Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

[emperus]

It's funny, all the people who swore there was nothing wrong with his comments like sound and emperus and jking and Tasha. I wonder when they'll comment...

Have you read the order? It was a 2-1 decision. One judge also felt that he shouldnt be dismissed. Note, noone could argue the facts oulined by MOM. THe 3 judge panel just looked at the legal sufficiency of the order if everything MOM said was true. Even so, they said it was a close call. I think they acted on prudence if nothing else. I don't agree with the order, but that is not my call.

But the question is what made a judge who originally gave GZ such a fair inital bail flip so? That's the probem most of you GZ supporters are missing in you inflapable defense of him?

On a side note this says more about the inequalities of justice than anything else. Most defendants wouldn't be able to afford an attorney that continuously files briefs trying to get lucky with a judge. It' snice to be able to cherrypick justice huh?

 

[Druidx]

I have a few questions concerning the removal of Lester but haven't found any legal discussion regarding it's effect. Will this result in any reversals of Lester's recent rulings. When Omara original filed, there was talk about how if Lester was removed it would set aside any of Lesters ruling within a certain time period or they would at least have to be reviewed and re-validated by the new judge.

 

[cybrsage]

The judge really should have recused himself. There is no shame in removing yourself when you know you are biased - it is seen as a good thing, for then you set a precident of showing you want to be fair. Fair judges are what we all want.

In The Law of Moses, if a judge recognizes one of the two litigants in his courtroom (meaning he knows the person outside the courts), he is supposed to step away from the case. This is to remove even the appearance of favoritism and keep the courts fair.

 

[JKing106]

And we have seen also here in the TM crowd, a braindead racist parroting other racists.

As pointed out in bold - each of your viewpoint can be addressed in another fashion.

Given that fact that you have problems with conveying your points at time you have to result to gutter language indicates how confident you are on your stand.

The same goes with anyone on either side.

Yet a sampling seems to be the TM side acts as the gutter trash much more than the GZ crowd.

However, there are some that break the mold

Oh, my. Gutter trash. You really put me in my place, champ. Think the NRA might give you a break on your dues for your outstanding loyalty to gun profits?

 

[JKing106]

The judge really should have recused himself. There is no shame in removing yourself when you know you are biased - it is seen as a good thing, for then you set a precident of showing you want to be fair. Fair judges are what we all want.

In The Law of Moses, if a judge recognizes one of the two litigants in his courtroom (meaning he knows the person outside the courts), he is supposed to step away from the case. This is to remove even the appearance of favoritism and keep the courts fair.

The Law of Moses doesn't apply in the real world. Separation of church and state, remember?

 

[Druidx]

Have you read the order? It was a 2-1 decision. One judge also felt that he shouldnt be dismissed. Note, noone could argue the facts oulined by MOM. THe 3 judge panel just looked at the legal sufficiency of the order if everything MOM said was true. Even so, they said it was a close call. I think they acted on prudence if nothing else. I don't agree with the order, but that is not my call.

But the question is what made a judge who originally gave GZ such a fair inital bail flip so? That's the probem most of you GZ supporters are missing in you inflapable defense of him?

On a side note this says more about the inequalities of justice than anything else. Most defendants wouldn't be able to afford an attorney that continuously files briefs trying to get lucky with a judge. It' snice to be able to cherrypick justice huh?

I have to disagree. Two of the judges said while any single allegation by itself was a close call, while taken together was enough.

 

[JKing106]

Your NRA dues hard at work. Time for a new judge!

 

[Geosurface]

I'm still waiting for someone to quote the statute or section of the self-defense law which specifies that you cannot defend yourself if the beating you got isn't as bad as other beatings which have happened in MMA. Or to other people at other times. Or just doesn't look that bad to casual internet observers.

 

[emperus]

I have to disagree. Two of the judges said while any single allegation by itself was a close call, while taken together was enough.

Well you would be disagreeing with the English language.

