Let's talk about Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, and how unbelievably fucked up this all is

so basically most of the world has adopted Nude Spock and/or Squirrel Police's politics

i think a sizeable chunk of the world has always rocked those politics

tryin to imagine a bunch of middle-aged to elder crackers sobbing in a room after being called "cracker" and...y'know...I'm just not buyin it

All I'm getting is a circle of old jerks making the pugnacious chin-out frat-face at one another.

now imagine they're black

/mcconaghey face

I see what you did there (last summer).

Bill O'Reilly floated the question: was Jamie Foxx being racially insensitive by wearing a Trayvon shirt to an awards ceremony

His audience is made up of people who would not see that as a question only an idiot would ask. They'd see it as a sharp blow against the hypocrisy of liberals.

http://gawker.com/watch-dozens-of-idiots-on-skype-call-the-zimmerman-tria-658043508

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v642/shakespeares_sister/gifs/fox_zimmerman_laughs_130703c1.gif

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/george-zimmerman-jury-told-injuries-insignificant/story?id=19552856

A medical examiner who reviewed video and photographs of George Zimmerman's injuries suffered during his fatal confrontation with Trayvon Martin called the neighborhood watch captain's wounds "insignificant" and "non-life threatening."

Dr. Valerie Rao testified that Zimmerman was struck as few as three times by Martin during the fight that night. She also asserted his head may have only been slammed on the concrete a single time.

no surprise, the head wounds didn't even remotely look significant in the pics I saw. I realize there will always be small discrepencies in a story you tell over time, but the gaps in his are just huge.

don't think this will be enough to convince the jury (or even prove guilt), but hopefully it budges them a little.

i've only been following this case superficially but dude is almost certainly going to be acquitted, right?

Ask the jury.

I haven't been watching, just reading, but the commentary is that the case is weak. Hell, Casey Anthony's case had plenty of holes (to where it wasn't a surprise that she walked), but even that was stronger than this one at this point.

Not sure what else the state can do at this point. They've about exhausted eyewitnesses, the star witness didn't make the impression they hoped, and now they're basically relying on poking holes in Zimmermann's accounts and having experts fill in blanks with analysis of things like the nature of his injuries, but none of these remotely do the work necessary to paint a picture of guilt.

At this point, I don't see what else is going to do him in. That he has contradicted his own story countless times isn't going to matter. He still gets the basic elements of his story the same (ie, I WAS ATTACKED FIRST), and given the weakness of the prosecution, that's enough to keep him afloat.

The judge just ruled that the jury can consider manslaughter.

Good. still a steep climb even to convict on that but at least it gives options

got a warm fuzzy feeling when listening to Starlito's Mental Warfare mixtape the other day. on one of the later tracks, he concludes one of the more melancholic numbers by giving a heartful shout out to Trayvon Martin. wasn't one of those 'tacked on' type things, was very real and full of warmth.

The judge just ruled that the jury can consider manslaughter.

― "Post-Oven" (DJP), Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:18 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

or did you mean the jury cna consider 'committing' manslaughter, cuz.........

my takeaway is that the judge really, REALLY want Zimmerman in jail

or manslaughtered

looks like his attorneys are holding onto the "Stand Your Ground" immunity as a 'get out of jail free' card, and may use it during an appeal if he loses. And apparently only haven't done so yet since it can only be invoked once. Not sure if it would work, given that similar cases, SYG has been dismissed, but it's such a horribly written bill, that who really knows.

verdict day is going to be a clusterfuck

omg

10:14 a.m. ET: Mantei is arguing why Zimmerman should also be charged with third-degree felony murder. Mantei said the basis for the charge is that Zimmerman committed the felony of child abuse that resulted in death.

10:16 a.m. ET: Mantei is buttressing his argument with examples from case law now.

10:20 a.m. ET: Mantei is explaining to the court multiple cases where third-degree murder was charged against the defendant.

10:23 a.m. ET: Mantei is now talking about the elements required of third-degree murder saying the jury must find the defendant was commiting a felony and as a result of the felony someone died.

10:26 a.m. ET: Mantei said the self-defense would apply to all the charges being considered in this case. West is now arguing before in the court.

wtf?

Is this like the murder equivalent of statutory rape? Like, if you murder someone under 18, it's child abuse?

looks like his attorneys are holding onto the "Stand Your Ground" immunity as a 'get out of jail free' card, and may use it during an appeal if he loses. And apparently only haven't done so yet since it can only be invoked once. Not sure if it would work, given that similar cases, SYG has been dismissed, but it's such a horribly written bill, that who really knows.

― Neanderthal, Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:35 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I guess I need to read the details, but this doesn't make sense to me. Normally you can only appeal on issues you raised at trial. There's no such thing as a "card" you can "play" only once in the sense of saving it for an appeal.

10:30 a.m. ET: "Just when I thought this case couldn't get anymore bizarre. The state is seeking third-degree murder based on child abuse. Is the court going to give this any serious contention or consideration, because if so we have a lot talking to do," said West.

