The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[pioneerpete]

Getting to Murder 2: Finding George Zimmerman?s ?Depraved Mind?



Florida defines murder in the second degree as:


The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree . . .

Florida’s standard jury instruction for murder 2 notes that:


An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:
1.a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
2.is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
3.is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.

Notice step 2. Under Florida law the mere fact that an armed man kills another who is unarmed does not prove a “depraved mind” (Poole v. State, Bellamy v. State, and Light v. State). Typically, the prosecution proves “ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent” through evidence of a long-standing grievance or some unusually wrongful or aggressive conduct on the part of the attacker.

 

[Jackson]

Usually all state witnesses speak towards their case, and defense witnesses speak towards their case. It only seems weird in this case because so many witnesses for the state spoke favorably for the defendant or had contradicting statements prior to trial. I think it is a stretch to imply that "assholes" or "fucking punks" meets the legal standard of what encompasses ill-will, spite or depraved mind. Different people have different opinions on foul language, but just those words don't legally reach that standard. Since the 911 tape was released every one has debated who's voice it was. Even if it is TM's voice, what are the explanations given by the state that he ended up on top of GZ screaming for help?

You think it is a stretch to imply that "assholes" or "fucking punks" meets the legal standard of what encompasses ill-will or spite? Come on! Do you go around greeting your friends each day, Good morning, Asshole and Fucking Punks? How are you today? I would say they just may be offended or think you are depraved or missed your meds!

Both of those terms are derogatory terms and considered cursing which denotes a negative emotion. It's as simple as that ...you can't shit and call it a rose.

I'm probably not the best person to ask that, because I do speak that way. However, negative emotions or offensive is not a depraved mind. Those words don't prove that he had the intent to kill whoever he came across when he walked down that dog path. How many people do you see a day that you don't like? Do you call them a jerk or stupid? Does that mean you are going looking for someone to kill?

Calling someone a name and relating that to an intent to kill is too much of a leap for any discourse.

 

[Meister]

Hi everyone here! This is my first post on the forum and just joined.

I'm a Zimmerman fanatic although I haven't followed the case for several months. I thought I might read through the posts ITT.

I'm rooting for the Trayvon side btw.

I'm a justice fanatic, no matter which way a case goes. Welcome to the board

 

[Sunshine]

Sarah has this thread covered.

Go Sarah!!

Sarah is black.

 

[pioneerpete]

Getting to Murder 2: Finding George Zimmerman?s ?Depraved Mind?



Florida defines murder in the second degree as:


The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree . . .

Florida’s standard jury instruction for murder 2 notes that:


An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:
1.a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
2.is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
3.is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.

Notice step 2. Under Florida law the mere fact that an armed man kills another who is unarmed does not prove a “depraved mind” (Poole v. State, Bellamy v. State, and Light v. State). Typically, the prosecution proves “ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent” through evidence of a long-standing grievance or some unusually wrongful or aggressive conduct on the part of the attacker.

1. Saying these words doesn't make here
2. These words don't describe his intent, ill will, hatred and spite are involved in the act itself.
3. If these words do that then every person in Florida traffic meets this standard.

 

[pioneerpete]

You think it is a stretch to imply that "assholes" or "fucking punks" meets the legal standard of what encompasses ill-will or spite? Come on! Do you go around greeting your friends each day, Good morning, Asshole and Fucking Punks? How are you today? I would say they just may be offended or think you are depraved or missed your meds!

Both of those terms are derogatory terms and considered cursing which denotes a negative emotion. It's as simple as that ...you can't shit and call it a rose.

I'm probably not the best person to ask that, because I do speak that way. However, negative emotions or offensive is not a depraved mind. Those words don't prove that he had the intent to kill whoever he came across when he walked down that dog path. How many people do you see a day that you don't like? Do you call them a jerk or stupid? Does that mean you are going looking for someone to kill?

Calling someone a name and relating that to an intent to kill is too much of a leap for any discourse.

But that is what he called him, a name. However, he didn't call him by a name personally so there is no way to prove these words were intended with any criteria that meets the legal standard.

 

[Sunshine]

I'm going to Florida in about 2 weeks for a birthday party. Not a Jewish or a Crackah one.

Cuban ?

