How much money do you think Zimm get from NBC?

[LTC8K6]

No. He waved his immunity hearing. In order to actually get it going forward, he'd have to file for it. That costs money. Money he doesn't have.

Whatever he does get, the NET will be very little after all his legal bills are paid.

IIRC, the State has to pay some of his expenses already, since he was acquitted.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

No. He waved his immunity hearing. In order to actually get it going forward, he'd have to file for it. That costs money. Money he doesn't have.

Whatever he does get, the NET will be very little after all his legal bills are paid.

Here's the law, please show where GZ must use a immunity hearing to get immunity.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1)  A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term "criminal prosecution" includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorneys fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.

The jury determined he was not guilty and if you listen to the one juror it was because they felt he had reasonable fear therefore his use of force was justified.

 

[boomerang]

How much he gets will be dependent upon to what degree his representation can show the editing of the recording to be a systemic problem within NBC. Another angle to perhaps pursue is how much did NBC stand to profit from profiling GZ in the manner they did?

Black on black crime is not newsworthy. Black on white crime is not newsworthy. White on black crime is the holy grail. (Yes, we all know GZ is not white.) Was the recording purposefully edited to sensationalize the case to increase revenue? Or will the defense paint those terminated at that affiliate as racists hell bent on turning public opinion against GZ?

If it settles out of court that will say a lot. But I can guarantee you that NBC can afford better representation than GZ. It will come down to how much NBC sees a public trial as a detriment.

The lesson the public learned is to let your home be robbed, let your wife be assaulted, let your kids be harassed, let your property be destroyed and don't fight back. You could end up like GZ if you do. Broke, stigmatized and unemployable for the rest of your life. Your pride won't pay your bills.

Civilized society has been torn asunder further. It's the American way!

 

[Doppel]

Their edit did change a thing that he actually said...they left out part of it...

Glad you agree it was wrong.

Btw, see what I did with your own words to change what you said?

 

[nextJin]

In this case I feel he should sue in the most harsh capacity imaginable. In my case, I would sue the network for 100 million dollars and see where the chips fall. Whatever I aquired (it wouldn't be close to 100 million) I'd move out of the country and try and start a new life.

His life is forever screwed and every moment he steps outside his home he will be in fear for his life. A lot of that is because of how certain news agencies portrayed this case and in come cases like NBC went so far as to edit factual content to give a false narrative.

 

[sgrinavi]

They're not in it for the money. Doubt we see civil.

bahahahaha

They want to send the racists a message with a big fat invoice attached.

 

[actuarial]

The lesson the public learned is to let your home be robbed, let your wife be assaulted, let your kids be harassed, let your property be destroyed and don't fight back. You could end up like GZ if you do. Broke, stigmatized and unemployable for the rest of your life. Your pride won't pay your bills.

Civilized society has been torn asunder further. It's the American way!

The lesson the public learned is that if you're born a certain colour and dress a certain way, you are not allowed to defend yourself from an overzealous wannabe cop who is stalking you lest you be legally gunned down.

Of course, neither of those things are actually true.

Comparing what Zimmerman did to defending your home from a robbery is asinine.

 

[TechBoyJK]

I'm hoping he gets enough to put Rachel Madcow out of work.

I don't agree with much of what she says, but I like her presentation.

 

[Genx87]

What NBC did was disgusting. They should pay as they were one of the many who broiled up a lynch mob to go after this guy for defending himself.

 

[Pens1566]

Here's the law, please show where GZ must use a immunity hearing to get immunity.

The jury determined he was not guilty and if you listen to the one juror it was because they felt he had reasonable fear therefore his use of force was justified.

It was brought up in the massive thread before. DVC I believe stated it. Since he's the only real lawyer commenting on the case I defer to him. Well I guess there is HumblePie, but he only stayed at a Holiday Inn Express once.

 

[BeeBoop]

300k because his lawyers get the rest of it.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

IIRC, the State has to pay some of his expenses already, since he was acquitted.

I know O'Mara says this, but I find no support for it in the law and it would be startling to me if such a law existed.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Here's the law, please show where GZ must use a immunity hearing to get immunity.

The jury determined he was not guilty and if you listen to the one juror it was because they felt he had reasonable fear therefore his use of force was justified.

I don't know that immunity necessarily flows from the outcome of the trial. Procedurally I think a motion would indeed be required, and that he would bear the burden of proof in such a motion, so a jury's not guilty verdict, based on a totally different standard of proof, would not suffice (though I think based on the facts he should indeed qualify for immunity). I know when O'Mara was asked about the prospect of a civil suit against Zimmerman, he said that if that occurred, they would bring a motion seeking immunity based on self-defense.

 

[Genx87]

I don't know that immunity necessarily flows from the outcome of the trial. Procedurally I think a motion would indeed be required, and that he would bear the burden of proof in such a motion, so a jury's not guilty verdict, based on a totally different standard of proof would not suffice (though I think based on the facts he should indeed qualify for immunity). I know when O'Mara was asked about the prospect of a civil suit against Zimmerman, he said that if that occurred, they would bring a motion seeking immunity based on self-defense.

My understanding is that is one of the reasons why they didnt bring a SYG motion at the criminal trial. If the judge threw it out they couldnt use it for a potetnial civil case.

 

[WHAMPOM]

One Mill if they settle an annoyance suite before court, ZERO if they go to court.

