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

Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

johnny,

all the snark in the world won't obscure the fact that your position... that the person seen by a witness on top of the other person moments before the shot, beating them and restraining them, was the one screaming...

and that the screams did not emanate from the man with the broken nose, and blood-covered head who was underneath someone as they assaulted him...

is a completely, laughably, childishly implausible position to subscribe to.

If you want to be the CSI equivalent of one of those people who keeps analyzing one little portion of Martian soil on a satellite picture until you finally see something of significance, then I suppose you can eventually convince yourself that somehow all logic about who was screaming is suspended in this case, and that it was the violent assailant doing the begging and screaming...

Personally, though? I think now would be a good time to just admit that the only reason there is even a meme that it was Trayvon screaming, is due to an early narrative in the media which was seriously deficient on facts. If the images of GZ beaten and bloody had been presented to the media, and disseminated, from day 1? I don't believe anyone would currently even be entertaining the notion.
 
Unabogie said:
Did O'Mara confirm to the media the identity of a juror that he didn't like? Yes, he did. That speaks for itself.
Click to expand...
Excuse, please keep you personal opinions as to OMara's motivation out of this thread.
Keep to the actual law, what did OMara do thatw as against teh law, otherwise take you opinion to the other thread please,
Perjured? You think perjury has been established here?

Remind me again what your position is on what George and Shellie did at the bond hearing?
Click to expand...
bolding mine
Excuse me, this is derailing in your second sentence, please take this kind of comment to the other thread, you are not discussing the trail or evidence at the trail and you are now personalizing an argument. Please confine that behavior to the other thread.

And YES if the juror knowingly made a mis-statement in court while under oath that is perjury.
 
Dancing David said:
Please cite the exact legal reason that he would do do so, what grounds for a suit would there be under FL law.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about a suit? I was clearly referring to his being upset that his name has been publicized. And this, after being assured that jurors would be anonymous? Dismissed, sure. Exposed in public? Not cool.
 
Unabogie said:
Who said anything about a suit? I was clearly referring to his being upset that his name has been publicized. And this, after being assured that jurors would be anonymous? Dismissed, sure. Exposed in public? Not cool.
Click to expand...
He's not a juror. He's a guy who tried to lie to the court about his motives and knowledge of the case, he got caught, returned to the courtroom to disrupt the proceedings and was then ordered away from the court until the trial was over.

Those are things you don't get to do anonymously.
 
WildCat said:
He's not a juror. He's a guy who tried to lie to the court about his motives and knowledge of the case, he got caught, returned to the courtroom to disrupt the proceedings and was then ordered away from the court until the trial was over.

Those are things you don't get to do anonymously.
Click to expand...

His identity was disclosed before he returned to the court. Apparently he returned to the court out of anger that he'd been exposed. As I said, I don't blame him for being pissed. You do your duty, show up, the defense does their job in getting you tossed, end of story. It's obvious that many of these jurors are lying to get on the jury, but he's the only one whose name was leaked. I don't care if he was pro-defense or pro-prosecution, citizens who show up for jury duty deserve better.
 
Unabogie said:
His identity was disclosed before he returned to the court. Apparently he returned to the court out of anger that he'd been exposed. As I said, I don't blame him for being pissed. You do your duty, show up, the defense does their job in getting you tossed, end of story. It's obvious that many of these jurors are lying to get on the jury, but he's the only one whose name was leaked. I don't care if he was pro-defense or pro-prosecution, citizens who show up for jury duty deserve better.
Click to expand...

He made an example out of himself by lying to get onthe jury high profile case. Whoever leaked his name should be exposed but this type of story is something the news was drooling for. It's really not all that surprising that his name got out there. The local news 13 analyst is suggesting that he be arrested for and made an example of.
 
Unabogie said:
Who said anything about a suit? I was clearly referring to his being upset that his name has been publicized. And this, after being assured that jurors would be anonymous? Dismissed, sure. Exposed in public? Not cool.
Click to expand...

You are not discussing the Zimmerman case as it were in trial. Off topic. If there are no legal grounds then you should take it to another thread.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
johnny,

all the snark in the world won't obscure the fact that your position... that the person seen by a witness on top of the other person moments before the shot, beating them and restraining them, was the one screaming...

and that the screams did not emanate from the man with the broken nose, and blood-covered head who was underneath someone as they assaulted him...

is a completely, laughably, childishly implausible position to subscribe to.
Click to expand...

