Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[TheL8Elvis]

I strongly doubt that GZ's choice of derogatory words will feature in the trial. He has far too many other things pointing to his guilt.

That and the fact that was pointed out earlier - the Prosecution has accepted that he said "punks" in thier documentation and has not made the case that he said otherwise.

Just as the prosecution has not claimed that TM was racially profiled.

Just as the prosecution has not claimed that TM needed to "stand his ground"

There are quite a few things the prosecution hasn't argued for that people here are.

 

[bynmdsue]

Who's supposed to be prone? Shooter or shootee? Because GZ is in the "Reverse-Prone Position", more correctly called "supine".

Also, batvette is awesome. Hope he comes back.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

What I suspect happened is that:

Martin runs from Twin Trees to the pathway, and then stops. Zimmerman runs from the west side of Twin Trees to the East end, and pauses to turn on his flashlight - and concludes his non emergency call.

Zimmerman then moved from Twin Trees Lane to the pathway between two rows of houses, and spots Martin.

Martin asks "Why are you following me?"

Zimmerman replies hostilely, and approaches.

Zimmerman *may* have attempted to detain Martin at this point, or Martin, in fear, may have hit Zimmerman.

Regardless, a fight ensued, Martin got the upper hand, and Zimmerman then shot Martin.

For reference, I'm not certain that Murder 2 is the correct charge in this case. I'm not a legal expert, but it seems to be a bit too far to me. A manslaughter charge does seem reasonable to me, though.

Dee Dee: And then he told me like the guy was getting close..like..and he told me the guy was
getting real close to him. The next I hear, “What are you following me for?
...
Zimmerman replies hostilely, and approaches.
...
Dee Dee: I hear this, ya know, man… it wa’ like a ol’ man…
BDLR: OK.
Dee Dee: …say, ‘Wha’ you doin’ aroun’ here?’

I don't know that either one of those statements sounds more "hostile" than the other.

And, that's assuming you believe witness 8. Although She and GZ both claim that a short verbal exchange occurred, although differing on the words used.

If that happened, did that happen at the Tee ? If so, why, in your opinion based on above, is the body then 40 feet from the Tee ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

This was dealt with about 200 pages ago. GZ was not a member of a body recognised by the Neighborhood Watch parent body. He was a volunteer wannabe cop who failed to follow simple NW protocols.

NW Captain? Crap.

Yes, it was. Only the SPD issued a statement saying GZ was acting as a member of the NW.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I'm shocked that you have soo little confidence in your justice system. You really believe that a sitting judge will disregard the law in such a blatant manner?

It's not all that shocking.

Do you have an opinion on why the Governor (political position) appointed a special prosecutor instead of the normal route of using the Grand Jury ?

It's not about a conspiracy theory - it does appear to be a little bit about the political and social realities about the case, though.

 

[Amazer]

It's not all that shocking.

Do you have an opinion on why the Governor (political position) appointed a special prosecutor instead of the normal route of using the Grand Jury ?

I've got little doubt the governor did what he did due to public pressure.

It's not about a conspiracy theory - it does appear to be a little bit about the political and social realities about the case, though.

I don't think i mentioned conspiracy theory... but anyway.

What is shocking to me is that none of the PIP's seem to have any trust that a judge would grant immunity or dismiss the case even if the case is as weak as you make it out to be.

 

[johnny karate]

It's not all that shocking.

Do you have an opinion on why the Governor (political position) appointed a special prosecutor instead of the normal route of using the Grand Jury ?

It's not about a conspiracy theory - it does appear to be a little bit about the political and social realities about the case, though.

I think it was politics that lead to further investigation.

And I think it was facts and evidence that lead to Zimmerman being charged.

That's how we ended up here, a year later heading into a trial. Otherwise you have to start stacking up events into more and more ridiculous coincidences.

This is what happens when you go down the rabbit hole of conspiracy.

The only way to explain why people in a position to prevent what a conspiracy theorist claims is happening are not preventing it is to implicate them in the conspiracy.

You can make all the accusations about the prosecutors and judges you want, and decry this case for having a dearth of evidence against Zimmerman, but none of that explains why O'Mara is allowing any of this to happen.

There are numerous legal avenues one can avail themselves of when facing wrongful prosecution, and despite the claims that Zimmerman should not have even been charged, O'Mara has sat on his hands.

So either there is a wide-ranging conspiracy against Zimmerman that includes his own lawyer, or there is actually merit to the case against him.

 

[johnny karate]

What is shocking to me is that none of the PIP's seem to have any trust that a judge would grant immunity or dismiss the case even if the case is as weak as you make it out to be.

It goes beyond implicating the judges (Zimmerman is on his third one).

It has been argued there isn't enough evidence against Zimmerman to even warrant a charge, let alone a conviction.

