I don't think this new judge is good for GZ at all. Given all the circumstances, a liberal judge would have been in his best interest.
Yes. But you have to qualify it, based on the fact that they weren't allowed to judge the accuracy of the allegations. (Which is kind of crazy to me).
It's like if I tell you I am 10feet tall and asked you do you think I could dunk. You would most likely answer yes. You aren't allowed to argue that I am not 10 feet tall.
So, that said, if the allegations MOM said are true, then a reasonable person would fear they will get a fair trial. Do you understand it? That doesn't necessarily mean that they would not get a fair trial. Again is was a 2-1 decision. Where the majority opinion said it was a close call.
Lastly, the reasonable standard in law is not the same as being a reasonable person. Different things.
Yes, we've gone round and round on this point as well. MOM is a sworn officer of the court and licensed to practice law in the state of Florida. There are stiff penalties for filing false court documents.
Along the same lines, the veracity of some of the facts in the probable cause affidavit were not challenged prior to Zimmerman's arrest. How is this any different?
Also, since you keep bringing it up: what do you think in the alleged facts of the motion is untrue?
I have stated this before, several times, this part of the law has never been interpreted in case law. GZ was not blindly attacked. So what you have is the state's contention that GZ' actions led to him confronting the teenager and the thus the ensuing confrontation. SYG or self defense will probably not fly, because who had the true right, GZ or Trayvon? The part of the law that allows even a prepetrator to kill to protect himself, which seems to be the potential case here, that part of the law has never been interpreted in a case that would give boundaries that would include the circumstances here.
What happened prior to the fight is just as important as the fight itself, depsite many who think it doesn't.
Let me add a liberal judge is more likely to allow a law to be much more flexible than a conservative judge. Conservative judges have tendancy to less likely to allow a law to be more flexible or far reaching. They are less likely to allow a law to include things it doesn't specifically spell out.
Last edited:
And, again, especially with no precedent a strict interpretation benefits Zimmerman.
Just because it's never been used in a case before doesn't make it irrelevant. There's always a first time.
More than anything else, this case is going to hinge on proof beyond any reasonable doubt. That's a hell of a burden in a state with laws structured like Florida.
You're not getting it. Please stick to the topic at hand. You have a penchant of doing that.
This is one example MOM mentioned in his brief. He claimed that Lester said GZ had little credibilty (don't quote me too lazy to open the motion and find it). MOM said something similar on TV, "that GZ had misled the court and had to rebuild his credibilty ". But in the motion MOm argued because Lester said it it hurt GZ in the publics eye. But when ur attorney says that on National TV it doesn't? The appeals panel could only look at the allegation that Lester said it. If you looked at the all the facts knowing that MOM said the same thing to a bigger audience, that argument becomes a little laughable.
Again, I didn't like Lsster. I though he was emotional at times and didn't do his homework. Example. When the issue of the hidden passport came up at the hearing where he revoked GZ's bond. Lester said it was like getting a 2nd license and losing ur old one and not a big deal. (and everyone here held up that mantra for weeks on end). If he had done his homework, he would have known that the hidden passport was the current active one. He finally did do his homework and that led him to his comments in the 2nd bond ruling. I didn't think he was that bright. But I didn't think he was biased against GZ. I've asked you more than a dozen times to name a ruling or anything to show he was biased and u still haven't done so. But you keep repeating that mantra. Facts be damned
Last edited:
I never said anything was irelevant. I am saying the exact opposite. A conservative judge does not help GZ. As for Florida, a lot of things change in that courtroom, people keep throwing out reasonable. There is nothing reasonable about this case, just like there was nothing reasoanble that Casey Anthony walked either. Jurors in cases like this tend to vote based on what is more probable than what is more reasonable.
If the law is to be followed the case MUST be thrown out as there is way beyond a preponderance of evidence zimmerman acted in self defense.
NO evidence zimmerman was in commission of ANY crime.
I have said repeatedly that the commentary in the revocation order was not appropriate and indicative of bias. You don't agree so you ignore it.
The appellate judges agreed with me, so which one of us is making a laughable argument?
Facts be damned, that's rich coming from you.
Again, show me a ruling where he has been biased and not fair. Any ruling. Until you answer that, there is no reason to continue having this discussion.
Pax.
Without beating a deadhorse, this where you are wrong. There is plenty of evidence that he has lied and more than enough evidence to support he sought to confront this kid. And no matter how you put it, a 17 year old kid, is still 17. And just the fact he ran, shows he definately was not looking for any trouble.
The case will eventually be settled, but to pretend that GZ's actions are not highly questionable here is preposterous.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
One can interpret Zimmerman's actions as trying to confront the kid or keeping track of the kid after the kid ran.
However, because the kid chose to not go home but to confront Zimmerman; he was looking for trouble afterwards.
And trouble found him regretfully, because of Martin's actions in not going home and staying there
And these points are going to what decides his fate. Does a jury believe he tried to confront the kid or did he happen to come across the kid? How or why he didn't make it home will also be up for debate. Here is where I disagree, his having injuries doesn't give him a free pass as many here suggest. This was still a minor.
And on this final point. Trayvon had no duty to go home. And this I believe will further work against GZ. There is zero evidence to support GZ's inital claim in the first place. There is nothing to support GZ had any right to call the cops or as you put it "keep an eye on Trayvon".
7-11 tape proving suspicious behavior and demeanor.
Also, according to the law, zimmerman has the right to defend himself from injury when he is on back, being straddled/mounted after been beaten about his head screaming for his life trying to get away from further harm.
lotus503
Diamond Member
- Feb 12, 2005
- 6,502
- 1
- 76
Yes it does, he looks VERY suspicious in that video.
"he looks like he's on drugs or something"
lotus503
Diamond Member
- Feb 12, 2005
- 6,502
- 1
- 76
Im sure to racists and bigots thats true, everyone else sees a teenager shopping.
LOL, no. Any potential jury member will know exactly what that thug walk is. Not to mention the entire thug costume.
Come on man, even you can do better than that. Nothing in that video shows a suspicous person. It shows a tall bony kid buying some food, but thats it. And if you think he looks suspicous, like GZ did, guess what that means, you profiled him. He has zero chance down that road.
Profiling somebody looking and acting like a criminal is exactly what neighboorhood watch people and every good citizen is supposed to do. Don't want to get treated like a criminal?
Don't act/look like one.
Don't want to get shot dead?
Don't brutally attack somebody, pound their head into the concrete, and then mount them to continue the beating as they scream for their life. Or to keep it simple - don't attack anybody. That is illegal, that is a forcible felony, that could get you lawfully shot.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
GZ had every right to call the police.
Whether the results would have been that TM was identified; that is for the future.
GZ profiled Martin and that matched up with previous incidents - profile was valid.
TM was supposedly going home; he did not.
Nothing is stating that he had to go home. He had the opportunity to go home after leaving the street and going down the walkway. There is no indication that that route was unavailable to him.
Did he go home and change his mind or did he wait for GZ to come by him while trying to understand the situation on who GZ was?
We do not know; there are indications that he may have gone home and then returned; are those indications accurate???
All indications are that he made the decision to confront GZ and up the ante.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter