final jury panel. But her candor Thursday was startling after three days of other prospective jurors gingerly answering questions, often equivocating, almost never saying an unkind word about the Miami Gardens 17-year-old.
Zimmerman alleges that Trayvon attacked him, knocking him to the ground with a punch that broke his nose, then climbed on top and began slamming Zimmerman's head against a sidewalk.
Prosecutors charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder, saying he profiled the unarmed high-school junior, followed and murdered him.
Day 5 of jury selection is to resume Friday at 9 a.m.
So far, 85 prospective jurors have been dismissed; at least 24 have survived the first round of questions, which have dealt solely with pretrial publicity. Attorneys in the case want a pool of 40 before they move on to a broader round of questioning.
The final panel will be made up of six jurors and four alternates.
The biggest development in the case Thursday was an announcement by Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson that she will sequester the jury once one has been picked. That came as no surprise. Attorneys for both sides have been warning prospective jurors all week that that might be the case.
Once panel members are sworn in, they won't be allowed to go home, and their contact with the outside world will be very limited.
"Would I have Internet access so I could do my quizzes online?" asked prospective juror K-95, a middle-aged woman who's taking college courses and described herself as "an IT geek" who gets 500 to 600 emails a day.
She did not get a clear answer.
Attorneys questioned 10 jurors in court Thursday. One of the trial's most emotional moments came in midafternoon when prospective juror N-18, a native of Puerto Rico, tried to explain in halting English the stress he's felt all week.http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-06-13/news/os-george-zimmerman-trial-day-4-20130613_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-jury-selection


THE zimmerman MURDER TRIAL BEGINS

George Zimmerman Trial: Possible Testimony From Voice Recognition Expert Challenged

SANFORD, Fla. -- Former neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is questioning the expected use of a voice recognition expert at his murder trial next month.

Zimmerman's attorney filed a motion made public Monday asking for a hearing to determine whether testimony from the expert would be allowed.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for fatally shooting 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year in a gated community in Sanford during a struggle. Zimmerman is pleading not guilty.

Neighbors called 911 during the struggle and cries of help can be heard on the calls. Martin's family claims the voice is that of the South Florida teen.

Zimmerman's father has said in court he believes the cries are from his son.

Zimmerman's attorney says jurors could be confused by a voice expert's testimony.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/george-zimmerman-trial-voice-recognition_n_3225598.html?utm_hp_ref=trayvon-martin

[natina]

Zimmerman Juror Escorted Out, Prohibited From Returning​​

http://www.newsoxy.com/world/zimmerman-juror-escorted-out-4-130981.html

[natina]

George Zimmerman trial's key question: Will he testify?

The jury has been seated, the witnesses lined up and the exhibits gathered, but the trial of George Zimmerman begins Monday with an unanswered question: Will he testify?
Lawyers are set to deliver opening statements with clashing accounts of why Zimmerman, 29, shot unarmed teen Trayvon Martin, 17, on a rainy February 2012 night in Sanford, Fla., sparking widespread protest and national debate that touched on race, guns and self-defense.
Zimmerman, a former neighborhood watch volunteer who has pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder, says he pulled the trigger in self-defense after Martin attacked him — and legal experts say it’s common in self-defense cases for the defendant to take the stand.

But as jury selection ended last week — with six women picked to decide Zimmerman’s fate — defense attorney Mark O’Mara said he doesn’t know yet whether his client will take the oath and tell his side of the story.
“That is a dynamic decision that has to be made within the context of a trial,” O’Mara said.
“This case will fall on the fact that the state will not be able to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt with their evidence that a crime was committed by my client.”
Legal analyst Kendall Coffey, who is following the proceedings closely, said O’Mara and his co-counsel

Don West, are unlikely to decide whether to call Zimmerman until the prosecution has rested.
"In self-defense cases, the defendant generally takes the stand. It’s hard to establish self-defense without the defendant explaining why they killed someone,” he said.
Yet, having Zimmerman testify carries risks.
Coffey said it’s unclear, given his limited public exposure, if he would be a good witness. In addition, getting on the stand would allow prosecutors to “drill down” on any possible inconsistencies in Zimmerman’s statements and bring in potentially unflattering details from his past that might otherwise be off limits, Coffey said.

“If I’m Mark O’Mara, I’m working it every way I can to keep George Zimmerman off the stand,” Coffey said.
In lieu of Zimmerman’s testimony, the defense can try to establish self-defense through statements he gave to police, which the prosecutors are likely to introduce, and through any witnesses who saw or heard the confrontation.
“They can also put on the medical evidence,” Coffey said, referring to photos and medical reports about injuries to Zimmerman’s face and head.
“It may well be that those thousand words a picture is worth are better than a thousand words from George Zimmerman’s mouth.
“But it’s going to be a game-time decision.”
The case has been in pregame mode for most of June with jury selection and pre-trial hearings. The defense won a ruling over the weekend when Judge Debra Nelson ruled that experts cannot testify about who can be heard screaming on a 911 call from the night of the shooting.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/130623-nelson-bcol-7p.380;380;7;70;0.jpgPool / Getty Images
Judge Debra Nelson will preside over the trial, which is expected to last up to four weeks.


A potential prosecution witness had testified in a report that using voice-recognition technology, he was able to discern Martin saying, “I’m begging you.” Defense experts disagreed and said the methodology was unreliable, and the judge agreed.
The jury can still hear the 911 call, and other witnesses – such as family or friends of Zimmerman and Martin -- can testify about it.
Before any evidence is presented, both sides will present their opening statements, starting with the prosecution.
The defense announced Sunday that West, not O’Mara, will deliver its opening. The statements could take up most or all of the first day of the trial, which is expected to last up to four weeks.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/23/19103306-george-zimmerman-trials-key-question-will-he-testify?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

[natina]

note!: the trial is underway

Zimmerman trial judge bars expert testimony on 911 call recording


The judge in George Zimmerman's second degree murder trial has decided to bar expert testimony about a 911 call that captured screaming before Trayvon Martin's February 2012 shooting death.

In a written order filed to county court this morning, Judge Debra Nelson called methodologies used by forensic voice analysts seeking to determine who is screaming during the call "not reliable."

However, Nelson said the recording itself can be played at trial -- and left the door open for family and others who knew Zimmerman or Martin to testify about it.

"This order does not prevent the parties from playing the tapes at trial or from calling witnesses familiar with the voice of the Defendant or Martin to testify regarding the identity of the person(s) making the scream," Nelson says.

The decision follows days of testimony from prosecution and defense experts.

Two state experts, forensic voice analysts Tom Owen and Alan Reich, said it was not Zimmerman screaming on the tape. Reich also said he could discern Martin speaking, claiming he could hear the 17-year-old say "stop" and "I'm begging you" in the moments before he was shot.

But three defense experts testified that the recording was of insufficient length and quality to make a determination, and attacked the research methods used by the state's experts.

In her ruling today, Judge Nelson said there is "no competent evidence that the scientific techniques used by Dr. Owen and Dr. Reich are generally accepted in the scientific field."

That standard -- evidence that the techniques are generally accepted in the field -- was the basis for the so-called Frye Hearing on the science behind voice analysis.

Zimmerman's lawyers had asked for the hearing, seeking to bar Owen and Reich's testimony.

Reached by phone this morning, George Zimmerman's lead attorney, Mark O'Mara, said he was happy with the decision.

"I thought when I took the case, we'd have the ability to decipher who was who," O'Mara said of the call. But, he said, he grew to think science couldn't determine the question.

Opening statements in Zimmerman's trial begin Monday.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/22/19091598-zimmerman-trial-judge-bars-expert-testimony-on-911-call-recording

[yodajazz]

Looks like the jury will be able to hear prior calls Zimmerman made. That will be important evidence as to his state of mind in going out that night. The prosecution does need to prove a "depraved state of mind" in its case. Looks like the judge may not allow evidence of Martin's marijuana use. I wonder whether or not, Zimmerman's medications will be part of the trial. Lastly, I have never seen any maps showing where Zimmerman's vehicle was. I think that the prosecution will able to establish that he was pursuing Martin. I still believe that it was reasonable that Martin felt fear in being followed at night, especially by someone of a different race.

[bobvela]

The prosecution does need to prove a "depraved state of mind" in its case.

Exactly... and the way this case is going, they have zero shot of that.

to quote me last year:

Zimmerman will walk... mark my words... he was over charged and will walk for the same reason that Casey Anthony did... the prosecution will not be able to prove their case to the degree charged.

Now at trial we see it's not just a matter of having over charged him... but because they have a very weak case in general.

Witness after witness for the state have done more to support the defenses claim of lawful self-defense than even hint at a "depraved state of mind".

Even the state's star witness has admitted on the stand to giving false statements to investigators (in addition to many other false statements related to the case).


Lastly, I have never seen any maps showing where Zimmerman's vehicle was. I think that the prosecution will able to establish that he was pursuing Martin. I still believe that it was reasonable that Martin felt fear in being followed at night, especially by someone of a different race.

You can find some aerial shots of there area here (http://lawofselfdefense.com/zimmerman-trial-myth-busters-did-zimmerman-chase-down-a-fleeing-martin/) & here (http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/evidence-that-trayvon-martin-doubled-back)... as well as some analysis that suggests that Zimmerman could not have 'chased down' Martin... and that in all likelihood, Martin doubled back.

I wonder when Zimmerman is acquitted... if those who were calling for his head will acknowledge they were wrong... and take responsibility for the violence that will almost certainly happen.

[trish]

At trial's end I will refrain from second guessing the conclusions of the jury. My main complaint is that Zimmerman would never had gone to trial had there not been a public outcry. Both Martin and Zimmerman deserve due process. That process is now ongoing, no thanks to the Florida enforcement community.

[Queens Guy]

Exactly... and the way this case is going, they have zero shot of that.

to quote me last year:


Now at trial we see it's not just a matter of having over charged him... but because they have a very weak case in general.

Witness after witness for the state have done more to support the defenses claim of lawful self-defense than even hint at a "depraved state of mind".

Even the state's star witness has admitted on the stand to giving false statements to investigators (in addition to many other false statements related to the case).



You can find some aerial shots of there area here (http://lawofselfdefense.com/zimmerman-trial-myth-busters-did-zimmerman-chase-down-a-fleeing-martin/) & here (http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/evidence-that-trayvon-martin-doubled-back)... as well as some analysis that suggests that Zimmerman could not have 'chased down' Martin... and that in all likelihood, Martin doubled back.

I wonder when Zimmerman is acquitted... if those who were calling for his head will acknowledge they were wrong... and take responsibility for the violence that will almost certainly happen.


The media and the 'analysts' have been doing a terrible job of reporting some significant things that have been happening in the court room, and their 'opinions' contrast dramatically with what the people watching the trial think. Many people, around half of them, think that Trayvon's female friend's testimony was damaging to the prosecution and helpful to the defense. However, the 'analysts' all seemed to think she was wonderful.

It's not accurate reporting. They seem to be raising the expectations of those who may expect a conviction. When the prosecution has a bad day, the media should let the public know that the prosecution had a bad day. As simple as that. They shouldn't pretend the prosecution had a good day.

They all ignored the exchange where Trayvon's lady friend admitted that she didn't care enough to make sure that what she said during the interview with Benjamin Crump, the Martin family attorney was accurate or not.

My jaw dropped when I heard her say that. Trayvon's family deserved better from her. But I didn't see that clip on the news.

[bobvela]

My main complaint is that Zimmerman would never had gone to trial had there not been a public outcry.

And yet the lead investigator was pushing for negligent homicide charges (a far easier bar to meet given the evidence)... and yet the public outcry gave prosecutor Angela Corey and excuse to get involved, bump up the charges and try to raise her political capitol.

How does it feel to be used?


Both Martin and Zimmerman deserve due process. That process is now ongoing, no thanks to the Florida enforcement community.

Due process requires a trial? You must not believe in prosecutorial discretion.

This is not due process... this is poor attempt at a legal lynching. Due process was prevented by the public outcry and a politician who saw a way they could gain. Instead false hope has been created and the violence and outrage that happens upon acquittal will be on the heads of those who demanded this.

[bobvela]

It's not accurate reporting. They seem to be raising the expectations of those who may expect a conviction. When the prosecution has a bad day, the media should let the public know that the prosecution had a bad day. As simple as that. They shouldn't pretend the prosecution had a good day.

Why would the same media that was pushing for the head of Zimmerman back off now? The current narrative from the media will play well into a later narrative of the "racist jury of mostly whites that acquitted Zimmerman" while removing blame from the state which never should have brought murder-2 charges in this case.

[natina]

The case is about negligent homicide and not homicide. There is a difference and this is the reason zimmerson should not be found not guilty.


Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html




the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .

the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.



911 call records george Zimmermans's desire to DETAIN Travyon martin.


ZIMMMERMAN STATED "they always get away" argument for racial profiling



http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite





Criminally Negligent Homicide







(or "depraved indifference") in the language of the indictment for second degree murder.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html



What this means is that the state is not attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully murdered Trayvon Martin.



Instead they will set out to prove that zimmerman by going after Trayvon with a loaded gun:



-- even after he had been reminded not to by the 911 operator



-- despite the proper protocals for any neighborhood watch program



-- despite zimmerman's own training in law enforcement





Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life.



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.







In the absence of any eyewitness who had a clear view of the start of the fight,



or the firing of the gun.



Florida authorities wisely avoided the pitfalls of attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully shot Trayvon in a situation where he had other options.



If the Jury believes that Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation where he might well use his gun...







then he's guilty under the law.

[yodajazz]

And yet the lead investigator was pushing for negligent homicide charges (a far easier bar to meet given the evidence)... and yet the public outcry gave prosecutor Angela Corey and excuse to get involved, bump up the charges and try to raise her political capitol.

How does it feel to be used?



Due process requires a trial? You must not believe in prosecutorial discretion.

This is not due process... this is poor attempt at a legal lynching. Due process was prevented by the public outcry and a politician who saw a way they could gain. Instead false hope has been created and the violence and outrage that happens upon acquittal will be on the heads of those who demanded this.

There was national outcry over the fact that there was not a trial, when there were in fact many questions involving this case. This trial is the due process, many people were asking for. Due process is not being prevented. Having a public trial is a form of due process, the last time I looked.

Seems to me like you are seeking a return to earlier times, when Whites would kill Black with impunity; lynchings, tar and feathers, bombs, and death by dragging. Whites have burned down Black people's entire towns, without there being prosecutions. We are human beings just like you are, in case it is not obvious to you. HA mods took down my post with a picture from an actual lynching. It was a picture of a large group of White men standing over a charred Black body. A few of the men even managed a smile. I think they also removed my picture of separate White and Black water fountains.
Apparently reality is too deep for some people to see.

So I'm going to post another picture. Its the church window where four Black girls, age 11-14 were killed by a bomb, planted by White separatists. Yeah, due process. It took 38 years for someone to be convicted of this crime.

[trish]

And yet the lead investigator was pushing for negligent homicide charges... The fact that there was an investigation at all is due to the public demanding there be one. Zimmerman was taken to the station, cursorily questioned and released. Many witnesses (including some who made the 911 calls, and others who lived nearby) weren't questioned until it became evident that there would have to be a real investigation. One early witness was interviewed in the presence of Trevon's mother. I'm not sure, is that considered good police procedure these days.

How does it feel to be used?Your asking a transgender, African/Asian American how it feels to be used? So a prosecutor has taken political advantage of the public relations mess created by the police. What's new? Good for her. It time the Florida police clean up their act. But not good for justice, I agree. The charge should be commensurate with what the prosecutor feels she can prove given the evidence of the investigation. Not being a prosecutor or privy to the facts of the much belated investigation I won't pass judgement on whether murder-2 charges were justified. I leave it to (what were your words...oh yes) prosecutorial discretion.

Due process requires a trial?Your words, not mine. I said both Martin and Zimmerman deserve due process. Martin was invited into the neighborhood. He had no weapon other than a box of skittles. Zimmerman was not invited. He was a self-proclaimed vigilante with a concealed weapon stalking the neighborhood for criminals. In fact the police kinda unvited him. Zimmerman pursues and confronts Martin for being "suspicious." A tussle ensues and Martin dies by Zimmerman's weapon. That all we or the police knew. So what did they do? They picked up Zimmerman, questioned him briefly and released him. The public thought the case deserved more scrutiny than it seemed the police were willing to give it. It seemed to the public that the police were hoping the outcry would quickly die away and the case would just go away. Is they any evidence to the contrary? Zimmerman was being tried and fried in the media. Due process is conducting a proper investigation and if the results warrant it, giving him a trial. Something, unfortunately, that wasn't going to happen without the media noise forcing Florida's hand. Due process is something Martin never got.

[Odelay]

to quote me last year:

Originally Posted by bobvela View Post
Zimmerman will walk... mark my words... he was over charged and will walk for the same reason that Casey Anthony did... the prosecution will not be able to prove their case to the degree charged.

bobvela quoting bobvela... how novel. I'm guessing bobvela has masturbated over that stunt a couple of times. Move along dimestore prosecutor, move along.

[broncofan]

For Bobvela, it is a failure of the system that someone is being tried for shooting an unarmed black teenager. The political pressure is based on the fact that so frequently prosecutors allow such events to happen without taking the necessary steps to determine whether they should pursue the case. The only people who should apologize are those who failed to investigate the circumstances of Martin's death and immediately released Zimmerman from custody.

I said months ago that I thought pursuing 2nd degree murder may be a bad idea because it would be tough to demonstrate Zimmerman had formulated the requisite intent to get a conviction. I think it is possible that Zimmerman is guilty of second degree murder but showing purpose or knowledge intent is difficult. "Depraved heart murder" usually requires that someone act so recklessly that an innocent's death is an obvious result. For instance, firing a gun into a playground for kicks and finding out that you unintentionally killed a child.

Here, since it is difficult to establish exactly what happened, it might be easier to show that Zimmerman did not have a legal privilege to take someone's life. That his self-defense was "imperfect", and that he committed reckless or negligent homicide.

[broncofan]

Why would the same media that was pushing for the head of Zimmerman back off now? The current narrative from the media will play well into a later narrative of the "racist jury of mostly whites that acquitted Zimmerman" while removing blame from the state which never should have brought murder-2 charges in this case.
What an insult to all the victims of racist violence in this country whose attackers have been acquitted in pernicious exercises of jury nullification. It is not a media narrative that individuals who have killed African-Americans have been acquitted by all white juries. It is a part of American history. In fact, one cannot read about jury nullification without encountering cases where juries acquitted men involved in the lynching of African-Americans despite numerous eyewitness accounts of the murders.

Good God it is amazing how ignorant some people are. Since the media does not act as a monolith it would only require one editorial saying what you have in quotes for your point to be proven by your standards.

[natina]

TRAYVON MARTIN is an inocent youth who was going to his father house after purchasing some candy and an ice tea when an embolded man who has had MMA training and was armed and was over zealous


tried to detain him and probably pushed him and attempted to take him to the ground with his MMA training.


For Bobvela, it is a failure of the system that someone is being tried for shooting an unarmed black teenager. The political pressure is based on the fact that so frequently prosecutors allow such events to happen without taking the necessary steps to determine whether they should pursue the case. The only people who should apologize are those who failed to investigate the circumstances of Martin's death and immediately released Zimmerman from custody.

I said months ago that I thought pursuing 2nd degree murder may be a bad idea because it would be tough to demonstrate Zimmerman had formulated the requisite intent to get a conviction. I think it is possible that Zimmerman is guilty of second degree murder but showing purpose or knowledge intent is difficult. "Depraved heart murder" usually requires that someone act so recklessly that an innocent's death is an obvious result. For instance, firing a gun into a playground for kicks and finding out that you unintentionally killed a child.

Here, since it is difficult to establish exactly what happened, it might be easier to show that Zimmerman did not have a legal privilege to take someone's life. That his self-defense was "imperfect", and that he committed reckless or negligent homicide.


The case is about negligent homicide and not homicide. There is a difference and this is the reason zimmerson should not be found not guilty.


Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation


http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html




the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .

the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.



911 call records george Zimmermans's desire to DETAIN Travyon martin.


ZIMMMERMAN STATED "they always get away" argument for racial profiling



http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/04/12/11166967-george-zimmerman-expected-to-take-the-stand-in-trayvon-martin-murder-case-legal-observers-say?lite





Criminally Negligent Homicide







(or "depraved indifference") in the language of the indictment for second degree murder.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html



What this means is that the state is not attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully murdered Trayvon Martin.



Instead they will set out to prove that zimmerman by going after Trayvon with a loaded gun:



-- even after he had been reminded not to by the 911 operator



-- despite the proper protocals for any neighborhood watch program



-- despite zimmerman's own training in law enforcement





Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life.



He WILLFULLY CREATED the circumstances where the gun was used.







In the absence of any eyewitness who had a clear view of the start of the fight,



or the firing of the gun.



Florida authorities wisely avoided the pitfalls of attempting to prove that Zimmerman willfully shot Trayvon in a situation where he had other options.



If the Jury believes that Zimmerman's actions willfully created a situation where he might well use his gun...







then he's guilty under the law.