10:31 a.m. ET: West said the third-degree felony was sprung on him at the last minute, and he is not prepared to make an argument about the third-degree felony murder.

10:32 a.m. ET: West appears to be very upset, and frustrated with the prosecution.

10:33 a.m. ET: Nelson said the law says that third-degree murder is a lesser included charge of second-degree murder.

10:35 a.m. ET: West is calling the prosecution's actions as a "trick." Nelson said she understands West's argument, and will come back to this issue. Nelson will give West some time to review the law, but not hours.

reading this makes me feel like I'm watching a Big Brother backdoor trap being sprung on an overly cocky housemate

I guess I need to read the details, but this doesn't make sense to me. Normally you can only appeal on issues you raised at trial. There's no such thing as a "card" you can "play" only once in the sense of saving it for an appeal.

― i don't even have an internet (Hurting 2), Thursday, July 11, 2013 11:04 AM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I'm mostly basing this on what I read in this article (ignore the LOL-ish article title)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-worried-murder-trial-close/story?id=19636641

O'Mara says any conviction would be met with an appeal, and hinted he could decide to use a Stand Your Ground immunity hearing during an appeal. Zimmerman's defense team elected not to apply Zimmerman's right to a stand your ground hearing during the trial because the immunity hearing can only be invoked once.

The felony murder doctrine is one that states that a death that occurs during the commission of a dangerous or otherwise enumerated felony will be deemed to be a murder if that death was a foreseeable outcome of the crime. An easy instance: A person is robbing a bank, a patron has a heart attack and dies as a result of fright - boom, you got your felony murder. This only applies, however, during the commission of the crime and immediate escape. So, if that same patron has a heart attack as a result of a dream he had about the robbery that night, and dies, no felony murder - the law would deem that to be too attenuated. Some jurisdictions provide what is known as the Redline limitation - this provides that a person will not be found liable for felony murder when a co-conspirator is killed as a result of resistance from the felony victim or the police.

xp That sounds wrong to me, but maybe Florida has some weird procedural quirks. The basic concept of an appeal is that the trial court made an error. So if you don't even raise something at trial, you generally can't raise it on appeal, because you can't say that the trial court made an error on something they didn't even get the chance to look at. Appellate courts are "law" courts only, whereas trial courts are "fact finders."

11:07 a.m. ET: West said if the jury thinks Zimmerman following Martin was illegal, but it wasn't and they must know it in the instructions or it will confuse the jury.

11:09 a.m. ET: Mantei said the jury should be free to consider the whether Zimmerman followed Martin when deciding who provoked the fight.

11:11 a.m. ET: Nelson said she will not include that following Martin was a lawful activity. She sternly told West not to continue to disagree after she has made a ruling. The defense will be allowed to tell the jury that following Martin the night of the shooting was lawful activity during closing arguments.

well clearly if it's legal to follow someone, it's also legal to shoot that person

if it looks like he is gonna lose zimmerman should consider shooting everyone in the jury and attempting a meta stand your ground defense

I was trying to think of a way to make that joke yesterday, damn you.

if we lived in florida I think you could probably shoot me now

you were following us. on a thread. you even had a bookmark.

11:14 a.m. ET: Nelson has moved on to the jury instruction regarding circumstantial evidence.

11:18 a.m. ET: West is arguing that a the jury should be given an instruction on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution has objected to the defense's instruction about the issue.

11:20 a.m. ET: West said circumstantial evidence is not as reliable as direct evidence and the jury does need to know be told that in the instructions.

11:24 a.m. ET: West has cautioned the court to not confuse the jury about the significance of circumstantial evidence.

11:25 a.m. ET: Nelson said she is not going to give the circumstantial evidence instruction to the jury.

I am getting the sense that Judge Nelson hates the defense a lot

I keep reading "Judge Nelson" as "Judd Nelson."

Save that for the movie!

http://cf2.imgobject.com/t/p/w500/nQHjPC0BLa858pyFJ3yRTv0nvCs.jpg

11:45 a.m. ET: Nelson now wants to move on to the verdict form that will be given to the jurors to fill out.

11:50 a.m. ET: West asked the court to put the not guilty option on the first page of the verdict form. Nelson said she was not going to to that very flatly.

lol

11:52am: West asked the court to make it illegal to find his client guilty. The court denies the request.

dicking around with forms is a way of life in FL

"West asked the court to replace the verdict form with a giant smiley-face sticker captioned 'C'mon, just let him go!' Nelson said she was not going to do that very flatly."

Whenever I read this thread it makes me sad that there was no ILX during the OJ trial.

oh man y'all would not have wanted to be around me during the OJ trial

jfc i remember that day so clearly. even more clearly than the rodney king verdict, which is kind of fucked up.

I am certain that I would have been delighted by your Display Names, DP.

The OJ debacle was something I don't want to re-live and I fear the Trayvon debacle will be similar.