danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:Actually, Zimmerman waived an SYG hearing, meaning that is not the basis of his defense. His defense is based on self-defense. In Florida, the prosecution has to prove it was not self-defense. Few think they have done that.

I was talking about the early period. That is what provoked the original outcry - that SYG was considered to be part of the reason for the prosecutors deciding not to proceed.

You are talking about the period after the investigation was re-opened and charges laid (leading to the question of hearings).

No, there is no case for manslaughter--not according to Abrams and any number of non-conservative analyses I've read. The prosecution is hoping emotion carries the day, not the rule of law. That should not be.

So how did it get to trial if there's no case? The case may be weak, but it didn't get thrown out at arraignment.

Politics. A young black man is dead. Politically, there had to be vengeance. So, even after charges were decided against, the political folks looked into it and overcharged. In fact, if you'll recall, the Black Panthers put a price on Zimmerman's head. Imagine if the KKK did that with a black man--do you suppose the Justice Department would launch a probe?

I really wish none of this had happened and Trayvon was still alive. It is painful to watch his mom and think what she's gone through.

But, justice is not served when bloated charges are levied. That the prosecution's case is so weak is obvious. In fact, I think the defense was probably tempted to put on no case at all.

Let me get this right.
We have one person saying the person getting the snot beat out of him (broken nose, battered back of his head, person straddling him going "ground and pound"
should have been able to escape the beating?
Really?
This one person knows exactly how well Zimmerman could or could not fight, he simply states Zimmerman "should have" been able to escape and we are to ignore the only injuries are made on Zimmerman? We are to ignore the ground and pound aspect, what is ground and pound? The person on top is wailing away mercilessly on the on eon bottom. We are to take this opinion as factual as if he KNEW better?
If we can point to a possibility this opinion is wrong, Zimmerman walks.
My money is on Zimmerman.

Doctor Fate wrote:

No, there is no case for manslaughter--not according to Abrams and any number of non-conservative analyses I've read. The prosecution is hoping emotion carries the day, not the rule of law. That should not be.

So how did it get to trial if there's no case? The case may be weak, but it didn't get thrown out at arraignment.

Politics. [/quote]SYG is politics. Dropping the case in fear of it was politics. Once that happened, it wasn't going to end well either way.

If you can show that the arraignment judge was influenced by the Black Panthers, then it would be relevant to my question. If not, then no need to repeat yourself.

Tom and others - can you guys just wait for the verdict? Can you stop just re-iterating the evidence you've seen (that supports your preconceptions) and pretending that watching bits on tv id the same as 'knowing' the facts. You are not getting everything the jury is.

GMTom wrote:Let me get this right.
We have one person saying the person getting the snot beat out of him (broken nose, battered back of his head, person straddling him going "ground and pound"
should have been able to escape the beating?
Really?

And, it is really worse than that. Does anyone doubt Zimmerman could have fled the scene? Remember, he was chatting it up with a young woman and described Zimmerman. Maybe a little less chatting and a little more moving?

What freeman3 has yet to try and and hurdle is the "self-defense" laws in Florida. That's why this case is going nowhere.

danivon wrote:If you can show that the arraignment judge was influenced by the Black Panthers, then it would be relevant to my question. If not, then no need to repeat yourself.

Maybe you've forgotten or were not aware:

In the past 48 hours, the case has:

•Sparked an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice, the FBI and the Florida state attorney's office;

•Brought calls for changes in a Florida self-defense law that says a person being attacked has no duty to retreat and may return force;

Trayvon Martin was talking on his cellphone when he was shot and killed in February.

•Ignited protests, including a "Million Hoodie March" in New York City planned today, a protest Wednesday outside the Florida Division of Licensing, urging state officials to withdraw George Zimmerman's concealed weapons permit and a rally Thursday in Sanford led by civil rights activist Al Sharpton;

•Amassed more than 600,000 signatures in an online petition calling for charges to be filed against George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch captain who said he shot Martin.

•Prompted NAACP national President Benjamin Todd Jealous and local NAACP officials to host an open forum Wednesday in Sanford for residents to share their stories of abuse and discrimination by the Sanford Police Department. Jealous said Tuesday night that the information provided would be turned over to the Department of Justice, which is investigating the Martin shooting.

Zimmerman has not been arrested or charged with a crime.

The case has resonated for many who say Martin died because of stereotypes of young black men as violent criminals. The shooting is already being compared with high-profile and historic civil rights cases — for instance, a doctored photograph has circulated throughout many social media sites that compares Martin to Emmett Till, a young man lynched by white men in 1950s Mississippi.

"It's not about these individual acts of racism," said Mark Neal, a professor of African and African American Studies at Duke University. "It's about the way that black males are framed in the larger culture … as being violent, criminal and threats to safety and property."

The tragic case played out in Sanford, population 54,000, about 30 minutes north of Orlando, when Martin left his father's home to buy candy and iced tea for his little brother at a nearby 7-Eleven.

