Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.
Separate names with a comma.
If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.
Discussion in 'The Furball Forum' started by RowdyatHeart, Mar 29, 2012.
Thanks. My friends will love that
You are most welcome.
Sent from my mind using Tapatalk 2
As someone whospent a long time on a murder trial jury and also on Grand Jury I think I know what the jury would be looking at if all they had were the facts we, the public, have at this moment.
The very first thing they will ask in deliberations is,
"Is there any actual evidence or any witness that PROVED Zimmerman did anything illegal?"
That simple, not "should he have done "X" "but "were his known actions lawful?"
They are NOT a civil jury, they are not there to decide if Zimmerman getting out of bed that morning led to the death, that doesn't mean squat.
Then the question of whether or not his decisions led to the shooting from an indifference to human life? Did he do something NEGLIGENT? Now whether or not the florida laws under which he was charged cover that or not, I can tell you that guilty or innocent juries want to leave that courtroom knowing, in their hearts, they made the right decision. They will reconstruct the incident until THEY feel they know what happened. If there are blank spots in the prosecutions case, they will only have Zimmerman's word to gon on, so they will evaluate and "profile" if you will, the participants in the event. Here is what they will add up (If they have no more info than we have today)
1. What is Zimmermans history with, Blacks, other minorities, Law enforcement. Are there any patterns?
2. On that day Zimmerman called the police, not Martin
3. When the dispatcher told him that they didn't need him to follow he said "OK", Do witnesses or evidence (location of the fight etc) corroberate refiute that he stopped.
4. When asked for his address, Zimmerman hesitate because he said that he didn't know where Martin was. evidence, witnesses?
5. Martin had a Cell Phone, why didn't he call the police if he was or felt threatened, if he was a law abiding citizen, isn't that what Zimmerman did when he saw soneone suspicious?
6. Is it more believable (absent any evidence) that Zimmerman who knew the police were on their way, would pursue and incite a fight when he was completely within his legal rights an responsibilities at that point, knowing that he had called the police and that they would show up at anytime pursued and caused a confrontation, or is it more believable that the young man who didn't feel threatened enough, or didn't for some reason,want to call the police, decided to physically confront Zimmerman?
When they feel they have the answers, to their satisfaction, to 1-6 it will justify in their minds the final vote on the charges before them.
Again this is based on what WE know and don't at this moment.
edit to add: It will come down to the question "Did Zimmerman start the "fight" or did he do anything to cause us to feel that we couldn't convict Martin of assault if he started the fight?"
I mentioned this on one of the threads that got closed down. I still think this case was hand picked from day one as a case to challenge "stand your ground" and concealed carry.
They wanted a case with a crazy white man with a CCW in a Stand your Ground state shooting an innocent unarmed black kid.
It is obvious some in the media, some black activist groups, and some in goverment, have been molding this case to fit that description. The question is why? Is it something to challange the law, it it for a political talking point for the upcoming election, or something else? Also how far does it go? Are the recent rash of black flash mob attacks nationwide on white people, cause by agitators, perhaps in the same league?
Crazy days we live in.
I contend that at the end of the day it will all hinge on if Zimmerman physically assaulted Martin, and that led to the fight that got Zimmerman on his back and Martin shot. Anyone on the street can yell and call you a criminal, but that does not give you the right to beat the crap out of them and ground and pound them. The might try to pin an ethnic intimidation wrap on him, but pretty much unless they can prove Zimmerman was brandishing his firearm, or physically touched Martin before Martin attacked, I can't see how zimmerman can be found guilty of anything.
Zimmerman defended himself and Martin was one ugly thug looking person at 17. He was no longer the innocent looking kid. I believe the shooting was righteous.
2. On that day Zimmerman called the police, not Martin
We will see if he did
"We will see if he did" ?????
You have got to be kidding, right?
Where did the recording come from?
Who released the recording?
That is ridiculous.
I can’t see how Rodney King was found not guilty or how the Officers were found guilty after seeing the “full” video that was played only once on TV. I can’t see how the thugs that beat down the trucker walked away scot-free. I can’t see how OJ walked. I hope I’m wrong but I see jail time for Zimmerman and I won’t be surprised if they beat him to death in prison. But then I’m just going buy historical fact when race becomes the whole issue in a trial. If we don’t get what we want we’ll riot seems to sway prosecutors and juries. It shouldn’t but it always seems to.
I can tell you how OJ walked
When Mark Furhman was caught in a lie and when the glove didn't fit.
In this case, IF the prosecution tries to establish a racist motive it will open the door for defense rebuttal, and from what we have heard about Zimmerman thus far, racial motive is not going to stand long in the minds of jurrors.
