Rush Reports Zimmerman Arrested again

[WorldWatcher]

according to the instructions to the jury


zimmerman presumed innocent of the charges

PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF

George Zimmerman has entered a plea of not guilty. This means you must presume or
believe George Zimmerman is innocent. The presumption stays with George Zimmerman as to each material allegation in the Information through each stage of the trial unless it has been
overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.


http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/jury_instructions_1.pdf

zimmerman did not waive his right to an "immunity hearing" in the future

should the need arise to use it

Correct, which is what I said, he waived it in the criminal proceeding and opted to go directly to trial.

If a civil suit were ever to be filed, then the defense would file a motion to dismissed based on self-defense, both side would submit their briefs, possibly there would be in in-court hearing (or there could be a summary decision), and the judge would issue a ruling.


>>>>

yup

did you happen to see how broke zimmerman is

-2.5 million in the hole

Ya I did. However I think, there was a motion filed recently with Judge Nelson for defense cost reimbursement and then he better hope for a settlement in the NBC suit. The lawyers will take 1/3 of the settlement for that case and then the leftover will go to the criminal defense team. I'd be surprised if (a) he wins the NBC suit, and (b) even if he dies if there would be anything left over after the creditors were taken care of that will attach leans prior to money being paid out.


>>>>

 

[Katzndogz]

At this point there has been no immunity hearing so the Martin family has the right to file a civil suit. They haven't and they won't. Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing as soon as it got in front of a judge. Then, according to Florida law, the plaintiff in the civil suit has to pay all attorney fees and court costs.

Which is pretty much what I said. You said before "Not guilty by reason of justifiable homicide", that was in fact incorrect, the jury made no such finding. And at this point no such ruling has been made by a Judge.



Yes he did waive the Self-defense hearing as part of the criminal precedings, that doesn't mean he doesn't get to make the self-defense motion if there were civil litigation.

But ya, he did waive it for the criminal trial.

This is Florida, they don't dismiss cases based on self defense. They have a pretrial immunity hearing.

The self-defense hearing (or as you call it the immunity hearing) determines if the homicide was justified be reason of the defendant presenting an affirmative defense of "self-defense". The "immunity" the Judge is ruling on is based on "self-defense".



?>>>>

according to the instructions to the jury


zimmerman presumed innocent of the charges

PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF

George Zimmerman has entered a plea of not guilty. This means you must presume or
believe George Zimmerman is innocent. The presumption stays with George Zimmerman as to each material allegation in the Information through each stage of the trial unless it has been
overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.


http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/jury_instructions_1.pdf

zimmerman did not waive his right to an "immunity hearing" in the future

should the need arise to use it

Oh Brutha. Look at the Florida law, there was no immunity hearing. You are confusing self defense with immunity. Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing (since he was found not guilty in the criminal trial) and they would have to pay Zimmerman's attorneys for bringing the motion. The cost of filing a civil suit, knowing they would lose, is exactly what has prevented these people from filing that suit.

 

[Mustang]

Which is pretty much what I said. You said before "Not guilty by reason of justifiable homicide", that was in fact incorrect, the jury made no such finding. And at this point no such ruling has been made by a Judge.



Yes he did waive the Self-defense hearing as part of the criminal precedings, that doesn't mean he doesn't get to make the self-defense motion if there were civil litigation.

But ya, he did waive it for the criminal trial.



The self-defense hearing (or as you call it the immunity hearing) determines if the homicide was justified be reason of the defendant presenting an affirmative defense of "self-defense". The "immunity" the Judge is ruling on is based on "self-defense".



?>>>>

according to the instructions to the jury


zimmerman presumed innocent of the charges

PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF

George Zimmerman has entered a plea of not guilty. This means you must presume or
believe George Zimmerman is innocent. The presumption stays with George Zimmerman as to each material allegation in the Information through each stage of the trial unless it has been
overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.


http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/jury_instructions_1.pdf

zimmerman did not waive his right to an "immunity hearing" in the future

should the need arise to use it

Oh Brutha. Look at the Florida law, there was no immunity hearing. You are confusing self defense with immunity. Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing (since he was found not guilty in the criminal trial) and they would have to pay Zimmerman's attorneys for bringing the motion. The cost of filing a civil suit, knowing they would lose, is exactly what has prevented these people from filing that suit.

What are you talking about? A person can win a criminal case which has a higher threshold of evidence (beyond a reasonable doubt) and still lose a civil case which has a lower threshold of evidence (a preponderance of the evidence). That's exactly what happened with O. J. Simpson.

