You are the Juror. George Zimmerman trial

[normiss 622]

"following"

This could be the interesting part of the case.

What evidence is there of following. Or given he is the neighborhood watch, why is following an unfamiliar and suspicious person wrong? It's not illegal.

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

normiss

"following"

This could be the interesting part of the case.

What evidence is there of following. Or given he is the neighborhood watch, why is following an unfamiliar and suspicious person wrong? It's not illegal.

GZ himself told the police dispatcher that he was following TM. He went against the advice of the dispatcher and got out of his car to continue following TM.

It isn't wrong or illegal to follow someone you consider suspicious. But being a member of a neighborhood watch doesn't give you any extra rights to do anything.

And following someone is a provocative act.

I've said this before:

Try it. Maybe near a school. Follow someone. Make it obvious so that they realize you are following them. When they try to evade you, get out of your car and try to continue to follow them.

Let me know what happens.

And one of the basic rules of self-defense is that the situation has to be unavoidable and not caused by the person claiming self defense. You can't pick a fight and when you start to lose, pull out a gun and shoot your opponent. That's not self defense.
And while GZ may not have started the physical confrontation that ended with TM's death, GZ certainly started the overall situation by following TM.
As I said, if the prosecutor can keep that as one situation, GZ is in trouble.
If the defense attorneys can separate it into two seperate incidents, GZ has a chance.

But GZ didn't voluntarily give up following TM, he told the police dispatcher "I lost him" (or words to that effect). That makes it more difficult for the defense to make it into 2 distinct and separate confrontations. And nobody but GZ and TM know if GZ really gave up looking for TM or if GZ kept looking around and found TM.

And someone in an earlier thread (maybe GeorgiaDon or Southern Man) found an interpretation of Florida self defense laws that made it possible to pick a fight and then claim self defense.

I don't know Florida laws all that well. I do know Wisconsin laws.
If the reports in the news are correct (I don't know that for sure), GZ would not have a valid claim of self defense in Wisconsin. His initiating the situation by following TM would negate any claim of unavoidable. His getting out of his car against the advice of the police dispatcher would completely destroy any claim of "unavoidable".
I've had this discussion with a couple of firearms instructors and the lawyer who advises them. They all agreed that, in Wisconsin, GZ would most likely be convicted of voluntary manslaughter.

It will be interesting to see how it turns out. I have my opinions, but I wouldn't bet very heavily on the outcome going either way.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 622]

After the 911 operator said "We don't need you to do that" GZ said "OK". He claims he also turned around at that point.
This 911 person has no legal authority to do anything anyway.

Interesting case to be sure - a lot of folks are on edge about defending themselves now....

So far this morning, both sides are arguing to have family members removed from the proceedings. The fight is on.

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

normiss

After the 911 operator said "We don't need you to do that" GZ said "OK". He claims he also turned around at that point.
This 911 person has no legal authority to do anything anyway.

Interesting case to be sure - a lot of folks are on edge about defending themselves now....

So far this morning, both sides are arguing to have family members removed from the proceedings. The fight is on.

Yes, it's going to be very interesting.

I'm really not following the case all that closely, and I heard a short bit on NPR this morning about specific language that both sides can use. One thing that I was wrong about was the dispatcher telling GZ not to leave his car, because he hadn't called until after he got out.

But didn't he say "OK' after being advised that "he didn't have to do that", and then later say "I've lost him."? Which would seem (to me at least) that he kept following.
I agree that the dispatcher didn't have any legal authority to order him to do or not do anything but it blows big holes in any self defense case if you ignore advice given by any LE.

And I'm perfectly fine with people being on edge about using deadly force to defend themselves. It should be very much a "last choice" option.
The old adage "I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six" says (to me at least), that if I use deadly force in a self defense situation, then I'm going to have to justify that in a court of law.
I fully realize (and agree with) the idea that use of deadly force will carry legal consequences.

I was advised that pulling a gun out and pointing it at someone will probably cost me around $5k. Actually shooting someone will run about $20k. IIRC, AggieDave quoted a cost of about $50k for a "no-bill" (Grand Jury choosing not to indict) CHL shoot in Texas.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Rick 67]

TBT article

interesting article on SYG

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[rehmwa 2]

Well, at least one station this morning was back at it again.

Martin was shown as the honor student and with pretty much his kindergarten pictures. Zimmerman appeared to have horns and flames airbrushed in. Though I don't really watch that station for the news.....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[wolfriverjoe 1,351]

Rick

TBT article

interesting article on SYG

Yes. I'm rather flabbergasted at how the simple concept of "removing the requirement to retreat" has been twisted and perverted.
Some of the cases clearly involved "showing up with a gun and starting a fight", but were considered self defense.

Based on some of the cases in that article, GZ may well walk. Again, I wouldn't bet very much on the outcome either way. It will be interesting to watch.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 622]

The defense isn't using the STG claim in the case, so it doesn't really matter in this regard.

The defense opening statement is very weird.
VERY weird. Bumbling even.

[Rick 67]

I agree Mark this is not a SYG case it is a straight up self defense claim.


But the SYG rule sure has been twisted around from what I believe is the original intent.

of course strictly my opinion.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

But the SYG rule sure has been twisted around from what I believe is the original intent.

That is, of course, what lawyers get paid to do. And, why it is so important to have clearly and precisely crafted laws. People complain that laws are long and complicated, but it seems laws that don't go into excruciating detail about every possible contingency just become superhighways for any lawyer to drive a truck over to get their client to their destination.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[wayneflorida 0]

I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

[turtlespeed 212]

wayneflorida

I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

LOL

I had the same thought, except in reverse.
Thorazine, or Xanax for the second day.

She looked like she had been to the principals office.

