• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

Status
Not open for further replies.
While it's typical to blame the victim, looking for "evidence" in one's middle school record is beyond contemptible. For our non-American readers, middle school is for children aged 11-14.

Not content in digging up junior high school info, now they want Facebook.

Knowing what he posted on Facebook will surely tell us who attacked whom first on that night.

http://www.wesh.com/news/central-fl...nfo/-/14266478/16896156/-/pl0wne/-/index.html

The attorneys filed a motion to obtain all posts made on any Twitter and Facebook accounts held by Martin.

According to the motion, the teen’s online social interaction “is discoverable as it is reasonably and calculated to lead to relevant admissible evidence.”

The attorneys say the material is relevant to their defense preparation.

Also in the motion is a request for the defense team to obtain the teen’s mobile phone information. They say his cellphone communication is also relevant and will help them prepare for the case.
 
Not content in digging up junior high school info, now they want Facebook.

Knowing what he posted on Facebook will surely tell us who attacked whom first on that night.

It very well could.

Zimmerman's Myspace page let us know he was a bigot with a penchant for criminal activities, and remember how important everyone agreed that was?

Oh wait...
 
Not content in digging up junior high school info, now they want Facebook.

Knowing what he posted on Facebook will surely tell us who attacked whom first on that night.
It is relevant if the prosecution is going to claim Martin was a model student and a choir boy who would never have attacked Zimmerman.
 
It is relevant if the prosecution is going to claim Martin was a model student and a choir boy who would never have attacked Zimmerman.

I don't see the prosecution claiming Martin was "a model student and a choir boy". That would be silly.

If they want to refute Zimmerman's claim he was the victim of an unprovoked attack by Martin, they can just point to the lack of evidence to support it.

I look forward to seeing what Martin's history reveals, and just how much hay is made out of it by those who dismissed Zimmerman's checkered past.
 
It looks as though GZ's team is going for a delay to depose 75 witnesses:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=238439&page=109

That is a link to this thread...

It was already covered in the article I posted 4 posts up, but here is a working link anyway:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/george-zimmerman-trial-delay_n_1951420.html


It is relevant if the prosecution is going to claim Martin was a model student and a choir boy who would never have attacked Zimmerman.


I think the first line of this Washington Post OP ED piece about this says it best (well, aside from it using the inflammatory word "victim"):

George Zimmerman, the killer of Trayvon Martin, didn’t know anything about his victim when he got out of his car Feb. 26.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...25de036-124c-11e2-a16b-2c110031514a_blog.html
 
Mark O'Mara lectures the Scheme Team

Mr. Crump is right in talking about the George Zimmerman case when he says: “It shouldn’t be about race.” But by projecting race onto the George Zimmerman case, Mr. Crump is pinning a supposed civil rights victory on a Zimmerman conviction. The problem is that by associating a Zimmerman conviction with a civil rights victory, Mr. Crump has framed a scenario where a Zimmerman victory in a Self-Defense Immunity Hearing or a Zimmerman acquittal will represent a civil rights defeat. That is inappropriate and dangerous to us as a nation.

The Zimmerman defense team is not arguing against civil rights. We are defending a man who claims he shot and killed an attacker in necessary self-defense. If Mr. Crump believes that the Sanford Police Department acted with bias during their investigation, then he should demand a comprehensive conclusion from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter of whether SPD conducted a proper investigation. If Mr. Crump believes that George Zimmerman’s actions were racially motivated, he should demand a comprehensive conclusion from the FBI, which conducted an exhaustive investigation on whether there is evidence that George acted with a racial bias. In that request, we join him.

Game on!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You know, after I've stepped back and really looked at the situation, I think that GZ may have a good case of self defense. But, theres still something about his story that doesn't add up, and it may be maybe he was trying too hard to make sure he wasn't charged, and maybe because he was being a little too eager....

Just my opinion.
 
You know, after I've stepped back and really looked at the situation, I think that GZ may have a good case of self defense. But, theres still something about his story that doesn't add up, and it may be maybe he was trying too hard to make sure he wasn't charged, and maybe because he was being a little too eager....

Just my opinion.

I wouldn't say "GZ has a good case" so much as "there just doesn't appear to be enough evidence to support a conviction beyond reasonable doubt".
 
You know, after I've stepped back and really looked at the situation, I think that GZ may have a good case of self defense. But, theres still something about his story that doesn't add up, and it may be maybe he was trying too hard to make sure he wasn't charged, and maybe because he was being a little too eager....

Just my opinion.

I still don't get the lies about the money and the passports and the jailhouse phone calls. What were he and his wife thinking??

The lies in the walk-through can be explained away as mistakes and memory problems, but that first bond hearing stuff just must be shear stupidity.
 
