Merged Continuation Part 2: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Am I really the only one that is not that confident? I don't think the state made a good factual case but they made one hell of an emotional plea. Perhaps this is something I shouldn't be saying but the jury is all female. It could work in the defenses favor but I would suggest that they are more likely to identify with the Trayvon's mother, rather than Zimmerman. I am not making a prediction, like I know what's going to happen but I don't think it's in the bag.

I would wager $10,000 at this moment, no murder 2 conviction. I would wager $1000 no manslaughter conviction.

That is my confidence level . Knowing that a couple members of the jury have concealed weapons permits should probably actually make me more confident than that .

 

[theprestige]

I'm wondering about the reasoning that justifies characterizing the inconsistencies in GZ's testimony as "lies". Given the overall gist of the narrative, I'd expect GZ's account to have many inconsistences just due to the natural unreliability of testimony from people under stress.

Calling them "lies" seems to be circular to me: We know GZ is lying (not just mistaken) because he really murdered TM. We know he really murdered TM because of all the lies (not mistakes) in his testimony.

 

[WildCat]

Zimmermans going to walk. Hopefully law enforcement will be able to contain the civil unrest fllowing Zimmermans acquital.

I'm not saying this si right but the evidence proves Travon attacked him and would have injured Zimmerman had he not been shot.

Zimmerman was stupid not to follow the watchgroups protocol and the 911 operators instructions which clearly state that you only report suspicious activity and not take any action of your own.

I feel that Zimmerman is morally but not legally responsible for Travons death.

What action did he take?

 

[WildCat]

Really? You need that explained?


Seems unlikely, considering how long GZ already lived in that area... and his role as "watch captain" of the local NW... and his seeming inability to learn the 3 street names during that time.


Right.....

The streets go in a circle, and NW isn't some formal group and there's no training.

And yes, do explain how he couldn't have learned the name of the street between the incident and the walk-through.

 

[LTC8K6]

What makes you think that GZ suddenly capable of learning street names while he was very much unable to do so earlier?

Driving right by the signs could help...

http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r205/kbp69/GZ-streetnamesign_zpsc6585490.jpg

 

[LTC8K6]

Prosecutor pointing out lie after lie GZ was caught in. In the walk through, GZ says TM turned down Twin Tree Lane, then a minute later says he didn't know the street name.

He didn't remember it that night on the phone...

Not that he didn't know it at all or would never remember it...

 

[LTC8K6]

About the skipping, there's a sort of show of force or dominance skip...very unlike your regular skipping...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tLt5Fdn9ciw

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I don't know. I am still waiting for him to get to the facts of the case. He is going to get to facts of the case, right?

Apparently not. BDLR pointed out holes in the defense, and asked a lot of questions about what might have happened.

I don't believe he came close to a theory of what happened.

Depending on what time this goes to the jury, I believe a not guilty could come back as early as tomorrow night.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

BTW, Shellie Zimmermans perjury hearing was moved back to 8/9

There is (apparently) no magic schedule for that, and it's ok to keep pushing that back.

After GZ is found not guilty, I wonder if AC will drop the perjury charges she was trying to use to get GZ to plea bargain ?

 

[Skeletor]

I would wager $10,000 at this moment, no murder 2 conviction. I would wager $1000 no manslaughter conviction.

That is my confidence level . Knowing that a couple members of the jury have concealed weapons permits should probably actually make me more confident than that .

I'm a bit more confident, but only after I read the jury instructions that Cylinder posted in the other thread:

But the jury instruction will read, if doubt exists to whether the defendant's use of force was justified, you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

This case is riddled with doubt. BDLR tried to cast doubt upon the doubt in his closing argument. Therefore, I feel there will be no conviction, no jail time, nothing but looking over his shoulder the rest of his life.

 

[sgtbaker]

I would wager $10,000 at this moment, no murder 2 conviction. I would wager $1000 no manslaughter conviction.

That is my confidence level . Knowing that a couple members of the jury have concealed weapons permits should probably actually make me more confident than that .

I am pretty confident that they failed to meet the Murder 2 charge but I am not so sure about the Manslaughter. It's not that they made a great case for it but they certainly focused on an emotional appeal. I really wonder how the defense is going to answer; if they are going to address the prosecutions claims or lay out a coherent story.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It isn't that complicated.

We will learn new things during the trial.

I would be very surprised if we learn zero new information during the trial. Beyond very. Flabbergasted. That's just now how trials work, even in the sunshine state. The prosecution has information we do not have. To suggest that is because they are "hiding" it is either weird, or telling of bias.

Again, we will learn new things during the trial.

You are seemingly trying to suggest that there is a possibility that we will not learn new things at the trial. That we know everything now. If you really weren't it was very unlcear.

That is a very pro-defense thing to suggest.
...

I believe we learned that when life hands you lemons, you make lemonade.

Are you flabbergasted ?