But the guy with the broken nose, and the blood-covered head, who according to his own word was being smothered by the drugged-up muscle-bound guy he decided to harrass, getting his head slammed into concrete...yeah, that's the guy who is screaming.

Zimmerman's story doesn't only conflict with his own police call, it also conflicts with common sense. It's time to drop it. The most sensible option here was that Zimmerman wasn't in mortal peril, he simply had poor judgement. That's not a shock, given the amazingly bad judgement shown in his own police recording.

That's one reason why I said I wouldn't be shocked if it were Zimmerman screaming, and that it doesn't change my opinion. He seems to be unable to access a situation properly, and unable to understand how his actions will be perceived by others. It's quite possible that he caught up with Martin, and began screaming as soon as he caught a good hit to the face, or as soon as he caught up. It doesn't change the fact that it was Zimmerman who initiated the conflict.
 
Bob001 said:
Side issue here: Jury selection has begun, and potential jurors are being advised that the case could require four to six weeks, maybe more, and the judge might sequester them. What kind of person would be willing to serve on that jury? Anybody with a demanding job (especially one where part of the pay is sales commissions), young children (especially a single parent), a summer vacation planned and paid for, etc., etc., will do pretty much anything to get out of serving. So you're left with either retirees who have nothing else to do, unemployed single people, or people who have an ulterior motive (they want to write a book, they want to be on TV, they want a chance to impose their version of justice). And apparently this will be a six-person jury, not the traditional 12, so any one juror will have that much more influence on the others.

So what will George's final jury look like? And in a case like this, where the core question is whether GZ was justified under the law, would he be better off making his case to the judge alone?
Click to expand...

Can someone please explain what you know about the number of jurors? I wasn't aware there could ever be a difference in the number of jurors...how does that happen? TIA
 
Mumbles said:
Zimmerman's story doesn't only conflict with his own police call, it also conflicts with common sense. It's time to drop it. The most sensible option here was that Zimmerman wasn't in mortal peril, he simply had poor judgement. That's not a shock, given the amazingly bad judgement shown in his own police recording.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's getting a bit tiresome to have to continually respond to arguments that assert as a fact everything Zimmerman says, or even worse, flat out disingenuously represent the evidence to favor his version(s) of events.

Here's the bottom line: If the evidence actually supported Zimmerman's version(s) of events as strongly has as been alleged over the last year, this case would have gone away.

At the very least, O'Mara would have attempted to make it go away. Instead, he has forgone every opportunity to do so.

That's why in the course of a year, we've gone from Zimmerman's defenders boldly proclaiming the probable cause affidavit wasn't sufficient to merit the charges, to the post hoc rationalizations for why O'Mara denied his client the opportunity to make his case and get acquitted.

And all this serpentine sophistry is done in service of one agenda: Denying the fact that there is a legitimate case to be made that Zimmerman is guilty of the crime of which he is accused.
 
Mumbles said:
That's one reason why I said I wouldn't be shocked if it were Zimmerman screaming, and that it doesn't change my opinion. He seems to be unable to access a situation properly, and unable to understand how his actions will be perceived by others. It's quite possible that he caught up with Martin, and began screaming as soon as he caught a good hit to the face, or as soon as he caught up. It doesn't change the fact that it was Zimmerman who initiated the conflict.
Click to expand...

Let's assume you're 100% right. Zimmerman was screaming but was totally misunderstanding the situation, overblowing it, reacting with way more fear and screaming than the situation merited.

In other words, the equivalent of this lady who was lightly touched with a paper on the back of her head and fell down screaming in court

If I grant your premise... now tell me why Trayvon didn't just raise his eyebrow, say "man you're crazy" and walk away? Why did he mount him and continue to beat him for over a minute? Why was he still on top of GZ pounding his head when Witness 6 came out? Why did he ignore Witness 6 instead of calling out to him to say "this guy is crazy, I'm not doing anything to him" or something?
 