Although many of the allegations in Zimmerman's motion, standing alone, do not meet the legal sufficiency test,1 and while this is admittedly a close call, upon careful review we find that the allegations, taken together, meet the threshold test of legal sufficiency.​

 

[cybrsage]

The Law of Moses doesn't apply in the real world. Separation of church and state, remember?

You are very wrong in what you actually said, but I understand that what you said and what you meant to say are vastly different things. As I understand it, what you meant to say is that The Law of Moses does not have the force of law in the US. That would be a correct statement.

It would also be as relevant as telling us how much a good cup of tea costs in Beijing. The post was to explain why fairness is important and the length cultures will go to in order to help ensure it happens.

 

[JKing106]

I'm still waiting for someone to quote the statute or section of the self-defense law which specifies that you cannot defend yourself if the beating you got isn't as bad as other beatings which have happened in MMA. Or to other people at other times. Or just doesn't look that bad to casual internet observers.

Hold up, chief. You can't just move the goalposts from "savage, vicious beating" to "it wasn't that bad, but you can still shoot them!" Which is it? Read the cheat sheet you received this morning. I'd like to know what the day's talking points are.

 

[TerryMathews]

Shake off the hangover, and try that again in English, Billy Bob.

Learn to read, I guess?

 

[Geosurface]

Hold up, chief. You can't just move the goalposts from "savage, vicious beating" to "it wasn't that bad, but you can still shoot them!" Which is it? Read the cheat sheet you received this morning. I'd like to know what the day's talking points are.

Not at all, dumby.

I haven't moved an inch on my feelings about the beating he sustained, as shown in the pictures we've seen. I am merely acknowledging that people have sustained worse beatings both in MMA, and other crime situations. Only a dumbfuck would deny that, it's undeniable.

Nonetheless, it was still a beating which resulted in 45% of his head covered in blood, a broken nose, at least two nasty gashes to the back of his head, and what at least his doctor said were two black eyes (though personally they didn't look like black eyes to me)

One of the things that makes me feel it was a VICIOUS beating isn't so much the level of injury, though that's part of it, but rather the remorseless, relentless way that Trayvon kept beating him despite him not fighting back and screaming for mercy. That's heartless and fucked up.

But regardless, the law is clear... if someone's beating you and you can't retreat, you are entitled to defend your life. The law does not specify how bad the beating must be. Sorry, I know you wish it did.

Actually though, I don't believe there is any point it could've gotten to where you would say it was okay for GZ to shoot TM. I think you are too fundamentally illogical, emotional, racially-minded, and anti-gun for that.

 

[TerryMathews]

Have you read the order? It was a 2-1 decision. One judge also felt that he shouldnt be dismissed. Note, noone could argue the facts oulined by MOM. THe 3 judge panel just looked at the legal sufficiency of the order if everything MOM said was true. Even so, they said it was a close call. I think they acted on prudence if nothing else. I don't agree with the order, but that is not my call.

But the question is what made a judge who originally gave GZ such a fair inital bail flip so? That's the probem most of you GZ supporters are missing in you inflapable defense of him?

On a side note this says more about the inequalities of justice than anything else. Most defendants wouldn't be able to afford an attorney that continuously files briefs trying to get lucky with a judge. It' snice to be able to cherrypick justice huh?

A) if they're facts, what is there to argue?

B) your point is a cop out. If it meets the threshold, it meets the threshold. You guys have been constantly saying spidey and geo won't accept a guilty verdict. How is this any different?

C) how is justice inequal here? Martin is more represented than most victims. For that matter, he is more represented than Zimmerman. What does he have on his side, a special prosecutor out for blood, two lawyers, and at least 1 SuperPAC. If you're arguing that one is David and one is Goliath, you have the roles reversed.

D) regarding bail: the bottom line is he took everything personally; it's just business.

 

[TerryMathews]

I have a few questions concerning the removal of Lester but haven't found any legal discussion regarding it's effect. Will this result in any reversals of Lester's recent rulings. When Omara original filed, there was talk about how if Lester was removed it would set aside any of Lesters ruling within a certain time period or they would at least have to be reviewed and re-validated by the new judge.

