The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Ernie S.]

I don't like the State starting Friday with summation rebuttal. I think closing arguments and jury instructions should all be done the same day.

I thought she said state's closing on Thursday, then Defense closing and state's rebuttal on Friday.

I thought I heard State and Defense close tomorrow. State's rebuttal Friday and then jury charge. Maybe I'm wrong?

At any rate, I'm about out of here for several hours. Poker night!

 

[testarosa]

Not very likely, but I can flesh out an argument for it. I would imagine his reasoning is this:

(1) As to manslaughter, that requires culpable negligence. Culpable negligence is a much different standard than depraved mind, and to instruct the jury would cause confusion of the issue of the required mindset for M2.

(2) As to aggravated assault, that requires use of a deadly weapon without intent to kill. Zimmerman intended to kill Martin, and that is not in dispute, so therefore to include the charge would only confuse the jury.

Edit: I hope I'm being clear; these are just hypothetical arguments. Technicalities that will not occur.

Yep. Gotcha thanks!

 

[testarosa]

[MENTION=43884]SantaFeWay[/MENTION] !!

Stamina on the feed.

 

[Pheonixops]

When should we expect them to call the "not guilty"?

Friday at the latest.

I'm just not convinced of that, Templar. I'm really not.

I think this guy might get sacrificed on the Altar Of Stupidity And Political Correctness.

If not Murder II, Manslaughter or maybe even Assault.

Something. I hope I'm wrong.

I would love to see the left go apoplectic

Is this what you are referring to?

Even If George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty Of Murder And Manslaughter, He Could Still Get 25 Years | Mediaite

 

[TemplarKormac]

I don't believe Appeals Courts overturn based on evidence. Not even sure they review evidence.

I think they review based on mistakes and objections.

I could be wrong. I'm just a layman with a layman's knowledge. Which is very limited.

Maybe one of Attorney friends could jump in on this.

I was watching coverage today and recordings of yesterday's action. The judge made three potentially damning errors which could possibly sway the jury into a conviction, O'Mara now knows this, and now he is laying grounds for an appeal. She completely disregarded Lamarque and Caldwell, which potentially violates Zimmerman's 5th Amendment rights to proper presentment before a jury. The texts were compelling evidence, as were the pictures of the gun and the weed. Her disallowance of the Defense to properly prepare themselves yesterday is another, lastly her overall behavior towards the defense suggests bias.

They are (should) review on the judge's bias. It has been clear for an amount of time that she is pro prosecution.

What was her rationale for not allowing the text messages? That they had no way of proving Martin was responsible for them even though they were on his phone?

She had no clear rationale as far as I know; other than "A seven year old could have picked up the phone and tampered with it." She was a real bitch last night. She used Rule 901, which had no bearing, since there was already precedent (Caldwell). This evidence was helpful to the defense. She must have consciously denied the evidence based in part on that.

 

[Ernie S.]

It doesn't matter what the defense argues. If the prosecution wants manslaughter as an option, right or wrong, the judge will grant that.

Manslaughter can be punished with a fine OR prison OR both.

It seems to me that if the jury accepts self defense, they can't convict for manslaughter. If it's self defense, it's self defense.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well now, if true, isn't this interesting?

A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.

The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

CRS spent $674.14 between March 25-27 related to having been “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.” CRS spent another $1,142.84 for the same purpose between March 25-28.


Read more: Daily Caller: Holder Spent Tax-Payer $ Supporting Anti-Zimmerman Protests - Fox Nation

 

[Wake]

This judge is starting to piss me off. She keeps ruling in favor of TM. What a joke.

Zimmerman gets 25 years for killing an unarmed child. We can dream.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9gqEej5OA]MIB 3 - Boris the Animal Laughing - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ScienceRocks]

1. It isn't illegal to come up to someone to ask a question
2. It is assault to attack someone(trayvon )
3. It is within Zimmermans rights to defend his self when trayvon is screaming I am going to kill you mother fucker.

How much more clear does it need to be?

 

[testarosa]

This judge is starting to piss me off. She keeps ruling in favor of TM. What a joke.

Zimmerman gets 25 years for killing an unarmed child. We can dream.

Now you know what's wrong with Rat ;-)

 

[Sunshine]

It doesn't matter what the defense argues. If the prosecution wants manslaughter as an option, right or wrong, the judge will grant that.

Manslaughter can be punished with a fine OR prison OR both.

It seems to me that if the jury accepts self defense, they can't convict for manslaughter. If it's self defense, it's self defense.

Involuntary manslaughter could not be a lesser included because all the elements would not be met. There are many things in the law that seemingly don't make sense. IMO.

 

[wavingrl]

I'm not sure what Florida's procedural code says. But I do know the ABA Code of Professional Conduct says that an attorney cannot put a person on the stand he KNOWS is going to commit perjury. It also says some things about perpetrating a fraud upon the court. Deep stuff.

I don't even know that much.

Zimmerman just doesn't seem like he would be articulate enough to impress jurors.

I was surprised to learn his father is a magistrate judge? His uncle a sheriff's deputy.

That would impress me or influence me as a juror. He really didn't need to say anything.

Well, he's been to school, so he may be more articulate than thought. But I've seen a lot of really articulate people in a state of being an emotional wreck. They don't present well.

Well, I don't pretend to know how he would feel--but I would be dealing with a lot of emotions and not make a good impression on the jury. It has to be difficult to hear yourself described as 'weak', for one thing. Much less all the other things that have been said.

