Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[AlBell]

Wait until you hear the prosecution's case if you want silly...

My thought as well.

The only way I can imagine the PA going 2nd degree murder is if she has something that makes her believe GZ was actively hunting a black guy to shoot, but doesn't think a grand jury would agree and come back with the correct-in-that-case murder 1. ymmv.

 

[curi0us]

Also confirmed here:

http://www.wesh.com/r/30841174/detail.html
(that's nbc in orlando)

A corporate spokeswoman for 7-Eleven said on Thursday they have a video secured at corporate headquarters showing Martin the night he was killed.

An executive with 7-Eleven viewed the tape and can confirm: "he observed an African American male in a hoodie purchase Skittles and an iced tea between 6 and 6:30 that evening."

Thanks for that.

I just checked with the 7-eleven website store locator and it confirmed that the closest 7-eleven to where TM was staying was 0.8 miles. That's a less then a twenty minute walk at a leisurely pace. If TM had really just been heading home with snacks he should have been back by 6:50 at latest.

 

[lane99]

...I'll also add the injuries do not necessarily have to BE life threatening for a legit self-defense claim. Just much of what I see here does not add up...

Sure, that goes without saying. Depending upon the scenario, one needn't have sustained *any* physical injuries whatsoever in order to have a valid self-defense claim.

However, in a situation where a fully grown man, armed with a gun, is now claiming self-defense against an unarmed 17y.o. boy whom he had moments before been pursuing and expressing antipathy and ill-will towards, how serious such claimant's injuries are (or aren't) will be a more important piece of the puzzle than they might be under different circumstances.

 

[RandFan]

The only way I can imagine the PA going 2nd degree murder is if she has something that makes her believe GZ was actively hunting a black guy to shoot...

What does that have to do with 2nd degree murder?

Looking for someone to shoot would demonstrate premeditation and or planning, right?

 

[lane99]

By statute, Zimmerman's testimony at the bond hearing is inadmissible against the defendant in all cases except perjury causes. I'll have to look the specific statute up (I've seemed to have lost it) but I believe it's linked earlier in the thread at the point we were discussing the bond hearing...

You must be mistaken. And I'm guessing you are referring to a statute that either doesn't exist, or that you've misunderstood.

The testimony the shooter gave at the bail hearing may well be available to be introduced to a jury at trial. The judge would rule, at that time, on any motion to do so.

 

[This is The End]

My guess is the EMT report will show a possible fractured/broken nose, and that the EMT's recommended going to the hospital, and GZ declined.

I would be very surprised if the EMT report says anything about a fractured or broken nose.

Then stay in your ******* car.

Sometimes the discussion gets a bit abstract and then you see something like this that pulls you back to Earth. I don't know if that is the truth but if it was, WTF. Dude, if you are scared while you are sitting in your car then go the **** home. And I'm not taking GZ to task for being scared. People who are armed and scared ought not be following suspicious people when no crime has been committed.

I agree. Forget all about the (distant past) history of Z's frame of mind (the arrests, twitters, myspaces, etc.). Forget about all the "future" evidence of Z's frame of mind (his post-incident website and online activity).

We have immediate evidence about Z's frame of mind during the incident. The not911 call.

I seriously doubt O'Mara would have brought up the medical records at the bond hearing (and made a big deal about Gilbreath's failure to request them) if he didn't think they were favorable to Zimmerman. No, they haven't been made public. But O'Mara has seen them, and we can make educated inferences from his use of them at the bond hearing. Everything I have seen from O'Mara strongly indicates that the guy knows what he's doing, so I'm inclined to trust his judgment as to whether the medical evidence is helpful or harmful to Zimmerman (at least until I can view the medical records for myself).

I would agree except he would also know that the medical records for Z's injuries are important. So even if they are only fairly favorable he would need to play them up.

<snip>

Also, the doctors who saw Zimmerman have no incentive to exaggerate the seriousness of his injuries, so if Zimmerman has been exaggerating then the medical records should reflect that his injuries were not significant.

<snip>

I wouldn't say that about all doctors. There are some who will agree with whatever the patient says just to move them along. You can get a doctor's note or a prescription for just about anything if you try hard enough.

In other words, some might call a broken nose what others would call a barely bruised nose. And on top of that there are multiple degrees of broken nose.

Of course, Z would have to be even dumber than we already know he is pull any kind of cover-up. I doubt that in the first 24 hours he had any idea his case would be receiving world-wide attention.

I have a question for Zimmerman supporters.

The screams on the 911 tapes.

If (let's just say) an audio of Trayman was found, and FBI voice analysis was able to determine with a very clear certainty it was his voice there, how much would that sway your impressions of where you stand on the issue?

That was discussed much earlier in this thread. Most people admitted it would imply Z is in big trouble. If the FBI voice analysis is peer reviewed of course.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

The only way I can imagine the PA going 2nd degree murder is if she has something that makes her believe GZ was actively hunting a black guy to shoot...but doesn't think a grand jury would agree and come back with the correct-in-that-case murder 1.

What does that have to do with 2nd degree murder?