But Zimmerman has no money. O. J. did.

 

[BDBoop]

This passage from WKMG's online report stood out:

"Mason said Scheibe’s daughter received a text message from George Zimmerman. Mason said that message was a still image from an intimate home video of Scheibe and Zimmerman."

WKMG updated the story at 5 p.m. Wednesday with the headline "Intimate Details."

Scheibe told WKMG that her relationship with Zimmerman was "so intimate ... that they took intimate videos of themselves," Sandoval said. When the relationship cooled, Scheiber said Zimmerman took an image from a video "and texted it to her young daughter," Sandoval reported.

George Zimmerman girlfriend: I did not set him up - Orlando Sentinel

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Lost in all of this, unfortunately, is the errant perception of Zimmerman by many conservatives as being some sort of ‘victim’ of the ‘liberal establishment,’ a ‘martyr’ to the myth of ‘political correctness,’ and a ‘hero’ to many white conservatives who incorrectly believe young African-American men to be criminals by default.

Rehashing the Zimmerman murder trial is obviously an attempt by the right to deflect attention from the facts above.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lost in all of this, unfortunately, is the errant perception of Zimmerman by many conservatives as being some sort of ‘victim’ of the ‘liberal establishment,’ a ‘martyr’ to the myth of ‘political correctness,’ and a ‘hero’ to many white conservatives who incorrectly believe young African-American men to be criminals by default.

Rehashing the Zimmerman murder trial is obviously an attempt by the right to deflect attention from the facts above.

Most of us Only mention the NOT GUILTY verdict AFTER your side claims he murdered Martin. Right now in this thread how many of your side have made that exact claim?

 

[Chris]

Lost in all of this, unfortunately, is the errant perception of Zimmerman by many conservatives as being some sort of ‘victim’ of the ‘liberal establishment,’ a ‘martyr’ to the myth of ‘political correctness,’ and a ‘hero’ to many white conservatives who incorrectly believe young African-American men to be criminals by default.

Rehashing the Zimmerman murder trial is obviously an attempt by the right to deflect attention from the facts above.

Most of us Only mention the NOT GUILTY verdict AFTER your side claims he murdered Martin. Right now in this thread how many of your side have made that exact claim?

A guy with a history of violent arrests shot and killed an unarmed teenager.

How long before he kills again?

 

[Meathead]

Lost in all of this, unfortunately, is the errant perception of Zimmerman by many conservatives as being some sort of ‘victim’ of the ‘liberal establishment,’ a ‘martyr’ to the myth of ‘political correctness,’ and a ‘hero’ to many white conservatives who incorrectly believe young African-American men to be criminals by default.

Rehashing the Zimmerman murder trial is obviously an attempt by the right to deflect attention from the facts above.

Most of us Only mention the NOT GUILTY verdict AFTER your side claims he murdered Martin. Right now in this thread how many of your side have made that exact claim?

A guy with a history of violent arrests shot and killed an unarmed teenager.

How long before he kills again?

A thug got killed because he attacked a man that was armed. So sayeth the jury, so sayeth the law. If another one of Obama's boys attacks Zimmerman, I hope he meets a similar fate.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Zimmerman shot and killed a black teenager named Martin.

He also threatened his wife with a gun to the point where she called 911 and had him arrested.

He also then threatened his girlfriend with a gun to the point where she called 911 as well and had him arrested.

I think that Zimmerman has problems, and also believe that he should also lose his concealed permit license as well as lose the right to carry weapons anywhere.

Why? Because if he's losing the argument, his first impulse is to pull a gun and threaten to shoot.

If he doesn't end up in jail for this, at the very least, he should lose his license to carry a weapon. He's proven that he can't do it very well, nor does he know when to draw a weapon.

I spent 3 years working for the security forces in Newport RI (yeah..............I volunteered), and they taught us that drawing a weapon with deadly force was the last thing we wanted to do.

Wonder why Zimmerman thinks that it's the first thing to do? Apparently, civilians are poorly trained whereas military thinks about what they have to do.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Which is pretty much what I said. You said before "Not guilty by reason of justifiable homicide", that was in fact incorrect, the jury made no such finding. And at this point no such ruling has been made by a Judge.



Yes he did waive the Self-defense hearing as part of the criminal precedings, that doesn't mean he doesn't get to make the self-defense motion if there were civil litigation.

