A media outlet compared them as look a likes to kareem abdul jabar did you see that?

Lilo your coming off very bias here. He should've ran ..run run as fast as you can here comes zimmerman the gingerman man

And Zimmerman should have stayed in his car instead of acting like a wannabe cop.

Everyone comes into confrontations in my life. I got shot the guy hit me twice and grazed once..you know what I did when I got outta the hospital I sprayed da bull

Yo fam I'm half black half Canadian. How many times did z-man fire the gun once or a bunch. If he shot him once then he should not be in a court room. I've been shot n shot back ..real shit

If you kill someone who had no weapon the courtroom is exactly where you need to be.

he wouldn't carry in his project because he feels safe In his neighborhood

going to the store or to your "boo's" house is when u get robbed or shot

it sounds like u need to go pull a George Zimmerman

However this turns out this is some of the worst lawyering I have ever seen in any case, let along a high profile one. My guess is Zimmerman walks because the prosecutors did not prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt.

In Sanford, Florida blacks cannot carry weapons, and they gotta be off the street before the sun goes down.

Boy am I glad to hear you say that DT. I've been trying to stay out of it here on the BB, but I've been watching the trial and feel the same way and wondered how you & Kly might feel. I have lots of questions as to how this is handled.


TIS

I guess everyone figured that out with the opening Knock Knock joke!

This case would not be so high profile if it wasn't pushed for the race issue.

The race blindness cuts clear across this country. Like there is a code to follow by some of the people.

TIS I have questions about how badly it has been mishandled. Don't these idiots (on both sides) interview their witnesses ahead of time?

DT,

Don't know if you or Kly saw it, but the lawyers were in court (without jury) until late last night with defense wanting to admit as evidence cell phone texts by Martin (which judge denied to enter) and also an animation expert who computerized what happened step by step per the defense. Naturally this was all pro Zimmerman's.

Anyway, the judge said it could NOT be admitted as evidence but as a demo only, I think in closing arguments. Since Martin isn't here to tell his side, it sounds prejudicial.

Also, tell me how closing arguments work. Who goes first, I forgot.



TIS

Tis, of course it would be pro Zimmerman- its the defenses turn to bring things in.
Correct me if I am wrong but it would have to be a demo as there is no one who could be crossed examined on this video by the other side for facts.

I also think that it is the defense that goes last on the closing arguments if I remember right.
Our local legal eagles will correct me if I am wrong.

Anybody watching the Zimmerman case? Judge and Defense attorney (West I think) got pretty tense. Judge asked GZ if he decided if he was gonna testify & his attorney objected to the question (a couple times). Judge got testy and overruled his objections, at least twice. Judge will ask again at end of day and indicated Defense may rest today.

I can't imagine GZ would testify but hope it does. What a dream for the prosecution no? Unless of course they F it up.


TIS

As for the computer generated cartoon, the judge made an really stupid ruling. The jury will get an instruction that the cartoon is not "evidence" but argument only. Thats the same instruction they give regarding opening and closing arguments of lawyers. Point is the jury will see it, and they wont pay attention to the instruction, so it is as good as in.

The judge should have either admitted it or not admitted it.

I have not tried a criminal trial for more than 25 years, so I am not 100% sure but I believe the prosecution goes first, then the defense, then the prosecution gets a brief rebuttal, however there's a way the prosecution can screw up and not ghet their rebuttal, but I forget what that is.

Zimmerman will be resuming his patrols within a week, having never testified.

There is no reason to have Zimmerman take the stand. Zimmermman will be in hiding though. Hidden away till things quite down, as the upraor will be a loud one. And we all know that is going to happen.

I think you are right DT, prosecution gets a brief rebuttal, but only on things that was talked about by the defense in their closing statement. No new things can be thrown in/up.

The case will be kicked around for weeks with news reports and opinions from every TOM, DICK and HARRY with ever angle they can find.
His parents will travel far and wide and be on every TV station and church that will have them. saying that they were wronged and showing pictures of their son. the new face of what is wrong with this country and the way it treats certain people.

I wouldn't expect any other kind of response from you. You are so blinded by your liberal viewpoints you can't see anything objectively anymore. Trayvon (hardly a child) attacked Zimmerman. Not the other way around. It was Trayvon who turned it physical and was acting like a thug. Zimmerman was being overzealous but he didn't "provoke" anything. As much as it may piss you off, that's what the evidence has shown. As I said before, involuntary manslaughter but not 2nd degree murder.

Voluntary manslaughter is a killing, derived from an intentional act in the heat of passion or provocation.

Involuntary manslaughter is an unintentional killing resulting from recklessness or negligence. A drunk driver hitting a child or a person, thinking a firearm is unloaded, shooting a friend are examples of involuntary.

If Zimmerman grabbed his weapon and formed an intent to shoot Martin in their scuffle, then voluntary would be more appropriate. If the jury feels that his use of the firearm was reckless, but unintentional, then involuntary may be considered.

To be exculpated Zimmerman must establish self-defense, which is a reasonable belief that he was in danger of losing his life or receiving serious bodily injury. This defense is not available if the jury determines that Zimmerman participated in some way of causing the physical confrontation that resulted in the shooting.

