Author Topic: George Zimmerman Trial  (Read 219278 times)

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #450 on: July 16, 2013, 08:29:03 PM »
It's not like they pay much attention to the rule of law as it is.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,400
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #451 on: July 16, 2013, 09:16:54 PM »
I think that the Obama Junta already think that's the way it is.

I got paid last Friday.  Still a county magistrate salary drawn from the county accounts.  No federal magistrate levelmpay, damn it.  I could use the pay raise. B =D
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

KD5NRH

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,926
  • I'm too sexy for you people.
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #452 on: July 16, 2013, 11:32:52 PM »
An associate professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Department of Religious Studies thinks God is a white racist.

You know, there are some Judgments I'd pay to see.

(But for my own sake, I'd really prefer they be done in private.)

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,197
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #453 on: July 17, 2013, 12:32:57 AM »
An attorney has two options ifbthe other side lie during closing arguments.  You can object.  Or you wait yournturn and point thenlie out in your close.  Final option is to report the lie to the lawyer discipline office, as it is unethical.  Ask Nancy Grace.  I think it's one of the things she got tagged for.

Twice, in fact.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,197
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #454 on: July 17, 2013, 12:40:47 AM »
Fail, we'll just declare them not really black enough.

Well, its all because of the new math.

Obama is half black and half white, so he's a black man.

Zimmerman is half Hispanic and half white, so he's white.

See, it's all about colors. Both sides of Obama relate to clors, so the media can pick and choose. One half of Zimmerman relates to a color, but the other side relates to an ethnicity, so they have to use the color. Its really simple if you [don't] think about it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #455 on: July 17, 2013, 08:43:37 AM »
This has got to be a hoax.   =|

Jimmy Carter: Jury made the right decision.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,400
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #456 on: July 17, 2013, 09:19:09 AM »
Interesting article my judge sent to me about the verdict and teh law of self-defense...

http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?action=post;topic=40085.450;num_replies=455

I'll start by saying that I have studied Ohio law quite a bit on the issue of self-defense.  Makes sense.  It's where I work and live.  Haven't done much study of other states.  But I've been assuming all along that most states were similar, in that self-defense is an affirmative defense.  If ABC got this correct, then I was wrong in my assumption.  Not sure that I do agree with this interpretation of the law, but hey, I've been wrong lots of times...
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

TechMan

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,562
  • Yes, your moderation has been outsourced.
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #457 on: July 17, 2013, 09:25:24 AM »
Ah Chris, your link it to the current thread here at APS.
Quote
Hawkmoon - Never underestimate another person's capacity for stupidity. Any time you think someone can't possibly be that dumb ... they'll prove you wrong.

Bacon and Eggs - A day's work for a chicken; A lifetime commitment for a pig.
Stupidity will always be its own reward.
Bad decisions make good stories.

Quote
Viking - The problem with the modern world is that there aren't really any predators eating stupid people.

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,400
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #459 on: July 17, 2013, 09:54:52 AM »
Which of you hacked Slate.com?

You Are Not Trayvon Martin
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45,739
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #460 on: July 17, 2013, 09:56:01 AM »
Quote
In the Buckeye State, rather than forcing the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was not self defense, the defendant adopts that legal burden. It is the defense that has to prove it’s more likely than not that self defense was justified (unless it occurs in your home).

This bothers me. With the IANAL caveat, I don't understand how that meshes with "innocent until PROVEN guilty". If the defendant takes on the legal burden, aren't they also taking on the burden of having to prove innocence, the opposite of what our legal system states?
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

CNYCacher

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,438
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #462 on: July 17, 2013, 02:12:08 PM »
Which of you hacked Slate.com?

You Are Not Trayvon Martin

Hating on Zimmerman is too mainstream now.
On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.
Charles Babbage

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #463 on: July 17, 2013, 03:13:32 PM »
Hating on Zimmerman is too mainstream now.

:lol:
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,400
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #464 on: July 17, 2013, 04:11:09 PM »
This bothers me. With the IANAL caveat, I don't understand how that meshes with "innocent until PROVEN guilty". If the defendant takes on the legal burden, aren't they also taking on the burden of having to prove innocence, the opposite of what our legal system states?