Looking for someone to shoot would demonstrate premeditation and or planning, right?

Did you really just do that?! You didn't think anyone would notice? I added back the part of his sentence in bold that you redacted to make it appear as though he said something different from what he did, the part that answers the very question you're now posing to him. Not to mention that there was pretty clearly some facetious in there.

 

[Freddy]

You must be mistaken. And I'm guessing you are referring to a statute that either doesn't exist, or that you've misunderstood.

The testimony the shooter gave at the bail hearing may well be available to be introduced to a jury at trial. The judge would rule, at that time, on any motion to do so.

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.132(c)(1) provides, in relevant part:

A final order of pretrial detention shall be entered only after a hearing in the court of trial jurisdiction...No testimony by the defendant shall be admissible to prove the guilt of the defendant at any other judicial proceeding, but may be admitted in an action for perjury based upon the defendant's statements made at the pretrial detention hearing, or for impeachment.​

So the testimony from the bond hearing is admissible only to impeach - it can be offered only for certain permissible purposes, such as pointing out a prior inconsistent statement (if he contradicts his testimony from the hearing). There are several other purposes for impeachment, but that's the most likely one to come into play, at least when it comes to his testimony at the bond hearing.

As for testimony at the self-defense pre-trial hearing (if he demands the hearing and testifies), I'm not sure about the admissibility. But I would imagine that if he also testifies at trial, it would also be admissible only for impeachment.

 

[GWCarver]

I have a question for Zimmerman supporters.

The screams on the 911 tapes.

If (let's just say) an audio of Trayman was found, and FBI voice analysis was able to determine with a very clear certainty it was his voice there, how much would that sway your impressions of where you stand on the issue?

From the Zimmerman bond hearing transcript:

O'MARA: Witnesses heard people arguing, sounded like a struggle. During this time, witnesses heard numerous calls for help. Some of this was recorded. Trayvon's mom reviewed the 911 calls and identified the cry for help and Trayvon Martin's voice. Did you do any forensic analysis on that voice tape?

GILBREATH: Did I?

O'MARA: Did you or are you aware of anything?

GILBREATH: The "Orlando Sentinel" had someone do it and the FBI has had someone do it.

O'MARA: Is that part of your investigation?

GILBREATH: Yes.

O'MARA: Has that given any insight as to the voice?

GILBREATH: No.

I can't post links yet, but the source is CNN transcripts.

 

[Giz]

However, in a situation where a fully grown man, armed with a gun, is now claiming self-defense against an unarmed 17y.o. boy

You mean an out-of-shape 5' 8" 170 lb male claiming defense against an in-shape 6' 2" 160 lb male?

whom he had moments before been pursuing and expressing antipathy and ill-will towards,

By pursuing, do you mean "attempting to keep in sight" or "run down and detain", or something in between (because we don't know) (although FWIW I think the former is a bit more believable).

By expressing antipathy, I presume you mean "called 911 to have the authorities handle him"?

 

[Ammonitida]

You mean an out-of-shape 5' 8" 170 lb male claiming defense against an in-shape 6' 2" 160 lb male?




By pursuing, do you mean "attempting to keep in sight" or "run down and detain", or something in between (because we don't know) (although FWIW I think the former is a bit more believable).

By expressing antipathy, I presume you mean "called 911 to have the authorities handle him"?

Antipathy as in, "these ****** always get away".

 

[curi0us]

Then stay in your ******* car.

Sometimes the discussion gets a bit abstract and then you see something like this that pulls you back to Earth. I don't know if that is the truth but if it was, WTF. Dude, if you are scared while you are sitting in your car then go the **** home. And I'm not taking GZ to task for being scared. People who are armed and scared ought not be following suspicious people when no crime has been committed.

GZ is obviously not the smartest guy, and he may even be lying about some critical case details that would make his actions outright criminal. However, at the moment it seems very possible that he was sincerely trying to do good when he was attacked by someone who was seriously off. In such a scenario GZ's willingness to act despite his fear would have been a noble act. It certainly didn't turn out well that night, but something to consider is that if just one of the people who heard the screams for help was more like GZ and had recklessly rushed to intercede then TM would probably be alive now.

There have been about a million Americans killed by violent crime in your lifetime Randfan, why so much energy on this case in particular? Why politicize a case where there is an eyewitness backed by an audio recording and physical injuries that support GZ's version that he was the victim? Thousands have been killed since TM was shot, many hundreds of thousands have been violently victimized, but they mostly don't seem to matter very much unless they fit someone's political agenda. GZ got caught up in a political agenda which used falsehoods to convince many that there was no chance GZ was a victim at all, I'm inclined to think that is much more important issue then the recklessness of him getting out of his truck.

 

[KatieG]

You mean an out-of-shape 5' 8" 170 lb male claiming defense against an in-shape 6' 2" 160 lb male?




By pursuing, do you mean "attempting to keep in sight" or "run down and detain", or something in between (because we don't know) (although FWIW I think the former is a bit more believable).

By expressing antipathy, I presume you mean "called 911 to have the authorities handle him"?