In most jurisdictions the party with the burden (Plaintiff or the prosecution) opens first and closes last. If they close first, they are usually afforded rebuttal.

So what do YOU think happen and what will it be?

When court ended today and it was just judge/lawyers they talked about possibility of lesser charges of manslaughter & aggravated assault to be determined tomorrow morning.



TIS

I haven't followed all of the testimony closely, but the prosecution's case didn't appear to unfold as they had hoped, and if I were defense counsel, I'd put a muzzle on my client, and think that a not guilty verdict is on the horizon. Zimmerman would certainly hurt hgis case by testifying.

The best news for the defense is that reasonable doubt is a tough horse for a prosecutor to ride when the prosecution's witnesses fall short. In this case while some might draw the inference that Zimmerman was belligerent and purposely approached Martin, putting a guy away on murder 2 is a big jump when the picture of the events is still possibly hazy.

What would make the defense nervous is that they can't escape the conclusion that whatever verdict is considered, Martin shouldn't have died that night. It's a tragedy that can't be undone, and that Zimmerman, armed with a gun, pursued Martin despite being advised by 911 not to do so can invite an inference that his hands are unclean.

While this incident has fueled a national debate about the role of race, I don't think the jury will be concerned about race in its deliberations. There are so many pieces of testimony and evidence along with complex jury instructions about applying the facts to each element of the law with appropriate standards of proof that there will be little time for such distractions.

I don't think there's a small chance for Murder 2, at least a 50% chance Zimmerman will walk, and a moderate chance at manslaughter or assault.

In order to limit possible appellate issues, the judge may have Zimmerman, if they decide not to testify, to give an oral colloquy to state that he voluntarily agrees not to testify in his defense.

Kly, Zimmermann did decline to testify. Also, the prosecution initially asserted that Zimmermann was on top; however,it's now pretty clear that he was not. The judge will decide tomorrow on included charges.

That's a prosecution mistake. That Zimmerman was never on top doesn't necessarily disrupt their theory, but failing to delver on a promise can weigh heavily. It may take some time to sort out which of the offenses will go to the jury.

I've been watching this trial from the start. Before it started, my opinion of Zimmerman from what I saw in the press was that he was a liar and more than likely a vigilante that made a big mistake. After seeing the entire trial, I wonder how this case even got past a Grand Jury. Almost all the evidence points to self defense. Yes, Zimmerman should have stopped following him, but all the evidence points to Zimmerman getting his head smashed against the sidewalk screaming for help. At that point by law, it's self defense. The Prosecution hasn't done a great job, but they also don't have a lot to work with. One by one the defense marched up "witnesses" to testify that it was George screaming for help on the tape. I believe more than 10 people testified. The Prosecution had I think 2. Martin's mother and father. There was testimony that his father first stated that it wasn't his son on the tape, and changed his story. The defense had law enforcement experts testify that Geroge's injuries were consistent with someone getting his head bashed against the ground. From what I've seen, there's a lot more than "reasonable doubt" that this isn't a 2nd degree murder case.

Right. Zimmerman claimed that Martin jumped out of the bushes and said "You're going to die tonight, homie". Not only does that sound like someone who has been watching too many The Wire reruns but there were no bushes.

But in your world an armed bully may follow someone and question his right to be in a neighborhood and then kill him...as long as that someone happens to be black.He's probably a thug anyway. I mean that's what the person who killed him said. Let's ignore the fact that Zimmerman told Hannity that he had never heard of Florida's Stand Your Ground law while Zimmerman's professor testified that they covered that law in their class. Let's ignore bullet trajectory evidence which doesn't fit Zimmerman's claims.

Zimmerman is going to get away with murder. If Zimmerman were black and Martin were white this trial would already be over with a first degree murder plea or conviction. I am not playing the race card, just stating a fact.

Of course in wacky world Martin deserved to die cause he was wearing a hoodie and self annointed cops like Zimmerman are heroes.

I've not followed the trial or any of the media shows about it.

Ultimately, what matters is the verdict..not what cnn ,fox,etc report or decide to cover.

I only go back and look at the coverage when I read someone online who appears to be repeating verbatim what a smarter person has said, and 99% of the time...I go back and they are repeating line for line what a "legal expert/talking head" said the night before on the news channel that they watch/listen to.

I guess they repeat what they see in an effort to sound "informed", but it has the opposite effect.



Speaking of recording things though...my initial thoughts after the general human feelings of empathy for the death of the young man, was that if Zimmerman really wanted to deter crime in his community that he should have helped set up a series of cameras all around his neighborhood.
Record faces, clothes people are wearing, license plate numbers,so that culprits can be identified and apprehended.

Even have some signs put up that "area is under 24/7 surveillance" if you want to force the issue.

action is recorded time stamped...

just seems like a more efficient way of combating crime .....

Driving around thinking you are charles bronson is just not a smart thing to do



===============

Now I fully understand why some people get so upset with some of the postings on here.

I also understand how hard it is to pull together a jury of people who can not walk into the courtroom without an idea stuck in their heads before they hear the facts in a case.

and I am starting to understand what drives the racist war machine.