But ya, he did waive it for the criminal trial.



The self-defense hearing (or as you call it the immunity hearing) determines if the homicide was justified be reason of the defendant presenting an affirmative defense of "self-defense". The "immunity" the Judge is ruling on is based on "self-defense".



?>>>>

according to the instructions to the jury


zimmerman presumed innocent of the charges

PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF

George Zimmerman has entered a plea of not guilty. This means you must presume or
believe George Zimmerman is innocent. The presumption stays with George Zimmerman as to each material allegation in the Information through each stage of the trial unless it has been
overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.


http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/news/documents/2013/07/12/jury_instructions_1.pdf

zimmerman did not waive his right to an "immunity hearing" in the future

should the need arise to use it

Oh Brutha. Look at the Florida law, there was no immunity hearing. You are confusing self defense with immunity. Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing (since he was found not guilty in the criminal trial) and they would have to pay Zimmerman's attorneys for bringing the motion. The cost of filing a civil suit, knowing they would lose, is exactly what has prevented these people from filing that suit.

Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

yes i agree i am not confusing anything

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing

yes they would instantly lose and be subject to all the defense costs

 

[jon_berzerk]

Correct, which is what I said, he waived it in the criminal proceeding and opted to go directly to trial.

If a civil suit were ever to be filed, then the defense would file a motion to dismissed based on self-defense, both side would submit their briefs, possibly there would be in in-court hearing (or there could be a summary decision), and the judge would issue a ruling.


>>>>

yup

did you happen to see how broke zimmerman is

-2.5 million in the hole

Ya I did. However I think, there was a motion filed recently with Judge Nelson for defense cost reimbursement and then he better hope for a settlement in the NBC suit. The lawyers will take 1/3 of the settlement for that case and then the leftover will go to the criminal defense team. I'd be surprised if (a) he wins the NBC suit, and (b) even if he dies if there would be anything left over after the creditors were taken care of that will attach leans prior to money being paid out.


>>>>

Ya I did. However I think, there was a motion filed recently with Judge Nelson for defense cost reimbursement

from what i read since he won that is an automatic win

however the amount that gets paid is negotiable

 

[paperview]

Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

yes i agree i am not confusing anything

Yes he did waive it.
You see that word there? pretrial. Think on that.

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing

yes they would instantly lose and be subject to all the defense costs

That's what O'Mara tried to convince people he would do.

What O'Mara didn't say to those who gobbled up his nonsense is that gambit is in uncharted waters.

There doesn't appear to be much in the way of case law of a defendant filing for immunity after a trial and most legal authorities disagree with his contention a pretrial immunity hearing can be filed post trial.

The word immunity, as used in the statute, is immunity from prosecution. GZ's case was prosecuted.

This from a lawyer who was also Assistant Public Defender in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, the circuit governing Sanford:

"The procedures for asserting prosecutorial immunity under the “Stand Your Ground” law are outlined in Peterson v. State, 983 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), a Florida First District Court of Appeal decision.

The Petersen decision definitively established that Section 776.032 was created by the Florida Legislature to establish a “true immunity” and not merely an affirmative defense. The Court stated that, when immunity under the law is properly raised by a defendant, the trial court (at a hearing) must decide the matter by confronting and weighing only factual disputes. Petersen held that a defendant may raise the question of statutory immunity pre-trial and, when such claim is raised, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that immunity attaches. Unlike a motion to dismiss, the trial court may not deny a motion for immunity simply because factual disputes exist.


NOTE: In Dennis v. State, 51 So. 3d 456, 460 (Fla. 2010), the Florida Supreme Court adopted the First District decision in Petersen, resolving a previous conflict that existed between the First and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. Petersen is now binding law on all Florida courts.


Thus, under the procedures outlined in Petersen, prosecutorial immunity does not attach under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law by way of mere factual assertion. The issue is raised pre-trial through the filing of a Motion for Declaration of Immunity and/or Dismissal."
​

(Originally posted last year)

http://www.husseinandwebber.com/stand_your_ground.htm


Also the FL Supreme Court makes it clear that Motion for Declaration of Immunity" must be filed pre-trial. There is also the matter of varying Burden of Proof.

Also, too: O'Mara dropped Zimmerman as a client. He still hasn't paid him. Good luck now to Z in trying to make a case that would require a Hell on Wheels superduper lawyer to thread that pretrial/posttrial/BOP immunity needle.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Under Florida law, there is a pretrial motion called an immunity hearing. Zimmerman didn't waive it, he reserved the right to bring it at any time.

yes i agree i am not confusing anything

Yes he did waive it.
You see that word there? pretrial. Think on that.

