Open Thread on Zimmerman Trial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
kelvinf said:
Prosecution for lesser charges as I understand. Manslaughter and aggravated assault.
Click to expand...
I don’t think it meets the criteria for either one of the lesser charges. If his claim to self-defense is upheld, then his use of lethal force is legal. But the jury may decide manslaughter, because, well juries are unpredictable.

Now, I don’t know how Florida law reads regarding a possible civil suit being allowed in the event he is found not guilty of the criminal charge. Some states prohibit it, others allow it. And a civil suit only requires a preponderance of the evidence.
 
I apologise if this has been answered in the thread or if it was revealed in the trial but one of the things that I heard was that Martin was reaching for Zimmerman’s gun while Martin was pounding him. Has this ever been confirmed by the eye witness testimony or forensics?

I ask this because if Martin did this, then I believe that Zimmerman is completely morally justified in using his gun.
 
fatima19172017 said:
I apologise if this has been answered in the thread or if it was revealed in the trial but one of the things that I heard was that Martin was reaching for Zimmerman’s gun while Martin was pounding him. Has this ever been confirmed by the eye witness testimony or forensics?

I ask this because if Martin did this, then I believe that Zimmerman is completely morally justified in using his gun.
Click to expand...
No witness was close enough to testify seeing or not seeing this.
 
fatima19172017 said:
I apologise if this has been answered in the thread or if it was revealed in the trial but one of the things that I heard was that Martin was reaching for Zimmerman’s gun while Martin was pounding him. Has this ever been confirmed by the eye witness testimony or forensics?

I ask this because if Martin did this, then I believe that Zimmerman is completely morally justified in using his gun.
Click to expand...
It would seem from the evidence that Martin was indeed pounding Zimmerman’s head against a sidewalk. That alone would have sufficed to put someone in fear of life or grave injury.
 
St_Francis said:
It would seem from the evidence that Martin was indeed pounding Zimmerman’s head against a sidewalk. That alone would have sufficed to put someone in fear of life or grave injury.
Click to expand...
Did the forensic pathologist indicate that in his testimony?
 
from the bleeding hearts at Slate:
George Zimmerman Is Probably Going to Walk, and That’s Not a Bad Thing
Click to expand...
[snip]
I think they’re right. Over the past two weeks, trial-watchers have seen a lot of things: bad jokes, anguish, rage, odd disparagement of Zimmerman’s physical capabilities. But there’s one thing we haven’t seen: a compelling, factual rebuttal to Zimmerman’s account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed.
Code: 
                                                                 Here is what we know: Trayvon Martin died in Sanford, Fla., on Feb.  26, 2012. If George Zimmerman hadn’t been there, Martin would still be  alive. Zimmerman found Martin suspicious. He called 911. A confrontation  ensued. Beyond that, the facts are unclear. There’s not much physical  evidence in the case. Other than the defendant, there are no  eyewitnesses. Zimmerman claims that he was attacked by Martin, and that  he shot him because he felt he was at risk of great bodily harm. We can  certainly speculate as to whether or not he’s telling the truth, but can  we say for sure? Zimmerman’s the only one who was there, and none of  the prosecution’s witnesses came close to conclusively refuting his  story.
Click to expand...
Code: 
                                                                 That’s a problem for the state. To convict Zimmerman, the prosecutors  have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. That hasn’t  happened. And if the prosecution can’t prove its case, then Zimmerman *should*  walk. Many will see this as an unsatisfying outcome; many will think it  shouldn’t be this easy to kill someone, concoct an uncontradictable  excuse, and get away with it. But a legally satisfying verdict cannot  always be the same as a morally satisfying verdict. It would be unjust  if Zimmerman were convicted based not on the strength of the evidence  against him, but rather on the public sentiment against him.
Click to expand...
I think they’re right.
 
didymus said:
from the bleeding hearts at Slate:

I think they’re right.
Click to expand...
Now the prosecution is asking for conviction on lesser charges.Even if the judge allows this,if the jury follows the instructions they are given,I still don’t see how he can be convictedof even third degree,or manslaughter.The evidence beyond a doubt just isn’t there.🤷
 
didymus said:
from the bleeding hearts at Slate:

I think they’re right.
Click to expand...
I agree with their conclusion, but their “facts” are wrong. The physical evidence agrees with Zimmerman and the state’s own eye witness collaborates Zimmerman’s account. The prosecution presented nothing that refuted the defendant’s account and actually helped confirm it.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Now the prosecution is asking for conviction on lesser charges.Even if the judge allows this,if the jury follows the instructions they are given,I still don’t see how he can be convictedof even third degree,or manslaughter.The evidence beyond a doubt just isn’t there.🤷
Click to expand...
I don’t see how they can prosecute a man for one set of charges then charge him with something else when it goes to jury.
 
How can they change the charges AFTER the defense rests? The prosecution wants “child abuse” considered because Martin was 17?

Why not add jay walking and a parking violation for where he left his truck?
 
SamH said:
How can they change the charges AFTER the defense rests? The prosecution wants “child abuse” considered because Martin was 17?

Why not add jay walking and a parking violation for where he left his truck?
Click to expand...
Exactly!Child abuse,reall?:rolleyes:I heard Trayvon was close to 6’ And weighed approx. 200lbs.
 
SamH said:
How can they change the charges AFTER the defense rests? The prosecution wants “child abuse” considered because Martin was 17?

Why not add jay walking and a parking violation for where he left his truck?
Click to expand...
Insane! The defense didn’t have a cahnce to deal with the issues which would be brought up in a child abuse case.
 
The term “child abuse” sounds weird in this case. However the law considers Trayvon a child.
 
kelvinf said:
The term “child abuse” sounds weird in this case. However the law considers Trayvon a child.
Click to expand...
Except this was not presented the opening arguments. Our system of law allows defense rebuttal of prosecution.
 
SamH said:
I don’t see how they can prosecute a man for one set of charges then charge him with something else when it goes to jury.
Click to expand...
Well, there is the concept of lesser included offenses, and I read that in Florida the law on second degree murder provides for the lesser included offense of manslaughter. So a jury can determine that while the elements of the offense of second degree murder were not proven, the elements of manslaughter were.

Fair enough if true, since the defense would have known and should have included this in their defense.

However, the child abuse charge is more interesting, and since the prosecution only brought it up this morning – and have researched the case law to support it-- the judge has allowed the defense until 1pm today to research case law to argue against it.

However, this may provide reversible error for appeal. That is, if Zimmerman is convicted on the charge he may appeal that he was not given the time/opportunity to prepare an adequate defense. We’ll just have to see.
 
fatima19172017 said:
Did the forensic pathologist indicate that in his testimony?
Click to expand...
The prosecution forensic patholgist minimized Zimmerman’s injuries; she said that they might all have been caused by one blow. The problem with that conclusion is that Zimmerman had injuries in several places on a round surface.

The defense forensic pathologist said they were more serious: that there were at least 6 forceful blows and that serious results could occur without external marks.

It was very obvious that Zimmerman had been injured, and apparently by having his head beaten against something rough. Given the eyewitness testimony, it seems reasonable to conclude that Zimmerman’s statement that Martin was beating his head against a sidewalk was accurate.

Now, imagine that you are on the ground with someone straddling you and beating your head against a sidewalk. Would you be concerned that grave bodily damage or even death might occur?
 
qui_est_ce said:
Except this was not presented the opening arguments. Our system of law allows defense rebuttal of prosecution.
Click to expand...
I am watching Fox 35 online and they seem to believe that the defense missed this because it was mentioned at the beginning that Trayvon was 17.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top