First off, the article is badly written.  Big surprise.  The way it really works is that the prosecution still has to prove that the defendant committed the crime.  the defense has the option of raising an affirmative defense, like self-defense.  If you can prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence (probable cause > 50%; preponderance of the evidence >75%; beyond a reasonable doubt > 99.99%), then the charge fails.  I never thought of it as that unusual.  Other examples I can think of are insanity pleas and statute of limitation arguments.  i'll try some research and see if somehow this is unique to Ohio, though I suspect it isn't.
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

Hawkmoon

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 27,197
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #465 on: July 17, 2013, 08:31:35 PM »
First off, the article is badly written.  Big surprise.  The way it really works is that the prosecution still has to prove that the defendant committed the crime.  the defense has the option of raising an affirmative defense, like self-defense.  If you can prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence (probable cause > 50%; preponderance of the evidence >75%; beyond a reasonable doubt > 99.99%), then the charge fails.  I never thought of it as that unusual.  Other examples I can think of are insanity pleas and statute of limitation arguments.  i'll try some research and see if somehow this is unique to Ohio, though I suspect it isn't.


Not exactly.

The way it works in a self defense case is that the defendant acknowledges that he did the deed (took another human life, a.k.a. "homicide"). He then goes on to assert that, even though he admits he did the deed, because of the circumstances the deed was not a crime. So, rather than having to prove that the defendant committed "the" crime, in reality what the prosecution has to prove is that the act was a crime.

It's more or less a polar opposite of the O.J. Simpson case. With Zimmerman, he acknowledged that he shot the kid, but he asserted that he did so because he was in fear for his life. Self defense defense. In the O.J. Simpson case, there was never any suggestion that the late Mrs. Simpson or her male escort had assaulted or threatened anyone. The deed was clearly a murder, but the prosecution had to prove that the deed was committed by O.J. Simpson. As we know ... they failed.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
100% Politically Incorrect by Design

T.O.M.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,400
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #466 on: July 17, 2013, 09:47:22 PM »
Just got home from Scouts, helping boys prep for a Philmont trip.  Hawk, do you know if this type of "self defense defense" is common outside of Ohio?
No, I'm not mtnbkr.  ;)

a.k.a. "our resident Legal Smeagol."...thanks BryanP
"Anybody can give legal advice - but only licensed attorneys can sell it."...vaskidmark

Ryan in Maine

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #467 on: July 18, 2013, 08:33:13 AM »
Uh-oh: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/

Quote
But approximately one third of Florida “Stand Your Ground” claims in fatal cases have been made by black defendants, and they have used the defense successfully 55 percent of the time, at the same rate as the population at large and at a higher rate than white defendants, according to a Daily Caller analysis of a database maintained by the Tampa Bay Times.  Additionally, the majority of victims in Florida “Stand Your Ground” cases have been white.

Very interesting. I'm assuming Holder will back off as soon as this information crosses his desk.  :rofl:

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #468 on: July 18, 2013, 09:07:59 AM »
Very interesting. I'm assuming Holder will back off as soon as this information crosses his desk.  :rofl:

Indubitably.
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

RoadKingLarry

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 21,841
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #469 on: July 18, 2013, 09:17:10 AM »
Uh-oh: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/blacks-benefit-from-florida-stand-your-ground-law-at-disproportionate-rate/

How dare those protected, disenfranchised, underprivledged, minorities defend themselves without direct government intervention!
This cannot be allowed to continue.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.

Samuel Adams

AZRedhawk44

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,948
The take-away
« Reply #470 on: July 18, 2013, 11:22:32 AM »
My take-away from the Zimmerman fiasco:

There's legal, and there's right.  They don't always intersect.  Often times, legal will hijack right and rape it into submission.

That's the Zimmerman verdict.

The lefty, pro-black angle of this thing is basically summed up as... Trayvon was not engaged at crime at that moment.  He had legitimate reason to be in the neighborhood.  He felt threatened by the "creepy-a$$ cracka" following him around, with one friend on the phone suggesting he might be a child molester.  Trayvon chose to confront this person that might have been a threat, and the person gave evasive answers.

The righty, pro-defense angle of this thing is summed up as... Zimmerman spotted inappropriate and suspicious behavior and reported it while surveiling the suspect.  He left his vehicle and continued on foot, then was told he didn't need to pursue any more by the dispatcher.  He complied and headed back to his car.  A verbal altercation started, initiated by Trayvon, then a physical confrontation where Zimmerman was bested physically until he produced his gun and shot Trayvon.

SYG is being claimed by both sides.

And the collision of SYG caused an escalation of force.