[Stavros]

The Orlando Sentinel has published this resume of the week's proceedings -I assume it is a reasonably fair report. Link at the bottom.

George Zimmerman trial: The week in review




http://1.2.3.10/bmi/www.trbimg.com/img-51cf67f6/turbine/os-george-zimmerman-5-scenes-to-remember-20130-001/600/600x298


Defense attorney Mark O'Mara, right, holds a photo of… (Joe Burbank/Orlando Sentinel )

June 29, 2013
Monday
In opening statements, attorneys took vastly different paths.
Assistant State Attorney John Guy was passionate, profane and loud. He dropped the f-bomb several times, using the words Zimmerman had said to a police dispatcher moments before the shooting.
"'[Expletive] punks. These assholes, they always get away.' Those were the words," Guy said, pointing at Zimmerman, "in that grown man's mouth."


http://1.2.3.10/bmi/articles.orlandosentinel.com/images/pixel.gif
http://1.2.3.10/bmi/articles.orlandosentinel.com/images/pixel.gif
Defense attorney Don West's opening was slow and methodical — and at nearly three hours, five times longer than Guy's.
"I think the evidence will show that this is a sad case, that the are no monsters," West said. "George Zimmerman is not guilty of murder. He shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense after being viciously attacked."
Neither attorney mentioned race in his opening statement, but the issue came up late in the day when Assistant State Attorney Richard Mantei began playing for jurors a call Zimmerman had made to police, reporting a suspicious black man in the neighborhood. But the subject was not Trayvon Martin. It was someone else.
Zimmerman had made many similar calls to police in the months before Trayvon's death. Defense attorney Mark O'Mara objected, asking that the audio playback be halted. The judge told attorneys to research case law and return Tuesday to hash it out.
Tuesday
Sanford police Sgt. Anthony Raimondo was first to testify and told jurors that when he arrived at the scene of the shooting, Trayvon Martin was face-down in the grass, a bullet in his chest, his hands beneath him.
Tuesday was also the day that jurors saw a slew of crime-scene and evidence photos. About a dozen photos of Trayvon's body were shown in court. Also Tuesday, prosecutors placed several important items into evidence, including Trayvon's now near-iconic hoodie and Zimmerman's gun.
The court session ended with the issue of whether jurors should listen to five phone calls Zimmerman made to police still unresolved.
The Neighborhood Watch coordinator for Sanford police, Wendy Dorival, also testified. She said Zimmerman was instructed — as are all Neighborhood Watch coordinators in Sanford — to call police if they see something suspicious and not to "engage" a suspect.
Wednesday
The state's star witness, Rachel "Diamond" Jeantel, gave a dramatic account of Trayvon Martin's last seconds. While on the phone with Trayvon, he told her a man was following him, someone he described as a "creepy-ass cracker," Jeantel said.
She said she could hear the man say, "What are you doing around here?" Jeantel then heard a "bump," followed by Trayvon saying "Get off. Get off," then the phone went dead, she testified.

http://1.2.3.10/bmi/articles.orlandosentinel.com/images/pixel.gif
Jeantel's account, though, was nearly lost amid the problems and spectacle she created. In her 2 1/2 hours on the stand, she used street slang, was sometimes defiant and talked so fast and so softly that it was often impossible to make out her words.
It was a rocky day for prosecutors. Early in the day, they called two neighbors who heard and saw part of the confrontation between Trayvon and Zimmerman the night of the shooting, both of whom were damaged on cross-examination.
Also Wednesday, jurors listened as prosecutors played recordings of five calls Zimmerman made to police dispatchers in the months before the shooting. In four he was reporting suspicious people — in each of those cases, the subject was black.
Thursday
Rachel Jeantel got back on the stand for a second day and told jurors she's convinced that she heard Zimmerman hit then climb on top of Trayvon. Defense attorney Don West challenged her, a tactic he kept up for 5 1/2 grueling hours over two days.
On Wednesday, Jeantel responded badly. On Thursday, she was more cooperative, ending nearly every answer with "sir" — even if the "sir" became more pointed as the day wore on.
At a news conference, defense attorney Mark O'Mara was asked who had won the battle of wills between Jeantel and West.
"The only battle in this court is for justice and truth," O'Mara answered. During the testimony, West led Jeantel through several of her earlier statements, trying to discredit her and show that she had changed her account.
Jeantel was one of four witnesses prosecutors called Thursday. Two others were neighbors.
Friday
At the end of the trial's first full week, jurors had heard from police, first responders, medical professionals and neighbors. And on Friday, they heard a lot about mixed martial arts, the full-contact boxing-like sport.
The state called the man expected to be the defense's star witness: John Good, a Zimmerman neighbor who told Sanford police after the shooting he'd seen a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man "just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style."
Good said he saw two people on the ground. The one on top was wearing dark clothes, he said, and the one of the bottom had lighter skin and was wearing white or red.
However, Good said he couldn't say for sure who called out for help — though he thought it was Zimmerman — and also said he didn't see the punches connect, just "arm movement going downward."
The last witness of the day was Lindzee Folgate, a physician assistant who treated Zimmerman the day after the shooting. She testified that during earlier visits, she'd noted that Zimmerman had "started to exercise intensely with" mixed martial arts, three times a week. His body mass rated him obese, she said: 5 feet 7.5 inches and weighing 204 pounds.


http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-06-29/news/os-george-zimmerman-trial-rail-highlights-20130629_1_george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-mark-o-mara

[Queens Guy]

Stavros, my concern with the reporting of this case is that there is too much supposed 'analysis' by 'experts' and not enough reporting on what the witnesses actually said.

I worry this will lead to a misinterpretation of why the witnesses, especially Rachel Jeantel, Trayvon's friend who was on the phone with him shortly before the shooting happened, were found not credible.

People will argue that she was found not credible because of her race, attractiveness or lack of attractiveness, use of slang, etc. and not because of what she said. That will lead many to think she was a victim of racism, or some other kind of discrimination. It will bolster the anger that underlies this case, and may even lead to violence. Violence that wouldn't happen, in my opinion, if the reporting referred more often to the testimony given in court.

The following is a portion of her testimony which I referred to in a previous post, which caused my jaw to drop when she gave it. It is why I question her credibility. And why I find the media derelict in their duty to report accurately, or with intelligent analysis of this case. It comes from CNN's website at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/sitroom.01.html
The 'Unidentified Male' is Don West, a defense attorney. Crump is Benjamin Crump, the Martin family attorney, who Jeantel should have considered friendly to her.

JEANTEL: I had told you what happened to me in the Crump interview. I had a rush on it.

Are you listening?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One more time.

I'm sorry. I was distracted.

You told me what?

JEANTEL: I had told you, during the interview between me and Crump, I had a rush on it. And before that interview, I had told my mom that have any -- if the officer wanted to talk to me, they could talk to me to know exactly what happened. And I had told you that on the depo. And I had told you -- and they sent it right down rush. I had told you I had a rush on me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you say you rushed on it, you mean you hadn't thought it through carefully to be sure that you spoke --

JEANTEL: I just told him the --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That you (INAUDIBLE) -- that you told the truth?

JEANTEL: -- the Trayvon part (INAUDIBLE) told the Trayvon part.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you saying that you rushed through it and you didn't think about it carefully enough to be sure that you told it accurately?

JEANTEL: Yes.

[Stavros]

Thanks for the link, Queens Guy. What it shows is how messy reality is, people are looking for neat questions and answers from witnesses with perfect recall of an event that transpired in a short space of time in the dark even when they weren't physically there. The slang that young people use, and the apparent indifference to the authority of proceedings they show (she seems to show) can be used against a witness, yet the key points which people are looking for, those absolute truths which confirm Zimmerman verbally abused Martin and attacked him, or Martin used verbal insults and attacked Zimmerman, cannot yet be verified, and may never be. I don't think she is an unreliable witness, she sounds to me like a teenage girl who is not in her comfort zone and wants to be somewhere else. And yes, the newspaper must select what it writes to compress a week's proceedings into one digestible report.
But presumably, if the prosecutor is struggling to prove that Trayvon was abused and attacked -and then unlawfully murdered- by Zimmerman, the team for the latter must prove that he was acting in self-defence as well as explain why Zimmerman appeared to ignore police instructions not to get involved in the first place.
A long way to go in this trial.

[Queens Guy]

Stavros, we will have to agree to disagree about the credibility of Ms. Jeantel. I can understand her disrespect or hostility toward the defense attorneys. I could understand her indifference to the whole system if the tables had been turned and Trayvon killed Zimmerman that night and was accused of murder. However, what I find reprehensible is the disrespect and indifference her conduct shows to the Martin family. She is not a child. She is an adult. She was an adult on the day Trayvon was killed. The Martin family deserves her to 'put on her helmet and get in the game'. To care enough to tell his story accurately.

Moving on to some of the other things you've said, which I think are either incorrectly reported, or at least have a counter-argument. In addition to the State of Florida having the overall burden of proof in the case in general, the State of Florida also has the burden of proof when it comes to self-defense. They must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did NOT act in self-defense. Even if the jury only thinks it was 50/50, then the State failed to reach their burden. With the testimony of the physicians assistant that treated Zimmerman the next day, she stated that his injuries are consistent with his claims that, using the defense lawyer's language, his head was smashed into the concrete walkway.

Again, I'm not rooting for one side or the other. I'm rooting for an accurate report of the days testimony. If the State 'had a good day', then say so. But, if the Defense 'had a good day', then say it.

Do we at least agree that the portion of the transcript in my previous post was important testimony, newsworthy, and worth printing and 'analyzing' by the 'experts'?

[broncofan]

I don't see that as being the most damning admission I've ever heard. That she was careless when she spoke to the family attorney.

She doesn't sound like a great historian and so I would have some doubts about exactly how things were phrased (and some precise details) but not about whether she is trying to accurately report something that happened.

It's easy to impeach someone's testimony if they are poorly organized or not a good speaker, but it doesn't mean what they say doesn't have any veracity.

I remember being deposed after a traffic accident. I was asked questions like how far away I was from the light when I saw it as green, how far away was I when I saw the car I collided with, how much time elapsed between those two distances. I thought they were trying to extrapolate my speed. Every answer I gave was, "ummm, I think I was 40 feet, or so ummm".

[broncofan]

Do we at least agree that the portion of the transcript in my previous post was important testimony, newsworthy, and worth printing and 'analyzing' by the 'experts'?
I also disagree with you. The prosecution has the burden of proof but establishing that he did not act in self-defense is only difficult because it's tough to precisely reconstruct the events. There's almost no conceivable way that he should have been legally privileged to take a life. Of course one can't make that argument to a jury who has a man's life in their hands. They want to know exactly what happened. If I remember correctly, to use deadly force one must not only believe it is NECESSARY to save their life, but also be justified in believing that.

Ultimately, Zimmerman pursued someone who was unarmed, initiated a confrontation with him when told not to, was losing a fistfight and perhaps getting somewhat hurt in the process, and killed that person. The problem is that they are attempting to convict him of second degree murder.

The fact that you are sort of adamant that the media is biased against Zimmerman and forewarning of racial violence does make it seem like you would like Zimmerman to succeed at trial. That's not a bad thing. I am after all, hoping he gets convicted.

[trish]

What the transcript shows is a lawyer putting words in a witness's mouth. What does "accurate" mean to to Jeantel? What does it means to the lawyer? What does it mean to the jury? If an account isn't accurate does it mean it's false? Does it mean it leaves out details? Significant details? Significant to whom? Does it mean the account is incomplete? I don't personally see this short segment of testimony as being all that telling of Jeantel's overall credibility. I would've gone on to ask her to clarify, "In what way not accurate?" But such clarification might not have dovetailed into the interrogator's narrative.

I haven't been paying all that much attention. I'll take your word for it the media coverage is wanting. As I've said before, I'm simply glad there finally was an investigation and that Zimmerman is now guaranteed due process. The tragedy is that Martin wasn't (for even if Zimmerman is not guilty and was rightfully standing his ground, had the police gotten to Martin before the vigilante no one would be dead).

[broncofan]

"Jeantel later explained she is of Haitian descent and grew up speaking Creole and Spanish."

Jeantel is apparently not a native English speaker. It is already very easy to trip up a witness on cross, even more so if English is not their native language.

Trish says, "But such clarification might not have dovetailed into the interrogator's narrative."

Exactly. First rule of cross is never ask an open ended question.

[Stavros]

Stavros, we will have to agree to disagree about the credibility of Ms. Jeantel. I can understand her disrespect or hostility toward the defense attorneys. I could understand her indifference to the whole system if the tables had been turned and Trayvon killed Zimmerman that night and was accused of murder. However, what I find reprehensible is the disrespect and indifference her conduct shows to the Martin family. She is not a child. She is an adult. She was an adult on the day Trayvon was killed. The Martin family deserves her to 'put on her helmet and get in the game'. To care enough to tell his story accurately.

Moving on to some of the other things you've said, which I think are either incorrectly reported, or at least have a counter-argument. In addition to the State of Florida having the overall burden of proof in the case in general, the State of Florida also has the burden of proof when it comes to self-defense. They must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did NOT act in self-defense. Even if the jury only thinks it was 50/50, then the State failed to reach their burden. With the testimony of the physicians assistant that treated Zimmerman the next day, she stated that his injuries are consistent with his claims that, using the defense lawyer's language, his head was smashed into the concrete walkway.

Again, I'm not rooting for one side or the other. I'm rooting for an accurate report of the days testimony. If the State 'had a good day', then say so. But, if the Defense 'had a good day', then say it.

Do we at least agree that the portion of the transcript in my previous post was important testimony, newsworthy, and worth printing and 'analyzing' by the 'experts'?

I agree and disagree. I think both you and I know that a teenager in law can be classed as an adult but lack maturity; to me she sounds immature however old she is. And was Trayvon the love of her life or just one cute guy among many she was dating who had a rough deal? Its like a film in which 'we' want the teenage girl to be absolute in her love and convictions, aware of the gravity of the situation, concerned above all for the victim, etc -the reality is that life is not like a film, it has incoherence, is shapeless, punctuated by mumblings, obscure words and phrases like 'I had a rush on it' which I could not and perhaps still do not properly understand.

In addition I am reminded of the fate of Desiree Washington, who was not only raped by Mike Tyson, but subsequently treated like a rag doll of no importance, even by Maya Angelou who spent more time defending Mike Tyson against 'a hostile media' than defending the right of Desiree Washington not to be abused -perhaps teenage black girls in the USA are close to the bottom of the pile when it comes to a hierarchy of respect?

So yes, it is worth paying attention to the details in this case and I was to some extent worried that the resume I posted would gloss over some important words and phrases, and your link filled in that gap, but there is a limit to what people will read.

I think also, the core issue is not just the 'stand your ground' element of Florida law, but a personal dynamic -was there a point at which both Zimmerman and Martin could have just stood up, as I am sure guys have done in parking lots and those basketball courts in the Projects lit at night, and said 'Fuck you!' and walked off? At what point does the shooting dead of Martin become a reasonable response, and not just a legal one?

[Stavros]

There's almost no conceivable way that he should have been legally privileged to take a life.

But is it not the whole point of the law in Florida that the 'stand your ground' element of its law does in fact give someone the legal privilege to take a life?

[Queens Guy]

I also disagree with you. The prosecution has the burden of proof but establishing that he did not act in self-defense is only difficult because it's tough to precisely reconstruct the events. There's almost no conceivable way that he should have been legally privileged to take a life. Of course one can't make that argument to a jury who has a man's life in their hands. They want to know exactly what happened. If I remember correctly, to use deadly force one must not only believe it is NECESSARY to save their life, but also be justified in believing that.

Ultimately, Zimmerman pursued someone who was unarmed, initiated a confrontation with him when told not to, was losing a fistfight and perhaps getting somewhat hurt in the process, and killed that person. The problem is that they are attempting to convict him of second degree murder.

The fact that you are sort of adamant that the media is biased against Zimmerman and forewarning of racial violence does make it seem like you would like Zimmerman to succeed at trial. That's not a bad thing. I am after all, hoping he gets convicted.


Please allow me to clarify something. I intend my statements to be a strong criticism of the media, and their performance. Not as support for George Zimmerman in any way. The media have an important duty to perform, and I think they are failing miserably.

I am not sure if the media is biased or not. They may just only care about selling newspapers or gaining viewers, which allows them to sell more advertising. In the case of Ms. Jeantel, what she looks like, how she speaks, her use of slang, the fact she can't read cursive (Which isn't her fault since schools have stopped teaching it.) and the response of social media doesn't really matter. What she said on the stand is what matters.

Also, I am not rooting for either side. If Zimmerman is guilty of what he's charged with, then throw him in jail. But, if he isn't, he shouldn't be found guilty regardless of the evidence. It wasn't right when it was done to African-Americans in the past, and it's not right if it is done today.

[trish]

What she said on the stand is what matters.True enough in a rational discourse by dispassionate participants about a topic that carries no social, political, religious, ethnic, sexual etc. baggage. However, the lawyers are adversaries, arguing for money, promotion and prestige; the jury is no doubt far from dispassionate, and the issue is entangled with most of the baggage mentioned above. How things are said is factored into how they are judged. How a witness is perceived will be factored into his or her credibility. The lawyers know that and play to it.

[bobvela]

The case is about negligent homicide and not homicide. There is a difference and this is the reason zimmerson should not be found not guilty.

Really? I cannot find that cited on any specific legal documents.


the charge is not 2nd degree homicide .

the charge is Zimmerman recklessly endangered Trayvon's life (Criminally Negligent Homicide ).

I don't think anyone is claiming that it is... the charge is murder in the second degree: http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/04/11/zimmerman.charges.pdf

One is forced to wonder how much of what you spew... errr copy & paste you actually understand.

Zimmerman will walk and you are part of the reason.

[bobvela]

There was national outcry over the fact that there was not a trial, when there were in fact many questions involving this case. This trial is the due process, many people were asking for. Due process is not being prevented. Having a public trial is a form of due process, the last time I looked.

You are correct... a public trial is one form of due process... however it is not the only one.


Seems to me like you are seeking a return to earlier times, when Whites would kill Black with impunity; lynchings, tar and feathers, bombs, and death by dragging....

You got me... that's just what I want. *shaking head*

Comments such as yours reveal more about your motivations than mine I would suspect.

[bobvela]

The fact that there was an investigation at all is due to the public demanding there be one.

Revisionist history that you actually contradict yourself in the very next sentence:


Zimmerman was taken to the station, cursorily questioned and released.

And yet the very next day he was back at the scene of the incident walking through it with them again. This is part of what we call an 'investigation'... something that was ongoing well before this story made national news.


Many witnesses (including some who made the 911 calls, and others who lived nearby) weren't questioned until it became evident that there would have to be a real investigation.

Because the evidence at the time didn't call for it.


One early witness was interviewed in the presence of Trevon's mother. I'm not sure, is that considered good police procedure these days.

You mean Rachel Jeantel? The woman who gave false statements to police when in this high pressure situation then was admit to lying while on the stand this week?

While we all understand why she said what she did... it was that kind of investigation that caused this (&^#-storm to continue and grow.


Your asking a transgender, African/Asian American how it feels to be used?

You assume that is relevant at all to this conversation... nice try to divert though.


So a prosecutor has taken political advantage of the public relations mess created by the police. What's new? Good for her.

You seem to be forgetting the fact that you helped enabled that.


The charge should be commensurate with what the prosecutor feels she can prove given the evidence of the investigation. Not being a prosecutor or privy to the facts of the much belated investigation I won't pass judgement on whether murder-2 charges were justified. I leave it to (what were your words...oh yes) prosecutorial discretion.

I'm sorry your willingness or ability to read and comprehend the actual facts of the case (which have been available for quite some time) limit you.


Your words, not mine. I said both Martin and Zimmerman deserve due process.

Rather than try to hide, come out and define exactly what kind of 'due process' Martin & Zimmerman deserve.

From what I see... we've got a miscarriage of justice on one side... and another person who is dead.

Martin was invited into the neighborhood. He had no weapon other than a box of skittles. Zimmerman was not invited. He was a self-proclaimed vigilante with a concealed weapon stalking the neighborhood for criminals. In fact the police kinda unvited him.


Zimmerman pursues and confronts Martin for being "suspicious." A tussle ensues and Martin dies by Zimmerman's weapon. That all we or the police knew.

If you honestly believe that then you clearly have memory issues or have refused to pay attention to the facts in this case.


So what did they do? They picked up Zimmerman, questioned him briefly and released him.

Then talked to him several more times over the following days.


Due process is conducting a proper investigation and if the results warrant it, giving him a trial. Something, unfortunately, that wasn't going to happen without the media noise forcing Florida's hand. Due process is something Martin never got.

No... the investigation had already occurred... you forced the state to charge him with trumped up charges and will now not see any kind of justice other than your success at turning George Zimmerman into a pariah.

Again... when the violence comes... every single broken limb and lost life... is on your head.

[bobvela]

For Bobvela, it is a failure of the system that someone is being tried for shooting an unarmed black teenager.

Liar.