I can't think of a scenario in which taking the stand would have been a serious consideration.

Just get this case to the jury. 'Everyone' is getting on my nerves.

Then I briefly heard that 'culture' may be a big factor in the SF Asiana airplane crash.

Could be true--but culture is an inflammatory word to me right now.

 

[idb]

It's really hard to see why anyone could gloat over this, no matter the outcome.
An unarmed kid, going about his business is dead.
The guy that killed him had a gun and misread the situation.
That's the guts of it.

It's fucking sad is what it is.

This bugs me. No offense. But how did GM misread anything?

Only if TM went home and nothing happened would that be the case.

The accusation that GZ is guilty of anything is just more bs propaganda

JMNSHO

He misread the situation in that Trayvon had every right to be there.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

You can just script a phone call between Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
Jesse calling Al:
Al: Yo brodda, waddup!
Jesse: Yo brother Sharpton, hey did yous here about dan lite skinned black teen who stabbed a dark skinned black in south Chicago? shud wees star a protest?
Al Sharpton: How lite skinned was the black dude?
Jesse: well brudda, da lite skinned broda was as dark as Bionce, so dere, he wasn't too dark. so should we protest?
Al Sharpton: No brudda Jackson, we cannot protest when a black man shoots or stabs anuda black man, we only need to stir up protests when a White Man, or White Hispanic disses a black man in a whitey neighborhood.

 

[Sunshine]

Well now, if true, isn't this interesting?

A division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) was deployed to Sanford, Florida in 2012 to provide assistance for anti-George Zimmerman protests, including a rally headlined by activist Al Sharpton, according to newly released documents.

The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

CRS spent $674.14 between March 25-27 related to having been “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.” CRS spent another $1,142.84 for the same purpose between March 25-28.


Read more: Daily Caller: Holder Spent Tax-Payer $ Supporting Anti-Zimmerman Protests - Fox Nation

So we frickin' PAID the DOJ to help them!

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The jury in this trial is 6 people.

You know so little about this case but you keep flailing away.

That's why I have over 2,000 posts in discussions about Zimmy.

I have been listening to the live feed for two days now and when I glance at it, I mostly look at the prosecution, defense, judge or witnesses. I saw the jury but it wasn't a wide-shot, at least, not one I saw.

Dude, you are one clueless person! The identity of the jurors is not being given out, ostensibly to protect them in this highly charged case. You didn't see the jury because they aren't SHOWING the jury! Duh?

I only started watching the trial yesterday. Gimme a break.

Like I said, I only glanced at people seated in galleries in the courtroom. I already admitted my mistake, why do you feel the need to belabor the point? But thanks I didn't know that either. I also thought juries were always seated in the courtroom. Florida has some strange ass procedures when it comes to juries.

Why is this mistake so important to you?

 

[Sarah G]

It's really hard to see why anyone could gloat over this, no matter the outcome.
An unarmed kid, going about his business is dead.
The guy that killed him had a gun and misread the situation.
That's the guts of it.

It's fucking sad is what it is.

This bugs me. No offense. But how did GM misread anything?

Only if TM went home and nothing happened would that be the case.

The accusation that GZ is guilty of anything is just more bs propaganda

JMNSHO

He misread the situation in that Trayvon had every right to be there.

I have faith that the jury will remember that fact.

 

[Sunshine]

It's really hard to see why anyone could gloat over this, no matter the outcome.
An unarmed kid, going about his business is dead.
The guy that killed him had a gun and misread the situation.
That's the guts of it.

It's fucking sad is what it is.

This bugs me. No offense. But how did GM misread anything?

Only if TM went home and nothing happened would that be the case.

The accusation that GZ is guilty of anything is just more bs propaganda

JMNSHO

He misread the situation in that Trayvon had every right to be there.

I don't recall any statement of Zimmerman's to the effect that li'l Trayvon didn't have the right to be there, just that he didn't have the right to assault and batter Zimmerman while he was where he had the right to be. As did Zimmerman, BTW, since it was common ground for use of all the residents.

 

[legaleagle_45]

I'm not saying there was. I'm saying if she had not asked HIM, it would have looked as though his lawyer could not put him on the stand for ethical reasons.

If I were Zimmerman I wouldn't want to testify either. I would be a wreck. I think I have been in some key places to see the kind of emotional turmoil people go through when there is a criminal accusation against them. I have also seen the fools who won't settle for probation but rather want their 'name cleared' and end up in the pen.

Clarification. Under Florida statutory law and the law of many states, the Judge must ask the accused these questions... informing them that they have a rigtht to testify even if there lawyer tells them not to, because it is the accused right to testify and the accused's lawyer can not make that decision for the accused.

SOP

Whether the jury heard it or not, I think it was a good thing. She will likely make it known to the jury that HE made the decision.

Standard jury instruction will be given. I can pull it for you if you want, but basically it states that the Defendant has voluntarily decided not to testify and that he has a constitutional right to do so and that the jury should not presume anything for his failure to testify.

 

[The Rabbi]

I was giving my impressions. Unless you want to take a case-by-case analysis. His whole life looks sociopathic to me.

Of course it would.

Can you be more specific? Wouldn't you agree that GZ is at least a loser? You'd have to be to follow people around to try and feel self-important and spend half of your adult life calling the police on people for any reason.

No. I think you're a pathetic fucking loser, flinging crap comments that contradict each other with no foundation other than your "feelings."