I also like how, in testimony to the prosecution, she clarified that TM said on the phone to her that a "Creepy ass cracker" was following him, and then, "That Niggah is still there"; but when the defense asked her if TM had evver used the "N Word" or "Cracker" she "Could not recall"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wayneflorida 0]

turtlespeed

***I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

LOL

I had the same thought, except in reverse.
Thorazine, or Xanax for the second day.

She looked like she had been to the principals office.

I also like how, in testimony to the prosecution, she clarified that TM said on the phone to her that a "Creepy ass cracker" was following him, and then, "That Niggah is still there"; but when the defense asked her if TM had evver used the "N Word" or "Cracker" she "Could not recall"



Yes I thought that too. Off drugs first day, on drugs second day.

[Gravitymaster 0]

turtlespeed

***I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

LOL

I had the same thought, except in reverse.
Thorazine, or Xanax for the second day.

She looked like she had been to the principals office.

I also like how, in testimony to the prosecution, she clarified that TM said on the phone to her that a "Creepy ass cracker" was following him, and then, "That Niggah is still there"; but when the defense asked her if TM had evver used the "N Word" or "Cracker" she "Could not recall"

As an admitted Cracker, I find her comments disgraceful.

[Rick 67]

turtlespeed

***I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

LOL

I had the same thought, except in reverse.
Thorazine, or Xanax for the second day.

She looked like she had been to the principals office.

I also like how, in testimony to the prosecution, she clarified that TM said on the phone to her that a "Creepy ass cracker" was following him, and then, "That Niggah is still there"; but when the defense asked her if TM had evver used the "N Word" or "Cracker" she "Could not recall"


Yeah not a good witness at all. This guy today seems very credible. He actually saw what happened. Unlike the girl yesterday that was sure it was GZ that threw the first blow from what she HEARD on the phone.

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[turtlespeed 212]

Rick

******I think Martin's female friend was on drugs the first day of her testimony. She was incoherent most of the time the first day of testimony.

Second day she was completely different. I could understand what she was saying.

I think somebody baby sat her overnight.

I really don't think she was much of a witness given how she was the first day.

I watched about 50% of her testimony Wed. and only some replays Thu.

LOL

I had the same thought, except in reverse.
Thorazine, or Xanax for the second day.

She looked like she had been to the principals office.

I also like how, in testimony to the prosecution, she clarified that TM said on the phone to her that a "Creepy ass cracker" was following him, and then, "That Niggah is still there"; but when the defense asked her if TM had evver used the "N Word" or "Cracker" she "Could not recall"


Yeah not a good witness at all. This guy today seems very credible. He actually saw what happened. Unlike the girl yesterday that was sure it was GZ that threw the first blow from what she HEARD on the phone.

She couldn't POSSIBLY have an agenda could she?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Rick 67]

or any coaching from the prosecution

You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!

[turtlespeed 212]

Rick

or any coaching from the prosecution

I can see it . . . Yes ma'am, if the defense asks you a question and you think it will hurt our case, just say you don't recall.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[devildog 0]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/28/Zimmerman-ground-and-pound

"On Friday, in testimony devastating to the prosecution’s case against George Zimmerman in his murder trial for the killing of Trayvon Martin, prosecution witness John Good stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him mixed martial arts style – Good used the term “ground and pound” -- before Zimmerman shot him. According to Good, he thought Zimmerman was shouting help as Martin beat him. “That’s what it looked like,” he stated. “It looked like there were strikes being thrown, punches being thrown.”"


That's not gonna help the prosecution at all

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[Gravitymaster 0]

The sad part of this for Zimmerman is that even if he is found not guilty, his troubles will just be starting. I have no doubt that the Obama/Holder Dept. of Justice will file civil rights violations against him and hound him into bankruptcy. Martins family will also file lawsuits for wrongful death and the Black Mafia will fund them.

[wayneflorida 0]

Gravitymaster

The sad part of this for Zimmerman is that even if he is found not guilty, his troubles will just be starting. I have no doubt that the Obama/Holder Dept. of Justice will file civil rights violations against him and hound him into bankruptcy. Martins family will also file lawsuits for wrongful death and the Black Mafia will fund them.

I thought that DOJ investgated and stated that this was not a hate crime. But thinking, I'm sure DOJ can dig up something to charge GZ even if not a hate crime.

As far as civil suits I concur with you.

[devildog 0]

Gravitymaster

The sad part of this for Zimmerman is that even if he is found not guilty, his troubles will just be starting. I have no doubt that the Obama/Holder Dept. of Justice will file civil rights violations against him and hound him into bankruptcy. Martins family will also file lawsuits for wrongful death and the Black Mafia will fund them.

They already sued and the HOA settled out of court IIRC

You stop breathing for a few minutes and everyone jumps to conclusions.

[davjohns 1]

Shotgun

Hmm, yeah, a Texan with a nickname of Shotgun. Maybe the prosecutor wouldn't want me. But I look like an innocent little lady who would want to send that bad man to jail, so who knows...

This phrase reminded me of a quote from a Cary Grant movie. Roughly, "Before the age of 14, a woman is protected by law. After 80, by Mother Nature. In between, she's fair game."

Once you are no longer a genuine 'little lady' I'm having a hard time with the 'innocent' part.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[muff528 3]

Question for the lawyers here --
Zimmerman's mother was not permitted into the courtroom to observe the trial. The reason given was that she may be called to testify. However, Martin's mother, who has been present for the trial is expected to testify. Does this have to do with which side would call them? Maybe the type of testimony they would be expected to give. Is it because Z is the one who is on trial? Another reason? Is there some legal requirement or is this a decision by the judge?

[kelpdiver 2]

as a WAG, she may have different treatment as family of the alleged victim. But I'm interested too in the answer.

(still can't get over a 6 member jury either)