Based on what I know... negligent homicide would be a charge that would be in line with the facts of the case. The very charge the police wanted to bring but that the prosecutor ignored and bumped up several levels.



The only people who should apologize are those who failed to investigate the circumstances of Martin's death and immediately released Zimmerman from custody.

Yes... there was zero investigation after the fact and before the public outcry.


Here, since it is difficult to establish exactly what happened, it might be easier to show that Zimmerman did not have a legal privilege to take someone's life. That his self-defense was "imperfect", and that he committed reckless or negligent homicide.

Bingo... which is why the blame goes back to those who demanded Zimmerman's head, this over charging, and now will force an even worse outcome.

[Queens Guy]

True enough in a rational discourse by dispassionate participants about a topic that carries no social, political, religious, ethnic, sexual etc. baggage. However, the lawyers are adversaries, arguing for money, promotion and prestige; the jury is no doubt far from dispassionate, and the issue is entangled with most of the baggage mentioned above. How things are said is factored into how they are judged. How a witness is perceived will be factored into his or her credibility. The lawyers know that and play to it.

Trish, my criticism is not directed toward the lawyers.

It's directed toward the press, who are supposed to engage in a rational discourse, and report the facts. We can't be in the courtroom listening to all the testimony. (Even if I've found myself to be a bit of a trial junkie the past few days.) They are supposed to be professionals.

[Queens Guy]

"Jeantel later explained she is of Haitian descent and grew up speaking Creole and Spanish."

Jeantel is apparently not a native English speaker. It is already very easy to trip up a witness on cross, even more so if English is not their native language.


She was born and raised in Miami, which she testified to the previous day.

Here is the video from youtube. She starts her testimony at the 1:00:00 mark. George Zimmerman Trial - Day 3 - Part 3 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iYVUt3_HOQ)

I was born and raised and live in an ethnically diverse part of New York City. In my experience, I've gone to school with and met many families where the parents were foreign born and the children were born in the U.S.
I've never considered the U.S. born children to be 'non-native speakers', and never noticed them having any problem to speak English just as well as I did, when I was their age.

It's like the media reported half of the truth, and didn't report the other half of the truth, leading you to form the wrong impression. They didn't have to go digging to get that information, like going to her neighborhood and knock on doors and such. They just had to pay attention to her testimony.

[trish]

You mean ...I mean the witness was examined in front of the victim's mother. This is not investigative procedure. There was no real investigation until the public demanded it.


You seem to be forgetting the fact that you helped enabled that.Yeah, 'cause all of Florida follows my posts here on HungAngels. :roll:

[broncofan]

But is it not the whole point of the law in Florida that the 'stand your ground' element of its law does in fact give someone the legal privilege to take a life?
I understand the stand your ground portion as saying that you do not have to retreat before defending yourself.

But it doesn't obviate the need for the force you use to be proportional to the force used by your attacker. So you can use deadly force but only if it is necessary to subdue your attacker.

If someone is attacking you with deadly force, then you do not have to run away before responding in kind. But if someone is attacking you with something less than that, can you immediately escalate the degree of violence to avoid having to retreat?

I didn't think so but I am not sure.

[broncofan]

.
We are on the same page mostly, but you just seem saturated with glee over the mistakes of the prosecution.

The prosecution should have responded to the initial mistakes and outrage with diligence and not made a charge that is difficult to sustain.

I am not familiar with Florida homicide statutes. For instance, some states have different degrees of manslaughter, with negligent homicide being a less culpable form. Voluntary manslaughter may also have been a winnable charge.

[broncofan]

Bingo... which is why the blame goes back to those who demanded Zimmerman's head, this over charging, and now will force an even worse outcome.
This is the part I disagree with. I don't see that following really. The prosecutor is responsible for the decisions she makes, though she doesn't make them in a vacuum.

Just looking at the overall trajectory of events is enough to make me want to see him locked up. I was outraged, and there was a lot of collective outrage. But the prosecutors legal mistakes are her own, however zealous she thinks she should be and however she misinterprets the public's will.

[yodajazz]

Liar.

Based on what I know... negligent homicide would be a charge that would be in line with the facts of the case. The very charge the police wanted to bring but that the prosecutor ignored and bumped up several levels.




Yes... there was zero investigation after the fact and before the public outcry.



Bingo... which is why the blame goes back to those who demanded Zimmerman's head, this over charging, and now will force an even worse outcome.

I wouldn't be so quick to write off the case. I don't see any people talking about the physical evidence of the case. Seems to me, one can draw some conclusions from the spot of the death. Zimmerman claims he was returning to his car. It doesn't seem that hard to prove that he followed TM. From the photos I saw of the crime scene, it looked like it was a considerable distance from his vehicle. He was armed. He had history of making false allegations. People made a big deal of Martin's girlfriend, lying about why she didn't go to the funeral, but Zimmerman has already lied to the court under oath, saying he had no money, when he had collected over $100,000. I think the prosecution is just setting the stage, to directly address Zimmerman's actions and history, to end their turn. From my understanding Zimmerman's story details have changed. So I expect those to be bought to the forefront. and on last thing; I dont know Florida law, but in many states, people can be re-charged, with lower degree codes, for the same crime. If this is the case, the state would be able to use the same evidence for the lower charge.

[broncofan]

http://www.policymic.com/articles/6887/george-zimmerman-trial-begins-everything-you-need-to-know

I found this and a couple of other articles. I am not knowledgeable about criminal procedure but apparently juries can be instructed on lesser included charges. As a result, Zimmerman could be convicted of manslaughter even though he is being charged with second degree murder.

But if he is acquitted of the charges brought against him the prosecution cannot bring lesser included charges such as manslaughter in a second trial without violating double jeopardy.

If this article is reliable, then our speculation about overcharging is moot, because the jury can convict of manslaughter.

[fred41]

; I dont know Florida law, but in many states, people can be re-charged, with lower degree codes, for the same crime. If this is the case, the state would be able to use the same evidence for the lower charge.

I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Usually before deliberations the judge will have a charge conference,in which it will be discussed what lesser included, if any, charges the jury will be instructed and allowed to deliberate on. I'm not sure on Florida's law on this ...but that is the general procedure.
...but
if a defendant is found "Not Guilty" after trial...you can't retry an individual on a lesser count.

[fred41]

..oops..sorry Bronco...didn't see your post.

[fred41]

The only way I can think of for a person to be retried on a lesser included would be if the jury found him "Not Guilty" of the top count..but were unable to come to a decision on a lesser included after lengthy deliberations and receiving the "Allen Charge".....but I'm not a lawyer.

[fred41]

sorry to post so much in a row. I was unsure about whether or not a judge has to charge the lesser included in the state of florida..especially if neither party want this.
This article by an attorney clears up a lot of questions...:
http://www.jlellis.net/blog/zimmerman-and-lesser-included-offenses/

[bobvela]

TRAYVON MARTIN is an inocent youth

Thank you for once again proving how full of crap you are.

Maybe he was... but your facts and statements here do not support it, let us not forget just a few days ago you said:


zimmerman lies to police saying he was the one hollering and screaming for help not knowing that the screams would be forensically analysis and he would be found to be a lie

your voice is as UNIQUE AS A FINGER PRINT.

voice identification NOW IS JUST LIKE FINGER PRINTS thats how terroist or potential terroist are caught now .

Or would you like to skip the fact that the judge refused to allow a couple of the state witnesses with an expertise in voice analysis as the judge agreed that the standards being used by them weren't widely accepted by the scientific community?

Or that on the 6th day of the trial (7/1) Dr. Hirotaka Nakasone from the FBI, an expert in speech identification and speaker identification (a state witness) testified YET AGAIN that current technology & science cannot identify the identity or age from a scream.


who was going to his father house after purchasing some candy and an ice tea when an embolded man who has had MMA training and was armed and was over zealous

If Trayvon was simply 'going to his father(sic) house'... how did he not make it?

The distances involved suggest that Trayvon did not in fact go home (nor was chased down) (http://lawofselfdefense.com/zimmerman-trial-myth-busters-did-zimmerman-chase-down-a-fleeing-martin/)... but instead doubled back or waited... a claim supported by the recording of George Zimmerman today.


tried to detain him and probably pushed him and attempted to take him to the ground with his MMA training.

You mean you have evidence that not even the State of Florida prosecutors have? I think they'd be very eager to know what you have as they are clearly behind and could use every little bit of help they can.

[bobvela]

We are on the same page mostly, but you just seem saturated with glee over the mistakes of the prosecution.

I am in the same way that I was in the Duke Lacrosse case... I can see when an overzealous prosecutor has overstepped their bounds and the realm of the supporting evidence and legality and not only hope for the acquittal of the accused... but also the same result to fall upon Angela Corey as did Mike Nifong.


The prosecution should have responded to the initial mistakes and outrage with diligence and not made a charge that is difficult to sustain.

No argument... provided there was a charge that they felt confident that they could have brought... though today we heard the testimony from Investigator Chris Serino, the lead detective in the case seemed to believe much of what Zimmerman had said... and even during a later interview when he lied to Zimmerman, claiming there was a tape of the incident, Zimmerman replied "Thank God!" tells quite a different story than what the state is claiming.


I am not familiar with Florida homicide statutes. For instance, some states have different degrees of manslaughter, with negligent homicide being a less culpable form. Voluntary manslaughter may also have been a winnable charge.

True to a point... however the self defense claim still comes into play here... which Mark O'Mara (lead defender) has done a remarkable job of weaving into his cross examinations of each of the state witnesses thus far... virtually all of which have given significant testimony that support the defense theory and not that of the prosecution.

[bobvela]

This is the part I disagree with. I don't see that following really. The prosecutor is responsible for the decisions she makes, though she doesn't make them in a vacuum.

This can be viewed as going hand with the actions of perjurious Rachel Jeantel... who made multiple (on the record) false statements to police and others... the key difference is that Rachel Jeantel is a simple gal who was put into a high pressure situation (ie giving her first statement on the killing in the presence of Trayvon Martin's mother)... while Angela Corey is said to be an experienced prosecutor.

While the prior giving such statements I will give a small pass to... a great deal of pressure would have to be applied to cause the later to do what they did.


Just looking at the overall trajectory of events is enough to make me want to see him locked up. I was outraged, and there was a lot of collective outrage.

Sorry to see/hear you are so swayed by public outrage... long ago I learned that if I am on the popular side of anything... that I should re-examine my views as I may be wrong... and quite often I found that I was as the popular option is rarely the right one.


But the prosecutors legal mistakes are her own, however zealous she thinks she should be and however she misinterprets the public's will.

I blame the prosecutor... just as I do a Roman emperor long ago looking down upon a pair of gladiators with the power of life and death... with a single movement of the thumb, they would choose who lived and who died... and often based on the input of the collective mass assembled.

This I'm afraid is little different. There is a group out for blood and is seeking a slow and rather incompetent lynching to achieve their ends... who will be very outraged that their attempts failed... and a person (prosecutor or emperor) who was more concerned with entertainment value than actual 'justice'.

In all of my years I have never been a member of such a lynch mob... and while such a powerful official should no better than to give in to certain types of public outcries... those who did participate in the swaying of them deserve full blame as well.

[maddygirl]

I think claiming he was killed for "walking in white suburbia" is a little farfetched....I don't know what transpired that day, but I highly doubt that's how it played out. And, in many of the news articles written about the case, it's obvious they're trying to infuriate people further by claiming Zimmerman was white (when he's not)... and that a horrible white guy is killing an innocent, powerless black child. I'm sorry, I don't buy it. It's sad nonetheless that this 17 year old boy was killed, but it's easy to jump on the bandwagon of sympathy without fully knowing all the facts.

[natina]

setting a bad precedence if zimmerman goes free

this will mean anyone can profile you, stalk/pursue you then confront you with out the proper authority and without proper training which would certainly instigate a fight.zimmerman had NO uniform or ID to show that he was not a threat to trayvon martin.


zimmerman is not a model citizen, he has a violent and troubled past. while trayvon martin does not have a criminal history and was doing well in school according to a teacher. a police officer stated he was a "good kid".

Investigator: Zimmerman missed opportunities to defuse situation


(CNN) -- George Zimmerman failed to identify himself twice during a confrontation with Trayvon Martin and missed opportunities to defuse the situation that led to the death of the teen, a detective says in a newly released report.

Zimmerman, who served as a neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with second-degree murder in the February 26 shooting death of Martin, 17, in Sanford, Florida.

Martin's family and civil rights activists said Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, racially profiled Martin and ignored a 911 dispatcher's advice not to follow him.

Also released Tuesday was an unredacted capias request, a request that someone be taken into custody, prepared by the lead police investigator in the case, Christopher Serino.

"Investigative findings show that (Zimmerman) had at least two opportunities to speak with (Martin) in order to defuse the circumstances surrounding their encounter," Serino wrote in the report. "On at least two occasions (Zimmerman) failed to identify himself as a concerned resident or a neighborhood watch volunteer."

The detective also said Zimmerman's actions "are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject."

In the same report, Serino wrote that Zimmerman's injuries were "marginally consistent with a life-threatening violent episode as described by him."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's defense attorney, said it will be up to a judge and jury to interpret what Serino's report means to the case.

"I don't want to get into a battle with investigator Serino's report considering what he believed after it seems he made the decision that charges should be filed," O'Mara said Tuesday.

"The lead detective made the determination at least on two different occasions Zimmerman had opportunity to defuse the situation. When he got out the car, he could have at least said, 'I'm a neighborhood watch volunteer' to defuse the situation and it's likely Trayvon Martin would be living today," Crump said.

"The lead detective today got demoted.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn (http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn)

video talks about new evidence & zimmermans gift to the DA and MARTIN FAMILY

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justice/florida-zimmerman-interview/index.html


http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

the police say that trayvon martin was a " good kid" with "NO CRIMMINAL RECORD" unlke zimmerman who has an extensive crimminal record of violence and police brutality

TEACHER RECALLS TRAVON MARTIN


http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/22/v-fullstory/2708960/trayvon-martin-a-typical-teen.html

[natina]

A Stupid Gun Owner is a Dangerous Gun Owner

Responsible gun owners and defenders of the right to self-defense must demand the prosecution of George Zimmerman

Police in the central Florida town of Sanford have said that 28-year-old George Zimmerman says he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in self-defense during a confrontation in a gated community. Police have described Zimmerman as white; his family says he is Hispanic and not racist. (US News)
Neighborhood vigilante George Zimmerman murdered young Trayvon Martin. I don't see how a reasonable person could reach any other conclusion. News outlets are blaming Florida's Stand Your Ground Law, but that's just agenda reporting.

Nothing in that law green-lights what Zimmerman did. He was flat-out wrong. Criminally wrong. You can’t just go chasing law-abiding citizens down the street at the point of a gun.

Zimmerman told a police dispatcher that the teen was "up to no good" because he was walking through his neighborhood "just walking around, looking about" with his "hands on his waistband." Does the idiot have kids? That's what teens do!

Zimmerman chased after Martin, complaining to the dispatcher, "These a******s always get away."

Hell yeah! When a gun-toting man is chasing you, you're going to try to get away. Of course Martin’s going to run. He probably thought Zimmerman was a pedophile or some kind of crazy person. He had every right to run. He also had a right to turn around and “jump” Zimmerman “from behind” (how do you get jumped from behind by someone you’re chasing? Zimmerman is lying.)

When someone chases you down and assaults you, you have a right to fight back. Too bad the kid didn’t end up kicking the dumb bastard’s head in.


The perpetrator was not “standing his ground,” he was chasing down an innocent young man who was just trying to get back to his house before the second half started. If anything, had the kid killed Zimmerman, that same law would have protected him.

This is a tragedy. It is assault with a deadly weapon and murder. And Florida's Stand Your Ground law needs to stand. It will protect potential victims from assaults by people like George Zimmerman.

The law did not authorize Zimmerman to chase down an innocent person. He was the aggressor in this instance.

http://westernhero.blogspot.com/2012_03_01_archive.html

[natina]

ARGUMENT FOR NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE

Detective faulted George Zimmerman for not avoiding confrontation with Trayvon Martin.



Neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman missed two opportunities to try to peacefully approach Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the unarmed teenager, according to an investigator's report released Tuesday.

"The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement, or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog in an effort to dispel each party's concern," investigator Chris Serino wrote in an arrest warrant affidavit.

The affidavit was filed more than two weeks after the shooting when the Sanford Police Department was being criticized for not having arrested Zimmerman. Serino's March 13 affidavit recommended Zimmerman be picked up for manslaughter, but a special prosecutor assigned to take over the case upped the charge to second-degree murder.

The documents released Tuesday are part of the public pre-trial records filed in the criminal case.

Zimmerman, 28, maintains he feared for his life and shot Martin in self-defense under Florida's "stand your ground law." He said he fired the fatal shot only after being ambushed and brutally attacked by the 17-year-old.

The deadly encounter occurred in a gated Sanford, Fla., neighborhood where Zimmerman lived and Martin was staying with a family friend. Zimmerman called 911 to report Martin as a suspicious person walking through the area. He told the operator Martin was "up to no good" and "has his hand in his waist band."

In the report released Tuesday, police say Zimmerman contradicted himself by saying that he was initially fearful of Martin but later got out of his vehicle and followed after the teen.

"His actions are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject," Serino wrote.

The Orlando Sentinel reported Tuesday afternoon that Serino, Sanford's lead investigator on the case, has been granted a request to move from detective work to patrol duty.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/detective-faulted-george-zimmerman-not-avoiding-confrontation-trayvon-192523670.html
.

[natina]

DA;Papantonio: Trayvon Killer Should Be Charged With Premeditated Murder


Papantonio: Trayvon Killer Should Be Charged With Premeditated Murder

Mike Papantonio talks with Ed Schultz about his views on the Trayvon Martin murder, as well as Florida's flawed "Stand Your Ground" law.

Papantonio: Trayvon Killer Should Be Charged With Premeditated Murder - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T23P2TdQXfE&feature=related)

[natina]

Neighborhood Watch volunteer George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, pursued him, frightened him, confronted him then shot him during a struggle, prosecutors alleged Thursday.

That's what the probable-cause affidavit filed Thursday by Special Prosecutor Angela Corey reveals. It is the first look at the criminal case that prosecutors plan to mount against Zimmerman.


The account is strikingly similar to the story that Trayvon's parents, the family's attorneys and civil-rights leaders have told for weeks — that Trayvon was an innocent victim hunted down and killed because he was black.

Herr found the affidavit legally sufficient to establish probable cause and ordered Zimmerman to appear for arraignment — when defendants formally enter a plea — on May 29 before Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler.

But the probable-cause affidavit, prepared by two investigators in her office, spelled out the bare bones of her case.

To Trayvon, it says, Zimmerman was a scary man, following him for some unknown reason. To Zimmerman, Trayvon was someone who was about to commit a crime, "a f------ punk," the affidavit said.

The affidavit offered evidence the state's position on three key points:

•"Zimmerman confronted Martin," it says, an apparent contradiction of Zimmerman's version of events.

•The state will argue that the voice heard crying for help in the background of one 911 call is Trayvon's. According to the affidavit, Trayvon's mother listened to the recording and identified the voice as her son's.

•State investigators will rely on the testimony of a friend of Trayvon's who told them she talked to the teenager on the phone in the lead-up to the shooting and heard the confrontation.

Based on the description, she appears to be the girl described by Martin family attorneys as his girlfriend.

When interviewed by state investigators, "The witness advised that Martin was scared because he was being followed through the complex by an unknown male and didn't know why," the affidavit said.

Trayvon tried to run home, the affidavit says, but Zimmerman ignored the advice of a police dispatcher and continued pursuing him on foot.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-12/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-charged-jail-20120412_1_face-murder-charges-today-show-accident

[Queens Guy]

zimmerman is not a model citizen, he has a violent and troubled past. while trayvon martin does not have a criminal history and was doing well in school according to a teacher. a police officer stated he was a "good kid".



I'm not sure how you can say he was 'doing well in school' when he was just suspended for 10 days.

He may not have had a criminal history, but his suspension was for criminal type behavior, had he been an adult. He went to an area of the school students aren't allowed in (Trespassing), his backpack contained a baggie that had a slight bit of marijuana in it (drug possession), a large screwdriver that is perfect for breaking into things (burglars tools) and jewelry whose owner he 'didn't know' (stolen property), which may have been obtained by breaking into something using that screwdriver. There is a bunch of jewelry in your backpack and you don't know who it belongs to?

Don't get me wrong, I think Zimmerman could have and should have taken his opportunities to have just told Trayvon that he was neighborhood watch and didn't recognize him as somebody living in the area. Then Trayvon could have said he just moved in, that's why you don't recognize me. Maybe it would have been friendly. Even if it was a bit tense,and they cursed each other out, I don't think it would have led to a killing.

[buttslinger]

The POLICE are pissed that the DA turned on them when pressure from ON HIGH said to fry Zimmerman for the National TV cameras.
The LAW that the cops went by that night said Zimmerman was allowed to carry a gun, and was allowed to use it when he felt his life was in danger. In spirit, that law is understandable.
This is the United States.
The FLIP SIDE of that Law says you don't go up and hassle some guy for walking home from the store. You don't kill someone because you're losing a fist fight.
Zimmerman broke the first Law of the Penal Code: Innocent until proven guilty. That's the first thing they teach you at the Police Academy.