The whole reason why the Martin parents have not filed the civil suit is because Zimmerman would win an immunity hearing

yes they would instantly lose and be subject to all the defense costs

That's what O'Mara tried to convince people he would do.

What O'Mara didn't say to those who gobbled up his nonsense is that gambit is in uncharted waters.

There doesn't appear to be much in the way of case law of a defendant filing for immunity after a trial and most legal authorities disagree with his contention a pretrial immunity hearing can be filed post trial.

The word immunity, as used in the statute, is immunity from prosecution. GZ's case was prosecuted.

This from a lawyer who was also Assistant Public Defender in the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida, the circuit governing Sanford:

"The procedures for asserting prosecutorial immunity under the “Stand Your Ground” law are outlined in Peterson v. State, 983 So. 2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), a Florida First District Court of Appeal decision.

The Petersen decision definitively established that Section 776.032 was created by the Florida Legislature to establish a “true immunity” and not merely an affirmative defense. The Court stated that, when immunity under the law is properly raised by a defendant, the trial court (at a hearing) must decide the matter by confronting and weighing only factual disputes. Petersen held that a defendant may raise the question of statutory immunity pre-trial and, when such claim is raised, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that immunity attaches. Unlike a motion to dismiss, the trial court may not deny a motion for immunity simply because factual disputes exist.


NOTE: In Dennis v. State, 51 So. 3d 456, 460 (Fla. 2010), the Florida Supreme Court adopted the First District decision in Petersen, resolving a previous conflict that existed between the First and Fourth District Courts of Appeal. Petersen is now binding law on all Florida courts.


Thus, under the procedures outlined in Petersen, prosecutorial immunity does not attach under Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law by way of mere factual assertion. The issue is raised pre-trial through the filing of a Motion for Declaration of Immunity and/or Dismissal."
​

(Originally posted last year)

http://www.husseinandwebber.com/stand_your_ground.htm


Also the FL Supreme Court makes it clear that Motion for Declaration of Immunity" must be filed pre-trial. There is also the matter of varying Burden of Proof.

Also, too: O'Mara dropped Zimmerman as a client. He still hasn't paid him. Good luck now to Z in trying to make a case that would require a Hell on Wheels superduper lawyer to thread that pretrial/posttrial/BOP immunity needle.

FL Supreme Court makes it clear that Motion for Declaration of Immunity" must be filed pre-trial.

yes and a motion would be made and won before any civil trial

 

[paperview]

pre criminal trial you dunce.

 

[jon_berzerk]

pre criminal trial you dunce.

the state supreme court says no such thing

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Lost in all of this, unfortunately, is the errant perception of Zimmerman by many conservatives as being some sort of ‘victim’ of the ‘liberal establishment,’ a ‘martyr’ to the myth of ‘political correctness,’ and a ‘hero’ to many white conservatives who incorrectly believe young African-American men to be criminals by default.

Rehashing the Zimmerman murder trial is obviously an attempt by the right to deflect attention from the facts above.

Most of us Only mention the NOT GUILTY verdict AFTER your side claims he murdered Martin. Right now in this thread how many of your side have made that exact claim?

A guy with a history of violent arrests shot and killed an unarmed teenager.

How long before he kills again?

Before he killed the unarmed black kid who was trying to run away from him, he beat up a woman and/or was stopped by cops at least three times. Daddy being a judge got him off and the records sealed. Since he killed the black kid who was trying to run away from him, he has beat up a woman and/or was stopped by cops, what?, 3-4 times?

One cop told time not to 'play with his gun'!

The guy has a ling history of violence, threatening women and children with guns and shooting an unarmed black kid who was trying to run away from him. Its just a matter of time before he kills someone else.

Why is he a hero to the rw's?

Because he got away with killing an unarmed black kid with a gun.

One real positive however is that since he didn't use any of his scam money to pay his attorneys, they won't be lining up to defend him the next time.

 

[WorldWatcher]

pre criminal trial you dunce.

the state supreme court says no such thing

Actually they did. In a conflict of rulings between two districts in Florida, the Peterson standard had different rulings, the FSC addressed this in Dennis v. State.