Sarah is black. How in the holy cat hair have you not figured that out? Years ago?

 

[RKMBrown]

There are a lot of people who have a lot more rep than I do. You are seriously shitting me if you are insinuating that I nor they never get negged. We ALL do. So suck it up. I have been on forums that have rep and forums where the staff don't want to be bothered. The rep is fun. Perhaps you need to do a little reflection on how to get the fun out of it. It makes the forum, fiery and dynamic. So, IMO, if you don't like it you can go piss up a rope. When you and your confederacy of fools get the rep is shut down a lot of people will leave and no one will be left but you whiners.

Nothing of the kind. Just asking how it works. More particularly how it works for you and how that's related to my post about GZ. Since your the only person negging me for no apparent reason. Thanks for the info. And I do see the fun of it. What good would pos be without neg?

I have told you the reason EVERY time I have given you rep. You just don't LIKE the reason and you want to rewrite the rules to suit yourself. Get over your little tutu wearing self.

IOW you got nothing but name calling. The word "disagree" by itself is not a reason. It's a verb. To form a sentence you need to have a subject and a verb. Try it some time, for the "fun" of it.

 

[Missourian]

 

[Sunshine]

Nothing of the kind. Just asking how it works. More particularly how it works for you and how that's related to my post about GZ. Since your the only person negging me for no apparent reason. Thanks for the info. And I do see the fun of it. What good would pos be without neg?

I have told you the reason EVERY time I have given you rep. You just don't LIKE the reason and you want to rewrite the rules to suit yourself. Get over your little tutu wearing self.

IOW you got nothing but name calling. The word "disagree" by itself is not a reason. It's a verb. To form a sentence you need to have a subject and a verb. Try it some time, for the "fun" of it.

Don't pee on your tutu.

 

[pioneerpete]

In any matter, I can go in to a street right now and call someone an "asshole" or "fucking punk" for literally anything, but that person doesn't have the right to assault me. When the assault occurs, that person has just escalated the situation by committing a crime. If I feel like I have no other option, and I am legally carrying a firearm I can shoot the person in self-defense. I may have been a jerk, and in the backyard the guy may have the right to punch me in the mouth, but legally he doesn't. I'm guilty of being a jerk. The other guy is guilty of assault with intent to do great bodily harm if the assault is persistent and with a foreign object aiding the assault.

 

[RKMBrown]

Sunshine's loop... troll, neg, call names, lie, pretend to be nice, talk about how superior she is over everyone, troll...

This is about a dead teen Sunshine.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Hi everyone here! This is my first post on the forum and just joined.

I'm a Zimmerman fanatic although I haven't followed the case for several months. I thought I might read through the posts ITT.

I'm rooting for the Trayvon side btw.

Welcome! Regardless of who side you are on, we love to hear your arguments. What do you think is the most important facts of this case?

Wow, thanks. I'm on the spot already.

I was hoping to do a lot of reading to refresh my memory of it all, there is so much.

Anyhow, I know it is unpopular, but I think the original analysis of GZ saying "coons" is near the top. It is very obvious to me he did say it. The difference between him being a definite racist saying such an inflammatory remark and "Well we don't know for sure" is a lot.

Of course, I have always been so thoroughly emotionally invested in Martin/Zimmerman because I believe people should be free to roam around without being controlled, stopped, finagled or questioned. Life is difficult enough without having to worry about people like Zimmy.

GZ's post-arrest troubles come to mind. He lied about where the donations were going and how much money he got. Stuff like that?

 

[Circe]

In any matter, I can go in to a street right now and call someone an "asshole" or "fucking punk" for literally anything, but that person doesn't have the right to assault me. When the assault occurs, that person has just escalated the situation by committing a crime. If I feel like I have no other option, and I am legally carrying a firearm I can shoot the person in self-defense. I may have been a jerk, and in the backyard the guy may have the right to punch me in the mouth, but legally he doesn't. I'm guilty of being a jerk. The other guy is guilty of assault with intent to do great bodily harm if the assault is persistent and with a foreign object aiding the assault.

All the same, I'd like to see you do it a few times, see what happens........

 

[Missourian]

Sack time, night all.

 

[Jackson]

Getting to Murder 2: Finding George Zimmerman?s ?Depraved Mind?