What possible reason would you even have to stop a guy walking down the street?

[natina]

Can Zimmerman win over the jurors?


John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
(CNN) -- Trial lawyers use an expression -- "You can't unring a bell" -- after a jury is exposed to something damaging. Even if a judge commands people to disregard that something, the harm is done once the words have been uttered.
George Zimmerman may be wishing that several ringing bells sounded in his attorney's opening statement last week could be unrung, beginning with a now infamous joke.
After a streamlined prosecution opening in which a rapt courtroom was told of efforts to resuscitate Trayvon Martin's lifeless form and heard a straightforward argument that Zimmerman shot Martin "because he wanted to, not because he had to," Zimmerman's attorney Don West chose to open his defense by telling a joke.


Resorting to humor -- even in traffic court -- is fraught with risk, but seems a particularly unwise idea at the outset of a murder case in which the defense must counter the appearance of casual and callous indifference on Zimmerman's part. Even worse, perhaps, it runs the risk of appearing to trivialize the trial itself. (The joke chosen even implies that selected jurors who weren't savvy enough to dodge their civic duty will now have their time wasted.)
Prosecutors will tell you that the most significant challenge to securing a guilty verdict is to persuade initially resistant jurors to grasp the gravity of a case, making them at least open to returning a guilty verdict. Several post-joke comments made by West in his opening could unwittingly pave a path to conviction.
West said that it was a dangerous dog in Zimmerman's neighborhood that forced his hand, necessitating that he buy a 9 mm Kel-Tec PF automatic firearm. The attorney matter-of-factly suggested it was the American way for an ordinary person, faced with an uncontrolled animal in his community, to procure a firearm. (Firing shots at a menacing dog could easily imperil others, of course.)
Arguing that during the confrontation with Martin, Zimmerman's head was struck against the pavement, West told the jury: "When you get your bell rung, stuff happens." While defending an emotional case like this is admittedly a tricky high-wire act, these words suggest an act of vengeance by an armed man rather than a genuine effort to avoid death. It will not be surprising to hear those words repeated back in the prosecution's closing statement. Five of the six jurors are mothers for whom "stuff happens" may seem an insufficient accounting for the termination of a life cut short shy of two decades.

By his lawyer's account, Zimmerman's worries were not confined to perceived community dangers, but to his own physical well-being. He wanted to learn martial arts, West said, but washed out of fight school, where he was described as too "soft."
Many defense attorneys deliver short openings or don't open at all because of the risk of a bad backfire. West's lengthy opening resulted in a composite picture of a person who easily conjures threats and fears, sought a gun as a leveler for his insecurities and whose response to these perceived threats could be seen as questionable and retaliatory.
Criminal defendants are not only at the mercy of the state's awesome powers, but also must live with the tactical decisions of their attorney. Trying to persuade an appeals court to overturn your conviction because of detrimental choices made by your lawyers at trial is all but impossible.
On Monday, the prosecution resorted to the often potent technique of using a defendant's inconsistent statements in an attempt to collapse his believability and blunt possible jury empathy for him. Prosecutors showed a video of Zimmerman giving an expansive explanation of what happened during a scene walk-through the day after the shooting, followed by playing a lengthy taped interview that was conducted by Sanford police a couple of days later.
The prosecution hopes that jurors will agree that the more Zimmerman explains his actions, the more self-serving he sounds, and the less trustworthy he will appear, something vitally important for someone who, when all is said and done, offers the only account detailed enough to justify using lethal force.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/02/opinion/odonnell-zimmerman-trial/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn

[broncofan]

In all of my years I have never been a member of such a lynch mob... and while such a powerful official should no better than to give in to certain types of public outcries... those who did participate in the swaying of them deserve full blame as well.
I don't think I'm swayed by public outrage. I was outraged based on what I perceived as an injustice. I am not outraged because other people are outraged nor should I be responsible for their excesses. I also don't really think I should have to temper my response unreasonably just because other people have bad judgment.

For instance, when Spike Lee is giving out addresses (incorrect ones it turns out) hoping that he can encourage vigilante violence why should that be laid at my feet? I have never supported that type of extra-judicial punishment, which is part of the reason I find Zimmerman's actions appalling to begin with. Like Trish, I want due process for Zimmerman and though prosecutors have discretion not to prosecute, I think prosecuting him for manslaughter at least is the right choice. If I recall, prosecutors only have to believe there is probable cause to sustain a charge. They do not have to be convinced at the outset beyond a reasonable doubt that the charges they pursue will yield a conviction. As they become convinced of a defendant's innocence, they have a responsibility not to pursue those charges.

As for self-defense, I am convinced that what George Zimmerman did was beyond what is and should be permitted by law. Self-defense in most states is an all or nothing defense and is not used to mitigate criminal liability if the mens rea and actus reus of the more severe charge is satisfied. However, the concept of "imperfect self-defense" which is used in a few jurisdictions makes the most sense to me in these kinds of difficult cases. Someone satisfies imperfect self-defense and mitigates a murder charge to manslaughter if they can establish that while their life may not have been imperiled enough to justify deadly force they held a subjective (though not objectively reasonable) belief that they were in such danger.

The facts so far appear as follows to me. George Zimmerman followed someone and engaged in what could colloquially be referred to as harassment. There was a confrontation and a fistfight ensued. Zimmerman was losing the fistfight and probably quite badly. He then pulled out his gun and saved himself further injury and humiliation by killing the person he was fighting. His attacker was unarmed and had been followed without reasonable cause by an armed man who was engaging in a pattern of profiling young black men. Whether this last fact makes Zimmerman a racist is not my focus. His vigilance and officiousness was uncalled for, precipitated a confrontation that he was too anxious to end with deadly force. He created each and every risk that culminated in a young man's death.

[starkem]

This thread is too long to read to make an informed commentary. I will, rather, "try to get in where I fit in."

Remember the Bernard Goetz story in NYC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernhard_Goetz#Criminal_trial

There is a great comparison and contrast in that story to victim(s), shooter, perception of danger, self defense rights and law, public reaction, etc.

I promise not to watch this Zimmerman case because I believed it would anger me to assess the developments in this matter. I wondered why there was no discussion of it here until I read the last page of this thread. It prompted me to watch the trial for the first time yesterday.

Out of all I observed yesterday (including talking heads commentary). I find it interesting that black people (particularly our youth) seemingly present a more severe threatening and menacing effacement that warrants lethal force by a civilian -and in similar cases the police authorities as well present such culpability. Whereas, some people have not to worry about mistakenly or intentionally being subjected to such extremes.

:praying:

[fred41]

Sounds like this would be a tough case to decide on as a juror so far:http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/03/us/prosecutors-in-zimmerman-trial-ask-jury-to-disregard-comments.html?_r=0

[starkem]

The trial is a mockery. There will be concessions for everyone at the end of the day and parting gifts for everyone , including the media. I doubt if anything is as it seems....

[fred41]

The trial is a mockery.

Please explain this statement.
Have you ever witnessed a trial in courtroom...or served on a jury in a criminal case?
It is often said that trial is a search for truth. It can't be perfect because we don't have a God Cam...so we go by evidence. Sometimes there isn't any...sometimes it's mostly circumstantial...sometimes it's pretty damning and cut and dried.
I have seen a fair amount courtroom proceedings in my life...so far from what I've read (not witnessed obviously) about this particular trial..it doesn't come across as a mockery.

[starkem]

You know, I was coming back to this thread to state that "mockery" may be too strong of a word or even misplaced.

I will indulge your inquiry to say this however: I refer to the prevailing circumstances leading up to outcry for justice and the subsequent grand jury and trial as evidence that the trial, drama and courtroom media coverage serves to pacify pendants on both sides of the issues of wrongful death and/or right to vigilance and self defense. That is a mockery of justice in my personal opinion, but not as the trial perse.

Accordingly, and as to the one day of the entire trial that I only watched yesterday's segment: I observed no sense of mockery. In fact, I particularly like the testimony of the Medical Examiner, expert witness that testified as to Zimmermans condition after the fatal encounter. I have a certain disdain/respect for lawyers, judges, juries and courtrooms that I will leave to the readers own conclusion.

I do think that your inquiry of my statement was justified as such. Hopefully the answer conveys some clarity. Ahh...wait! I just thought of the word: transparent, illusion -a trial of superficial significance to appease those similarly effected to the expense of a mockery of justice to those with some exposure to the above mentioned professionals and procedures. LOL. That is definitely an extremely harsh statement. (smiles). Perhaps, I will withdraw and acknowledge the futility of my statement as it pertains to this case to play it on the safe side.




Please explain this statement.
Have you ever witnessed a trial in courtroom...or served on a jury in a criminal case?
It is often said that trial is a search for truth. It can't be perfect because we don't have a God Cam...so we go by evidence. Sometimes there isn't any...sometimes it's mostly circumstantial...sometimes it's pretty damning and cut and dried.
I have seen a fair amount courtroom proceedings in my life...so far from what I've read (not witnessed obviously) about this particular trial..it doesn't come across as a mockery.

[starkem]

There is no way from what I saw yesterday from the prosecution that they will be able to prove murder 2. Granted, I have not any other portions of the trial, but I think it was a little zealous and presumptuous on the part of the state to seek the higher penalty.

Of course, manslaughter is not off the table (according to what was reported), and Zimmerman has been his own worst enemy -Zimmerman having presented so many alleged discrepancies with regard to the fatal occurrence. Having only seen one day of this trial' I still find it rather unsettling that some of the news analyst that I watched (lawyers) said that it appears that the prosecution is blowing the case. I'm not sure if the same was suggested on other post cort day analysis shows like MSNBC.

*shrugs*

[fred41]

The problem with media trials is the human factor. Usually it should be about whether or not a defendant is guilty...but (and especially when there is media coverage)...the stakes are higher: a successful defense attorney can make more money in the future, and a successful prosecutor can go higher up the political ladder. So they sometimes have a bigger audience to play to than just the jury.
..and then there is the judge who has to referee the whole thing (and deal with their own, often inflated egos).

...but this is still, in my eyes, a relatively simple trial...not too many witnesses ..and only one defendant. I doubt the defense is going to complicate this, but you never know what will happen in a case until both sides have rested.

If the prosecution aimed too high, then the jury can still convict on the lesser included charges...(again..read this one page..it tells you what they might be towards the middle: http://www.jlellis.net/blog/zimmerman-and-lesser-included-offenses/ ) If they don't find him guilty of anything, there will be a civil trial...or they could wind up hung and we do this all over again. That's how it works.
It's hard to say what will happen, because I'm not sitting in that jury box. I'm not the one who has to decide if there's enough evidence to convict the defendant of anything...but that is what a trial is for. I can read stories about the testimony...but I'm not there...hearing it live...watching facial reactions..deciding who sounds truthful and who doesn't.
..up to now though...if you go by Zimmerman's story as published by the media...Murder 2 probably won't happen...maybe not manslaughter either..it depends how much of his story you believe...of course he can always take the stand and ruin it for himself...you never know...the human element makes trials unpredictable.
...but it's up to a jury (and in some cases a judge). Based on what they see and hear. Not what we read and hear.

..because a lot of us probably wouldn't have been picked as a juror in this case anyway.

[natina]

Does DNA evidence contradict Zimmerman?

Prosecutors in the George Zimmerman trial presented evidence of DNA test results to the jury Wednesday that may contradict the former neighborhood watch captain's story of how Trayvon Martin died.

Anthony Gorgone, DNA lab analyst for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, methodically walked the jury through the results from his DNA testing of Zimmerman's gun, the clothing both individuals wore the night of the shooting, and scrapings from Martin's finger nails.

Zimmerman did not show any emotion as the Gorgone gave his testimony, but it appeared he was paying close attention.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Martin in Sanford, Florida, on February 26, 2012. Zimmerman told police that the teenager looked suspicious and that there had been several break-ins in the neighborhood. The two got into a physical altercation and Zimmerman said he was forced to draw his gun and kill Martin in self-defense.

Protests were held around the country when it appeared Zimmerman wasn’t going to be arrested for Martin’s death. Zimmerman was eventually charged with second-degree murder in April of 2012. The case has reinvigorated national conversations about race, racial profiling and self-defense laws.

Gorgone testified Wednesday that he only found Zimmerman's DNA on the gun he used to shoot Martin, and did not find any of Martin's DNA on the gun. Zimmerman's holster only tested positive for Zimmerman's DNA as well. The lack of Martin's DNA on the gun and the holster may contradict Zimmerman's claim that Martin grabbed his gun during the altercation.

Gorgone testified that testing of Martin's hooded jacket that he was wearing as an outer layer the night of shooting did not yield much of Zimmerman's DNA. Only one stain on Martin's hooded jacket yielded a partial DNA profile that matched Zimmerman. This may challenge the claim Zimmerman and Martin were in fight for their lives, if only a minimal amount of Zimmerman's skin or blood transferred to Martin's outer clothing. Scrapings from under Martin's fingernails yielded none of Zimmerman's DNA.

Martin was also wearing a gray sweatshirt under his hooded jacket. Gorgone said two stains on that sweatshirt matched both Martin's and Zimmerman's DNA.

During cross examination, defense attorney Don West pointed out that Martin's sweatshirts were wet from rain the night of the shooting, and they were not allowed dry before they were stored in plastic bags. Gorgone said if wet evidence is not left to air dry before being stored in plastic mildew can degrade DNA evidence.

West asked, "Frankly then you just didn't find much of anything on this gray hooded sweatshirt when it boils right down to it?"

"Just that partial profile on stain A" said Gorgone.

West asked, "That was the shirt that stunk to high heaven?"

"It didn't smell good," said Gorgone.

Earlier Wednesday, prosecutors called several witnesses to help support their assertion that the former neighborhood watch captain was a "wannabe cop" who well knew Florida's self-defense and "Stand Your Ground" laws.

Records admitted into evidence on the eighth day of testimony included a letter rejecting Zimmerman’s application to be a police officer in Virginia in 2009 because of his credit issues. A release form filed with the Sanford Police Department lists Zimmerman’s reason for wanting to ride along with them as, “solidify my chances of a career in law enforcement.” Records also indicate Zimmerman applied for a diploma in criminal justice in 2011 at Seminole State College in Florida.

The instructor who taught Zimmerman’s criminal litigation class testified Wednesday that he covered Florida’s self-defense laws extensively, even though there was no mention of them in the course book. "It's not one of those things that you're just going to whisk through in a day,” said Alexis Carter, who is now a military prosecutor.

The testimony seemed to counter a key claim that Zimmerman made last year in a Fox News interview that was replayed in court: that he didn’t know about Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” laws until after the shooting.

Self-defense laws were “something that I constantly iterated ... it was something that I think the students really wanted to know about, it was so practical, they were very much engaged in class discussion," Carter said. He called Zimmerman “one of the better students” in his class and said he gave him an A. He also said he taught his students about “imperfect self-defense,” which he said means “the force that you are encountering, you meet that force disproportionately -- excess force. Like a gunshot."

Prosecutors say that while evidence showing that Zimmerman wanted to be a cop isn’t “bad,” they hope it will give jurors some insight into his thought process the night he shot and killed Martin. They also suggest that his studies in criminal justice show Zimmerman knew how to testify and talk to police.

Scott Pleasants, another Seminole State College teacher, testified Wednesday via webcam about the criminal investigations class in which he taught Zimmerman. He says that while the course book covered profiling and how to testify as a witness, they never actually discussed it in class. A bizarre moment occurred when several Skype users started flooding prosecutor Richard Mantei’s account with calls. "There's a really good chance we're being toyed with," defense attorney Mark O'Mara said. Pleasants was able to resume his testimony via speakerphone and proceedings continued.

A firearms expert with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, Amy Siewert, examined Zimmerman’s gun and said he had one bullet ready to fire in the chamber as well as a fully loaded magazine when he fatally shot Martin.

"They’re not much use if they’re not ready to fire, are they?" asked O'Mara.

"No," said Siewert.

The defense got her to agree that many law enforcement agents carry fully loaded weapons that are ready to fire. Siewert also showed jurors how the gun wouldn’t fire accidentally -- the trigger has to be pulled. But Siewert wouldn’t go so far as to call the loaded gun “safe,” saying it’s a matter of personal preference.
HLN is live-blogging Zimmerman's trial. Click here (http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/07/02/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-day-7) for HLN's live blog of Tuesday's testimony. Read below for minute-by-minute updates:
5:24 p.m. ET: The attorneys have joined the judge for a sidebar.
5:23 p.m. ET: Judge Nelson has recessed court for the evening. Court will pick back up Friday morning at 8:30 a.m. ET.
5:20 p.m. ET: Gorgone is done testifying, and the attorneys are now at a sidebar with the judge.
5:19 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has finished his re-direct examination. West is now asking Gorgone about the right cuff of Zimmerman's jacket again.
5:17 p.m. ET: Gorgone said none of Zimmerman's DNA was found on Martin's hooded jacket.
5:15 p.m. ET: De La Rionda asked Gorgone how Martin's DNA got of right cuff of Zimmerman's jacket. Gorgone said it could have gotten there many different ways, but it had to come in contact with Martin's DNA.
5:11 p.m. ET: The attorneys are at a sidebar with the judge.
5:10 p.m. ET: West has finished his cross examination of Gorgone. Prosecutor De La Rionda is now asking him questions.
5:09 p.m. ET: West has asked for a moment to confer with O'Mara.
5:07 p.m. ET: So far Gorgone has pointed out two stains, one on the front of Zimmerman jacket and one on the right cuff that containing both Martin and Zimmerman's DNA.
5:04 p.m. ET: Gorgone is just going over the stains found on Zimmerman's jacket that included Martin's DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_217.jpg
5:01 p.m. ET: West is now asking Gorgone to go back over the DNA results from Zimmerman's jacket.
4:58 p.m. ET: Gorgone is going back over the DNA he found on Martin's gray sweatshirt.
4:56 p.m. ET: West is now asking Gorgone about the testing conducted on Martin's gray sweatshirt he was wearing under the hooded jacket.
4:53 p.m. ET: West asked, "Frankly then you just didn't find much of anything on this gray hooded sweatshirt when it boils right down to it?"
"Just that partial profile on stain A" said Gorgone.
West asked, "That was the shirt that stunk to high heaven?"
"It didn't smell good," said Gorgone.
4:50 p.m. ET: West had Gorgone point out to the jury what stains he tested from Martin's hooded sweatshirt.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_215.jpg
4:48 p.m. ET: Gorgone said he does determine or predict how DNA gets onto a surface.
4:45 p.m. ET: West is now going back over the DNA results from Martin's hooded sweatshirt.
4:43 p.m. ET: Gorgone is explaining how he uses chemicals to isolate DNA evidence, and ultimately tests it.
4:41 p.m. ET: West is asking Gorgone about how he tests materials for the presence of blood.
4:39 p.m. ET: Gorgone said the general practice is to let "wet" evidence air dry, before being placed in a plastic bag to avoid degradation of the DNA. The sweatshirts were still damp when he pulled them out of the plastics bag for testing.
4:35 p.m. ET: Martin's sweatshirts were sealed in biohazard plastic bags when he received them for testing.
4:33 p.m. ET: Gorgone is explaining how "wet" biological evidence should be dried or their is a risk environmental factors could degrade the DNA evidence. West is now asking about how Martin's sweatshirts were taken care by the evidence collectors.
4:29 p.m. ET: West is asking Gorgone about how his lab is accredited, and standardized.
4:26 p.m. ET: Gorgone said one stick is used to scrap each finger on one hand, and another stick is used for the fingers on the other hand.
4:24 p.m. ET: West keeps making the point that Gorgone was not involved in any DNA sample collection from evidence in the case or at the crime scene.
4:21 p.m. ET: Gorgone said when he tests fingernail scrappings he is really just looking for DNA that is foreign to person's whose fingernails are being tested.
4:18 p.m. ET: West is now asking Gorgone about the DNA samples from the scrapings from Martin's fingernails.
4:14 p.m. ET: Gorgone said he could not exclude or include Martin's DNA from being on the holster for Zimmerman's gun.
4:13 p.m. ET: West is asking Gorgone about the DNA tests results from the slide on Zimmerman's gun. Gorgone said he was unable to exclude Zimmerman's and Martin's DNA from being present on the gun slide. West made the point that environmental factors like rain could have affected the DNA quality on the slide.
4:10 p.m. ET: Gorgone said envirmental factors like moisture and heat and degrade DNA samples.
4:08 p.m. ET: West is asking Gorgone about his role in collecting DNA evidence. He said he does not collect DNA samples from the crime scene that is left to someone else.
4:05 p.m. ET: Defense attorney Don West is about to cross examine Gorgone.
4:04 p.m. ET: Judge Nelson is on the bench, and the jury is being seated.
3:40 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has finished his direct examination of Gorgone. Judge Nelson has recessed court for 15 minutes.
3:38 p.m. ET: Multiple stains on Zimmerman's shirt matched Zimmerman's DNA. None of the stains on the shirt have matched Martin's DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_214.jpg
3:35 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has now moved on to Gorgone's DNA testings results from Zimmerman's shirt he was wearing the night of the shooting.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_213.jpg
3:28 p.m. ET: Multiple stains on Zimmerman's jacket tested positive for Zimmerman's DNA. At least two stains from Zimmerman's jacket, tested positive for a mixture of DNA that included Martin's DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_211.jpg
3:25 p.m. ET: Gorgone said a stain found on the back right shoulder of the jacket had a mixture of DNA. The major contributor to the mixture of the stain was Zimmerman, but the lesser contributor to that stain could not be determined. However, it is possible Martin contributed to that mixture.
3:22 p.m. ET: Two stains on Zimmerman's jacket tested positive for Zimmerman's DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_209.jpg
3:19 p.m. ET: Gorgone is pointing out to the jury all the different stains he tested from Zimmerman's jacket.
3:17 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has now moved on to the DNA testing Gorgone did on Zimmerman's jacket he was wearing the night of the shooting.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_207.jpg
3:13 p.m. ET: One stain on the grey sweatshirt did not yield any results of foreign DNA, but Gorgone could not exclude the possibility that Zimmerman's DNA was in that stain.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_206.jpg
3:08 p.m. ET: Gorgone said one stain on Martin's gray sweatshirt contained Zimmerman's DNA. Another stain tested positive for Martin's DNA, and yet another had a mixture with both Martin's and Zimmmerman's were included in the DNA mixture.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_203.jpg