I think the first line of this Washington Post OP ED piece about this says it best (well, aside from it using the inflammatory word "victim"):



http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...25de036-124c-11e2-a16b-2c110031514a_blog.html
That's not even relevant to what I said. Zimmerman claims Martin attacked him, and the prosecution may well try to claim that didn't happen because Martin was a good kid who never got into trouble. The defense would need Martin's records to counter that claim, to show that attacking Zimmerman was not out of character for him.
 
I still don't get the lies about the money and the passports and the jailhouse phone calls. What were he and his wife thinking??

The lies in the walk-through can be explained away as mistakes and memory problems, but that first bond hearing stuff just must be shear stupidity.
Remember the atmosphere after TM was killed. There were rallies led by the usual suspects, Rev.'s Jackson and Sharpton, among others, death threats, and relatives being threatened. GZ was vilified, evidence wasn't available or made up whole cloth, TM's 12 year old picture was plastered on the national news, and false accusations were rampant.

GZ was investigated and released by the SPD (investigated honestly, as it turned out). The media and the mobs made up that there was no investigation and made it sound like a good ol' boy was immediately released with a pat on the back. The 911 call was edited by a nation news outlet, etc.

I, and very many here, if in a similar situation, would consider fleeing what for all intents and purposes, looked like a state sponsored lynching/ caving to the mobs. I would very much fear for the safety of myself and my family.
 
That's not even relevant to what I said. Zimmerman claims Martin attacked him, and the prosecution may well try to claim that didn't happen because Martin was a good kid who never got into trouble. The defense would need Martin's records to counter that claim, to show that attacking Zimmerman was not out of character for him.

Highly unlikely. It's already been established that Martin was no angel. I doubt O'Mara is attempting to counter a claim the prosecution already can't make.

What's more likely is that O'Mara just wants to drag Martin's name through the mud in the media. The more unlikable he can make Martin look, the more people might forget how unlikable his client is.
 
I, and very many here, if in a similar situation, would consider fleeing what for all intents and purposes, looked like a state sponsored lynching/ caving to the mobs. I would very much fear for the safety of myself and my family.

That's pretty specious reasoning. Despite any hostile atmosphere in the media and the public, we still have a system of law. The state can't "lynch" someone because they feel like it. There are minor issues of evidence and due process.

So yeah, maybe the Zimmermans were planning to flee because they feared our legal system would cease to exist, and in this new lawless dystopia they would be hunted by blood-thirsty mobs. But I feel like that probably won't fly as a valid defense for breaking the law.
 
That's not even relevant to what I said. Zimmerman claims Martin attacked him, and the prosecution may well try to claim that didn't happen because Martin was a good kid who never got into trouble. The defense would need Martin's records to counter that claim, to show that attacking Zimmerman was not out of character for him.

Like I said earlier, that is all about as likely as the prosecution finding evidence that M acted in self defense.

I'm not sure why one side of the coin sounds silly to some of you but the other side sounds completely reasonable.

None of it has any bearing on who attacked first that night.
 
Highly unlikely. It's already been established that Martin was no angel. I doubt O'Mara is attempting to counter a claim the prosecution already can't make.

What's more likely is that O'Mara just wants to drag Martin's name through the mud in the media. The more unlikable he can make Martin look, the more people might forget how unlikable his client is.

I somewhat doubt that. Right wing sites have been more than happy to smear Martin based on laughable evidence and to push the "scary black guy" theme, and they've already done so. There's no need for O'Mara to involve himself in that.

For the moment, O'Mara looks like a competent attorney. He's looking for evidence to bolster his client's self-defense claim, and he's looking in the most obvious place for evidence that martin was violent. And that's only established via official school records, rather than through rumors leaked to the media.

It seems like he'll find nothing relevant, but he might, and Zimmerman does deserve a strong defense. And if Martin actually does have a history of starting violence (as opposed to the history of rap quotes and gold fronts that the right-wing race-baiters like to push) then that should be brought up. I don't personally think it helps, given that Zimmerman decided to pursue a fleeing Martin, but he does deserve a fair hearing.
 
I wouldn't say "GZ has a good case" so much as "there just doesn't appear to be enough evidence to support a conviction beyond reasonable doubt".

I'd agree with that. Something is shady as **** with him, but there's not enough evidence, IMO, to think that he deserves a long prison sentence.

He shouldn't be allowed any firearms, or a CWP for quite some time though.
He seems like a loose cannon.
 
I still don't get the lies about the money and the passports and the jailhouse phone calls. What were he and his wife thinking??

The lies in the walk-through can be explained away as mistakes and memory problems, but that first bond hearing stuff just must be shear stupidity.

Absolutely, and that is what troubles me the most.

Something doesn't make sense about his (IMO) willingness to flee, and lie to the courts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom