George Zimmerman Trial

[GoIrish41]

True. Very blunt...but true.

But people have trouble being blunt about these topics.

If Pat thinks it is blunt, you can take that to the bank!!!!!

 

[NDWorld247]

Philosophy of Dexter Morgan

I clicked from this thread to Barstool and found this gem: » Bro Arrested For Being A Real Life Dexter Barstool Sport: BarstoolU

A South Carolina man targeted a sex offender, killed him and his wife and later told deputies he planned to kill others on the state’s sex registry, authorities said Wednesday. Jeremy Moody and his wife, Christine, were arrested and charged with murder, Union County Sheriff David Taylor said. Jeremy Moody confessed to the crime and told investigators they arrested him just in time, Taylor said. “He planned to kill another sex offender on the register today,” the sheriff said.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

True. Very blunt...but true.

But people have trouble being blunt about these topics.

Hey, that's what anonymous internet commenting is for

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Because when you're going out to randomly shoot people, the first thing you do is call 911.

That puzzled me too. They kept calling him a "wannabe cop", but that didn't fit the narrative required to get a conviction. If anything, it hurt them (e.g., the juror believing that "George's heart was in the right place").

Under the law they needed to call him a "cold-blooded killer" -- a little tough considering the evidence, but maybe they should have thought of that before they brought the case.

Again, I don't have any hard and fast answers, but it seemed with GZ it wasn't that he just shot someone, but that he did it as a law enforcement agent, ie., that he shot a bad guy. GZ did remind me of some nebbishes I knew that followed us around and tried to emulate our craft. That GZ wants to be a hero, if this report that he pulled someone from a wreck is true, is supported by this post shooting behavior.

Maybe I never made this be clear. Picture a little guy playing cops and robbers. I said, or hope I said I didn't necessarily thing GZ had malice in his heart. But, how do they say it? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Whatever you think of TM, he didn't deserve to die. And whatever you think of GZ, a competent person in his place would not have had to discharge his weapon to determine that TM actually belonged there.

Here is one: the tone of GZ's voice could have been other than racial hatred, or upset with the kids, it could have been indicative of his personality or attributable to his behavioral response. People with PTSD or GAD often react with a tone of voice and/or anger out of proportion to the situation. (This is PTSD and General Anxiety Disorder 101. Not me being an expert.)

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Ahhh....Now where can I find an example of that.......

Just because you don't have the brains to deal with or the balls to stick to the original words . . .

http://thefuntimesguide.com/audio/B...Heroes_Mr_Driving_Range_Ball_Picker_Upper.mp3

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...a competent person in his place would not have had to discharge his weapon to determine that TM actually belonged there.

Very true. Good thing that wasn't why GZ discharged his weapon.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Very true. Good thing that wasn't why GZ discharged his weapon.

That is exactly why he had to discharge his weapon. He was incompetent. Not saying every one doesn't have someone get the advantage on them once in a while, but GZ couldn't have done worse, from needing batteries for his flashlight, to not being able to read the street addresses on the buildings to his right and having to walk across the darkness to the next street, to walking into a darker area "forgetting" he had a gun, he couldn't have been stupider.

I am not a genius but I clear every obstacle, obstruction, hiding place before I move on, and I keep my back to the wall. Oh, yeah, and if I have a gun I don't forget about it, I draw it! (This is such a stupid line to follow.)

 

[Irish Houstonian]

To be honest Bogtrotter, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

To be honest Bogtrotter, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

GZ wanted to be a cop-hero. Even being held like Barney Fife wasn't enough. Andy only gave Barney one bullet, and he had to keep it in his pocket. Barney was more competent to carry that GZ. A law that allows an absolute moron like this to carry, discharge his weapon, and kill a man may infringe on my right to carry. Do you really want to be out there with GZ and MZ Htown big game hunter? Or do you want your kids out there in that?

 

[BGIF]

Juror B-29 Speaks To ABC

Juror B-29 Speaks To ABC

George Zimmerman Juror B-29 talks to ABC - OrlandoSentinel.com

By Hal Boedeker
Staff writer
10:56 a.m. EDT, July 25, 2013

Juror B-29, the only minority juror from the George Zimmerman trial, has talked to ABC's Robin Roberts.

ABC identified B-29 as Maddy and said she is Puerto Rican. The other five jurors were white women. But Maddy tells ABC that the case was never about race for her.

In fact, Maddy says she doesn't believe the case should have gone to trial. "I felt like this was a publicity stunt," she tells Roberts. "This whole court service thing to me was publicity."

Yet Maddy's comments may seem contradictory. She says she originally wanted to convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder, then realized on the second day of deliberations that there wasn't enough proof to convict Zimmerman of that or manslaughter.

"As the law was read to me, if you have no proof that he killed him intentionally, you can't say he's guilty," she said.

Zimmerman was acquitted of murder in Trayvon Martin's death. Maddy, the mother of eight, says she feels that she owes an apology to Trayvon's parents because she feels "like I let them down."

About the deliberations, Maddy says: "As much as we were trying to find this man guilty ... they give you a booklet that basically tells you the truth, and the truth is that there was nothing that we could do about it. I feel the verdict was already told."