IMO this case IS, in the jury room, going to be about FACTS, real honest FACTS, and not assumptions and opinions that internet ex-spurts pass off as facts. Some EVIDENCE, not assumption or fantasy, or "must have" or "obviously" is going to have to show that Zimmerman physically started the fight for him to be convicted. This is not a Civil Court with a "Preponderance of evidence shows that "most likely"..... This is a Criminal Court, and Zimmerman is innocent until it is "Proven beyond a reasonable doubt". Unfortunately there are too many people who think the product of their own imaginations is some kind of "proof". By the time the jury sets to deliberation they will have been educated on the difference beyond the level of internet Ex-spurts.
I agree with you but it is because the laws are "ass backwards". Did you see the Black guy in Baltimore the other day that was acquitted for running down the White kids? Pretty disgusting to me.
Its not the law, although I agree there are many screwed up laws, it's the liberal judges and cockeyed juries that are being selected. Ive only been allowed to sit on one jury, civil case. All one juror was worried about was getting it over with and back to work. He was afraid hed lose his job. Another couldnt wait to get back to the bottle. One woman was so afraid shed make the wrong decision that I literally convinced her which way to vote. I could go on but there were only two of us that actually knew right from wrong and we literally convinced all the others to vote our way. I never want my life to be in hands of jury like the one I was on.
I was called and questioned for a criminal case. I was asked if I believed in the Hat Crime Law. I said no. I was then asked why. I told the DA that it was a useless law. He asked what I meant. I told him that criminals dont believe they will be caught so its not a deterrent. I also said that to add time to a persons sentence because they committed a crime against someone of another races was ludicrous. A crime is a crime no matter whom it is committed against and should carry the same penalty for all. I believe what REALLY upset the applecart is when I looked him straight in the eye and with emphases said, beside the law is not being applied equally. I was promptly dismissed.
I'm not talking aboput Zimmerman's 911 call, I'm talking about if Martin made a 911 call. If it exist that evidence would be released at the prelimary hearing.
I hate to bet on this case, but I would bet that the whole alleged cell phone exchange between Martin and the girlfriend was BS. Again its all a wait and see at the prelims.
The recording of that call (if it existed) would be in the hands of the same people that released the recording of Zimmermans call. Since they released one call to the public it would seem rather incongruous to not have released the other.
I think that is grasping at "Well, it could of happened"
Sorry and I was a LEO at the time of Rodney King, that was a complete and obvious ass woopin' . Was the ass woopin' deserved, probably, but its still very illegal for police beat the crap out of suspects that are down and not resisting.
OJ, unfortunately it was a matter of "Reasonable Doubt". If the Zimmerman case does not get dropped at the two prelims (Styandard Prelim and the Stand Your Ground hearing), and it goes to trial, Reasonable doubt will also play in Zimmerman's favor.
Zimmerman should get off, its just a matter if it will dropped at the prelims , or he will be found not guilty because they cannnot convict him of 2nd Degree murder or manslaughter because there is reasonable doubt.
I completely agree with this asessment.
I’m not a LEO, have never been a LEO and don't pretend to be a LEO. Did you see the video? The Whole video? I did! He was hopped up on drugs. They tried to get him cuffed and he picked up a cop and threw him. The cops jumped on him and brought him to his knees. He threw them off and stood back up. They knocked him down by hitting him in the legs with their sticks. He stood back up and continued fighting them. They started whaling on him and he went down. He kept trying to get back up so they kept hitting and started kicking him (that’s the part they kept playing on TV over and over again) and he just wouldn’t stay down. What do you do when a guy leads you on a high speed chase, wrecks and then keeps fighting you while you’re trying to make an arrest? I guess they should have just said, oh well have a nice night and be on your way.
I’ve seen police brutality and police abuse. What they did, what I saw in the FULL vidio wasn’t abuse it was justifiable force.
Why did he get off and why did the cops get convicted. Because the animals rioted and scared the hell out of the juries.
Someone above said Zimmerman ignored the dispatchers advice to not follow Martin and got out of the car to follow Martin anyway.
This is wrong.
Zimmerman was already out of the car. And when he was told he didn't need to follow Martin he said OK and all indications are that he did indeed stop. Why? Because he spent the next minute on the phone talking to the dispatcher and during that conversation told the dispatcher he didn't know where Trayvon was.
This blog basically puts together all the pieces about Trayvon Martin's girlfriend and it pretty much turns out that she's not his girlfriend, was not devastated, not hospitalized and it's all a giant smoke screen by the Martin's attorneys and that the Martin family is as much a victim of what's going on as is Zimmerman.
Great read, the blog.
MONEY TALKS. "Follow the Money" as Deep Throat said. Everyone is being played at the cost of one youngsters life to date and one young mans freedom and pending legal bills. Maybe his life as well.
The registered trademarking of the late sons name thing was revealing to moi.
All that is needed is ONE guilty plea somewhere, on any charge, for payday to arrive and ju$tice is only a chosen jury away.
Think Mommy and Daddy will write a best selling book on their ordeal and make a million dollars? Writing books is hard work I understand. I do wish Z would write one with M. Ayoob doing play by play and courtroom legal-beagle analysis... (might be a good learning tool for future CCW classrooms and help defray Z's legal costs along the way)