Zimmerman trial BITOG style....

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell

Sorry to say but my guess is that Martin would have eventually ended up injuring or murdering a totally innocent person in the long run so it may have been the best outcome for him.


Please clarify this last line. I don't want to put any words in your mouth.


Martin was "likely" to end up killing an innocent bystander in the long run. All the historical evidence indicates this.


And most importantly because his juvi records were sealed we can't know just how troubled this subject was.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell

Sorry to say but my guess is that Martin would have eventually ended up injuring or murdering a totally innocent person in the long run so it may have been the best outcome for him.


Please clarify this last line. I don't want to put any words in your mouth.


Martin was "likely" to end up killing an innocent bystander in the long run. All the historical evidence indicates this.


And most importantly because his juvi records were sealed we can't know just how troubled this subject was.


What is this historical evidence you speak of? I have no idea what you're implying.

 

[otis24]

Then there will probably be more shootings and more trials. Probably a good thing there is an ammo shortage, or a bad thing, depending on whose shoes you are in.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dishdude


What is this historical evidence you speak of? I have no idea what you're implying.


He was an out of control young man. His mother could not handle him, frequent drug use, theft, he was a ticking time bomb. His juvi records were sealed. If they would have been allowed to be examined I think it would be a much more open and shut case against Martin.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: dishdude


What is this historical evidence you speak of? I have no idea what you're implying.


He was an out of control young man. His mother could not handle him, frequent drug use, theft, he was a ticking time bomb. His juvi records were sealed. If they would have been allowed to be examined I think it would be a much more open and shut case against Martin.


Prove any of this, other than he smoked weed. I, like most 17 year olds also smoked weed when I was 17 but I didn't end up dead, or killing/injuring someone later in life. There is nothing connecting the trace amounts of THC in his system to that night, and this is nothing Zimmerman knew at the time. None of this was relevant to the case.

Should the jury have heard about Zimmerman's previous infractions?

In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with "resisting officer with violence" and "battery of law enforcement officer." Both these felonies are considered third-degree. Due to his desperate attempts, the charges were reduced to "resisting officer without violence" and then the only remaining charge was also completely waived off when he entered an alcohol education program.
In the same year (2005), Zimmerman's ex-fiance, Veronica Zuazo, filed a civil motion for a restraining order, alleging domestic violence. In retaliation, Zimmerman filed for a retraining order against Zuazo and both these claims were resolved with both restraining orders granted.

By that account, Zimmerman is a cop and wife beater.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dishdude



Prove any of this, other than he smoked weed. I, like most 17 year olds also smoked weed when I was 17 but I didn't end up dead, or killing/injuring someone later in life. There is nothing connecting the trace amounts of THC in his system to that night, and this is nothing Zimmerman knew at the time. None of this was relevant to the case.


Prove me wrong.

If Martin was such victim why not have the juvi records unsealed so that the jury can see how noble and upstanding a citizen he was. LOL

The reason the family REFUSED to let those juvi records become public was because they reveal a very troubled, potentially DANGEROUS individual that could possibly "murder" someone. Perhaps with his bare hands?


I agree that Zimmerman's records should have been allowed into the case, but then so too should have Martins'.

I believe that Martins' records would show a much more dangerous type than Zimmerman, and the family knew it would be an instant dismissal of the case if they would have been opened.


Is Zimmerman a saint, no. But that is no excuse for Martin to basically full throttle pummel this guys face in because he didn't like that Zimmerman was doing his duty as a Neighborhood Watchman.

Subject Martin's objective was to "murder" Zimmerman.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: dishdude



Prove any of this, other than he smoked weed. I, like most 17 year olds also smoked weed when I was 17 but I didn't end up dead, or killing/injuring someone later in life. There is nothing connecting the trace amounts of THC in his system to that night, and this is nothing Zimmerman knew at the time. None of this was relevant to the case.


Prove me wrong.

If Martin was such victim why not have the juvi records unsealed so that the jury can see how noble and upstanding a citizen he was. LOL

The reason the family REFUSED to let those juvi records become public was because they reveal a very troubled, potentially DANGEROUS individual that could possibly "murder" someone. Perhaps with his bare hands?


I agree that Zimmerman's records should have been allowed into the case, but then so to should have Martins'.

I believe that Martins' records would show a much more dangerous type than Zimmerman, and the family knew it would be an instant dismissal of the case if they would have been opened.


Is Zimmerman a saint, no. But that is no excuse for Martin to basically full throttle pummel this guys face in because he didn't like that Zimmerman was doing his duty as a Neighborhood Watchman.

Subject Martin's objective was to "murder" Zimmerman.


The difference is, Martin had no criminal history to release.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: dishdude


The difference is, Martin had no criminal history to release.


That is because he could hide behind his underage status as a juvenile offender. The criminal actions are cloaked in those records and sealed. Still doesn't change the reality that his actions had he been over 18 would have been in a criminal record.

I am definitely for lowering the age of charging younger offenders with standard criminal statutes not under juvenile statutes.. I say violent and drug offences should be done in the adult system at 15 and over. I wonder just how many SERIOUS (felony) charges we would have seen from this "kid" Martin?

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: dishdude


The difference is, Martin had no criminal history to release.