GZ was 5'8" and about 200-225 at the time of the shooting.

 

[Mumbles]

How silly can things get? Zimmerman had injuries to his nose and back of his head. The back of his jacket was wet. NO ONE (prosecutor, parents , undertaker) has claimed that Trayvon suffered any injuries. Are you suggesting that Trayvon was screaming for help while he was beating Zimmerman? REPLY TO "RARE TRUTH" 2:18 TODAY

Actually, pretty much everyone agrees that Martin was shot in the chest. That's a rather serious injury, and an obvious cause of his death.

I'm not sure why I should consider whether or not he had other injuries. Beating someone who jumps out of his car to chase you, as Zimmerman did, is a pretty sensible move. The claims that he should have called 911 are asinine, since this would require Martin to take his eyes off of Zimmerman, and wait for several minutes for police to arrive. No, if he did hit Zimmerman first (and this is not known), then he was responding correctly to a threatening person.

 

[crimresearch]

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.132(c)(1) provides, in relevant part:

A final order of pretrial detention shall be entered only after a hearing in the court of trial jurisdiction...No testimony by the defendant shall be admissible to prove the guilt of the defendant at any other judicial proceeding, but may be admitted in an action for perjury based upon the defendant's statements made at the pretrial detention hearing, or for impeachment.​

So the testimony from the bond hearing is admissible only to impeach - it can be offered only for certain permissible purposes, such as pointing out a prior inconsistent statement (if he contradicts his testimony from the hearing). There are several other purposes for impeachment, but that's the most likely one to come into play, at least when it comes to his testimony at the bond hearing.

As for testimony at the self-defense pre-trial hearing (if he demands the hearing and testifies), I'm not sure about the admissibility. But I would imagine that if he also testifies at trial, it would also be admissible only for impeachment.

The Supremes were pretty clear about that in Garrett.

"...we find it intolerable that one constitutional right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another".

 

[GWCarver]

GZ was 5'8" and about 200-225 at the time of the shooting.

Oh, really? You're certain his weight was within that 25 pound range? What kind of a scale is only accurate to within 25 pounds?

 

[Giz]

GZ was 5'8" and about 200-225 at the time of the shooting.

Those were the initial reports, which appear to have been erroneous.

Seems 170 for GZ and 160 for TM are the new "accepted" figures.



CNN transcript (anchor speaking):
And not to beat a dead horse, but I keep going back to the witness account of what she thought was the Hispanic looking man, who she called the larger man. George Zimmerman is 5'9'', about 160, 170 pounds. And Trayvon Martin again to the police report is six feet. According to other reports, he may be taller and is approximately 160 as well. So it's a little hard to determine who is the bigger man.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/09/cnr.07.html

 

[Mumbles]

Zimmeraman says the cops will have to make a turn on Twin Trees Lane in order so see his truck. For that to be the case, his view of Retreat View Circle will be obstructed by housing blocks or the clubhouse

Yes, and that narrows it down somewhat. But I don't think that he was actually following Martin around in his car. It seems to me that he would have driven up Twin Trees on his way out of the neighborhood, and spotted Martin at the side of the clubhouse, and this is when he decided to call the cops.

Basically, I doubt that Zimmerman was following Martin around in his car. Granted, doing so would make him far more suspicious, but I don't think it matches the evidence that we've seen.

 

[Freddy]

The Supremes were pretty clear about that in Garrett.

"...we find it intolerable that one constitutional right should have to be surrendered in order to assert another".

Could you provide a cite please? There are a lot of Garretts, and I don't want to sort through all of them. The Garrett I'm familiar with is a double jeopardy case, and that doesn't seem on point. The quote you provided seems in line with my understanding, and I know for a fact that a defendant's testimony in a suppression hearing is inadmissible at trial. But I'd like to read the entire case.

 

[RandFan]

GZ is obviously not the smartest guy, and he may even be lying about some critical case details that would make his actions outright criminal. However, at the moment it seems very possible that he was sincerely trying to do good when he was attacked by someone who was seriously off.

Agreed.

In such a scenario GZ's willingness to act despite his fear would have been a noble act.

No. Don't accept that. No crime had been committed. There was no basis to believe that anyone was in danger. Well intentioned an imprudent is just imprudent.

It certainly didn't turn out well that night, but something to consider is that if just one of the people who heard the screams for help was more like GZ and had recklessly rushed to intercede then TM would probably be alive now.

See, that's where you take a wrong turn. Screams are evidence of imminent danger, right?

There have been about a million Americans killed by violent crime in your lifetime Randfan, why so much energy on this case in particular? Why politicize a case where there is an eyewitness backed by an audio recording and physical injuries that support GZ's version that he was the victim? Thousands have been killed since TM was shot, many hundreds of thousands have been violently victimized, but they mostly don't seem to matter very much unless they fit someone's political agenda. GZ got caught up in a political agenda which used falsehoods to convince many that there was no chance GZ was a victim at all, I'm inclined to think that is much more important issue then the recklessness of him getting out of his truck.

There's nothing wrong with learning from such incidences and I have every right to share my opinion.