Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[bookworm]

Williams v. Florida^WP, 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.

Thank you

 

[Cylinder]

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

There's no intrinsic news value in reporting E-81's identity. She went to court, presumably she made true statements and the truth of those statement's from an information consumer's perspective is not linked to her identity. E-81 was dismissed for cause and the system chugged along normally. Her identity is a public record at this point and I assume you could Sunshine it if you really wanted to. As an editorial policy, most legitimate news organizations carefully balance a private person's identifying information with the public's need to know that identity to add information to a legitimate news story,

 

[Mumbles]

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?

You assume I think that Zimmerman was screaming for help because he wanted to escape some sort of attack. That doesn't make much sense. Again, Zimmerman was the guy who apparently saw Martin walking down the street minding his own business, freaked out, called the cops, creeped after Martin in his car, and then chased him on foot after Martin tried to run away, all the while calling Martin "real suspicious" and " on drugs or up to no good", among other, much stronger terms. It seems apparent that Zimmerman was far more hostile towards Martin, than vice versa.

My strong suspicion is that Zimmerman thought that he was being a hero, and when he discovered that he couldn't simply restrain Martin until the police arrived, he began yelling for help because he hoped the surrounding people would all rush out and help him restrain Martin. Naturally, almost everyone heard someone yelling for help in a street fight, and decided that they didn't want to get involved - street fights are dangerous - and instead called the cops. But Martin didn't have the choice to simply walk away, because Zimmerman was the aggressor who wanted to detain him for no apparent reason.

And in fact, he even says such in his (admittedly untrustworthy) walkthrough, explaining that he asked for help in restraining Martin, even after he shot him. I find this far more likely than his story where the guy who literally ran away from him reappeared unarmed, while he was going back to the truck that he didn't want to meet up with police near in order to meet with police, after crossing to a street to find an address that nobody cared about.

 

[Mumbles]

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.

Yep.

Frankly, I'm not even sure he was panicky, during the fight. He may have seen himself as the local Batman. But in the end, he was chasing a stranger around for the supposed crime of walking down his street in the rain. And his justifications - Martin was looking around, covered his head in the rain, wasn't running - are pathetic. Those are all activities that aren't worth noticing, much less chasing after someone over.

I was pretty sure it was Martin screaming at first, because that made much more sense. Some dude chases you down and pulls a gun? Yeah, I'd probably scream in that situation. I run chase a guy down because he was "walking around, looking about" and enter a fight with him with a gun in my waistband? Well, first off, I wouldn't do that ever. But even if the person screaming were Zimmerman..well, it seems like he was screaming because he got what he wanted.

 

[sgtbaker]

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

I don't understand the comparison. Was she shown to be active in a Justice for Trayvon site or something? It's not the negativity towards the defense that bothers me about the stealth juror. It's the demand for justice than attempting to circumnavigate the process by misleading the justice system. I think a person like the stealth juror is confusing justice with a desirable o outcome. If she claimed to be completely neutral but was actively contributing to the Zimmerman defense fund, she is lying under oath and would deserve equal recognition by the law. While I never said outing him was fair or appropriate, I would say in such a high profile case, it comes as no surprise.

At the end of the day, I want justice. If the state can prove beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty as accused, it's justice. My opinion, at this time is that the evidence I know of, does not prove guilt but this hasn't been tried yet so we will see. However, if the state fails to make a case and Zimmerman is found not guilty (notice I did not use innocent), then that is justice, too.

 

[Cylinder]

Some dude chases you down and pulls a gun?

If you can prove that, the whole issues evaporates since those actions constitute a forcible felony leaving Zimmerman with no appeal to justification whatever. The problem is that the state itself hasn't made that claim. There's no forcible felony independent of the act for which he claims self-defense charged in this instance.

I run chase a guy down because he was "walking around, looking about" and enter a fight with him with a gun in my waistband?

See above. If you can prove Zimmerman entered a fight in any consensual manner, then his story becomes a lie. The problem is that Zimmerman is either seen or heard where and in the circumstance he claims when the various witnesses were exposed to their little snapshot of the event.

Zimmerman claims three exchanges. W11 estimates three exchanges. W8 claims three exchanges.

Zimmerman claims Martin confronted him. W8 claims Martin confront him.

Zimmerman claims the struggle occurred after the three exchanges. W11 claims the struggle occurred after three exchanges.

Zimmerman claims he was knocked on his back and mounted. All witnesses who could make clothing IDs put Zimmerman on the ground or not-Zimmerman on top.

Zimmerman claims his head was beaten against the concrete. W6 places Zimmerman with his head on the concrete either being "beaten or forcibly restrained."

Zimmerman claims after the fatal shot he straddled Martin. Cutcher & Selma claim after the gunshot Zimmerman was straddling Martin.

etc...etc...etc...

I just don't know if I can assign any weight to the inference that a person seen getting "beaten of forcibly restrained" after suffering a broken nose and lacerations to the back of his head needs any external motive for screams for help.

 

[johnny karate]

The problem is that Zimmerman is either seen or heard where and in the circumstance he claims when the various witnesses were exposed to their little snapshot of the event.

Zimmerman claims three exchanges. W11 estimates three exchanges. W8 claims three exchanges.

Zimmerman claims Martin confronted him. W8 claims Martin confront him.

Zimmerman claims the struggle occurred after the three exchanges. W11 claims the struggle occurred after three exchanges.