. . .

The two men fought and Trayvon Martin was left dead. Zimmerman told the Sanford police that he shot the teen in self-defense because he was fearful for his life. The police have said there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claims. Police say Zimmerman was bleeding from his nose and the back of his head.

So, yeah, a LOT of political pressure forced the issue. No court was going to stand up to what amounted to a political lynching.

Tom and others - can you guys just wait for the verdict? Can you stop just re-iterating the evidence you've seen (that supports your preconceptions) and pretending that watching bits on tv id the same as 'knowing' the facts. You are not getting everything the jury is.

I'm fine with that. You seem to know less than the rest of us, so since your bias is clear, I'm willing to wait. It's only about a week away.

An unarmed boy who was minding his own business was killed by an armed man who wasn't. A larger man who had no reason to follow the boy and no reason to call 9-11, he hadn't observed the boy doing anything wrong. He went after the boy despite being told by authorities not to. This doesn't sound like the actions of a reasonable man.

Is stupid and armed a legal defense in FL? DF could be right on this one.

Neal Anderth wrote:An unarmed boy who was minding his own business was killed by an armed man who wasn't. A larger man who had no reason to follow the boy and no reason to call 9-11, he hadn't observed the boy doing anything wrong. He went after the boy despite being told by authorities not to. This doesn't sound like the actions of a reasonable man.

Is stupid and armed a legal defense in FL? DF could be right on this one.

Thank you. I've wondered whom rickyp viewed as his role model. I wonder no more.

danivon wrote:So how did it get to trial if there's no case? The case may be weak, but it didn't get thrown out at arraignment.

Quite honestly this doesn't mean shit. My judge had a case before him about 2 or 3 weeks ago that was assault and harassment. The basic facts of the case were Defendant was at a Christmas eve gathering at his in-laws house. His 12 year old nephew was horsing around with his sister's (Defendant's niece) 16 year old boyfriend. It started outside when 12 yr old hit 16 yo with a snowball. 16 yo started chasing the 12 yo who ran into the house. 16 yo tackled 12 yo and started play hitting him.

Uncle saw his nephew being hit by an older kid so he grabbed 16 yo by the collar of shirt and pulled him off. 16 yo's Father called Uncle the same night and asked why did he touch his son. Uncle replied he was attacking my nephew. Father said he was calling the cops. The next morning Uncle called Father back to say Sorry in the hopes of it not becoming anything bigger. Father called cops.

This is basically drunk uncle misunderstood and over reacted and then over protective father got pissed that Uncle dared to lay hands on his precious boy. Yet the police decided to charge this and the DA decided to prosecute.

The point is just because it made it to trial, doesn't mean anything.

no, we never have politically motivated cases? we never have court cases that are baseless.

Here is how the prosecution could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily serious when he shot Trayvon:

(1) The minor injuries by themselves would not justify using a gun

(2) Trayvon did not have a weapon

(3) Traycon was 17 and not particularly big

(4) The fact that Zimmerman has injuries does not mean that Trayvon was the aggressor.
(5) Evidence indicating Zimmerman was the aggressor was the fact that he followed Trayvon, he called 911, he was a wannabe cop, and he said they always get away. Also you would think that if Trayvon were the aggressor he would set the iced tea down.
(6) Taken together Good's testiomony and Mora's testimony are not contradictory--they simply saw different stages of the fight. When Good looked out apparently Trayvon was winning when Mora came out after the shooting the situation had changed and Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon after the shooting. Good does not contradict Mora and Mora's testimony indicates Zimmerman was not acting in Self-defense.
(7) Good cannot corroborate Zimmermans claim that his arms were pinned.
(8) Good did not indicate that Zimmerman was in a helpless position
(9) Defense expert claim that Trayvon was leaning over Zimmerman because the shot was fired against Trayvon's clothing and from 2-4 inches away is unconvincing because Trayvon was wearing a baggy sweatshirt
(10) Good did not corroborate Zimmermans claim that Trayvon was banging his head against the cement.
(11) Given Zimmerman's would it have been reasonable to shoot for fear of being punched again? No. Is there evidence that Zimmerman that was in a helpless position such that he would be in reasonable fear that he would be punched numerous times causing great bodily injury? Not from Good and we can't credit Zimmerman's testimony.
(12) Zimmermans incomplete testimony cannot be credited. His testimony about his arms being pinned cannot be credited because Good did not see it and moreover they could not have been pinned when he shot Trayvon. His contention that he did not follow Trayvon is not credible, he claimed on national tv that he did not know about stand your ground when he had taken a class that included it. His contention that Trayvon accosted him given how aggressive he was prior to the confrontation. Moreover he has reason to lie to save his skin.
Also, as yet, his testimony is not under cross-examination.
(13) Take out Zimmerman's self-serving statements and what do you have? An older man following a 17 year kid, tells 911 they always get away, carrying a gun indicating that he was prepared for an altercation, sustains minor injuries during the altercation, at some point appears to be losing the fight (but was not helpless or having his head slammed), and regains control of the fight and in anger straddles Trayvon and shoots him (mora)