That is because he could hide behind his underage status as a juvenile offender. The criminal actions are cloaked in those records and sealed. Still doesn't change the reality that his actions had he been over 18 would have been in a criminal record.

I am definitely for lowering the age of charging younger offenders with standard criminal statutes not under juvenile statutes.. I say violent and drug offences should be done in the adult system at 15 and over. I wonder just how many SERIOUS (felony) charges we would have seen from this "kid" Martin?


There is nothing to indicate Martin had any juvenile record. You're purely dreaming something up for the purpose of demonizing a kid that had his life cut way too short in a tragic event.

 

[JimPghPA]

Originally Posted By: Slick17601
I think the area better be ready for riots if their is a not guilty verdict. I do not understand the point of destroying your own hometown but it will likely happen.



If there is a destroying riot, the people doing the destroying know that they can not destroy (read set fire to with intent to burn to the ground) buildings and houses that are occupied by other people who would be within their rights to stand their own ground and use lethal weapons to defend them self and other occupants (read family members) from possible death from fire, or death from attack by an angry mob if forced to leave their dwelling when a mob angry enough to use fire as a weapon is outside their dwelling.

And since they would be facing lethal force if they attacked such dwellings, they can only attack those locations where they know that no such lethal force would be used against them.

Now, if law abiding citizens could not have firearms within their dwellings then the target of such riots might be completely different. This alone makes keeping the rite to bear arms worth fight for.

 

[Art_Vandelay]

None of this would have happened if the Police Officer, that Zimmerman assaulted in 2005, simply shot and killed him.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Art_Vandelay
None of this would have happened if the Police Officer, that Zimmerman assaulted in 2005, simply shot and killed him.


Hehehe. That's as good as the diner comparison. Glad I wasn't mid-gulp this time.

 

[AVB]

I believe in innocent until proven guilty. I don't think the state proved their case.

I also think that if their would have been evidence that Zimmerman broke the law, then he would have been charged with a crime from the begining.

 

[Mr Nice]

Governor Rick Scott has put the FL National Guard on alert in case of riots.

 

[BISCUT]

Originally Posted By: FXjohn
the stand your ground law is stupid and the liabilities will make the state back off on it. myself I prefer CC/OC and castle law which my state has. In my opinion Z abused his carry rights.


I'm in partial agreement with you BUT that is what the law is/was when Z used it. He should be judged under it as it's applicable.

This is a prime example of the outcome of taking a bad case forward, and this was a very bad case, is bad law. We have all witnessed what the injection of politics into law does -- distorts and manipulates. Mother of TM HIRED and PAID a community activist to get this moved to the center stage.

Here in New Yorkistan the law is often skewed but under the Z n TM case it would have worked. Same situation here this would clearly be a lower Manslaughter charge initially brought not a Murder 2. But this venue is FL. Amazing to see how the state, special prosecutor, and sadly the judge are subliminally stacking the deck against Z.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: LT4 Vette
Governor Rick Scott has put the FL National Guard on alert in case of riots.


Smart move.

 

[rjundi]

Either way Zimmerman gets a life with a painted targeted affixed on his back.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
One thing I find very interesting is that at least in the mass media (although not sure it if has actually been brought up in the court room) was the question of why Martin didn't simply call 911 himself when he saw Zimmerman following instead of engaging him in a physical confrontation which we know is a fact, even if the details are not clear. Martin had equal responsibility to avoid a confrontation as much as Zimmerman did but I sure haven't heard this mentioned.

The grim reality for a HUGE proportion of Americans is that, for various reasons, they simply do not believe the police are there to help.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: BISCUT
Originally Posted By: FXjohn
the stand your ground law is stupid and the liabilities will make the state back off on it. myself I prefer CC/OC and castle law which my state has. In my opinion Z abused his carry rights.


I'm in partial agreement with you BUT that is what the law is/was when Z used it. He should be judged under it as it's applicable.

This is a prime example of the outcome of taking a bad case forward, and this was a very bad case, is bad law. We have all witnessed what the injection of politics into law does -- distorts and manipulates. Mother of TM HIRED and PAID a community activist to get this moved to the center stage.

Here in New Yorkistan the law is often skewed but under the Z n TM case it would have worked. Same situation here this would clearly be a lower Manslaughter charge initially brought not a Murder 2. But this venue is FL. Amazing to see how the state, special prosecutor, and sadly the judge are subliminally stacking the deck against Z.


Very astute. Don't forget our own Justice Dept. had staff involved in the early protests! This started at the highest levels.

And it's completely irrelevant under the law what you did previously, as TM's past was excluded from the courtroom, too. Not just GZ's.

IMO the judge has been carefully instructed to do whatever she could to get a guilty verdict. Ask any real attorney and they'll tell you this case was WEAK. It's purely a media creation.

Just this AM an obscure news outlet posted a crime where 4 young black men killed a white waitress for pocket money. It will NEVER appear on the major media because it does not fit the agenda. I know great black families who are horrified at the threat of rioting and violence, they know this sets them back in the eyes of the public.

A truly sad situation anytime any young PERSON dies. No matter the circumstances, as a Father my heart goes out to the families of BOTH involved.

 

[Mr Nice]

Originally Posted By: rjundi
Either way Zimmerman gets a life with a painted targeted affixed on his back.

How long will he last in prison ?