3:03 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has now moved on to testing Gorgone did on the sweatshirt Martin was wearing under his hooded jacket.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_202.jpg
3:00 p.m. ET: Gorgone said he did not find anyone else's DNA on Martin's hooded jacket.
2:58 p.m. ET: One stain on Martin's hoodie did test positive for his DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_201.jpg
2:55 p.m. ET: De La Rionda is asking Gorgone to point to the stains he tested from Martin's clothing.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_200.jpg
2:52 p.m. ET: Gorgone found Martin's DNA on the skittles bag he bought from the store moments before being shot.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_199.jpg

2:48 p.m. ET: Scrapings from Martin's fingernails did not show the presence of Zimmerman's DNA.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_198.jpg

2:46 p.m. ET: Gorgone did match DNA found on the holster for his gun to Zimmerman. He was able to exclude Martin's DNA as being on his holster.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_197.jpg
2:44 p.m. ET: There was no testable DNA found on the slide of Zimmerman's gun.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_196.jpg
2:41 p.m. ET: Gorgone was unable to find any testable DNA off the trigger of Zimmerman's gun.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_194.jpg
2:38 p.m. ET: This chart shows the DNA testing results from DNA found on handle or grip of Zimmerman's gun. The DNA from the gun matched George Zimmerman's DNA profile. Martin's DNA was not present on the DNA mixture that was found on the grip of the gun.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_189.jpg

2:36 p.m. ET: Defense attorney West is reviewing a chart that shows Gorgone's results from testing the DNA samples from Zimmerman's gun.
2:33 p.m. ET: De La Rionda is now asking Gorgone about DNA samples swabbed from Zimmerman's gun.
2:30 p.m. ET: De La Rionda is displaying results of the DNA testing in Zimmerman's case. Gorgone is explaining what the data means.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_188.jpg
2:27 p.m. ET: De La Rionda is showing Gorgone the DNA samples he tested in this case.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/dr/hln/www/release/sites/default/files/static/images/blhor_185.jpg
2:24 p.m. ET: De La Rionda has now moved on Gorgone work in Zimmerman's case.
2:21 p.m. ET: Gorgone is explaining the probability another person in the population would match the DNA in sample from a crime scene.
2:17 p.m. ET: Gorgone said if he has a mixture of DNA from multiple people he can determine whose DNA is in the mixture.
2:14 p.m. ET: De La Rionda asked Gorgone how a DNA sample from a crime scene is compared to a DNA sample taken from a suspect.
2:11 p.m. ET: Gorgone is now talking about how a DNA sample can be taken by swabbing a surface like a gun or a table.
2:09 p.m. ET: Gorgone is explaining how he makes a DNA profile for a DNA sample.
2:07 p.m. ET: De La Rionda is now asking Gorgone about the specific DNA testing he did in Zimmerman's case.
2:04 p.m. ET: De La Rionda asked Gorgone to tell the jury about the precautions he takes to make sure the DNA samples being tested are not contaminated.
2:00 p.m. ET: Gorgone is explaining DNA and how it is used to identify to criminal suspects.
1:58 p.m. ET: Prosecutor Bernie De La Rionda has called Anthony Gorgone, Florida Department of Law Enforcement crime lab, to the stand.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/07/03/george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-martin-day-8?hpt=ju_c1

[hippifried]

Remember the Bernard Goetz story in NYC.
Apples & oranges. Goetz was under assault by multiple antagonists. Or at least that's the story that stuck. Zimmerman wasn't. He may have been unduly paranoid to start with, but Goetz was just sitting on the train, minding his own business. Zimmerman went out of his way to create a situation. He stalked, pursued. closed on, & confronted Martin. That's the assault. The fight is irrelevant because it began due to the initial assault. A rabbit will attack a hungry wolf if cornered. Zimmerman's 911 calls belie any claim of absent malice. That comparison doesn't work.

[broncofan]

In a case like this where the law is somewhat nuanced, jurors are often unable to compare the facts to the legal standard very well. There is some disagreement on this subject, but if you believe jurors should only be triers of fact, then they will have difficulty translating whatever factual scenario they believe into a verdict.

There is also some confusion about burdens of production. Can jurors infer that what happened was murder because the probability of proper self-defense is extremely low? It's impossible to prove a negative, for instance, that Zimmerman did not have the right to self-defense. I think he was probably getting beaten up. But did he have a concussion? Did he get an MRI? A catscan? Did he go to the hospital because he was vomiting in the days after the event and showing acute symptoms of a concussion? Or was it just a case of an insecure man policing a neighborhood out of some delusion that he served some public service, who couldn't stand the fact that he was being beaten up?

Nobody wants to lose a fight. But if the law permitted you to end fistfights with a gun and call it self-defense, you'd have a lot of matters settled out of court, with the wrong party prevailing.

[broncofan]

The reason I ask about self-defense is this. I was always taught that it was an affirmative defense. Now I am hearing that lack of self-defense is somehow mixed in with the prosecutor's prima facie case. Let's say it's an affirmative defense.

The prosecution proves murder by demonstrating that Zimmerman shot Martin with the intent to kill him or cause major bodily injury and he in fact died. The defense then has the burden of proving that there was a justification, that is, self-defense. If they cannot prove it as an affirmative defense in whole, the verdict should be murder.

I've been using the word reckless and negligent as intent standards somewhat recklessly (and maybe negligently). Someone recklessly causes a death if they commit an act where their purpose is not to cause a death and they do not commit the act with the knowledge that it will lead to death. The standard for recklessness is stated as consciously disregarding a known risk. Of course, this depends how far back you go in the sequence of events. Did Zimmerman consciously disregard a known risk by confronting someone without knowing proper procedure for conducting a search, not identifying himself as being law enforcement or neighborhood watch, all the while carrying a gun?

Because he certainly committed the final act with "purpose" intent to kill. This was not a case where he fired a gun in the air, disregarding the risk that it might as a probability, result in someone's death. He killed someone, purposefully. If self-defense is an all or nothing affirmative defense, then the only issue is whether he met its strictures in full.

[starkem]

As the following author of the link describes a concise overview of self defense:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/zimmerman-case-the-five-principles-of-the-law-of-self-defense/

As soon as I read your prior post, I was motivated to find exactly what, if any, affirmative defenses were asserted by Zimmerman's defense team in this matter. I didn't locate reported (or actual) defendant's answer for this criminal proceeding. My search did yield the overview stated in the above link. Accordingly, there is a basic structure or principles for asserting this affirmative defense nationally. The author also mentions the procedures under penal codes for Florida as well.

For those not familiar with affirmative defense rules and terminology:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Affirmative+Defense
This procedural rule simply asserts a defendant is invoking a defense for which a law already exists to exhonorate or acquit a defendant whether said defendant has actually done as charged in the criminal complaint.

Otherwise, defendants answer (exclusive of this invocation of "affirmative defense") is tried on case law as to adjudication (court decision). Someone with more legal knowledge can correct my layperson explanation. Thanks!




The reason I ask about self-defense is this. I was always taught that it was an affirmative defense. Now I am hearing that lack of self-defense is somehow mixed in with the prosecutor's prima facie case. Let's say it's an affirmative defense.

The prosecution proves murder by demonstrating that Zimmerman shot Martin with the intent to kill him or cause major bodily injury and he in fact died. The defense then has the burden of proving that there was a justification, that is, self-defense. If they cannot prove it as an affirmative defense in whole, the verdict should be murder.

I've been using the word reckless and negligent as intent standards somewhat recklessly (and maybe negligently). Someone recklessly causes a death if they commit an act where their purpose is not to cause a death and they do not commit the act with the knowledge that it will lead to death. The standard for recklessness is stated as consciously disregarding a known risk. Of course, this depends how far back you go in the sequence of events. Did Zimmerman consciously disregard a known risk by confronting someone without knowing proper procedure for conducting a search, not identifying himself as being law enforcement or neighborhood watch, all the while carrying a gun?

Because he certainly committed the final act with "purpose" intent to kill. This was not a case where he fired a gun in the air, disregarding the risk that it might as a probability, result in someone's death. He killed someone, purposefully. If self-defense is an all or nothing affirmative defense, then the only issue is whether he met its strictures in full.

[hippifried]

Wasn't Martin defending himself? Wasn't he "standing his ground"?

I'm just sick & tired of punks like Zimmerman, who think a gun makes them a badass & gives them impunity to act like jerks. All I see is pussies with a bunch of false bravado, who can't possibly back any of it up without that fake dick strapped on. Has he shown any remorse, or just tried to redirect blame? Despite legal nuance, the undisputed fact is that he shot & killed somebody who wasn't armed.

[starkem]

Defense has to establish some suspicion or reasonable cause for Zimmerman to be alarmed and subsequently resisted by Trevon Martin to meet self defense. This can be accomplished by merely be allowed to introduce the background or witnesses as to Martin's character flaws (not saying it is right -just the premise of such a legal strategy). Even if the above can not be reasonably established by defense, and even if Zimmerman is deemed wrongfully the aggressor, the defense (if they asserted affirmative defense in their answer) can assert that Zimmerman's wrongful action became legal self defense because Martin subsequently acted with deadly force or inescapable harm to Zimmerman.

I do understand your frustration though. This is why I have a love/hate relationship with legal matters.


Wasn't Martin defending himself? Wasn't he "standing his ground"?

I'm just sick & tired of punks like Zimmerman, who think a gun makes them a badass & gives them impunity to act like jerks. All I see is pussies with a bunch of false bravado, who can't possibly back any of it up without that fake dick strapped on. Has he shown any remorse, or just tried to redirect blame? Despite legal nuance, the undisputed fact is that he shot & killed somebody who wasn't armed.

[trish]

Good you're not on the jury.

[Queens Guy]

The reason I ask about self-defense is this. I was always taught that it was an affirmative defense. Now I am hearing that lack of self-defense is somehow mixed in with the prosecutor's prima facie case. Let's say it's an affirmative defense.

The prosecution proves murder by demonstrating that Zimmerman shot Martin with the intent to kill him or cause major bodily injury and he in fact died. The defense then has the burden of proving that there was a justification, that is, self-defense. If they cannot prove it as an affirmative defense in whole, the verdict should be murder.

I think you may have 'affirmative defense' and 'burden of proof' confused. Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so you could be right about those terms.

What I do know, though, is that the burden of proof falls on the Prosecution. For both the crime and the claim of self-defense.The State of Florida still must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman was NOT acting in self defense. If the jurors think it's 50/50 or even only 20/80 that it was self-defense, they are supposed to vote 'not guilty'. They have to be convinced to 100%, or very close to that.

The defense doesn't have to prove self-defense, they only have to raise a 'reasonable doubt'.

Again, here are my disclaimers - I wasn't there that night. I don't know what happened. I'm not taking either side or making up my mind until the trial is over.

However, I am critical of the media because I think you should know the answers if they were doing their jobs properly.

Yesterday, while the news stressed that the Prosecution caught Zimmerman in a lie he made during the interview with Sean Hannity, they ignored the fact that the Professor that testified about it, also went on to explain 'stand-your-ground' and 'self-defense'. And that part of his testimony was VERY helpful to Zimmerman. It allowed the witness to play the role that the judge is supposed to play, and will play, when it comes to instructing the jury immediately before they deliberate. Normally, a witness can't explain the law and how it's supposed to be interpreted, but, technically, he was only saying what he told the class when he explained the law and how it is to be interpreted. I think the Professor came across as a credible witness. Maybe it shouldn't be true, but the fact that he was a Black man had to help. He also used to work for the Public Defender's Office, so he is no NRA-type whacko.

The Professor also explained 'imperfect self-defense', which cover the 'he shouldn't have gotten out of the car' and 'Zimmerman started it' parts of this trial. The witness testified that even if Person A starts it, using some low level of force, Person B can respond with a similar level of force, BUT if Person B responds with a great deal of force, the kind that would put Person A in fear for his life or serious physical injury, then Person A can respond with deadly physical force. Person A didn't lose their right to 'self-defense'. The professor also said that Person A doesn't have to wait for Person B to 'almost kill him'. If Person A is in fear of his life, and thinks his life is in danger, then he can use deadly physical force. Again, I found that part of his testimony also worth being mentioned on the news.

Yes, the Professor showed that Zimmerman lied about something during the Hannity interview. That certainly is important, and a headline. But did you hear the other stuff he said? I think it's almost as important. Certainly worth being reported. We all want to know what was in Zimmerman and Trayvon's heads that night. What were they thinking? Well, this part of the Professor's testimony help answer an important part of that question.

[broncofan]

Affirmative defenses almost always shift the burden of proof. They are for defendants to prove in order to escape liability despite committing the acts spelled out in statutory law. The prosecution has the burden of proof for the underlying defense, but typically not for an affirmative defense.

I just graduated from law school. This doesn't mean I am right about this jurisdiction and how they treat self-defense. There may be some jurisdictions where lack of justification is part of the prosecution's case but this seems fairly counter-intuitive.

As for using deadly force, the person asserting self-defense has to both believe he is required to use it and it has to be objectively reasonable. It can't just be his opinion but also that which a reasonable person in that situation would have.

The reason this area of the law is so confused is that each state may treat self-defense differently. As for murder there are model codes but each state is allowed to adopt it in their fashion. Further, each state has its own precedent from cases that help explain how the statutes have been interpreted when there were similar fact patterns.

The broad principles laid out in the article by starkem are useful. Imminence for instance. Is Zimmerman permitted to use deadly force prior to the point in time at which he faces a deadly threat? Anyone who is losing a fight is at the eventual mercy of their attacker if they have no duty to retreat. They just may anticipate the deadly threat before it's there.

[broncofan]

Affirmative defenses almost always shift the burden of proof. They are for defendants to prove in order to escape liability despite committing the acts spelled out in statutory law. The prosecution has the burden of proof for the underlying defense, but typically not for an affirmative defense.

I just graduated from law school. This doesn't mean I am right about this jurisdiction and how they treat self-defense. There may be some jurisdictions where lack of justification is part of the prosecution's case but this seems fairly counter-intuitive.

As for using deadly force, the person asserting self-defense has to both believe he is required to use it and it has to be objectively reasonable. It can't just be his opinion but also that which a reasonable person in that situation would have.

The reason this area of the law is so confused is that each state may treat self-defense differently. As for murder there are model codes but each state is allowed to adopt it in their fashion. Further, each state has its own precedent from cases that help explain how the statutes have been interpreted when there were similar fact patterns.

The broad principles laid out in the article by starkem are useful. Imminence for instance. Is Zimmerman permitted to use deadly force prior to the point in time at which he faces a deadly threat? Anyone who is losing a fight is at the eventual mercy of their attacker if they have no duty to retreat. They just may anticipate the deadly threat before it's there.

Edit: I am not saying you are wrong about how self-defense is treated. It may not be treated as a typical affirmative defense (which results in burden shifting). Or it may only require a shift in the burden of producing evidence but without shifting the burden of persuasion. I'm guessing this last scenario is the case which would mean that lack of justification is part of the prosecutor's case as you say. It does put the prosecution in the position of having to prove a negative as part of their case.

[Queens Guy]

Affirmative defenses almost always shift the burden of proof. They are for defendants to prove in order to escape liability despite committing the acts spelled out in statutory law. The prosecution has the burden of proof for the underlying defense, but typically not for an affirmative defense.

I just graduated from law school. This doesn't mean I am right about this jurisdiction and how they treat self-defense. There may be some jurisdictions where lack of justification is part of the prosecution's case but this seems fairly counter-intuitive.

As for using deadly force, the person asserting self-defense has to both believe he is required to use it and it has to be objectively reasonable. It can't just be his opinion but also that which a reasonable person in that situation would have.

The reason this area of the law is so confused is that each state may treat self-defense differently. As for murder there are model codes but each state is allowed to adopt it in their fashion. Further, each state has its own precedent from cases that help explain how the statutes have been interpreted when there were similar fact patterns.

The broad principles laid out in the article by starkem are useful. Imminence for instance. Is Zimmerman permitted to use deadly force prior to the point in time at which he faces a deadly threat? Anyone who is losing a fight is at the eventual mercy of their attacker if they have no duty to retreat. They just may anticipate the deadly threat before it's there.


Self-defense varying from State to State matches up with what the Professor said about how he taught Florida-specific things in addition to the general information contained in the book.

I'll let the Professor speak for himself, by attaching a link. If you look on youtube, some people have been uploading each day's testimony, so you can look for him by name.

Here is a link to one of the local TV stations in Orlando doing what I think is a good job reporting that day's testimony. Doing a much, much better job than what I saw on the networks.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/george-zimmerman-school-records-police-applications-allowed-in-trial/-/1637132/20824442/-/11wqyc2z/-/index.html

[broncofan]

Self-defense varying from State to State matches up with what the Professor said about how he taught Florida-specific things in addition to the general information contained in the book.

I'll let the Professor speak for himself, by attaching a link. If you look on youtube, some people have been uploading each day's testimony, so you can look for him by name.

Here is a link to one of the local TV stations in Orlando doing what I think is a good job reporting that day's testimony. Doing a much, much better job than what I saw on the networks.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/george-zimmerman-school-records-police-applications-allowed-in-trial/-/1637132/20824442/-/11wqyc2z/-/index.html
Thanks. I'll look into it!

[natina]

LIVE trial

http://www.wftv.com/s/zimmerman-livestream/

[hippifried]

Seems to me that defining self defense in this case does no good until there's a clear definition of assault.

[TSBootyLondon]

did anyone see the dog that was shot repeatedly for 'sniffing an officers feet'!

Granted it was the owners fault for leaving the windows open but the officer shot repeatedly and didn't even kill it! left it lying in extreme pain!

[natina]

Defense Motion to Acquit Zimmerman Denied

Earlier: Trayvon Martin's mom testifies

(Newser) – Trayvon Martin's mother and brother took the stand today in George Zimmerman's trial, followed by the medical examiner who performed Martin's autopsy, and the prosecution rested its case around 5pm. The defense will now present its case; defense attorney Mark O'Mara started by asking the judge to acquit Zimmerman because there is no direct evidence that spite played a role in the killing. The judge denied the motion, CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/05/justice/george-zimmerman-trial/index.html) reports. Earlier, with the court playing a 911 tape (http://www.newser.com/story/170350/fbi-expert-cant-id-screams-on-trayvon-911-tape.html) from the night of the shooting, Sybrina and Jahvaris Fulton both identified the screams on the tape as belonging to Martin, the Orlando Sentinel (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-state-rests-20130705,0,1610504.story) reports. Among the details from today's testimony:


Sybrina Fulton told the court that Martin had a pair of tattoos bearing the names of his great-grandmother, grandmother, and herself.
O'Mara asked Sybrina if anyone had "prepared" her before she heard the recording; she said no.
He also noted that "the only alternative" to Martin screaming was Zimmerman screaming, which would suggest the teen was responsible for his own death, he said; he asked whether she hoped her son wasn't at fault. "I would hope for this to never have happened," she said.
Jahvaris acknowledged having initially told the media he wasn't certain who was screaming. "I didn't want to believe it was him," he said, per the San Jose Mercury News (http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_23603723/george-zimmerman-trial-mother-says-trayvon-martin-cried).
During his testimony, the medical examiner said Trayvon was alive for a while after being shot, "still in pain" and "suffering."

http://www.newser.com/story/170543/trayvons-mom-911-screams-were-my-son.html

[natina]

Did George Zimmerman LIE (A Lot!) Under Oath?

"In the spring of 2010, a military prosecutor with the Army taught a college class near here that delved into Florida's Stand Your Ground law. One of his pupils stood out for his diligence: George Zimmerman, who earned an A."*

George Zimmerman may have perjured himself in his trial. Did Trayvon Martin grab Zimmerman's gun like he said? Did Zimmerman not know about the "Stand Your Ground" laws taught in his law school class, which he aced? Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian discuss.