Mumbles said:
That's one reason why I said I wouldn't be shocked if it were Zimmerman screaming, and that it doesn't change my opinion. He seems to be unable to access a situation properly, and unable to understand how his actions will be perceived by others. It's quite possible that he caught up with Martin, and began screaming as soon as he caught a good hit to the face, or as soon as he caught up. It doesn't change the fact that it was Zimmerman who initiated the conflict.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

I've never understood the obsession Zimmerman's defender's have with assigning meaning to the fact that it might be Zimmerman screaming. As if his screaming alone tells us anything definitive about what was happening.

It's this same kind of fuzzy thinking that attributes meaning to the mere fact the Zimmerman was bleeding, as we are constantly seeing "bloody" as some kind of harrowing descriptor in detailing Zimmerman's condition after the altercation.

The fact that Zimmerman was bleeding doesn't matter. It's his actual injuries that matter. And his actual injuries are minor.

And the fact that he might have been screaming doesn't matter either, because it doesn't necessarily prove he was in reasonable fear for his life.

Zimmerman might just be a panicky idiot who was losing a fight.
 
bookworm said:
Can someone please explain what you know about the number of jurors? I wasn't aware there could ever be a difference in the number of jurors...how does that happen? TIA
Click to expand...


Williams v. FloridaWP, 1970

SCOTUS has ruled that there is nothing unconstitutional about a jury of less than 12, and the cited case specifically allows Florida's jury of 6.

I think that in capital cases Florida uses 12, but otherwise I believe 6 is the norm for state trials.
 
Skeptic Tank said:
Let's assume you're 100% right. Zimmerman was screaming but was totally misunderstanding the situation, overblowing it, reacting with way more fear and screaming than the situation merited.

In other words, the equivalent of this lady who was lightly touched with a paper on the back of her head and fell down screaming in court

If I grant your premise... now tell me why Trayvon didn't just raise his eyebrow, say "man you're crazy" and walk away? Why did he mount him and continue to beat him for over a minute? Why was he still on top of GZ pounding his head when Witness 6 came out? Why did he ignore Witness 6 instead of calling out to him to say "this guy is crazy, I'm not doing anything to him" or something?
Click to expand...

Your questions are all based on the false premise that Zimmerman's claims are substantiated fact.

They aren't, and especially not by Witness 6:
When they were wrestling, with their hands, it looked like almost a struggle, a hand struggle. If I was on top of you, you know, just kinda wrestling around trying to get a position of some sort maybe, that's all I could, you know, see with the hands for the most part...
Click to expand...
There were no, um, you know, punches at that point or any hands flare, you know, in the air. It just more of looked like it was wrestling, but he was on top at that point.
Click to expand...


So when we stop pretending that this was a totally one-sided assualt with Zimmerman a completely helpless victim, the answer to the question as to why Martin didn't just "walk away" or engage in a conversation with Witness 6 - based on the actual facts as opposed to manufactured fantasy scenarios - becomes self-evident: He couldn't.
 
sgtbaker said:
He made an example out of himself by lying to get onthe jury high profile case. Whoever leaked his name should be exposed but this type of story is something the news was drooling for. It's really not all that surprising that his name got out there. The local news 13 analyst is suggesting that he be arrested for and made an example of.
Click to expand...

Rhat about equal diligence from the lawyers and media ob disclosing the identity of prospective juror E-61, who shared her opinion of Martin

"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."​

Could she serve?

Prospective juror E-81, the bold woman in the pink jacket, told Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda that although she thinks Zimmerman is innocent, if selected for the panel, she would listen to all the evidence, make a decision based solely on it and follow the law.

"If you can prove differently," she said, "do it."​

I believe her :)
 
TheL8Elvis said:
It appears that gzlegal didn't list this motion, maybe I missed it. Saw it listed on Talkleft:

Defendants third motion to continue:
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/June 8 Defendant's Third Motion for Continuance.pdf

A few interesting things in there, especially about a second medical examiner ?

The continued denial of a continuance is going to be good grist for an appeal, if necessary.
Click to expand...

This was already argued in court last week and the defense had the motion denied. I'm not clear why an appeals court would consider denial of motions to continue, for a case where the crime occurred over a year before trial and the defendant had $500,000 to play with for his defense, would be grist for appeal. Can you cite some case law?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

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