Do some googling. Start with Alan Dershowitz. Review the posts in the original thread from last June.

There was outcry over the supposedly unethical and baseless probable cause affidavit. More than one person opined the charges would be dismissed and Corey would be sanctioned.

And yet almost a year later, we're heading into trial. No motion for dismissal was ever even filed. And then an opportunity for an immunity hearing was declined.

People are caterwauling about the governor, prosecutors, and judges, but the real villain in this alleged conspiracy is Mark O'Mara.

He is the one person who is supposed to be advocating for Zimmerman and acting in his best interests, and he is the one person who has the means to make these allegedly bogus charges go away.

And he has done nothing to that end.

Nothing.

 

[AlBell]

Can you answer my questions so we can move on ? Unless the goal is to get the thread moderated by baiting me by implying I am a racist and stirring everyone up by turning everything into a race issue ? Because if that's the goal, it seems to be working.

IMO it's been a race issue ever since the original tv report said it was, and the Jackson/Sharpton trip to Sanford ensured it would remain so.

 

[Dan O.]

That and the fact that was pointed out earlier - the Prosecution has accepted that he said "punks" in thier documentation and has not made the case that he said otherwise.

Just as the prosecution has not claimed that TM was racially profiled.

That is bad news for George. If the prosecutor here doesn't address the civil rights issue, it can be picked up at the federal level.

But maybe George will get lucky and loose in the first trial before O'mara runs out of his money.

 

[AlBell]

AlBell played the race card rather solidly not so long ago.

No, it was played at the outset. Nor do I believe the staunchest TM defenders are all caucasians or asians. ymmv.

 

[johnny karate]

And by the way, the very public nature of this case automatically implicates the media and the law profession in general in the conspiracy against Zimmerman.

Because, outside of the conservative blogosphere, where is the outcry over the grave injustice Zimmerman is suffering?

Where are the legions of lawyers telling us how Zimmerman is being railroaded without a shred of evidence against him?

 

[Newtons Bit]

That is bad news for George. If the prosecutor here doesn't address the civil rights issue, it can be picked up at the federal level.

The Feds already investigated.

 

[AlBell]

Would it blow your mind to know that I voted for Obama?

Nope. IMO there are a handful of posters here who didn't, and you aren't obviously one of them.

 

[This is The End]

Well that may not be true but all of the people who didn't vote for Obama definitely are!

Anyway, in all seriousness, there obviously are many people who didn't vote for Obama simply because they are racist. Of course it's not all of the people that didn't vote for him! Some people say something is an absolute for effect, just because the reality is almost as bad.

And if you don't even believe the former then I have a bridge to sell you. (Really it's not much different than someone not voting for him just because he is Democratic... Though it is much more socially unacceptable to be "out" as a racist than as a specific party member!)

Likewise there are many people who are pro-Z simply because they are racist.

There are several ways to tell, several lines of reasoning they use that give us a hint. Quite often they don't even know it when they type it either! But sometimes they see it afterwards...

Would it blow your mind to know that I voted for Obama?

First of all, did you even read the post? A racist does not require them being self aware of the fact. Surprisingly they often aren't.

Secondly, why do you think it was directed at you?

And finally, why does your response remind me of the classic "I'm not racist I have a black friend!".

 

[Unabogie]

I guess this article needs to be reposted every time we're told that an immunity hearing would be so very difficult to win, especially for an innocent guy like George.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/public...s-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133

Questionable cases

Whatever lawmakers' expectations, "stand your ground" arguments have resulted in freedom or reduced sentences for some unlikely defendants.

• An 18-year-old felon, convicted of cocaine and weapons charges, shot and wounded a neighbor in the stomach, then fled the scene and was involved in another nonfatal shootout two days later, according to police. He was granted immunity in the first shooting.

• Two men fell into the water while fighting on a dock. When one started climbing out of the water, the other shot him in the back of the head, killing him. He was acquitted after arguing "stand your ground."

• A Seventh-day Adventist was acting erratically, doing cartwheels through an apartment complex parking lot, pounding on cars and apartment windows and setting off alarms. A tenant who felt threatened by the man's behavior shot and killed him. He was not charged.

• A Citrus County man in a longstanding dispute with a neighbor shot and killed the man one night in 2009. He was not charged even though a witness and the location of two bullet wounds showed the victim was turning to leave when he was shot.

Even chasing and killing someone over a drug buy can be considered standing your ground.

Anthony Gonzalez Jr. was part of a 2010 drug deal that went sour when someone threatened Gonzalez with a gun. Gonzalez chased the man down and killed him during a high-speed gunbattle through Miami streets.