Sounds like he should be convicted to me.

freeman3 wrote:Here is how the prosecution could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not have a reasonable fear of death or great bodily serious when he shot Trayvon:

(1) The minor injuries by themselves would not justify using a gun

(2) Trayvon did not have a weapon

(3) Traycon was 17 and not particularly big

(4) The fact that Zimmerman has injuries does not mean that Trayvon was the aggressor.
(5) Evidence indicating Zimmerman was the aggressor was the fact that he followed Trayvon, he called 911, he was a wannabe cop, and he said they always get away. Also you would that if Trayvon were the aggressor he would set the iced tea down.
(6) Taken together Good's testiomony and Mora's testimony are not contradictory--they simply saw different stages of the fight. When Good looked out apparently Trayvon was winning when Mora came out after the shooting the situation had changed and Zimmerman was straddling Trayvon after the shooting. Good does not contradict Mora and Mora's testimony indicates Zimmerman was not acting in Self-defense.
(7) Good cannot corroborate Zimmermans claim that his arms were pinned.
(8) Good did not indicate that Zimmerman was in a helpless position
(9) Defense expert claim that Trayvon was leaning over Zimmerman because the shot was fired against Trayvon's clothing and from 2-4 inches away is unconvincing because Trayvon was wearing a baggy sweatshirt
(10) Good did not corroborate Zimmermans claim that Trayvon was banging his head against the cement.
(11) Given Zimmerman's would it have been reasonable to shoot for fear of being punched again? Is there evidence that Zimmerman that was in a helpless position such that he would be in reasonable fear that he would be punched numerous times causing great bodily injury? Not from Good and we can't credit Zimmerman's testimony.
(12) Zimmermans incomplete testimony cannot be credited. His testimony about his arms being pinned cannot be credited because Good did not see it and moreover they could not have been pinned when he shot Trayvon. His contention that he did not follow Trayvon is not credible, he claimed on national tv that he did not know about stand your ground when he had taken a class that included it. His contention that Trayvon accosted him given how aggressive he was prior to the confrontation. Moreover he has reason to lie to save his skin.
Also, as yet, his testimony is not under cross-examination.
(13) Take out Zimmerman's self-serving statements and what do you have? An older man following a 17 year kid, tells 911 they always get away, carrying a gun indicating that he was prepared for an altercation, sustains minor injuries during the altercation, at some point appears to be losing the fight (but was not helpless or having his head slammed), and regains control of the fight and in anger straddles Trayvon and shoots him (mora)

Sounds like he should be convicted to me.

Put your money on it.

He walks.

Did you listen to the defense pathologist? He was 1000x as convincing as the prosecution "expert."

And, the standard is NOT whether Zimmerman sustained life-threatening injuries. It's whether he reasonably could have thought he had or was going to. Trayvon Martin did not run away. He did not knock Zimmerman down and run away. Instead, all the evidence suggests, he knocked him down, jumped on him, and began pummeling him.

Good luck. You'll need it.

Well we know what result conservatives want. I suspect that the jury will agonize over this case a lot more than you think. Six women thinking over how they would feel if they had a son who went out to get a snack, gets followed by a guy for no reason, a fight ensues and their son dies? The one thing great about our system is that the jury can ignore the conservative pressure out there to acquit Zimmerman and do justice.

freeman3 wrote:Well we know what result conservatives want. I suspect that the jury will agonize over this case a lot more than you think. Six women thinking over how they would feel if they had a son who went out to get a snack, gets followed by a guy for no reason, a fight ensues and their son dies? The one thing great about our system is that the jury can ignore the conservative pressure out there to acquit Zimmerman and do justice.

Newsflash: this case has been all about liberal pressure.

I'm going to sleep just fine if he's convicted. I just don't think it's likely. The evidence is not there.

Again, if you're so confident, the offer remains.

freeman3 wrote:Well we know what result conservatives want. I suspect that the jury will agonize over this case a lot more than you think. Six women thinking over how they would feel if they had a son who went out to get a snack, gets followed by a guy for no reason, a fight ensues and their son dies? The one thing great about our system is that the jury can ignore the conservative pressure out there to acquit Zimmerman and do justice.

Well we know what result liberals want. I suspect that the jury will agonize over this case a lot more than you think. Six women thinking over how they would feel if they had a son who went out to protect his neighborhood, gets attacked by a guy for no reason, a fight ensues and their son's life is instantly changed. The one thing great about our system is that the jury can ignore the liberal pressure out there to convict Zimmerman and do justice.

You know there are two sides to every coin. Your slant on the case in no more compelling than mine.

This is America we are entitled to our opinions (and, no, I don't believe we have to wait until the jury decides to express them--sorry Dan I have to disagree with you there). Though some opinions are better than others...