We didn't learn anything new from the prosecution that helped their case, AFAIK.

In fact, everything we heard at trial was pretty basic stuff, known for a long time through discovery.

Please let me know, if you disagree, what you think we learned.

 

[dudalb]

Zimmermans going to walk. Hopefully law enforcement will be able to contain the civil unrest fllowing Zimmermans acquital.

I'm not saying this si right but the evidence proves Travon attacked him and would have injured Zimmerman had he not been shot.

Zimmerman was stupid not to follow the watchgroups protocol and the 911 operators instructions which clearly state that you only report suspicious activity and not take any action of your own.

I feel that Zimmerman is morally but not legally responsible for Travons death.

If the Governor of Florida has any brains at all, the preliminatry alert orders for the Florida National Guard will go out the minute the jury announces it has a verdict.....

 

[PhantomWolf]

further to this:

I would argue that by getting out of the car he placed himself in a postion of potential danger and if he had stayed put then none of this would have happened, personally I think it is indisputable Zimmerman bought this about through his actions alone, and should get manslaughter bought on by his own incompetence.

Let's take your argument to it's conclusion shall we?

A girl walks through a dark park at night and is attacked by a man who tries to rape her, she shots him. By your argument, she is guilty of his manslaughter because by entering the dark park at night she placed herself in a position of potential danger and if she had stayed to well lit streets then none of it would have happened, thus by your argument, it is indisputable that this girl bought the attempted rape about through her actions alone, and should get manslaughter bought on by her own incompetence.

Really?

 

[AlBell]

Any chance that once he's acquitted, they trump up some lesser charges a la Casey Anthony? Something like "he's being fined for trespassing" and "we're charging him with disorderly conduct for not taking the 911 operator's advice and staying in the car."

(I know the charges Anthony got hit with were on the table the entire trial, just trying to be a bit funny here. I know he can't be charged "after the fact".)

I suspect Holder etal have already drafted the Civil Rights Violation charge.

 

[Noztradamus]

It is not indisputable that it was brought about through his actions alone. Assuming Zimmerman is telling the truth then if Trayvon had simply continued to his dads house there would have been no confrontation or if they did come into contact if Trayvon had told him I am going to my dads house there may have been no fight.

1) assumes facts not in evidence

2) Because teens are obliged to justify where they are to any creepy ass cracker who asks

 

[eeyore1954]

1) assumes facts not in evidence

2) Because teens are obliged to justify where they are to any creepy ass cracker who asks

I am only responding to the statement that it was indisputable. It is dispute able because there Zimmerman may be telling the truth. It is disputable because it is possible Trayvon came back and confronted Zimmerman. If that is true his actions may have been responsible.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I hear that BDLR just announced he's going to start a private law practice with Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden as soon as the case is over.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I just don't get it. People are assuming some incredibly bigoted things about a black teenager, like if you smoke pot, ditch school, and send someone an image of a gun on your cell phone you must be ready to murder some guy you don't know who followed you simply because you saw his gun.

"You're gonna die tonight honkey?" Really? That's credible enough to ignore every lie Zimmerman is clearly caught telling and proclaim, "see, can't prove beyond a doubt"?

A kid with no arrest record beyond graffiti scribbling at school becomes a ready-to-murder-monster at the mere drop of someone-followed-him hat? I can't imagine how afraid some people must be of every black teenager that walks past them at night. Put your hand on that concealed weapon as you walk past those awful black teens, make sure you are safe, those gang-banger black kids are out there ready to murder anyone who looks sideways at them.

The black kid beats and almost kills complete stranger for following him scenario is credible, despite nothing but a stereotype as evidence, while evidence that shows lie after lie after lie is dismissed with a wave of a hand. If you claim self defense and no one saw you kill an unarmed black teenager, well there you go, there must be reasonable doubt.

And those of us who believe the evidence instead of the evidence refuted lies, we're the people with the preconceived beliefs we can't let go of?

 

[Sam.I.Am]

I suspect Holder etal have already drafted the Civil Rights Violation charge.

Given the precedent in the Rodney King mess I would say that there is at least some chance of that happening. However seeing as the administration has already injected their opinion on the matter it may be seen as malicious prosecution and could very well blow up in their face. This is not anywhere near being as clean cut as R.K. There is no video tape of the attack to make most people say "Huh? How did that happen?". This whole media circus has been so full of speculation that has poisoned the well to the point of drinking from it may kill you politically.

I think that the WH response will be along the lines of "There has been a full and fair trial where all of the known facts were presented. Those facts were given to a jury of Mr Zimmerman's peers and they have made their decision just as our legal system provides for. Justice is not about a conviction but about making sure that a good faith attempt to reach the truth was done fairly and openly.".

I don't think that it will be along the lines of "This is a travesty of justice. I have directed my AG to investigate the matter fully and to make a decision as to whether or not a civil rights violation has happened to Trayvon and Trayvon's family in this trial.".