Florida defines murder in the second degree as:


The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree . . .

Florida’s standard jury instruction for murder 2 notes that:


An act is “imminently dangerous to another and demonstrating a depraved mind” if it is an act or series of acts that:
1.a person of ordinary judgment would know is reasonably certain to kill or do serious bodily injury to another, and
2.is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent, and
3.is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.

Notice step 2. Under Florida law the mere fact that an armed man kills another who is unarmed does not prove a “depraved mind” (Poole v. State, Bellamy v. State, and Light v. State). Typically, the prosecution proves “ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent” through evidence of a long-standing grievance or some unusually wrongful or aggressive conduct on the part of the attacker.

1. Saying these words doesn't make here
2. These words don't describe his intent, ill will, hatred and spite are involved in the act itself.
3. If these words do that then every person in Florida traffic meets this standard.

I am leaning that he does not qualify for Murder2. I would have to read the Manslaughter charge to see if he fits in there.

 

[RKMBrown]

The prosecution had its day. All they have left is cross examinations and a closing argument. And they can't bring up anything in cross that wasn't brought up in direct. It's over.

Unless the killer gets on the stand.

 

[pioneerpete]

In any matter, I can go in to a street right now and call someone an "asshole" or "fucking punk" for literally anything, but that person doesn't have the right to assault me. When the assault occurs, that person has just escalated the situation by committing a crime. If I feel like I have no other option, and I am legally carrying a firearm I can shoot the person in self-defense. I may have been a jerk, and in the backyard the guy may have the right to punch me in the mouth, but legally he doesn't. I'm guilty of being a jerk. The other guy is guilty of assault with intent to do great bodily harm if the assault is persistent and with a foreign object aiding the assault.

All the same, I'd like to see you do it a few times, see what happens........

Tough talk, but doesn't change the fact that I am right. Where you located and maybe I will stop by.

 

[Pheonixops]

In any matter, I can go in to a street right now and call someone an "asshole" or "fucking punk" for literally anything, but that person doesn't have the right to assault me. When the assault occurs, that person has just escalated the situation by committing a crime. If I feel like I have no other option, and I am legally carrying a firearm I can shoot the person in self-defense. I may have been a jerk, and in the backyard the guy may have the right to punch me in the mouth, but legally he doesn't. I'm guilty of being a jerk. The other guy is guilty of assault with intent to do great bodily harm if the assault is persistent and with a foreign object aiding the assault.

"Fighting words are written or spoken words, generally expressed to incite hatred or violence from their target.[1] Specific definitions, freedoms, and limitations of fighting words vary by jurisdiction. It is also used in a general sense of words that when uttered tend to create (deliberately or not) a verbal or physical confrontation by their mere usage."

"The fighting words doctrine, in United States constitutional law, is a limitation to freedom of speech as protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

In 1942, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine by a 9-0 decision in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. It held that "insulting or 'fighting words,' those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" are among the "well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of [which] ... have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem."

 

[Jackson]

Hi everyone here! This is my first post on the forum and just joined.

I'm a Zimmerman fanatic although I haven't followed the case for several months. I thought I might read through the posts ITT.

I'm rooting for the Trayvon side btw.

Welcome! Regardless of who side you are on, we love to hear your arguments. What do you think is the most important facts of this case?

Wow, thanks. I'm on the spot already.

I was hoping to do a lot of reading to refresh my memory of it all, there is so much.

Anyhow, I know it is unpopular, but I think the original analysis of GZ saying "coons" is near the top. It is very obvious to me he did say it. The difference between him being a definite racist saying such an inflammatory remark and "Well we don't know for sure" is a lot.

Of course, I have always been so thoroughly emotionally invested in Martin/Zimmerman because I believe people should be free to roam around without being controlled, stopped, finagled or questioned. Life is difficult enough without having to worry about people like Zimmy.

GZ's post-arrest troubles come to mind. He lied about where the donations were going and how much money he got. Stuff like that?

I share many of your concerns and I didn't mean to out you on the spot! So Sorry!

The ability to walk without being stalked is a biggie for me. I want to know just what made Z (Zimmerman) so suspicious of TM. And we won't know unless he takes the stand and tells us.