Open Thread on Zimmerman Trial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just heard that the judge has allowed these new charges to move forward.:eek:
 
kelvinf said:
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.
Click to expand...
Okay, if GZ gets off on self-defense, how can he be guilty of child abuse??? Are you not allowed to defend yourself if you feel life-threatened by a 6"0 200lb child??

I hate all these legal wranglings. It’s about argumentation and not about truth.
 
kelvinf said:
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.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m not a lawyer but it isn’t a matter of knowing that Trayvon was a minor. The issue is that in the US, a person is required to be charged with a crime prior to being tried. That is, know the charges against him to construct his defense. Which would include researching the law and case precedents for the crime he is charged with.

If the law provides that a charge for a particular crime encompasess lesser included offenses is one thing. But it is another thing to tell someone at the end of a trial, oh by the way, you were also an trial for this other crime which isn’t among the lesser included offenses.

So knowing that Trayvon was a minor didn’t include knowing the prosecution was putting him on trial for this other offense. (again not a lawyer, so perhaps this is some kind of add-on condition for sentencing purposes that modifies a finding for a lesser included offense?)
 
qui_est_ce said:
Okay, if GZ gets off on self-defense, how can he be guilty of child abuse??? Are you not allowed to defend yourself if you feel life-threatened by a 6"0 200lb child??

I hate all these legal wranglings. It’s about argumentation and not about truth.
Click to expand...
If the law doesn’t provide for self-defense against a minor–

When the law is against you argue the facts
( Defense: well, he was big and beating the guy’s head against the cement!!!)

When facts are against you argue the law
( Prosecution: sure, he was having his head beaten against the cement, but the law says no self-defense against a minor. )

When the facts and law are against you, scream like h***

(Both: Squirrel!!)
 
qui_est_ce said:
Okay, if GZ gets off on self-defense, how can he be guilty of child abuse??? Are you not allowed to defend yourself if you feel life-threatened by a 6"0 200lb child??

I hate all these legal wranglings. It’s about argumentation and not about truth.
Click to expand...
🤷

Again, I believe that the term child abuse used in this case is weird. However the prosecution can legally ask for that. Whether the judge will finally accept it or not is still to be seen.

Edited to add: she has rejected the charge anyways.
 
Observers are tweeting that Judge Nelson said no to 3rd degree murder with child abuse.
 
Considering the fact that new charges of child abuse (which is odd because Zimmerman isn’t in a position of authority over Martin like a teacher or a parent or care giver is) and the Judge asking Zimmerman directly if he will testify, are these realistic grounds for a successful appeal, should the jury convict him?
 
fatima19172017 said:
Considering the fact that new charges of child abuse (which is odd because Zimmerman isn’t in a position of authority over Martin like a teacher or a parent or care giver is) and the Judge asking Zimmerman directly if he will testify, are these realistic grounds for a successful appeal, should the jury convict him?
Click to expand...
Given that the judge apparently did not accept the 3rd degree/child abuse murder charge. No on that count.

The talking directly to Zimmerman prior the final witness being called is unusual, but I don’t see how it would be appealable. How did it preclude a fair trial?

There are a lot of other things which give Zimmerman a much stronger grounds for appeal.
  • In the pre-trials, Judge Nelson accepted an affidavit from the Martin’s family lawyer,Crump, who arranged and was present for the interview of Jeantel vice allowing him to be deposed by the defense over their objections. Very unusual. This was appealed to the District Court of Appeals which over-ruled Judge Nelson and ordered her to allow the defense to depose Crump. The defense asked for delay to the start of trial so this could be done and Nelson refused. He still hadn’t been deposed by the July 4th weekend, mid-way through the trial. I don’t know if the deposition ever happened. This issue alone gives Zimmerman strong grounds for appeal.
  • Judge Nelson ruled that none of the social media information could be used by the defense, or his prior actions regarding fighting. Despite the critical issue here being a fight and the likelihood of who started it. Several lawyers I’m reading think this is a very appealable issue.
  • Prosecution slow rolled a lot of discovery. They had the images and texts from Martin’s phone in January yet didn’t turn over any info about the phone. When pressed, they turned over the binary source file vice the actual images and texts. This came to light when the IT director for the state attorney’s office became concerned with his own potential liability and informed the defense. Yet, the defense still had to file a motion on May 23rd to force prosecution to turn over the material. The prosecution initially identified Jeantel as a minor (I think this was in good faith based on what they were told initially by Crump/Jeantel) which limited access by the defense, but they didn’t inform the defense when they found out she was actually an adult. They also did not tell the defense she had perjured herself in her testimony. When defense found out and filed a motion to determine they why, literally BDLRs response was that he forgot. He forgot for months that his critical witness had lied under oath.
There are other things as well, but, I guess those will come up in another thread if he’s convicted and folks are interested in the appeal.
 
The issue of the judge repeatedly asking Zimmerman if he declined to testify kind over over-emphasized the fact that he was not testifying, which it is his right to do. Additionally, she directly addressed Zimmerman rather than his attorneys.

WRT Martin’s texts, this one is huge, In my amateur opinion. The prosecution kept usable copies from the defense intil 4 days before the trial started, and the judge would not allow them because they had not been authenticated, which they didn’t have time to do ebcause the prosecution had kept that info from them.
styrgwillidar said:
Given that the judge apparently did not accept the 3rd degree/child abuse murder charge. No on that count.

The talking directly to Zimmerman prior the final witness being called is unusual, but I don’t see how it would be appealable. How did it preclude a fair trial?