Did George Zimmerman LIE (A Lot!) Under Oath? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKrFasEGE78)

[natina]

these videos say very much about zimmerman

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL OPENING STATEMENTS PROSECUTION


GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL OPENING STATEMENTS PROSECUTION 6.24.13 PT.4 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5_Vgg9qsww)



motion to dismiss murder charge denied
WATCH: Prosecution Argues Against Acquittal - Zimmerman Din't Act Out of Self-Defense

Prosecution rests in Zimmerman trial; defense asks for acquittal
SANFORD, Fla. (AP) — The prosecution in the murder trial of George Zimmerman wrapped up its case after a dramatic day of testimony Friday, with Travyon Martin's mother and brother saying the screams for help that can be heard in the background on a 911 call came from the 17-year-old.




WATCH: Prosecution Argues Against Acquittal - Zimmerman Din't Act Out of Self-Defense - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJvAwt14vSM)

[natina]

Crowd On MSNBC Cheers As Motion To Dismiss Charges Against George Zimmerman DENIED!


On Friday, the state of Florida wrapped up its presentation of the case against George Zimmerman for the 2012 murder of Trayvon Martin. Following the state resting, Zimmerman's counselors argued a motion before the judge to acquit Zimmerman due to a lack of evidence. What that motion was dismissed by the presiding judge, a crowd attending the Essence Festival in New Orleans where MSNBC is broadcasting live burst into cheers and applause.

Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, concluded his request for an acquittal by noting that Martin "did cause his own death." The judge summarily dismissed O'Mara's motion and proceeded to instruct him to begin the defense phase of the trial by calling their first witness.


The crowd at the Essence Festival that had been watching the proceedings as MSNBC's hosts broadcast live from that event exploded in cheers upon hearing the news that Zimmerman will not be acquitted without a jury passing a verdict of "not guilty."

Watch the clip below via MSNBC:


Crowd On MSNBC Cheers As Motion To Dismiss Charges Against Zimmerman Denied - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXEjHeUYmWk)

[natina]

Judge to consider lesser charges for George Zimmerman

The Florida judge in George Zimmerman’s second-degree murder trial will decide Thursday whether she will allow the jury to consider lesser charges – manslaughter and aggravated assault – when they begin deliberations on Friday.
The prosecution has requested that Judge Debra Nelson consider the lesser charges for Zimmerman, 29, the neighborhood watch volunteer charged with the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, 17. Convicting Zimmerman of second-degree murder would still be an option for the jury.
The state is scheduled to deliver closing arguments at 1 p.m. on Thursday; the defense will present its closing arguments on Friday morning.
If convicted of second degree murder, Zimmerman could face up to life in prison. Zimmerman did not testify on his own behalf during the trial.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/11/19415120-judge-to-consider-lesser-charges-for-george-zimmerman?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=1

[natina]

After days of courtroom drama, 6 jurors deliberate Zimmerman's fate



CNN) -- After 14 days of witness testimony and arguments on both sides, the fate of George Zimmerman now rests with six women.
These jurors began their deliberations around 2:30 p.m. Friday, after Judge Debra Nelson read a lengthy list of instructions. They have three options: convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder in Trayvon Martin's death, convict him of manslaughter or find him not guilty. The judge approved the manslaughter option on Thursday, over the defense's vehement objection.
"All of us are depending on you to make a wise and legal decision," Nelson told the jurors.
The start of deliberations capped yet another emotional day in a case that has captivated many nationwide

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/12/justice/zimmerman-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

[Ben in LA]

All hell is going to break loose.

[trish]

I hope not, it would just play right into the storyline Fox and friends are trying to weave.

[natina]

Prosecutions EXPLOSIVE Common Sense Rebuttal To Defense Closing Arguments. Zimmerman Trial

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSn-yiTbI6o

[hippifried]

All hell is going to break loose.

Nah. Just half. Satan has a boatload of stupid to deal with, & can't keep up.

[natina]

George Zimmerman trial: Prosecutor blasts Zimmerman's self-defense claim during closing arguments
Prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda portrayed Zimmerman as a "wannabe cop" who profiled Martin -- who he said was a boy only several weeks past his seventeeth birthday -- as a criminal. But he told the jury that it was Martin, not Zimmerman, who had reason to be in fear that evening.
"Who started this? Who followed who? Who was minding their own business? Of the two, who was the one that was armed?" de la Rionda asked the jury.
Martin, he said, would "no longer walk this Earth" because of Zimmerman's incorrect assumptions about the teen.
Playing Zimmerman's videotaped re-enactment of the altercation, de la Rionda aimed to poke holes in Zimmerman's self-defense story, saying the 29-year-old lied about following Martin.
Zimmerman claimed he got out of his car to find an address to give to non-emergency dispatchers, de la Rionda argued, but pointed out there was an address close by he could have offered without walking further into the neighborhood.
Zimmerman also claimed not to know the names of the streets in his community, de la Rionda said, though there were only three streets and he had lived there several years.
"If he's not doing anything wrong in following an individual, why does he have to lie about it?" de la Rionda asked.
The six jurors will have three options when they start deliberations as early as Friday: guilty of second-degree murder, guilty of manslaughter and not guilty.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57593377-504083/george-zimmerman-trial-prosecutor-blasts-zimmermans-self-defense-claim-during-closing-arguments/

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL PROSECUTION CLOSING ARGUMENT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoyynTUiGcs

[Dino Velvet]

Grab your keys and coats. It's over folks.

http://news.yahoo.com/jury-reaches-verdict-in-zimmerman-trial-131511601.html

[envivision]

Viva la raza !

[Ben]

If Trayvon Martin had been a woman …

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/12/trayvon-martin-female

[savannahguy]

Justice

[bobvela]

Justice

Not yet.

Once Bernie De La Rionda, John Guy but especially Angela Corey are disbarred... then we will be closer.

Malfeasance cannot be excused, especially when so blatant.

[robertlouis]

So in Florida it's now ok for a vigilante to shoot an innocent black kid.

Words fail me.

[Prospero]

So in Florida it's now ok for a vigilante to shoot an innocent black kid.

Words fail me.

I agree. A shameful and shaming verdict.

[bobvela]

I agree. A shameful and shaming verdict.

Self-defense is a shameful act? Good to know how you think.

[robertlouis]

Self-defense is a shameful act? Good to know how you think.

Self-defence??? Listen to yourself.

How is shooting an unarmed juvenile self-defence?

Asshole.

[bobvela]

Self-defence??? Listen to yourself.

How is shooting an unarmed juvenile self-defence?

Asshole.
First... it's spelled 'self-defense', not 'self-defence'.

Moron.

Lets walk through it slower as clearly haven’t graduated from special-ed yet.

While TM was not carrying a gun or knife... the testimony does indicate he was using weapons... in the form of his fists and the ground. So much for being unarmed.

While TM was not yet 18... there are 17 year olds who are emancipated or have even enlisted in the military. Just because he is not 18 does not mean he is not responsible for his own actions.

If as the testimony suggests... that TM was running (or skipping) away from GZ... either you believe that GZ is such a fantastic runner (something no one claimed in court) that he caught up to TM who was running for out of fear or for his life... or that either TM hid and waited for GZ to approach... or doubled back.

It’s either #2 or #3… TM made the choice to confront. Stupid? Yup. Was it stupid for GZ to get out of his car and see where TM was going? Probably (doubly so with what we now know)… neither of which are illegal.

Unfortunately it seems that TM attacked GZ… and after screaming for help after multiple blows… GZ defended himself against the assault which most people (if in that situation) would reasonably believe could cause them significant injury or death.

Like it or not… the jury reached the correct verdict given the evidence presented.

[Prospero]

You are just plain wrog Bobvela. Probably a racist to judge by your remarks. And as for spelling Bobvela, you are a fool... do you not realise the English language has many words spelt and pronounced differently on different sides of the Atlantic. By the way we spell the word to describe you as arsehole... but it means the same as your own word asshole.

Staggering that such people exist.... if your unarmed son had been gunned down by this murderer perhaps you'd feel differently.

[youngblood61]

Sad day

[trish]

Zimmerman is not guilty of murder according to Florida law. I firmly believe that once someone has been found not guilty, or once someone has serve their time, they should be allowed to continue with their lives and be integrated back into society. So I hope will be the case with Zimmerman. This is not to say Martin’s family shouldn’t pursue civil action against Zimmerman. But the legal charge of murder has now been settled; and Zimmerman is not guilty.

When a prosecutor loses a case in court it clearly doesn’t mean the case should never have gone to court. Not only the prosecutor but the public and the grand jury saw the need to settle the issue of fault in this particular shooting in a court of Florida law. Had there been a serious investigation from the beginning, and had Zimmerman been arrested on the night of the shooting, this case would not have gotten a tenth of the public attention it now has. I think is was right to have a trail, to clarify what happened that tragic night, to give the Martins some closure and to give Zimmerman the opportunity to clear his name, which he has.

Yet clearly something is still amiss. An boy was walking through a neighborhood, armed with only a box of skittles. A self professed and armed vigilante views him as a suspicious character and calls 911. The police virtually ask the vigilante to back off (had they only made their request literal). He doesn’t; the vigilante confronts the boy and a scuffle ensues. The boy is shot and killed. The vigilante has lesions on the back of his head. The only thing that is clear is that if the police had got to the boy first, no one would’ve been injure, no one would be dead.

So what is wrong with this picture?

Florida’s stand your ground law.

In actual practice it’s protecting more drug dealers, gang bangers and thugs than ordinary citizens. In a street shoot out between two gangs, any surviver can claim and does claim he fired his weapon in self-defense. Of course the paradox is the dead were firing thei weapons in self-defense too.

The Zimmerman case underscores the tragedy of stand your ground laws because neither Zimmerman nor Martin were drug deals, gang bangers nor thugs. Both may have been acting in self-defense, but the law only protects the survivor who shoots, not the survivors of the dead who were shot.

[dderek123]

'Murica Fuck Yeah!

[dderek123]

I would want my guilt to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt if I were on trial, and so would you.

[fred41]

Very well put Trish. Now the family will pursue a civil suit. Which they stand a much better chance of winning. That's how the law works.

A thousand newspapers will be writing about this, but locally - the N.Y.Daily News put it pretty well:http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/zimmerman-verdict-fair-unsatisfying-article-1.1398206

George Zimmerman verdict: Jury's decision unsatisfying but respectable given the circumstances
Although Zimmerman bears moral guilt for the killing of Trayvon Martin, the prosecution fell short of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt the 'ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent' necessary for second-degree murder under Florida’s penal code..(read on by hitting the link..it's a good article)

It could have easily went either way on the Manslaughter count...(personally, as I may have previously stated, I wouldn't have been at all surprised if the jurors would have been hung on the second count. I believe,that if they had twelve jurors, as they do in most states with a charge of this importance, they might have argued about the second count for an even longer time...and may not even have been able to come to a verdict on it ..though I'm sure the court would have pushed for one)..but ultimately, when the jury focused on what the evidence shows,may have happened in that short period of time on the ground, they didn't think the state met their burden of proof - of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, as charged to them by the court. That's the law.

In my mind,Zimmerman did a stupid thing - being armed, but not really being physically prepared to take on the challenge of single handedly guarding his community against real or imaginary culprits. It seems like Martin may have avoided altercations also, because it does seem, according to the timeline, that he actually came back and confronted Zimmerman....after all that,we will never know what would have happened if Zimmerman didn't have a gun. Would Martin just have beat his ass and left him there to lick his wounds,or would he have been harmed much worse...or would they have just wrestled until the police arrived.
We'll never know.
But someone is dead and because of that , some people will never be satisfied by the jury's verdict. Totally understandable because of the emotions involved...but again - that's the law.

[bobvela]

You are just plain wrog Bobvela.

Really? Care to explain?



Probably a racist to judge by your remarks.

And you probably rape children for fun.

See how easy it is to make things up?

Or would you like to support your claim?


And as for spelling Bobvela, you are a fool... do you not realise the English language has many words spelt and pronounced differently on different sides of the Atlantic.

By the way we spell the word to describe you as arsehole... but it means the same as your own word asshole.

So much name calling but still no specific proof of your claim that I am a racist. Again we see the quality of your arguments. Doubly so in the context of what was said above.


Staggering that such people exist.... if your unarmed son had been gunned down by this murderer perhaps you'd feel differently.

Maybe, however I am raising my son to be smart enough not to do stupid things like getting into fights... especially under circumstances which could lead to his death.

Many people carry weapons... legally or not... and unless you know your target is unarmed or that you can prevent the use of the weapon... you are a fool.

It's the same reason he's being raised to know that while he may have the right of way vs a car... the car will still win any collision and that he should be careful anytime walking across a road.

[trish]

Maybe, however I am raising my son to be smart enough not to do stupid things like getting into fights... especially under circumstances which could lead to his death. Things like never carrying a box of skittles through a gated neighborhood wearing a hoodie. Who'd a thunk that'll getcha kilt.


It's the same reason he's being raised to know that while he may have the right of way vs a car... the car will still win any collision and that he should be careful anytime walking across a road. So should he be run over in a cross walk enjoying his right of way, it would be wrong to hold the driver responsible. Just question him and let him go without charges.

[dderek123]

Martin was crossing through peoples yards. Not walking along the street. Zimmerman was suspicious of that and decided to follow him.

[dderek123]

Read this on another forum. Just copied and pasted his post.

"I present to you the facts. I also included my opinion at the end but you can feel free to ignore that part.

Who:

George Zimmerman: - 29 Years Old - Hispanic Male - Insurance Fraud Investigator - Spearheaded a Neighborhood Watch program after a string of burglaries. - Lives in a gated community in Sanford Florida. - Record of Assaulting a Police Officer


Trayvon Martin: - 17 Years Old. - Black Male. - Student - Suspended from school for Vandalism - Participated in and refereed illegal MMA fights. - Lives in Miami Gardens, Visiting father's France's house in Zimmerman's neighborhood.


Rachel Jeantel - Trayvon's Friend. Originally claimed to be his girlfriend. - Was on the phone with Trayvon during the moments leading up to the shooting. - Originally claimed to be 16. That's why she was not featured before the trial. She is actually 19. - Ms. Jeantel has offered a few variations of events. For simplicity we will use the version she gave during the trial.


Where:
Sanford Florida. Gated community where Zimmerman lives as well as Tracy Martin's fiancé.

When:
February 26, 2012 between 7pm and 8pm. It was raining and getting dark.

What:
-Trayvon was visiting his fathers fiancé.
-Trayvon went to the gas station to get skittles and iced tea.
-Zimmerman notices Martin walking through people's yards.
-Zimmerman calls the non emergency line for the Local PD.
-Zimmerman describes Martin to dispatch and requests a police officer.
-Zimmerman says These Fucking Punks always get away.
-Trayvon notices Zimmerman watching him as tells Jeantel it is a creepy ass cracker.
-Trayvon continues to walk through people'a yards.
-Zimmerman gets out his his car in order to follow Trayvon and see why he is traveling through people's yards.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel "The nigga still following me"
-Trayvon begins to run towards his fathers finances house.
-Zimmerman begins to run in order to keep sight of Trayvon.
-Dispatcher hears wind noise and asks Zimmerman what he is doing.
-Zimmerman states he observing the subject and trying to find an address for the PD to intercept Trayvon.
-Dispatch tells Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that"
-Zimmerman stops and loses sight of Trayvon.
-Zimmerman heads back to his car.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel that he lost Zimmerman and he is right outside his fathers finances house.

*Up until this point Zimmerman's story and Jeantel's testimony match. Now the stories diverge.*

Zimmerman's Version: - As he is walking back to his car Trayvon approaches him and asks, "You got a problem?!" - Zimmerman says "No" - Trayvon says "You do now" - Trayvon attacks Zimmerman and smashes his head into the sidewalk. - Zimmerman draws his weapon while Trayvon is on top and fires into his chest killing him.

Jeantel's Version: (From Trial) - Trayvon is outside his Fathers finances house. - Trayvon suddenly says, "Oh Shit" - Jeantel hears Zimmerman say, "What you doing here?" - Jeantel then says she hears a bump and wet grass sounds and the phone goes out.

My opinion: - Jeantel's version doesn't make sense. If Mr. Martin was already at his Father's finances house then the altercation would have occurred there and not over a hundred yards to the north towards Zimmerman's SUV.
I think what happened was Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman. After all he didn't feel he was doing anything wrong and would've been pissed that a white guy was following him as wanted to teach him a lesson.


I think we had two hot headed individuals that both had opportunities to walk away.
Unfortunately they didn't and one was killed.
I believe that Zimmerman had every right to simply observe Trayvon and call the police.
Unless we can prove that Zimmerman walked up to Trayvon and started a physical confrontation with him then his claim of self defense should be upheld.
Just because Trayvon was annoyed that a (what he thought was) white guy was following him does not give him the right to use any physical force.
It all comes down to who threw the first punch. Based on witness testimony and the layout of the neighborhood I believe that Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman."

[bobvela]

Things like never carrying a box of skittles through a gated neighborhood wearing a hoodie. Who'd a thunk that'll getcha kilt.

Yes, because GZ saw a person wearing a hoodie and visibly carrying skittles and said “I think I'm going to go kill him!”

I'm sorry, but no matter how often they are referenced... the hoodie, skittles & tea are irrelevant to this case as nothing more but an albatross. They existed, but were no more contributing factors than the position of the moon or the date on the calendar.

An uncomfortable truth about this case, is that our neighborhoods would be far better off if we had more people acting like GZ and fewer acting like TM.

No, I'm not saying people should go around shooting hoodie wearing people, nor that people like TM deserve to die. Think for a moment about what lead up to the death of TM without the emotional charging.

On the one side you have a person who took a proactive role in trying to make their community a better place by keeping an eye out for things that didn't seem right, calling them into the police.

On the other side, you have a person who assaulted someone who apparently asked them what they were doing there.

Is it wrong to hope for neighbors who keep an eye out and don't sucker punch?


So should he be run over in a cross walk enjoying his right of way, it would be wrong to hold the driver responsible. Just question him and let him go without charges.

First... I would hope that he wouldn't be 'enjoying his right of way' without taking steps to make sure he was/is safe in the first place. Just because the sign says walk doesn't mean you are safe to walk across.

Second... unlike you, I am not out for blood for blood sake. It would depend on the circumstances involved. Unless there was immediate evidence of alcohol, negligence or malice being involved... no, indefinite detention would not be called for. Unless a crime is strongly suspected (and even then only of certain types) or there is an immediate need to arrest... the police will often release the person involved as they gather more information... which is exactly what they did in the GZ case.

[dderek123]

Racism. When two minorities go to court and one loses.

[buttslinger]

Martin was crossing through peoples yards. Not walking along the street. Zimmerman was suspicious of that and decided to follow him.

Better bring your handgun, yard cutter-throughers are known to be murderers. Better safe than sorry. You never know when you might need to stand your ground.

[dderek123]

He was suspicious. Would I have been? Most likely not, I probably wouldn't have even bothered following him. Carrying a gun around is wrong? Well that's a whole different issue.

I think they were both knuckleheads and this unfortunate event could have been avoided. A guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt was really hard to attain since there are a lack of witnesses and Jeantels version of the events wasn't believable. That's about it.

[bobvela]

Racism. When two minorities go to court and one loses.

To paraphrase a tweet I saw last night:

A black man is shot by a Hispanic man, who is acquitted by an all woman jury... but it's still the fault of racist white men.


and Jeantels version of the events wasn't believable.

Admitting to quite a few lies while on the stand can cause that... doubly so when some of those perjurious lies were instrumental in the bringing of the charges.

[fred41]

He was suspicious. Would I have been? Most likely not, I probably wouldn't have even bothered following him. Carrying a gun around is wrong? Well that's a whole different issue.

I think they were both knuckleheads and this unfortunate event could have been avoided. A guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt was really hard to attain since there are a lack of witnesses and Jeantels version of the events wasn't believable. That's about it.

Yeah...and I'm glad so far everything is mostly calm...I think a lot of that stems from the given facts of this case, as seen by people that actually followed it, and realized how hard it was to be to get a guilty verdict in this case.

[buttslinger]

Two guys:
one is walking home from the local store.
one is looking for trouble with a gun.

You don't need to be a mind reader to figure this one out.

[Bruce Wayne]

DDerek Zinnerman was white/Hispanic not just Hispanic.

[dderek123]

Two guys:
one is walking home from the local store.
one is looking for trouble with a gun.

You don't need to be a mind reader to figure this one out.

The evidence presented in court suggests that's not how it went. I'm not a mind reader but I still know how to read. haha

[dderek123]

DDerek Zinnerman was white/Hispanic not just Hispanic.

Thanks for the info. So did race still have an affect on the outcome of the court case? I believe stereotyping probably had more influence.

[bobvela]

DDerek Zinnerman was white/Hispanic not just Hispanic.

And President Barack Obama is white/black... yet he is generally only called 'black'.