 

[WHAMPOM]

My understanding is that is one of the reasons why they didnt bring a SYG motion at the criminal trial. If the judge threw it out they couldnt use it for a potetnial civil case.

There may be a catch-22 in that SYG had it been used would have shielded GZ from both a criminal and civil trial. And so cannot be used again.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

One Mill if they settle an annoyance suite before court, ZERO if they go to court.

I think that's pretty much right. I do not see them actually trying this case, though. I think if I were their attorney I would like to see them take a run at getting summary judgment, because I find it very difficult to see how Zimmerman in fact suffered any damages from this, but I expect a judge would deny it and leave the question of damages for a jury.

 

[WackyDan]

$1M is my prediction. I also anticipate a confidential settlement so we will never know for certain.

DVC....

Was reading that the defense is now going to go after the prosecution over a few different Brady violations - which have to do with the state withholding evidence from the defense that would have been helpful to Zimmerman. If those violations are found true and penalties levied on the prosecution, am I right to think that Zimmerman could then sue both the state of Florida along with the individuals on the prosecution?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

DVC....

Was reading that the defense is now going to go after the prosecution over a few different Brady violations - which have to do with the state withholding evidence from the defense that would have been helpful to Zimmerman. If those violations are found true and penalties levied on the prosecution, am I right to think that Zimmerman could then sue both the state of Florida along with the individuals on the prosecution?

Negative. They would be absolutely immune from such a suit even if they had withheld discovery in bad faith. The court can sanction them but he would still have no valid cause of action.

 

[Exterous]

DVC....

Was reading that the defense is now going to go after the prosecution over a few different Brady violations - which have to do with the state withholding evidence from the defense that would have been helpful to Zimmerman. If those violations are found true and penalties levied on the prosecution, am I right to think that Zimmerman could then sue both the state of Florida along with the individuals on the prosecution?

Interesting - I was not aware of that facet of the back and forth

Her office confirmed last week that it had fired its information technology director, Ben Kruidbos, who had testified in a pre-trial hearing that files he created with text messages and images he retrieved from Martin's phone were not handed to the defense.

Kruidbos testified last month that he found embarrassing photos on Martin's phone that included pictures of a clump of jewelry on a bed, underage nude females, marijuana plants and a hand holding a semi-automatic pistol.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-omara-idUSBRE96F04R20130716

 

[Attic]

I don't agree with much of what she says, but I like her presentation.

She reminds me of what would happen if one of Jon Stewarts turds could talk and it had hair.

Regardless of the stench of what she says, it's entertaining for sure.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I don't know that immunity necessarily flows from the outcome of the trial. Procedurally I think a motion would indeed be required, and that he would bear the burden of proof in such a motion, so a jury's not guilty verdict, based on a totally different standard of proof, would not suffice (though I think based on the facts he should indeed qualify for immunity). I know when O'Mara was asked about the prospect of a civil suit against Zimmerman, he said that if that occurred, they would bring a motion seeking immunity based on self-defense.

Here's what as law professor from Florida had to say on the subject.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323394504578605753229447968.html

Attorneys for Mr. Martin's family said they are considering filing a civil lawsuit against Mr. Zimmerman, though they haven't made a decision. "We're still trying to make sense of the verdict in the criminal case," said Benjamin Crump, a lawyer for the family. "We'll be talking about our options going forward in the coming days."

Such a case would face high hurdles, legal observers say. Mr. Zimmerman can seek immunity from civil lawsuits under Florida's so-called Stand Your Ground law—something his attorney said he planned to do. "In effect, there will be no civil suits," said Tamara Lave, a University of Miami law professor. "If there is a civil suit filed, it will be dismissed, and future ones will be barred."

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Here's what as law professor from Florida had to say on the subject.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323394504578605753229447968.html

Interesting - that seems to track with what I thought.

I'm not sure I agree that there is no way a civil suit will be brought, though - it may depend largely on whether Zimmerman recovers substantially from NBC. If, hypothetically, he gets a very large payday from NBC (and thus has the ability to pay a large judgment), I expect some plaintiff's attorney might well risk suing him in the hopes of surviving the immunity hearing, even knowing that the Martins would be on the hook for Zimmerman's attorneys' fees if immunity is granted after a suit is brought.

I would have thought O'Mara could bring a post-trial motion seeking a ruling from the criminal court that he is entitled to immunity based on the evidence adduced at trial, but procedurally I don't know whether that is something the court could or would grant based on the evidence in the criminal case. If it isn't, it would seem to me that Zimmerman would have to testify at an evidentiary hearing regarding a motion for immunity in order to be granted immunity, where he would be subject to cross-examination with all his prior statements. Could be . . . tricky. (Actually I'm not sure who would even oppose him in the hearing - I suppose he would file with the court seeking a ruling of immunity, and the Martins would intervene to oppose it.) If he didn't get immunity and were sitting on a hypothetical pile of NBC's money, the Martins would be strongly positioned to get a substantial settlement.

Of course, one would hope the professor you've quoted knows the law better than me, and thus that her prediction is totally accurate. I'm sure the Florida lawyers handling the case know how this statute works in practice, and I have zero experience with it.

 

[Yreka]

They're not in it for the money. Doubt we see civil.

Considering a lawsuit against Attic, as he just caused my sarcasm meter to explode and shower glass all over co-workers. DVC you interested in taking the case ?

 

[rpanic]

Give him all the ad revenue generated from there networks each time his name was brought up after a news cast with having anything to do with him in it, from the beginning to the end of trial.