There are a lot of other things which give Zimmerman a much stronger grounds for appeal.
  • In the pre-trials, Judge Nelson accepted an affidavit from the Martin’s family lawyer,Crump, who arranged and was present for the interview of Jeantel vice allowing him to be deposed by the defense over their objections. Very unusual. This was appealed to the District Court of Appeals which over-ruled Judge Nelson and ordered her to allow the defense to depose Crump. The defense asked for delay to the start of trial so this could be done and Nelson refused. He still hadn’t been deposed by the July 4th weekend, mid-way through the trial. I don’t know if the deposition ever happened. This issue alone gives Zimmerman strong grounds for appeal.
  • Judge Nelson ruled that none of the social media information could be used by the defense, or his prior actions regarding fighting. Despite the critical issue here being a fight and the likelihood of who started it. Several lawyers I’m reading think this is a very appealable issue.
  • Prosecution slow rolled a lot of discovery. They had the images and texts from Martin’s phone in January yet didn’t turn over any info about the phone. When pressed, they turned over the binary source file vice the actual images and texts. This came to light when the IT director for the state attorney’s office became concerned with his own potential liability and informed the defense. Yet, the defense still had to file a motion on May 23rd to force prosecution to turn over the material. The prosecution initially identified Jeantel as a minor (I think this was in good faith based on what they were told initially by Crump/Jeantel) which limited access by the defense, but they didn’t inform the defense when they found out she was actually an adult. They also did not tell the defense she had perjured herself in her testimony. When defense found out and filed a motion to determine they why, literally BDLRs response was that he forgot. He forgot for months that his critical witness had lied under oath.
There are other things as well, but, I guess those will come up in another thread if he’s convicted and folks are interested in the appeal.
Click to expand...
 
qui_est_ce said:
Okay, if GZ gets off on self-defense, how can he be guilty of child abuse??? Are you not allowed to defend yourself if you feel life-threatened by a 6"0 200lb child??

I hate all these legal wranglings. It’s about argumentation and not about truth.
Click to expand...
What’s even more ridiculous is when is the defense allowed to defend against these new charges that are posted in the last day of the trial? Really child abuse? The prosecution is truly desperate to even try and get that in at this point.
 
styrgwillidar said:
The talking directly to Zimmerman prior the final witness being called is unusual, but I don’t see how it would be appealable. How did it preclude a fair trial?
Click to expand...
I’m not a lawyer, but I have a family member who is. I asked them about the judge speaking to the defendant. He described the judges actions as ‘outrageous’, ‘overtly hostile’, and ‘way out of line’. The issue is the judge was attempting to force the defendant to reveal his defense strategy and interfering with attorney-client relationship. He said the only appropriate inquiry would be to ask the defendant if he agreed with his attorney’s strategy at the time the attorney announces it. So she could have asked Zimmerman if he agreed with his attorney’s strategy when the attorney announced either that he was testifying or not testifying.

As for being appealable, again I’m not an attorney, but I would think so grossly interfering with the attorney-client relationship would most certainly compromise a trial. That is why the attorney’s objected.
 
Cider said:
What’s even more ridiculous is when is the defense allowed to defend against these new charges that are posted in the last day of the trial? Really child abuse? The prosecution is truly desperate to even try and get that in at this point.
Click to expand...
The judge disallowed the assault and child abuse charges, and FL apparently requires the inclusion of manslaughter as a lesser charge, so it seems that the defense is probably ok in this area.
 
exnihilo said:
I’m not a lawyer, but I have a family member who is. I asked them about the judge speaking to the defendant. He described the judges actions as ‘outrageous’, ‘overtly hostile’, and ‘way out of line’. The issue is the judge was attempting to force the defendant to reveal his defense strategy and interfering with attorney-client relationship. He said the only appropriate inquiry would be to ask the defendant if he agreed with his attorney’s strategy at the time the attorney announces it. So she could have asked Zimmerman if he agreed with his attorney’s strategy when the attorney announced either that he was testifying or not testifying.

As for being appealable, again I’m not an attorney, but I would think so grossly interfering with the attorney-client relationship would most certainly compromise a trial. That is why the attorney’s objected.
Click to expand...
He probably just should have used the Lois Lerner defense with that line of questioning.
 
scipio337 said:
He probably just should have used the Lois Lerner defense with that line of questioning.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’d want to try that with a judge - especially this one. It would look even worse before a jury. One would think she would face a disciplinary hearing for her intentional interference in attorney client privilege in open court.
 
SamH said:
I don’t think you’d want to try that with a judge - especially this one. It would look even worse before a jury. One would think she would face a disciplinary hearing for her intentional interference in attorney client privilege in open court.
Click to expand...
I kid, I kid!
 
St_Francis said:
The issue of the judge repeatedly asking Zimmerman if he declined to testify kind over over-emphasized the fact that he was not testifying, which it is his right to do. Additionally, she directly addressed Zimmerman rather than his attorneys.
.
Click to expand...
Agreed that’s the whole point in having a lawyer represent you in a court of law. The judge refused to allow his attorney to represent him even though he was standing beside him. A violation of the 6th Amendment rights.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence
Click to expand...
If you notice the judge repeatedly prevented the defense lawyer from providing assistance. For such a violation of an individual’s rights during a murder trial is astounding.
St_Francis said:
WRT Martin’s texts, this one is huge, In my amateur opinion. The prosecution kept usable copies from the defense intil 4 days before the trial started, and the judge would not allow them because they had not been authenticated, which they didn’t have time to do ebcause the prosecution had kept that info from them.
Click to expand...
Once the defense learned of these texts did they ask for a continuance?
 
SamH said:
I don’t think you’d want to try that with a judge - especially this one. It would look even worse before a jury. One would think she would face a disciplinary hearing for her intentional interference in attorney client privilege in open court.
Click to expand...
The jury wasn’t present at the time the judge was questioning Zimmerman.

The judge was out of line though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top