Why then is it important to point out the whiteness in half of the roots of Zimmerman but not Obama?

[trish]

Zimmerman is not guilty. I'm good with that. It's good that he had a trial. I make no claims about racism in this case, though it's clear Zimmerman profiled the boy he killed. But the claim that


our neighborhoods would be far better off if we had more people acting like GZ and fewer acting like TM.is crazy. Really? More vigilantes ignoring the police and killing more teenagers will make our gated communities even better? What we really need is less guns, no more concealed carry, an end to stand your ground laws and no more public sanctioned vigilantism.

[fred41]

The evidence presented in court suggests that's not how it went. I'm not a mind reader but I still know how to read. haha


..again I agree. When the case was first reported I had a different viewpoint...but the evidence changed my mind on a few things.

I think maybe a discussion on guns and changing some laws (maybe) would once again be appropriate...but that's about it.

[buttslinger]

The evidence presented in court suggests that's not how it went.

The evidence presented by Zimmerman. Martin was dead, so he couldn't testify.

It's a damn shame Martin didn't survive, then he could go to jail for attempted murder, right? Or would it be attempted manslaughter.? haha

[dderek123]

Zimmerman is not guilty. I'm good with that. It's good that he had a trial. I make no claims about racism in this case, though it's clear Zimmerman profiled the boy he killed. But the claim that

is crazy. Really? More vigilantes ignoring the police and killing more teenagers will make our gated communities even better? What we really need is less guns, no more concealed carry, an end to stand your ground laws and no more public sanctioned vigilantism.

Woah you're right that is a crazy claim, vigilanteism isn't what people need. Just look at what's going on in Egypt. Also agree with you on the concealed carry laws. It shouldn't be so easy.

[bobvela]

Zimmerman is not guilty. I'm good with that. It's good that he had a trial.

So you are happy with blowing quite a bit of tax payer dollars on a case that was unwinnable and gave the Martin family a false sense of hope? Good to know!


I make no claims about racism in this case, though it's clear Zimmerman profiled the boy he killed.

So? Nothing is inherently wrong with profiling... or are you saying he 'racially profiled'? In which case you would be contradicting yourself.

Just 'profiled'? You probably do it 100+ times a day without even thinking about it. Which outfit goes best with the shoes you want to wear? Profiling! Am I in the mood for soup or salad with my lunch today? Profiling! This car salesmen strikes me as kinda sleazy. Profiling! Someone is banging your head into the sidewalk and you fear for your life? Profiling!


More vigilantes

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word you are using.


ignoring the police

GZ ignored the police? When? And don't say the dispatcher because they are not only not police... but have as much legal authority to give orders as you do. Doubly so when their statement of "we don't need you to do that" was simply a CYA (cover your ass) move... and response being "Ok", not "screw you! I'm going to go shoot me someone!"


and killing more teenagers will make our gated communities even better?

Yes... I am advocating for the mass killing of teenagers... but only in gated communities. You got me!


What we really need is less guns,

There are about as many firearms in this country as it has people in it... good luck with that.


no more concealed carry,

Given the fact that not long ago... the courts threw out the concealed handgun band in Illinois and forced the state to pass a CPL law... things are not going your way.

Of course why let facts get in the way of your clearly emotional ranting? In places that have loosened the requirements to legally carry a weapon... violent crime rates actually go down.

It will be very interesting to watch what happens in the war-zone that is Chicago as a result of the new law.


an end to stand your ground laws

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Stand your ground doesn't really apply here. In most states you have the right to use lethal force in order to prevent injury or death... the circumstances that must be in place vary from place to place, stand your ground simply does not require you to attempt to retreat or hide... something GZ was unable to do when he was mounted by TM and being repeatedly assaulted.


and no more public sanctioned vigilantism.

Did I miss a memo from the Sanford Police Department that gave GZ carte blanche to do such a thing? No... you still clearly do not understand what the meaning of vigilantism.

I stand by what I said... ALL of our neighborhoods... gated or not would be better off if more people kept an eye out on the goings on and reported things that were off.

Again you are focusing on a specific emotional aspect and ignoring the larger picture:


Many people throughout the country who have organized or non-organized neighborhood watch programs.
Many people report suspicious activity about things happening to the police.
Many people are free to walk where they have the legal right to be, even if that direction is in the same direction as someone else who may or may not be up to something.
Many people carry legal or illegal weapons on their persons for the purpose of self-defense.


Which of the first three are you against? Because those are part of what was happened that night... & TM was just unlucky to run into and assault someone that #4 applied to.

[bobvela]

The evidence presented by Zimmerman. Martin was dead, so he couldn't testify.

You must be ignoring the testimony from the witnesses for the prosecution which corroborated the evidence presented by Zimmerman.


It's a damn shame Martin didn't survive, then he could go to jail for attempted murder, right? Or would it be attempted manslaughter.? haha

While you laugh... there is an unfortunate aspect to that where if GZ wasn't armed that evening... TM may have caused worse injury or even death to GZ. If caught, he would be just another incarcerated black youth. While yes, TM would still be alive, but his family would still be suffering because of his actions.

[trish]

If GZ hadn't been armed he would have wussed out. There never would've been a confrontation, the police would've questioned Martin on what he was doing in the neighborhood and let him go his way. There would have been no crime committed because none was in progress or planned to begin with and no one would be dead. Instead, GZ carried a concealed gun and that made all the difference.

[bobvela]

If GZ hadn't been armed he would have wussed out. <other theoretical nonsense>

Really? How do you know that?

A sad thing about anti-gun bigots like you is you do not understand how the minds of those of us who carry.

You assume that when we do so we have a sense of power and invulnerability and use that feeling to do things we wouldn't otherwise (not unlike a bit of liquid courage when at a bar and trying to work up the nerve to ask someone out)... which is true for a small number of people.

Most of us treat carrying a weapon the way we do wearing shoes or carrying a wallet... as just part of our normal daily routine and just make sure we have it and do not give it a second thought until entering a place we know we cannot carry (assuming we know).

Think of how much the average guy keeps in his wallet (or women and their purse)... do they need all of that stuff every day? Nope... but would just prefer to have it on hand 'just in case' but don't give it much thought until they need their Space Camp ID card for some random reason.


Instead, GZ carried a concealed gun and that made all the difference.

Liar. If you want to get into hypotheticals... had TM not doubled back and assaulted GZ... TM would be alive today. Your insistence on blaming GZ for acting legally (but perhaps stupidly (which on it's own is not illegal)) but ignoring the criminal act of TM that directly lead to his death is pathetic and once again demonstrates you do not care about facts... you just care about blood.

[trish]

Most of us treat carrying a weapon the way we do wearing shoes or carrying a walletOne might've hoped you would treat a gun with more caution and respect than you would a pair of shoes. It seems those who admit to carrying concealed firearms are hotheads prone to calling those who oppose them with ideas and reason "liars" and "bigots". Can people like that really be trusted with firearms? Instead them have shoes and wallets.

[Silcc69]

You must be ignoring the testimony from the witnesses for the prosecution which corroborated the evidence presented by Zimmerman.



While you laugh... there is an unfortunate aspect to that where if GZ wasn't armed that evening... TM may have caused worse injury or even death to GZ. If caught, he would be just another incarcerated black youth. While yes, TM would still be alive, but his family would still be suffering because of his actions.

Wait you mean to tell me that a 17 year old would've beatin a 28 year old man to death lol gosh you conservatives.....

[robertlouis]

What a sad fucked-up country. Too many guns people, and not enough controls.

Would tighter control on gun-carrying have prevented this tragedy? Don't know, nobody does, but there can be no doubt that a culture in which carrying guns is entirely accpetable, concealed or otherwise, breeds a certain attitude.

You can have no idea just how incredibly alien and bizarre the whole set-up appears from the perspective of a country with some of the tightest gun control laws in the world.

And I know I'm safer here.

[bobvela]

One might've hoped you would treat a gun with more caution and respect than you would a pair of shoes.

The shoes I am wearing cost ~$40 and can do little harm... the revolver in my pocket cost ~$500 and can do a great deal of harm if misused... so yes, steps are taken, but the latter does not give me some 'steel courage'


It seems those who admit to carrying concealed firearms are hotheads prone to calling those who oppose them with ideas and reason "liars" and "bigots".

You again don't seem to understand the meaning of words. When you make a factually incorrect statement, one that you either know to be untrue... you are by definition a liar. Should I refer to you as a cucumber instead?

What are anti-gay marriage advocates often called? Close minded? Hate filled? Bigoted? Why? Because they are intolerant of the views of others. You repeatedly show yourself to be quite intolerant of the views of those of us who safely and legally carry weapons and hurt no one... and seem to wish to stop us. What does that make you again?


Can people like that really be trusted with firearms? Instead them have shoes and wallets.

Sadly for you... it's not up to you as I've been licensed to carry a good number of states... and do. No issues yet, odd that eh?

[bobvela]

Wait you mean to tell me that a 17 year old would've beatin a 28 year old man to death lol gosh you conservatives.....

I wasn't there. Were you? I'm just going based on the Q of what if GZ had not ended the fight as he did? Do you know how long TM would have gone for? Given the screams from GZ in the 911 calls... TM hadn't found a reason to stop yet.

[bobvela]

What a sad fucked-up country. Too many guns people, and not enough controls.

You clearly are unaware of the degrees of controls that exist today... not to mention the very real legal liabilities such an has every time they go anywhere. In some states a store owner placing a small sign can make the carrier into a felon (if found to be carrying)... other states are less restrictive.


Would tighter control on gun-carrying have prevented this tragedy? Don't know, nobody does, but there can be no doubt that a culture in which carrying guns is entirely accpetable, concealed or otherwise, breeds a certain attitude.

Why not focus then on the attitude in the war zone that is certain parts of Chicago where hundreds are injured or killed every year... and by guns owned and used by people who are not complying with existing laws & controls.


You can have no idea just how incredibly alien and bizarre the whole set-up appears from the perspective of a country with some of the tightest gun control laws in the world.

And I know I'm safer here.

To each country their own then.

[trish]

Gee, should we say that those who oppose the freedom to hire hit men for murder are intolerant bigots? How about those opposed to the phlogiston theory of combustion; are they bigots? Hey, about those who oppose the freedom to own children; bigots? Or those opposed to the carry of concealed firearms in public places because of the increased risk of accidental injury or death to innocent bystanders. Those people are bigots too, eh? Talk about knowing the meanings of words! You need to look up "bigotry."

[buttslinger]

A sad thing about anti-gun bigots like you is you do not understand how the minds of those of us who carry.


I'm pretty sure your mind is just part of the problem.

[trish]

If GZ hadn't been armed he would have wussed out. There never would've been a confrontation, the police would've questioned Martin on what he was doing in the neighborhood and let him go his way. There would have been no crime committed because none was in progress or planned to begin with and no one would be dead. Instead, GZ carried a concealed gun and that made all the difference.

Really? How do you know that?Yes, really. It's the most like hypothesis. You know it is.


A sad thing about anti-gun bigots like you is you do not understand how the minds of those of us who carry. You assume ...No, you assume. I wasn't making any assumption about how people like you think. I merely going on what Zimmerman's own lawyer said about his client. He was afraid for his life. If his pants are full of shit, you must acquit. Haven't we all seen enough of Zimmerman to know he's a wuss who self-confidence depends on the gun he carries?

Your insistence on blaming GZ for acting...I've already said, I'm not blaming GZ. I blaming concealed carry. Subtract the gun from this scenario and everything comes out fine.

[95racer]

Zimmerman is not guilty. I'm good with that. It's good that he had a trial. I make no claims about racism in this case, though it's clear Zimmerman profiled the boy he killed. But the claim that

is crazy. Really? More vigilantes ignoring the police and killing more teenagers will make our gated communities even better? What we really need is less guns, no more concealed carry, an end to stand your ground laws and no more public sanctioned vigilantism.


Concealed carry may have saved Zimmerman's life. How far would have "the boy child" gone with punching and hitting GZ's head on the concrete?

[95racer]

I have held back posting on this thread waiting for the actual facts and court trial to happen. There are no winners with this event and Martin loss his life. The jury was able to focus on what happened in the court room and make their decision. Zimmerman went into the trial after over a year of spinning-of-facts, altered voice recordings, claimed to be a racist, call a white/ Hispanic (what?), etc. The local police and prosecutor saw it for what it was- self-defense. Not until the usual race and hate mongers came to town (news media, Jackson, Sharpton, Black Panthers, Obama, Holder, DoJ) did this get ramped-up with a special prosecutor appointed.

Unfortunately for Martin he chooses to fight a man with a CPL and used his firearm it to end the assault. He could have continued walking to where he was staying. Instead he came back to confront Zimmerman.

Neighborhood watches have been going on for years. Around my house we are more aware than ever with crime on the rise. Section 8 housing has brought a lot of the bad elements into the area. Guess what, they walk down the street (our sidewalks are fine) with their hoodies pulled way over their heads, and slowly go by cars looking into the windows. They are ‘scouting’. Later that night the window gets knocked-out and items get taken. Cities are cutting back on staff so when you call to report that a strange guy is scouting cars maybe they’ll send a cop in 45 minutes or so. The next day the cops come and make the report for the stuff stolen. Two of these thugs were ‘greeted’, told we’re onto what they’re doing, cops have been called, and get the fuck out of our neighborhood. B&E’s, even some broad daylight hold-ups have been happening. As GZ said, “they always get away”.

Now where is the outrage over all of the killing in Chicago? Oh, that’s Holder’s old stomping grounds.

[natina]

STORY #1


40 YEARS SENTENCE for zimmerman like antics
Texas man gets 40 years in stand-your-ground case


HOUSTON -- Retired Texas firefighter Raul Rodriguez, armed with a handgun and video camera, had claimed he was standing his ground and had no choice but to use deadly force when he fatally shot his unarmed neighbor after confronting him about a noisy party.


A jury decided otherwise Wednesday, sentencing Rodriguez to 40 years in prison for killing the neighbor, Kelly Danaher, a 36-year-old elementary school teacher. Prosecutors said they are hopeful the punishment will stop others from settling matters with violence and trying to use Texas' version of a stand-your-ground law as a defense.


"I think it sends a clear message that this was not a case of stand-your-ground," said prosecutor Kelli Johnson. "And I think from his behavior, his intent, the provocation ... shows that this had ... nothing to do with self-defense."


Rodriguez, who faced up to life in prison for the 2010 killing, will be eligible for parole in 20 years. Jurors deliberated about five hours Wednesday before reaching their verdict. The same jury convicted him of murder on June 13.


His reference to standing his ground was similar to the claim made by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer who is citing Florida's stand-your-ground law in his defense in the fatal February shooting of an unarmed teenager, Trayvon Martin. Rodriguez's case, however, was decided under a different kind of self-defense doctrine.


During closing arguments earlier Wednesday in the trial's punishment phase, Johnson referenced Zimmerman but told jurors that case was different from what Rodriguez was convicted of doing.


In a 22-minute video he recorded that night, Rodriguez can be heard telling a police dispatcher "my life is in danger now" and "these people are going to go try and kill me." He then said, "I'm standing my ground here," and fatally shot Danaher and wounded the other two men.


http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/27/2870148/texan-in-stand-your-ground-case.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy



STORY #2


Oklahoma City pharmacist Jerome Ersland gets life; judge refuses to suspend any prison time



A judge Monday refused to cut any time off the life term of a pharmacist convicted of murder for fatally shooting a robber.


“It's injustice of a monumental proportion,” Jerome Jay Ersland, 59, said after his formal sentencing.



His lead defense attorney, Irven Box, asked that Ersland be given probation for life. Oklahoma County District Judge Ray C. Elliott refused, saying he saw no reason to suspend any of the sentence.


“I'm going to appeal,” Ersland told a large throng of news reporters and cameramen as sheriff's deputies led him in chains to a jail elevator.


The judge's decision means Ersland likely will die in prison unless he wins on appeal, the law is changed or a governor grants clemency. Under current law, Ersland will have to serve more than 38 years before he is eligible for parole.


Box called the jury verdict a tragedy. He said the outcome “more than likely” would have been different if jurors could have heard witnesses and testimony disallowed by the judge.


“We really strongly believe that we didn't play on a level playing field,” he said. “We believe that we have a lot … of issues to appeal from.”


A jury in May chose the life term as punishment. Ersland was convicted of first-degree murder for fatally shooting an unarmed robber inside the Reliable Discount Pharmacy in south Oklahoma City two years ago.


Prosecutors said the fallen robber, Antwun “Speedy” Parker, 16, was unconscious from a shot to the head when Ersland got a second gun and shot him five more times. Prosecutors at trial called the final shots an execution. Ersland said he was defending himself and two female co-workers. He claimed the masked robber was getting back up.


A second robber, Jevontai Ingram, had fled already. Ingram, then 14, did have a gun.


2 other men sentenced


Also Monday, another judge sentenced the two men who planned the drugstore robbery. Both were convicted in May of first-degree murder for Parker's death.



http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-pharmacist-jerome-ersland-gets-life-judge-refuses-to-suspend-any-prison-time/article/3584676

Gee, should we say that those who oppose the freedom to hire hit men for murder are intolerant bigots? How about those opposed to the phlogiston theory of combustion; are they bigots? Hey, about those who oppose the freedom to own children; bigots? Or those opposed to the carry of concealed firearms in public places because of the increased risk of accidental injury or death to innocent bystanders. Those people are bigots too, eh? Talk about knowing the meanings of words! You need to look up "bigotry."

[natina]

MORE INFO FOR STORY #1

fire fighter pulls a zimmerman over loud music

Firefighter Shoots, Kills Neighbor Over Loud Music - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48YIcVGcq_A)

MORE INFO FOR STORY #2

OKC pharmacist guilty of murder for killing injured robber
Jay Ersland, a pharmacist from Oklahoma City, has been convicted of murder after he killed a robber during a holdup at his business in 2009.

The defense argued that it was self-defense, but Ersland had shot the robber, chased after his accomplice and came back into the store, where he unloaded his gun into the injured suspect, who was lying on the floor.

From the Daily Oklahoman:

Prater played for jurors again a security camera recording of the shooting. He stopped it at points, telling jurors the pharmacist turned his back to the downed robber to get a second gun to shoot the robber again.

“It's a human trait. You don't turn your back on something you're afraid of,” Prater said.


http://blogs.kansascity.com/crime_scene/2011/05/okc-pharmacist-guilty-of-murder-for-killing-injured-robber.html


Ersland Charged With Murder in Pharmacy Shooting - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHshsgpsxFg&list=PL2CB0034637C38F40&index=2)

[dderek123]

Nice post.
Some food for thought:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sL2f0PoqME

[natina]

ZIMMERMAN IS A LYING SACK OF SHIT!

THOSE INTERVIEWS HE DID WHERE HE KEPT CHANGING HIS STORY IS PROOF.

florida will take care of zimmerman and the civil lawsuit will make him broke

[natina]

the police said zimmerman could of avoided the incident in several ways

zimmerman created a hostile scary enviroment




the better way #1
Detective faulted George Zimmerman for not avoiding confrontation with Trayvon Martin.

ARGUMENT FOR NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE
Neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman missed two opportunities to try to peacefully approach Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the unarmed teenager, according to an investigator's report released Tuesday.

"The encounter between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was ultimately avoidable by Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle and awaited the arrival of law enforcement, or conversely if he had identified himself to Martin as a concerned citizen and initiated dialog in an effort to dispel each party's concern," investigator Chris Serino wrote in an arrest warrant affidavit.

The affidavit was filed more than two weeks after the shooting when the Sanford Police Department was being criticized for not having arrested Zimmerman. Serino's March 13 affidavit recommended Zimmerman be picked up for manslaughter, but a special prosecutor assigned to take over the case upped the charge to second-degree murder.

The documents released Tuesday are part of the public pre-trial records .Zimmerman, 28, maintains he feared for his life and shot Martin in self-defense under Florida's "stand your ground law." He said he fired the fatal shot only after being ambushed and brutally attacked by the 17-year-old.

The deadly encounter occurred in a gated Sanford, Fla., neighborhood where Zimmerman lived and Martin was staying with a family friend. Zimmerman called 911 to report Martin as a suspicious person walking through the area. He told the operator Martin was "up to no good" and "has his hand in his waist band."

In the report released Tuesday, police say Zimmerman contradicted himself by saying that he was initially fearful of Martin but later got out of his vehicle and followed after the teen.

"His actions are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject," Serino wrote.


http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/detective-faulted-george-zimmerman-not-avoiding-confrontation-trayvon-192523670.html

the better way #1

Investigator: Zimmerman missed opportunities to defuse situation


(CNN) -- George Zimmerman failed to identify himself twice during a confrontation with Trayvon Martin and missed opportunities to defuse the situation that led to the death of the teen, a detective says in a newly released report.

Zimmerman, who served as a neighborhood watch volunteer, is charged with second-degree murder in the February 26 shooting death of Martin, 17, in Sanford, Florida.

Martin's family and civil rights activists said Zimmerman, who is white and Hispanic, racially profiled Martin and ignored a 911 dispatcher's advice not to follow him.