Zimmerman claims he was knocked on his back and mounted. All witnesses who could make clothing IDs put Zimmerman on the ground or not-Zimmerman on top.

Zimmerman claims his head was beaten against the concrete. W6 places Zimmerman with his head on the concrete either being "beaten or forcibly restrained."

Zimmerman claims after the fatal shot he straddled Martin. Cutcher & Selma claim after the gunshot Zimmerman was straddling Martin.

etc...etc...etc...

Yeah, when you leave out all the parts that contradict Zimmerman's story or just flat out misrepresent what the witnesses said, it does seem that Zimmerman has a pretty good case.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

If this is an indication of what's to come from the defense, they are in trouble. This is absolutely cringe inducing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WpQSJVgKn8k

 

[KatieG]

O'Mara would have been the better choice for the opening statement. Not sure what purpose West serves on this defense team.

 

[ABC10]

I think West and his opening is great.

 

[Bob001]

I'm honestly flabbergasted that there are any people who think GZ is guilty of anything on these boards, really. Like... amazed by it.

Even if Zimmerman's story is true -- and there are plenty of questions -- the key issue is whether it was justifiable for Zimmerman to use deadly force in the circumstances. In order to answer yes, you have to believe that it was reasonable for Zimmerman to believe that he was in fear for his life or grave bodily injury. I have a hard time believing that an adult man who had worked as a bar bouncer and had police and martial arts training was scared to death of an unarmed teenager and that he was helpless. It's also hard to believe that TM was slamming his head on the ground (not so easy against a resisting victim) AND covering his mouth AND punching him AND reaching for his gun. And if Zimmerman accosted TM and prevented him from running away -- not at all implausible -- Zimmerman would be the aggressor -- not for the first time.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...ard-aggressive-ex-co-worker-article-1.1053223

 

[johnny karate]

10:14 a.m. ET: West is going over all the different opportunities Jeantel had to mention "get off, get off," but choose not to bring it up.

10:10 a.m. ET: West is grilling Jeantel about why she did not mentioned hearing Martin say "get off, get off," in the past.

10:07 a.m. ET: West is asking Jeantel why she did not tell Fulton that she heard Martin tell Zimmerman to get off of him. Jeantel said Fulton did not ask her about her about that.

Sounds like she's having a hard time keeping her story straight. I guess that's one of the pitfalls of making things up as you go along.

Well, if this is the standard that's being set for witness credibility, Zimmerman and his ever-changing story are in a lot of trouble.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Well, if this is the standard that's being set for witness credibility, Zimmerman and his ever-changing story are in a lot of trouble.

Examples? Preferably with links.

 

[Unabogie]

Examples? Preferably with links.

Go read the entire other thread where it's been discussed ad nauseum. If you're new to the case, you should catch up a bit.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Go read the entire other thread where it's been discussed ad nauseum. If you're new to the case, you should catch up a bit.

No.

 

[Piggy]

I have no opinion re. whether Zimmerman is guilty of anything under the law. I'll leave that to the folks hearing the trial.

But I will say this, as a refugee from the great state of Florida....

If Zimmerman is not at least partly legally responsible for Martin's death -- which, granted, is not what this particular trial is to determine -- it's difficult for me to conclude that we have anything but a horribly wrong state of legislation.

Because even if Zimmerman had been correct in his assessment of Martin, we still have a situation in which an armed civilian is knowingly initiating a confrontation, while armed and against the advice of law enforcement, which any reasonable person would realize had a high likelihood of ending in a physical confrontation.

That being the case, if Zimmerman has no legal culpability whatsoever, this means that the law in Florida holds that one may initiate an utterly avoidable and unnecessary physical confrontation, and then, if one starts getting the worst of it, one has the right to kill the other person.

Again, I know that this observation is not directly relevant to the much more narrow concerns of this trial, but I simply wanted to post that observation.

Carry on....

 

[WildCat]

I have no opinion re. whether Zimmerman is guilty of anything under the law. I'll leave that to the folks hearing the trial.

Okay... but then you go on to state an opinion:

Because even if Zimmerman had been correct in his assessment of Martin, we still have a situation in which an armed civilian is knowingly initiating a confrontation, while armed and against the advice of law enforcement, which any reasonable person would realize had a high likelihood of ending in a physical confrontation.

The defense denies Zimmerman confronted Martin, that it was Martin that confronted Zimmerman.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Jeez these lawyers sometimes spend hours to make a point that could be made in minutes. I am watching this lawyer takes forever to make the point that a call that says "3 minutes" could really only be 2 minutes and 3 seconds. I guess they think they need to emphasized it ad nauseum to make sure the jury gets it.

A large segment of the population is stupid. Juries are derived from the population. So...yeah.

 

[Brainster]

A large segment of the population is stupid. Juries are derived from the population.

Worse, they are derived from that part of the population that can't figure a way out of serving.

 

[johnny karate]

Current witness is describing scuffling, wrestling getting closer and closer to her unit. Again supporting Zimmerman's version of events, and evidence that the scuffle was moving and not stationary which explains how the body (and thus the fight) ended up 30 feet from the T.

That witness actually contradicts what Zimmerman claimed multiple times:

...the suspect punched me in the face. I fell back wards onto my back. The suspect got on top of me.

As soon as he punched me, I fell backwards, um, into the grass...

And he punched me in the nose. At that point, I fell down...

So yes, the witness testimony does explain how the altercation moved from the T to where Martin's body was found. But it doesn't explain why Zimmerman ommitted that detail in several of his initial accounts.