Maddy explains how the jury arrived at its acquittal. "You can't put the man in jail even though in our hearts we felt he was guilty," she said. "But we had to grab our hearts and put it aside and look at the evidence."

The jury followed the evidence and Florida law, she tells Roberts.

Yet Maddy share her personal view. "George Zimmerman got away with murder, but you can't get away from God," she tells Roberts. "And at the end of the day, he's going to have a lot of questions and answers he has to deal with. [But] the law couldn't prove it."
...

 

[BGIF]

As Contradictory As The Eye/Ear Witnesses

As Contradictory As The Eye/Ear Witnesses

She says the case shouldn't have gone to trial but she owes an apology to the Martin parents because she let them down.

They put their feeling aside and reached a verdict based upon the law and evidence.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I can see how she feels that way in the case of every statement. The two lines of instructions that allowed the jury to take into account stand your ground precluded them from convicting GZ. Without a signed written malicious statement he was not guilty.

In a sense I believe the juror was right. If people had any understanding of how stand your ground laws have eroded the law and order of this country, they would change them. This trial was theater to keep people from uniting to change them (syg). It was a rather easy task to accomplish, people got into an argument over race rather quickly. It never became about idiots with guns.

 

[phgreek]

I can see how she feels that way in the case of every statement. The two lines of instructions that allowed the jury to take into account stand your ground precluded them from convicting GZ. Without a signed written malicious statement he was not guilty.

In a sense I believe the juror was right. If people had any understanding of how stand your ground laws have eroded the law and order of this country, they would change them. This trial was theater to keep people from uniting to change them (syg). It was a rather easy task to accomplish, people got into an argument over race rather quickly. It never became about idiots with guns.

Boggs...I'm not as up on the instructions as maybe I should be...but seems like what you are saying here is, despite the defense NEVER utilizing SYG to my knowledge, the jurors were still instructed to treat the case as a SYG based guilt or innocence determination.

 

[IrishLax]

I can see how she feels that way in the case of every statement. The two lines of instructions that allowed the jury to take into account stand your ground precluded them from convicting GZ. Without a signed written malicious statement he was not guilty.

In a sense I believe the juror was right. If people had any understanding of how stand your ground laws have eroded the law and order of this country, they would change them. This trial was theater to keep people from uniting to change them (syg). It was a rather easy task to accomplish, people got into an argument over race rather quickly. It never became about idiots with guns.

Can you please link these two lines of instruction?

 

[Irish Insanity]

At the end of the day, I consider truly 'justifiable' killings to be good things. It means the right person survived.

But in this case, nobody should have lost their life. And I'm not sure the right person survived

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Boggs...I'm not as up on the instructions as maybe I should be...but seems like what you are saying here is, despite the defense NEVER utilizing SYG to my knowledge, the jurors were still instructed to treat the case as a SYG based guilt or innocence determination.

Exactly. The judge quoted the syg law requirements in the jury instructions. Google it. From what that added, no one could convict. The public was not overtly apprised. In fact, I would say that the public was led to believe because GZ didn't invoke the syg hearing, the law didn't affect him. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[GoIrish41]

She says the case shouldn't have gone to trial but she owes an apology to the Martin parents because she let them down.

They put their feeling aside and reached a verdict based upon the law and evidence.

She also said that she thought Zimmerman got away with murder.
Link: Trayvon Martin Juror B29: ‘George Zimmerman got away with murder’ - NY Daily News

 

[kmoose]

Only an idiot would claim to know what a person had in their heart at a given instant.

Again, I don't have any hard and fast answers, but it seemed with GZ it wasn't that he just shot someone, but that he did it as a law enforcement agent, ie., that he shot a bad guy. GZ did remind me of some nebbishes I knew that followed us around and tried to emulate our craft. That GZ wants to be a hero, if this report that he pulled someone from a wreck is true, is supported by this post shooting behavior.

Maybe I never made this be clear. Picture a little guy playing cops and robbers. I said, or hope I said I didn't necessarily thing GZ had malice in his heart. But, how do they say it? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Whatever you think of TM, he didn't deserve to die. And whatever you think of GZ, a competent person in his place would not have had to discharge his weapon to determine that TM actually belonged there.

Pot? Meet kettle

 

[Irish Insanity]

At the end of the day, I consider truly 'justifiable' killings to be good things. It means the right person survived.

But in this case, nobody should have lost their life. And I'm not sure the right person survived

And I easily can see TM being tried and held responsible had GZ lost his life.

 

[IrishLax]

Exactly. The judge quoted the syg law requirements in the jury instructions. Google it. From what that added, no one could convict. The public was not overtly apprised. In fact, I would say that the public was led to believe because GZ didn't invoke the syg hearing, the law didn't affect him. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Can you please link these two lines about stand your ground that were given as instructions to the jurors? I tried Googling it and couldn't find it.

 

[Woneone]

Edit: Post removed. Screw it. I was doing so good staying out of this thread. Posting what I did will only cause me to post more.

This thread has become a cesspool of misinformation, misinterpretation, and flat-out making **** up.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Pot? Meet kettle

On my experience it seems. I don't claim to know. Seems. If that is pot-kettle in your book, I ain't eatin' at your place!