Zimmerman was lucky that Martin was not well trained in fighting.  Had Martin been a boxer or martial artist, 2-3 good quick hits is all it takes to incapacitate or kill a man (or even just 1). 

Who here doesn't feel that it's appropriate to turn the tables on a stalker and give them fair warning to eff off right now?

Who here doesn't feel that it's appropriate to shoot someone that is in the act of pummeling your face, and that person initiated the fight?

The lefty, black community also feels that Trayvon's "sentence" doesn't fit his "crime."  He's dead.  He committed assault and battery in a confusing SYG situation, and his penalty is death.  They're saying that if Zimmerman just stopped fighting, justice could have been pursued after the altercation.

Part of me that yearns for a more old-fashioned approach to this world of ours agrees with the lefty black community.  How many westerns have you watched where a fight starts off and both men have pistols and knives, but the fight goes on to decide its victor and neither man draws the weapons?  My understanding is that tradition carried on well into the 20th century, talking with my grandparents and others of older generations.

In a way, I think we've lost something as a society by culling our ability to fight honorably to settle disputes.

Yes, God made man and Sam Colt made them equal.  I get it.  But not everything is a life and death altercation.

Learning to fight is important.  Learning to win a fight is important.  Learning to lose a fight is important.  Learning when to stop fighting is important.  And learning when to never stop fighting is important.

People need to know how to take a punch.  People need to know when they've won a fight and stop it graciously before the pounding results in more than a swollen face and cracked ribs, and results in something life threatening or altering.

I think this fight (Z&M) was more about territorialism and chest-thumping than real self defense.  As such, it actually could have been handled as a fight.  Z got his butt whipped.  M might have been winding down (or not... who knows?) and delivered his last punch, about to de-straddle Z.  That might have given Z his opening to produce his pistol, essentially when the fight was over but Z didn't know it.

Yes, it's highly speculative and monday morning quarterbacking.  No, it doesn't stand up to legal scrutiny for prosecution to use.  That's not the point of this argument.

I'm just saying that in a world with honor, this would have just been a fight between two men and left at that.

In this world, where the rules of fighting between men as a means of dispute resolution are lost to the passage of time, it means that M is dead.

My verdict is that we as a society have lost this case, due to overlegislation of human interaction and the culling of the thousands-year-old tradition of fisticuffs as a means of dispute resolution.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
--Lysander Spooner

I reject your authoritah!

Perd Hapley

  • Superstar of the Internet
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 61,327
  • My prepositions are on/in
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #471 on: July 18, 2013, 12:37:40 PM »
 [popcorn]
"Doggies are angel babies!" -- my wife

Monkeyleg

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,589
  • Tattaglia is a pimp.
    • http://www.gunshopfinder.com
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #472 on: July 18, 2013, 12:52:56 PM »
Oh, for cryin' out loud, I don't even know where to begin.

Know how to take a punch when you're ground-pounded and then pinned while getting your face smashed? Yeah, that's really the American tradition of fair fighting.

Stand Your Ground laws? Zimmerman's attorney and the prosecutor both said that law had nothing to do with this case. Zimmerman had no means of escape, as he was pinned to the ground.

This was simply about a young guy who never learned that assaulting someone could get him shot, and a guy who at some point decided that the pounding he was taking might do him some serious harm, and he'd better end it the only way he could. There's no John Wayne or Gary Cooper in this story.


French G.

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,183
  • ohhh sparkles!
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #473 on: July 18, 2013, 12:57:54 PM »
And I'm sick of the post trial moral equivalence game, it was just a tragedy, Martin had a right to be there, etc.

Zimmerman made tactical mistakes, not moral ones. He had a right to be in his neighborhood and history suggests that he gave a crap about it. Martin was a guest in that neighborhood. In countless cities and foreign countries I have conducted myself in accordance with local norms despite what I may want to do. If I don't belong I can feel it and I act accordingly. Let's call a thug a thug.
AKA Navy Joe   

I'm so contrarian that I didn't respond to the thread.

Gewehr98

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,010
  • Yee-haa!
    • Neural Misfires (Blog)
Re: George Zimmerman Trial
« Reply #474 on: July 18, 2013, 01:14:23 PM »
Stand Your Ground was specifically waived during this trial by the defense during the pre-trial immunity hearing.

The case proceeded purely as a self-defense trial.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida-zimmerman-defense 

This was not a Stand Your Ground case.

Jeebus...
"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...

http://neuralmisfires.blogspot.com

"Never squat with your spurs on!"