I believe that the new judge can choose to revisit any decision in this case.

I imagine as a matter of professional courtesy most will not be revisited and will stand. As a matter of fact, I don't forsee any decisions being changed outside of maybe the latest bail order.

 

[TerryMathews]

Your NRA dues hard at work. Time for a new judge!

Yep, you're right. The mighty NRA owns the entire judicial system and the poor defenseless NAACP has no say or influence at all.

 

[TerryMathews]

Hold up, chief. You can't just move the goalposts from "savage, vicious beating" to "it wasn't that bad, but you can still shoot them!" Which is it? Read the cheat sheet you received this morning. I'd like to know what the day's talking points are.

Both of those points have been brought up since the beginning. Goalpost movement not found.

 

[JKing106]

Both of those points have been brought up since the beginning. Goalpost movement not found.

Do you realize when you're lying, or does your brain just change "facts" when it's convenient? Or do you just not care?

 

[emperus]

A) if they're facts, what is there to argue?

B) your point is a cop out. If it meets the threshold, it meets the threshold. You guys have been constantly saying spidey and geo won't accept a guilty verdict. How is this any different?

C) how is justice inequal here? Martin is more represented than most victims. For that matter, he is more represented than Zimmerman. What does he have on his side, a special prosecutor out for blood, two lawyers, and at least 1 SuperPAC. If you're arguing that one is David and one is Goliath, you have the roles reversed.

D) regarding bail: the bottom line is he took everything personally; it's just business.

Read the ruling. My gosh

Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330 requires a trial judge to grant a
motion to disqualify without determining the accuracy of the allegations in the motion, so
long as the motion is "legally sufficient." R.M.C., 77 So. 3d at 236. "A motion is legally
sufficient if it alleges facts that would create in a reasonably prudent person a wellfounded
fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial." Id. (citing MacKenzie v. Super

Kids Bargain Store, Inc., 565 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 1990)).

​

​

​

 

[TerryMathews]

Do you realize when you're lying, or does your brain just change "facts" when it's convenient? Or do you just not care?

How am I lying? Spidey specifically pointed out that someone could exercise their self defense rights absent any injuries at all. It's one of things you called him a racist over.

 

[OCNewbie]

On a side note this says more about the inequalities of justice than anything else. Most defendants wouldn't be able to afford an attorney that continuously files briefs trying to get lucky with a judge. It' snice to be able to cherrypick justice huh?

And why is it that this defendant can afford such an attorney? It's a miscarriage of justice for GZ to have even been charged with a crime (especially 2nd degree murder), and because of that, people are doing what they can, by providing monetary support, to improve the odds that this travesty falls short of an innocent man being wrongfully convicted based on emotional, factually-naive public outcry.

There was nothing "lucky" about this ruling. The appeals court didn't roll any dice; they made a ruling based on law and found Lester biased, and he was removed because of their findings.

 

[cybrsage]

A well founded fear appears to imply the allegations are accurate. If they were inaccurate, the fear would not be well founded.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Oh, my. Gutter trash. You really put me in my place, champ. Think the NRA might give you a break on your dues for your outstanding loyalty to gun profits?

No need to point out the obvious to you - it goes over your head.

At least you have started to tone down the garbage drivial that you were spouting - that shows hope for all.

 

[PokerGuy]

I haven't followed the case much in a long time, but saw an update in the news that a biased judge had to be removed from the case. Good to see the justice system isn't just letting someone get railroaded to satisfy the PC crowd.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Read the ruling. My gosh

Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330 requires a trial judge to grant a
motion to disqualify without determining the accuracy of the allegations in the motion, so
long as the motion is "legally sufficient." R.M.C., 77 So. 3d at 236. "A motion is legally
sufficient if it alleges facts that would create in a reasonably prudent person a wellfounded
fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial." Id. (citing MacKenzie v. Super

A major issue is that Lester should have done this on his own when the bias was pointed out.

He did not - forcing it to go upstairs.

AC also did everything legally sufficient without determining the validity w/ respect to the original warrant.