Definition of SEEM
1: to appear to the observation or understanding

2: to give the impression of being

 

[Bogtrotter07]

There is so much bull shiit on this thread. Why?

Here you go LAX!

In the Zimmerman jury instructions, the jury was instructed on the stand-your-ground law:

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.​

That instruction may not have been dispositive of the case—we’ll never know, since jurors decide then justify (based on the evidence and jury instructions)—but had the jury been given the pre-stand-your-ground jury instruction…

The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify his use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating he could have avoided the need to use that force.​

 

[kmoose]

There is so much bull shiit on this thread. Why?

Here you go LAX!

In the Zimmerman jury instructions, the jury was instructed on the stand-your-ground law:

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.​

That instruction may not have been dispositive of the case—we’ll never know, since jurors decide then justify (based on the evidence and jury instructions)—but had the jury been given the pre-stand-your-ground jury instruction…

The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify his use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating he could have avoided the need to use that force.​

I'm still not sure why it matters, that the judge instructed jurors on what the law in Florida is? Isn't that one of the responsibilities of a judge? Regardless of what you think of it, SYG is the law in Florida. And, despite your dire predictions, I don't think that the US is about to revert to the days of the Wild, Wild West.

 

[Woneone]

Another great article:

The Volokh Conspiracy » Florida’s Self-Defense Laws

Final paragraph - In sum: there is not a shred of support for the claim that Florida law protects, or has protected Zimmerman, if he unlawfully attacked Martin. If Zimmerman’s story is true (Martin attacked him, putting him in imminent peril of grave bodily injury, with no opportunity to retreat), then Zimmerman’s self-defense claim would be valid under the laws of Florida, New York, or any other Anglo-American jurisdiction. The particular legal changes resulting from Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” and “Castle Doctrine” laws (deadly force in the home/automobile; no duty to retreat in public places; Fourth Amendment arrest standard affirmation; protection from civil suits) simply have nothing to do with whether Zimmerman’s actions were or were not lawful.

 

[phgreek]

Exactly. The judge quoted the syg law requirements in the jury instructions. Google it. From what that added, no one could convict. The public was not overtly apprised. In fact, I would say that the public was led to believe because GZ didn't invoke the syg hearing, the law didn't affect him. Nothing could be further from the truth.

well I'll be...she did. Bogs +1. As you said...who knows the impact.

it appears based on how SYG dovetails into justifiable force/self defense the instructions may be proper after all...

For me I just had SYG as this special case...its not, its a normal condition of self-defense except for the ability to get immunity...which seems like any self defense determination should get you immunity then...

 

[Bogtrotter07]

At the end of the day, I consider truly 'justifiable' killings to be good things. It means the right person survived.

Philosophy of Dexter Morgan

Until someone kills a family member or friend. Ooopps! Forget about making a mistake, you can't take it back.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I'm still not sure why it matters, that the judge instructed jurors on what the law in Florida is? Isn't that one of the responsibilities of a judge? Regardless of what you think of it, SYG is the law in Florida. And, despite your dire predictions, I don't think that the US is about to revert to the days of the Wild, Wild West.

INDENT]If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.[/INDENT]

Okay I underlined the part about property. I said early on this case was about property.

Please a legally trained poster please comment. The underlined part A) makes the whole thing a subjective judgment based upon the mental workings of an untrained possibly unstable person, and; B) this includes simple burglary and robbery. (Burglary does not require a weapon or firearm and robbery 2nd degree does not) Someone goes to pry a window of an unoccupied car, or an unoccupied dwelling and BAM!

This dovetails quite nicely with the Texas law which a john used to kill the prostitute he frequented as he claimed she took some 'extra' money. In Texas you can shoot someone dead for taking your property. Jean Valjean was lucky he lived in nineteenth century France!

Forcible felony.—“Forcible felony” means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Edit: Post removed. Screw it. I was doing so good staying out of this thread. Posting what I did will only cause me to post more.

This thread has become a cesspool of misinformation, misinterpretation, and flat-out making **** up.

On who's part?

 

[kmoose]

Okay I underlined the part about property. I said early on this case was about property.

Please a legally trained poster please comment. The underlined part A) makes the whole thing a subjective judgment based upon the mental workings of an untrained possibly unstable person, and; B) this includes simple burglary and robbery. (Burglary does not require a weapon or firearm and robbery 2nd degree does not) Someone goes to pry a window of an unoccupied car, or an unoccupied dwelling and BAM!

This dovetails quite nicely with the Texas law which a john used to kill the prostitute he frequented as he claimed she took some 'extra' money. In Texas you can shoot someone dead for taking your property. Jean Valjean was lucky he lived in nineteenth century France!

Ok.......... let's use Texas as an example: Texas ranks 26th in gun deaths, per 100,000 ( Firearms Death Rate per 100,000 statistics - states compared - Crime data on StateMaster ). So, despite it being "so easy" to justify killing someone, they don't have a problem with runaway gun deaths. You seem to be worried that SYG-type laws will lead to near lawlessness. I'm sorry, but I don't see any evidence to support your concerns.