Before the "stand your ground'' law, Miami-Dade prosecutors would have had a strong murder case because Gonzalez could have retreated instead of chasing the other vehicle. But Gonzalez's lawyer argued he had a right to be in his car, was licensed to carry a gun and thought his life was in danger.

Soon after the filing of a "stand your ground'' motion, prosecutors agreed to a deal in which Gonzalez pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of manslaughter and got three years in prison.

Amazingly, all of these guys held their immunity hearings and their motions for immunity were granted. You'd think, and I'm just spitballing here, that an innocent guy like George would be a lock for dismissal. And get this, if he gets immunity, those money grubbing Martins and the Scheme Team can't sue them!!!

It's a win for all god fearing Neighborhood Watch Heroes around the world.

I just can't seem to understand why O'Mara didn't try. This conspiracy is deeper than any of us can ever know.

ETA: This quote sums it up.

Argument for success

Donald Day is a Naples defense lawyer who has handled three "stand your ground" cases and believes the law is working "remarkably well."

Day said the immunity hearings are a critical backstop in self-defense cases that should never go to a jury. Of the cases in the Times' database that have been resolved, 23 percent were dismissed by a judge after an immunity hearing. That means 38 defendants facing the prospect of a jury trial were set free by a judge who ruled the evidence leaned in their favor.

"Where the defendant is clearly in the right and gets arrested, should you have to take your chance with what six people believe or don't believe?" Day said. "Judges are denying these motions where they should be denied and granting them in the limited number of cases statewide where they should be granted."

 

[Rare Truth]

It goes beyond implicating the judges (Zimmerman is on his third one).

It has been argued there isn't enough evidence against Zimmerman to even warrant a charge, let alone a conviction.

Do some googling. Start with Alan Dershowitz. Review the posts in the original thread from last June.

There was outcry over the supposedly unethical and baseless probable cause affidavit. More than one person opined the charges would be dismissed and Corey would be sanctioned.

And yet almost a year later, we're heading into trial. No motion for dismissal was ever even filed. And then an opportunity for an immunity hearing was declined.

People are caterwauling about the governor, prosecutors, and judges, but the real villain in this alleged conspiracy is Mark O'Mara.

He is the one person who is supposed to be advocating for Zimmerman and acting in his best interests, and he is the one person who has the means to make these allegedly bogus charges go away.

And he has done nothing to that end.

Nothing.

*ouch *ouch*

 

[phonebook]

I'm shocked that you have soo little confidence in your justice system. You really believe that a sitting judge will disregard the law in such a blatant manner?

It's not a lack of confidence in the entire justice system (or maybe it is, to some extent), and it won't be in a blatant manner. I don't believe this judge for this trial would be willing to burden all the "blame" for allowing GZ to go free, regardless of the evidence. It wouldn't be blatant though, as there's enough circumstantial evidence to make it appear that GZ may have done something illegal, etc., but there isn't enough direct evidence to prove one way or the other. This could potentially change if GZ were to take the stand and somehow become his brother, capable of clear, consistent dialogue. Based on how confusing GZ's attempts are at making a coherent story, and how quickly this causes people to conclude that his failed attempts equate to him being intentionally deceitful, instead of taking the time to actually try to make sense of what he's saying, I think this would only serve to give the prosecution more "ammo" (in the form of his statements on the stand at the pre-trial hearing) that they could then use against him at the jury trial.

In the end, it's still a judgement call by the judge. Unless there was like multiple-angle, multiply-sourced video evidence of TM assaulting GZ, and essentially behaving in nearly the same way GZ has described, I don't think Judge Nelson's personal decision (which it is her personal decision whether the defense has presented a preponderance of the evidence or not) to move the case forward to a trial, especially with how much public pressure there is FOR a trial, would be heavily scrutinized, and she likely knows that.

 

[phonebook]

Although I have feeling that GZ's phone records might reveal if and how many times and how long GZ was trying to reach the NEN number.

I truly hope so.

 

[KatieG]

You know, a lot of us have been here for a looooong time on this, over a year now, with some pretty intense run through of the details and the evidence. Many of us have been through the same details you mention literally hundreds of times.

It's a little insulting to respond to people who have been so long on a topic as if they don't know the evidence and details.

You no doubt have been on other forums discussing this, but JREF is different and the mods keep a close check on civility and tit for tat bickering. TWICE this thread had to go on moderated status, and I'll tell you that really kills a thread.

None of us want that to happen again, so I'd like to ask you politely to tone it down. There is full-bore, head-on tone and attitude that is coming off, and perhaps welcomed at the other sites you visit --

Not here. And there is a pretty intelligent and logical group of folks here (and I say this of both sides of the dialogue) and is, imo, one of the best in offering excellent analysis while maintaining high standards of debate civility.

Please work to help us keep it that way.

Well said, Rare Truth. Sometimes it's necessary to sit back and take a deep breath