Also released Tuesday was an unredacted capias request, a request that someone be taken into custody, prepared by the lead police investigator in the case, Christopher Serino.

"Investigative findings show that (Zimmerman) had at least two opportunities to speak with (Martin) in order to defuse the circumstances surrounding their encounter," Serino wrote in the report. "On at least two occasions (Zimmerman) failed to identify himself as a concerned resident or a neighborhood watch volunteer."

The detective also said Zimmerman's actions "are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject."

In the same report, Serino wrote that Zimmerman's injuries were "marginally consistent with a life-threatening violent episode as described by him."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's defense attorney, said it will be up to a judge and jury to interpret what Serino's report means to the case.

"I don't want to get into a battle with investigator Serino's report considering what he believed after it seems he made the decision that charges should be filed," O'Mara said Tuesday.

"The lead detective made the determination at least on two different occasions Zimmerman had opportunity to defuse the situation. When he got out the car, he could have at least said, 'I'm a neighborhood watch volunteer' to defuse the situation and it's likely Trayvon Martin would be living today," Crump said.

"The lead detective today got demoted.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn





I have held back posting on this thread waiting for the actual facts and court trial to happen. There are no winners with this event and Martin loss his life. The jury was able to focus on what happened in the court room and make their decision. Zimmerman went into the trial after over a year of spinning-of-facts, altered voice recordings, claimed to be a racist, call a white/ Hispanic (what?), etc. The local police and prosecutor saw it for what it was- self-defense. Not until the usual race and hate mongers came to town (news media, Jackson, Sharpton, Black Panthers, Obama, Holder, DoJ) did this get ramped-up with a special prosecutor appointed.

Unfortunately for Martin he chooses to fight a man with a CPL and used his firearm it to end the assault. He could have continued walking to where he was staying. Instead he came back to confront Zimmerman.

Neighborhood watches have been going on for years. Around my house we are more aware than ever with crime on the rise. Section 8 housing has brought a lot of the bad elements into the area. Guess what, they walk down the street (our sidewalks are fine) with their hoodies pulled way over their heads, and slowly go by cars looking into the windows. They are ‘scouting’. Later that night the window gets knocked-out and items get taken. Cities are cutting back on staff so when you call to report that a strange guy is scouting cars maybe they’ll send a cop in 45 minutes or so. The next day the cops come and make the report for the stuff stolen. Two of these thugs were ‘greeted’, told we’re onto what they’re doing, cops have been called, and get the fuck out of our neighborhood. B&E’s, even some broad daylight hold-ups have been happening. As GZ said, “they always get away”.

Now where is the outrage over all of the killing in Chicago? Oh, that’s Holder’s old stomping grounds.

[yodajazz]

For me it comes down to if you believe that Zimmerman was telling the truth. However it seem like details of his story changed. Also there was the incident for which his wife is still charged over lying to the court regarding his finances. It impossible to believe that he was not working with his wife to cheat the system.
That seems to be evidence that he lied, or supported someone else lying.
It seems illogical that a past domestic violence, or whatever it was, was not able to be used as evidence of past behavior. Isn't that stuff a matter of public record? And it goes directly to the matter of violent intent. Much was made over Trayvon's marijuana use, but my understanding that Zimmerman, had been prescribed medications. Side effects of medications are public knowledge. Why should this information be excluded from the decision making process, once he took someone's life? He had to have had a diagnosis, to have been given prescriptions. How hypocritical is to use drugs as a possible cause of behavior for Martin, but excluded from evidence of the person that killed him?

By the way, does anyone know if it is legal to follow people, besides Florida? If it's only a matter of public safety, shapely young women or even a decent sized child could be able to commit a crime? So then, I could follow people around, for the sake of crime prevention. Then of course, I would get a legal permit to carry a gun, too. The future looks bright for us perverts, I mean, concerned citizens, responsible gun owners.

[yodajazz]

[SIZE=3]Now where is the outrage over all of the killing in Chicago? Oh, that’s Holder’s old stomping grounds.

We would not be human, if we did not fell outraged over the killing in Chicago. We are human beings. But we also have the right to be outraged at someone who admits killing someone, to walk free without even having to submit to a drug test. People these days have to summit to drug tests for practically everything, including driving a vehicle. Zimmerman had been driving a vehicle, plus he killed someone. But I do suppose that killing a Black person, is not that big of deal to be inconvenienced. It's not like he made a sudden lane change, or something.

You statement is like saying, that if most White women who are raped, are raped by White men, including family members, You should not care that much if one was raped by a Black man. After all the 'real important'
issue is the rape done by fellow Whites. Yet, recent history there is records of Whites burning aown entire Black towns, over an alleged rape rumor, or brutally murdered over an improper remark, in the case of Emmit Till.

[yodajazz]

Black Americans are the most incarcerated population on planet Earth. And this woman had a court protection order against the person whom she fired the warning shots for.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/

[hippifried]

Zimmerman's still a punk.

What started out as a bunch of paranoia driven stupid that got out of hand, has now become a state sanctioned lynching. It'll be interesting to see how fast he cashes in by lending his name to a ghost writer who'll fill up a volume with a list of cliches about standing one's ground, or myths about the enforcement powers of the neighborhood watch.

[Ben in LA]

Just a few pics from my Instagram...

[yosi]

Most of us treat carrying a weapon the way we do wearing shoes or carrying a wallet...
.

Shoes or wallet DON'T kill ...........

[natina]

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1243409/thumbs/o-NYDN-570.jpg?7



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/ny-daily-news-trayvon-martin_n_3597797.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/ny-daily-news-trayvon-martin_n_3597797.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

Justice Department To Review George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin Case
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/14/justice-department-george-zimmerman_n_3595835.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

[Queens Guy]

I've criticized the media in this case for their poor performance of just reporting the facts. If the Prosecution 'had a good day', then report it. If the Defense 'had a good day', then report that, too. Don't pretend that the Defense never put up a case.

Stephen A. Smith of ESPN, a network which revolves around sports, and not politics, said he was angry at the verdict at first, but them he looked at the testimony for himself, without the filter of the media, via youtube, and he understands the verdict.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67WhBlXssUA

[natina]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=602640&stc=1&d=1374039439

[Dino Velvet]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=602640&stc=1&d=1374039439

As I said in another thread, you are one confused self-loathing White man, natina. Does Zimmerman remind you of you? Is that really why you want him dead? How ironic would it have been for you to be one of the victims of that flash mob robbery attack right by you last night?

[maddygirl]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=602640&stc=1&d=1374039439
He had his trial, he was found not guilty. Move the fuck on.

[Dino Velvet]

He had his trial, he was found not guilty. Move the fuck on.

She can't. Race obsession/confusion is her bread and butter. She enjoys dividing people.

[trish]

Zimmerman had his State trail, he was found innocent of murder and cannot be retried for that crime. Though he can still be sued in civil court (which imo the Martins should pursue) , and tried for civil right violations in Federal court (which imo Holder should not pursue). I agree that the issue is no longer (or should no longer be) about Zimmerman. Public discussions (imo) would be better off to focus not on Zimmerman but on the legal, legislative and social issues that played into the tragic scenario the led to Trevon's death, namely 1)Stand Your Ground laws that (whether they figure into the trail or not) encourage violence in situations where violent resolution can be averted; 2) the relative non-regulation of firearms that exists in this country; 3) the proliferation of firearms and the love some Americans seem to have for them.

[dderek123]

She can't. Race obsession/confusion is her bread and butter. She enjoys dividing people.

She's just like the mainstream media.

[natina]

Trayvon martin has the right to stand his ground with a brick if that was true from a man motivated by his failure to become a police officer. A wanna be cop scares you and lies about the encounter. A jury believes the lies and the perpetrator does not testify because the lies will come forefront.
the VERICT WAS NOT FAIR! A innocent child was killed because some one armed and without police proper training never identified hisellf as a concern citizen and escalated a hostile situation.

Wire's' David Simon: 'If you stand your ground with your fists and you're black, you're dead'


http://www.baltimoresun.com/entertainment/sns-rt-us-davidsimon-zimmerman-20130715,0,5375295.story

[Dino Velvet]

As I said in another thread, you are one confused self-loathing White man, natina. Does Zimmerman remind you of you? Is that really why you want him dead? How ironic would it have been for you to be one of the victims of that flash mob robbery attack right by you last night?


She can't. Race obsession/confusion is her bread and butter. She enjoys dividing people.

No denial or response, natina/Nathan??? Just the thumbs down, huh?

[Ben]

Tavis Smiley Challenges O'Reilly On Black Crime: Let's 'Arm Every Black Person' See What NRA Thinks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AW4VT-C_XcE

[yodajazz]

He had his trial, he was found not guilty. Move the fuck on.


Read the story of Emmit Till. He was a Black 14 year old, who was brutally murdered by Whites for making a suggestive remark to a White woman. It took decades to get some justice, as they were acquitted for murder. There were/are many cases such as this, which took decades after Blacks were murdered my
Whites. so you you suggest that people, should not fight injustice. It's okay that children are murdered by anyone?

[maddygirl]

Read the story of Emmit Till. He was a Black 14 year old, who was brutally murdered by Whites for making a suggestive remark to a White woman. It took decades to get some justice, as they were acquitted for murder. There were/are many cases such as this, which took decades after Blacks were murdered my
Whites. so you you suggest that people, should not fight injustice. It's okay that children are murdered by anyone?
Really clever of you to add something which has literally nothing to do with this trial. Trayvon was beating Zimmerman's head against the concrete and Zimmerman shot him. It's not like he was skipping down the street throwing rose pedals. Give me a break. It's sad that he got killed, yes, but it wouldn't have happened had he not attacked Zimmerman. Oh while we're at it, should we re-try O.J. Simpson as well?

[yodajazz]

Zimmerman had his State trail, he was found innocent of murder and cannot be retried for that crime. Though he can still be sued in civil court (which imo the Martins should pursue) , and tried for civil right violations in Federal court (which imo Holder should not pursue). I agree that the issue is no longer (or should no longer be) about Zimmerman. Public discussions (imo) would be better off to focus not on Zimmerman but on the legal, legislative and social issues that played into the tragic scenario the led to Trevon's death, namely 1)Stand Your Ground laws that (whether they figure into the trail or not) encourage violence in situations where violent resolution can be averted; 2) the relative non-regulation of firearms that exists in this country; 3) the proliferation of firearms and the love some Americans seem to have for them.

One issue for me is that Zimmerman had different rights than Trayvon. One ironic thing in court, was that Trayvon was expected to run home, and it was used as evidence, however no one said much directly that he had a legal right to stand his ground.

Here is my list, from another thread:

Martin had far less rights than Zimmerman. Martin had a toxicology report, which was used against him, but Zimmerman didn't get one, the night of the death, and his drug history was excluded from court evidence, I believe, as were other historical things like his legal history. Martin's school history was used, but what was Zimmerman's school record? Was he ever suspended? Martin had no duty to retreat home, specifically because of "Stand your ground", yet this is much more often mentioned as a right of Zimmerman. Martin's phone records were used, but not Zimmerman's, outside of the 9-11 calls. I thought some expert said that voices had a 'unique print', yet evidence from experts hired by the prosecution were excluded. Whereas Zimmerman, did not have to be cross examined, the only counter-version, was subject of a five hour cross examination. So the only major way to point Zimmerman's inconsistencies, was in closing arguments. I not sure how much this was even laid out, by prosecution. It would have been my main focus, if I was.

[yodajazz]

Really clever of you to add something which has literally nothing to do with this trial. Trayvon was beating Zimmerman's head against the concrete and Zimmerman shot him. It's not like he was skipping down the street throwing rose pedals. Give me a break. It's sad that he got killed, yes, but it wouldn't have happened had he not attacked Zimmerman. Oh while we're at it, should we re-try O.J. Simpson as well?

You cant see, because you don't want to see. I say they are related, and I have seen more than one article linking the cases. Some I am far from the only one. Without Martin, being falsely identified as a criminal, he would still be alive. if he was not pursued, he would still be alive, also. If Martin perceived that he was being threatened, and he had been followed, he had a right to defend himself against a perceived threat. I still have questions regarding the nature of their verbal exchange. Did Zimmerman ever identify himself? Even While they were struggling physically he perhaps could have diffuse the situation verbally. Zimmerman bears some responsibility in the chain of events which led to the death. And the point is that Z was he was sent home, the same night.

This case affects me personally, in that I walk to the store often in the evening. I am more of a night person. There is enough of the normal safety concerns, but having the added concern of being falsely targeted as a criminal, by some shortsighted person.

[natina]

you know funny! THAT YOU SAID THAT TRAYVON MARTIN WAS SKIPPING DOWN THE STREET.

THAT ONE OF THE LIES THATS A WHOPPER THAT ZIMMERMAN TOLD.
THEY WERE AFRAID TO PUT HIM ON THE STAND FOR THAT REASON.

HERE IS THE TRANSCRIPTS AND THE TAPE.


video talks about new evidence & zimmermans gift to the DA and MARTIN FAMILY

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/19/justice/florida-zimmerman-interview/index.html


http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html

George Zimmerman Will Not Tell The Truth

George Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to His Honor, the Court, or the public. When Zimmerman took the witness stand at his 20 April 2012 bond hearing, he lied under oath in two forms: acts of omission and blatant falsehoods.


Zimmerman took the stand to make a self-serving statement in the cloak of an apology, but the message’s audience was for the media and a candid public, not the parents of the slain Trayvon Martin. It should be noted that O’Mara allowed this disrespectful action to be undertaken and His Honor did not stop it, either.
The faux apology given to turn the tide of negative media attention:
O'MARA: You advised me that you wanted to make a short statement, is that correct?
ZIMMERMAN: Correct.
ZIMMERMAN: I wanted to say I am sorry for the loss of your son. I did not know how old he was. I thought he was a little bit younger than I am. And I did not know if he was armed or not.
O'MARA: Nothing further, your honor.
George Zimmerman took the stand and performed for the media. The narrative was starting to change and the fickle media started pretending as if both the dead, unarmed minor, Trayvon Martin, and his confessed killer, George Zimmerman, were victims. This is absolutely incorrect. Man profiled, stalked, chased, and ultimately killed the minor. Those are the facts. Furthermore, Zimmerman lied on the stand about how old he thought Trayvon Martin was. When the non-emergency dispatcher asked how old Zimmerman thought the supposedly “suspicious guy” was, Zimmerman said “late teens.” 17 would classify as late teens. Let’s let that percolate into our collective conscience for a moment. A 28-year-old adult male tells the dispatcher that he believes a minor is indeed a minor and he stills exits his vehicle, with gun holstered, to chase after the “fucking punk” who would not get away. I can’t speak for Angela B. Corey, but when I heard this, I thought for sure any doubt about her over-charging Zimmerman went away.

IMPORTANT READ MORE;

http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html


Zimmerman’s most egregious lie is above. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman about how many statements he gave. Zimmerman replies. De La Rionda asked Zimmerman if he said “I don’t remember?” when Serino/Singleton poked holes in his account of what happened, using the non-emergency phone call to do so, and Zimmerman replied matter-of-factly, “Absolutely not.” Folks, that is the third lie to His Honor’s Court. George Zimmerman Legal Case has the audio still up. It is up for anyone who wants to listen to it. Make no mistake, when asked about things that didn’t add up, Zimmerman would say “I don’t know/I don’t remember.” When it was clear that Serino/Singleton were playing bad cop or no longer believed him, Zimmerman got defensive, lied, and omitted facts. He told the dispatcher he was following Trayvon. On the February 29, 2012, part 3 of the interview with Serino/Singleton; he said he wasn’t following, but walking in the same direction. When asked what type of running Trayvon was doing, he said he couldn’t remember/didn’t know. When asked why he got out of his car, Singleton bluntly said, “That isn’t what you told me.”


George Zimmerman is going to assert an affirmative defense in his second-degree murder trial. If Zimmerman has no interest in expressing fidelity to the truth in His Honor’s Court, I wouldn’t be making any long term plans for the future unless they included a prison facility.

important read more;
http://wearytravelermusings.blogspot.com/2012/06/george-zimmerman-will-not-tell-truth.html


Really clever of you to add something which has literally nothing to do with this trial. Trayvon was beating Zimmerman's head against the concrete and Zimmerman shot him. It's not like he was skipping down the street throwing rose pedals. Give me a break. It's sad that he got killed, yes, but it wouldn't have happened had he not attacked Zimmerman. Oh while we're at it, should we re-try O.J. Simpson as well?

[natina]

Quotation from Interview with Detective


QUOTE

The biggest problem, according to (Detective) Serino, was Zimmerman’s insistence that Trayvon suddenly jumped him and tried to kill him without provocation.

“The kid has no violent tendencies that we can find. What made him snap?” Serino asked.

“He's not on PCP. He's not on anything. He’s on Skittles.”

Zimmerman could not answer.

“He was 17 years old, an athlete, probably going into aeronautics. A kid with a future, a kid with folks that care...not a goon,” the detective said.

“He does not fit the profile of what occurred.”

Zimmerman had no reaction.

Serino also questioned Zimmerman repeatedly about why he never identified himself to Trayvon as a neighborhood watchman, Which Zimmerman could not explain.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-06-21/news/32356355_1_new-evidence-answer-teenager


Now that Zimmerman has been charged, I'm happy to simply await the outcome of the trial.

But a little notice to the baiters who come here to insinuate that Trayvon was some kind of a thug.


THIS DETECTIVE IS EXPLICITLY SAYING THAT TRAYVON DID NOT FIT THAT PROFILE.

It is also abundantly clear that Zimmerman did NOT politely identify himself as a concerned citizen / neighborhood watch

[eccentricBlue]

There are no winners in this case, however by scanning this thread I can tell that there are plenty of whiners.

You all got race baited by the media.

[paulclifford]

>>>“He's not on PCP. He's not on anything. He’s on Skittles.”

As a matter of fact, Trayvon's own Facebook page admits that he was addicted to "Sizzurp" or "Purple Drank", which is a cocktail of codeine (or Robitussin, if codeine is unavailable), mixed with Arizona Watermelon Iced Tea, and Skittles. The coating on the Skittles, apparently, dissolves in the cocktail, giving the drink its distinctive purple color.

Trayvon had just purchased Arizona Watermelon Iced Tea and Skittles. It's likely he was going to make some "Purple Drank" when he returned home, though it's uncertain whether he had access to codeine at that time.

One effect of consuming this stuff on a regular basis is violent and paranoid behavior. So it's certainly possible that Trayvon initiated a surprise attack on Zimmerman.

In any case, we know from eye-witness testimony, that Martin was on top and Zimmerman was on bottom during a violent row between the two. Zimmerman's voice was also identified as the one yelling for help on a 911 call, and he had lacerations to the back of his head from Martin having pounded it on a concrete walkway. Irrespective of who started what, someone on the bottom has a right to defend himself in whatever way he can. Unfortunately for Martin, Zimmerman's self-defense took the form of deadly force from a legally concealed firearm.

The constant drumbeat in the mainstream media of Trayvon as a kind of cherub — just a young kid with some candy in his pocket and a container of "soft drink" (the media never tells us what it was specifically) — is propaganda, probably for anti-gun, gun-control purposes, though it may have some racial component, too.

See:

http://www.occupyhln.org/george-zimmerman/skittles-and-iced-tea-or-purple-drank/

The article has screenshots of Martin's Facebook page asking where he can score some prescription codeine.

[paulclifford]

>>>2) the relative non-regulation of firearms that exists in this country; 3) the proliferation of firearms and the love some Americans seem to have for them.

Different states have different levels of regulations of firearms. Unfortunately for you argument, the following is demonstrably true:

Those cities and states with the strictest regulation of firearms, have the highest number of deaths from firearms (specifically, Chicago and Washington, DC).

Those cities and states with the most lenient regulation of firearms — including easy access to legal "carry & conceal" licenses — have the least number of crimes from the use of firearms.

For some reason, the anti-gun crowd in the US assumes that if you pass a law restricting legal ownership of guns to the law-abiding, then the law-breaking lobby — known as "criminals" — will dutifully observe the same laws. Wrong!

The anti-gun crowd also ignores easily available statistics that prove them wrong: overall, violent crime in the US has declined dramatically since the 1950s at the same time that legal gun ownership has dramatically increased. That's the exact opposite of what one would expect if it were true that "guns cause violent crimes."

The anti-gun position is mainly fueled by the horrible crimes of mass-shootings at Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and Columbine High School. Without exception, however, these were all states and cities with high levels of gun control and gun regulation, and in which the shooters had illegally obtained their firearms, regardless of the laws. These were all so-called "gun-free zones." Obviously, such "gun-free zones", and such gun-control regulations, don't work when you're dealing with criminals . . . they only prevent law-abiding citizens from easily obtaining something that can save their own lives.

[trish]

Unfortunately for Chicago, it's close to Wisconsin and Iowa where its very easy to acquire firearms and bring them into the city. Look at States, not cities. States with lenient firearm laws have the highest rates of gun crime.

[hippifried]

Oh boy. Guess if I ever want to become the next big hip-hop star, all Ize gots ta does is add some "colored" sugar & tussin to my watermelon juice. It's on the internet. Must be true.