"We conclude that where a criminal defendant files a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 776.032, the trial court should decide the factual question of the applicability of the statutory immunity. A motion to dismiss on the basis of section 776.032 immunity is not subject to the requirements of rule 3.190(c)(4) but instead should be treated as a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.190(b). While the error in Dennis was harmless, we disapprove the Fourth District‟s reasoning and approve the reasoning of Peterson
on the conflict issue."

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2010/sc09-941.pdf​

So in the Zimmerman case you have an individual that waived an Immunity Hearing prior to the Criminal Trail, therefore the defendant had no claim of immunity. It appears to be unclear under the case law if the defendant can then apply for immunity post trail or if they are able to reserve such a waived hearing for a later date.

Now IMHO, Zimmerman if sued in civil court (which seems unlikely) in a wrongful death suit, would still be able to petition the Civil Court Trial Judge for dismissal under Self-defense Immunity and receive a hearing at that point. The hearing would still need to take place because at this point he doesn't technically have immunity**. I would think though that he has a very, very good chance of prevailing on the motion.




** He doesn't currently have immunity because that must be stated on the record by a Judge. He waived that option pretrial in the criminal action and the jury makes no finding as to "by reason of", they simply indicate on the record "guilty" or "not guilty".


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

and the records sealed.

Again with the sealed records thing.

What are you talking about, Florida has some of the must open Sunshine Laws in the Country and every aspect of the case was placed in the public domain through discovery.

So what are these "sealed records" you speak of that have a bearing on this case?



>>>>

 

[jon_berzerk]

pre criminal trial you dunce.

the state supreme court says no such thing

Actually they did. In a conflict of rulings between two districts in Florida, the Peterson standard had different rulings, the FSC addressed this in Dennis v. State.

"We conclude that where a criminal defendant files a motion to dismiss pursuant to section 776.032, the trial court should decide the factual question of the applicability of the statutory immunity. A motion to dismiss on the basis of section 776.032 immunity is not subject to the requirements of rule 3.190(c)(4) but instead should be treated as a motion filed pursuant to rule 3.190(b). While the error in Dennis was harmless, we disapprove the Fourth District‟s reasoning and approve the reasoning of Peterson
on the conflict issue."

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2010/sc09-941.pdf​

So in the Zimmerman case you have an individual that waived an Immunity Hearing prior to the Criminal Trail, therefore the defendant had no claim of immunity. It appears to be unclear under the case law if the defendant can then apply for immunity post trail or if they are able to reserve such a waived hearing for a later date.

Now IMHO, Zimmerman if sued in civil court (which seems unlikely) in a wrongful death suit, would still be able to petition the Civil Court Trial Judge for dismissal under Self-defense Immunity and receive a hearing at that point. The hearing would still need to take place because at this point he doesn't technically have immunity**. I would think though that he has a very, very good chance of prevailing on the motion.




** He doesn't currently have immunity because that must be stated on the record by a Judge. He waived that option pretrial in the criminal action and the jury makes no finding as to "by reason of", they simply indicate on the record "guilty" or "not guilty".


>>>>

Now IMHO, Zimmerman if sued in civil court (which seems unlikely) in a wrongful death suit, would still be able to petition the Civil Court Trial Judge for dismissal under Self-defense Immunity and receive a hearing at that point. The hearing would still need to take place because at this point he doesn't technically have immunity**. I would think though that he has a very, very good chance of prevailing on the motion.

yes of course the motion can be made at any time in a hearing before the relevant court

 

[Esmeralda]

Correct, which is what I said, he waived it in the criminal proceeding and opted to go directly to trial.

If a civil suit were ever to be filed, then the defense would file a motion to dismissed based on self-defense, both side would submit their briefs, possibly there would be in in-court hearing (or there could be a summary decision), and the judge would issue a ruling.


>>>>

yup

did you happen to see how broke zimmerman is

-2.5 million in the hole

Ya I did. However I think, there was a motion filed recently with Judge Nelson for defense cost reimbursement and then he better hope for a settlement in the NBC suit. The lawyers will take 1/3 of the settlement for that case and then the leftover will go to the criminal defense team. I'd be surprised if (a) he wins the NBC suit, and (b) even if he dies if there would be anything left over after the creditors were taken care of that will attach leans prior to money being paid out.


>>>>

He should kill himself: he's a depressive and a screwed up nut case who owes millions of dollars and likes to kill people. If he did away with himself, he'd save his next victim from death and avoid paying off his debts--and he'd be getting what he has coming to him, though I'd rather seem him waste away in prison for 50 years.