Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (3 Viewers)

[Zow]

Um, I nailed the half hour for jury instructions.

Well what do I know? I've not seen a minute of the trial

(that's pretty damn fast though)

 

[timschochet]

OK JoJo- here's the bet- earlier in the thread, I asked if jurors were allowed to ask about sentencing requirements for manslaughter. A discussion ensued. If I can find the post in which I asked this, you owe me $50. If I can't produce it, I owe you $50.

Do we have a bet?

Yeah like I figured, that is NOT what I asked. Nice try chump, you don't change the terms of a bet to suit what you posted. I asked you to look it up, you challenged me with a $50 bet. I asked you the terms to make sure it was clear to you what it was I asked? So what do you do? You go ahead and look up exactly what you say and then phrase YOUR question in a form of a bet. Par for the course for you.

Wait- I'm honestly confused here. What is the difference between what I just wrote and what you asked? Please explain it to me, because I'm mystified.

 

[jamny]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

They don't want too many people in harm's way if a sharknado hits the courtroom.

No spoilers!

Saved Sharknado for tonight. Dying to read the thread on it.

Well, not to hijack this thread, but you have DVR'ed what is, without question, the greatest movie ever made. When tim does his next draft, it will be the first pick - and it doesn't matter what the topic of the draft is - greatest entertainment, greatest movie, greatest soundtrack, greatest effects in hollywood, greatest events in human history, reasons why we have eyes, literally everything. Get a fine bourbon, a fine woman, and sit back and enjoy. I envy you.

OMGOMGOMGOMGOMGOMG!

 

[Zow]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

Just the law in Florida.

Florida is really ####ed up huh? I thought it was standard across the board that juries consisted of 12. Learn something new every day. Thanks.

It's really just a cost saving tool. I'm pretty sure capital murder 1 gets 12 jurors.

Oh so they can vary depending on the case? Is it like that in all states? I sat on a personal injury trial jury and we had a full 12 in PA. (fat lady sued the maker of a chair for pain and suffering because she fell out of it. 'Merica!)

Law requires a minimum of six. I think capital requires 12. A verdict must be at least 9-3. Otherwise the number between 6-12 (and whether it must be unanimous) is up to state law.

 

[Phil Elliott]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

They don't want too many people in harm's way if a sharknado hits the courtroom.

No spoilers!

Saved Sharknado for tonight. Dying to read the thread on it.

Well, not to hijack this thread, but you have DVR'ed what is, without question, the greatest movie ever made. When tim does his next draft, it will be the first pick - and it doesn't matter what the topic of the draft is - greatest entertainment, greatest movie, greatest soundtrack, greatest effects in hollywood, greatest events in human history, reasons why we have eyes, literally everything. Get a fine bourbon, a fine woman, and sit back and enjoy. I envy you.

Saw a clip on it this morning. Many comments seem to be "its so bad, its good".

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

They don't want too many people in harm's way if a sharknado hits the courtroom.

I saw a videos of sharknados (maybe) around the Tampa area yesterday too. Is that close to Sanford?

 

[Billy Bats]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

Just the law in Florida.

Florida is really ####ed up huh? I thought it was standard across the board that juries consisted of 12. Learn something new every day. Thanks.

It's really just a cost saving tool. I'm pretty sure capital murder 1 gets 12 jurors.

Oh so they can vary depending on the case? Is it like that in all states? I sat on a personal injury trial jury and we had a full 12 in PA. (fat lady sued the maker of a chair for pain and suffering because she fell out of it. 'Merica!)

Law requires a minimum of six. I think capital requires 12. A verdict must be at least 9-3. Otherwise the number between 6-12 (and whether it must be unanimous) is up to state law.

Cool thanks woz. I must've been sleeping that day in high school.

 

[Joe McGee]

OK JoJo- here's the bet- earlier in the thread, I asked if jurors were allowed to ask about sentencing requirements for manslaughter. A discussion ensued. If I can find the post in which I asked this, you owe me $50. If I can't produce it, I owe you $50.

Do we have a bet?

Yeah like I figured, that is NOT what I asked. Nice try chump, you don't change the terms of a bet to suit what you posted. I asked you to look it up, you challenged me with a $50 bet. I asked you the terms to make sure it was clear to you what it was I asked? So what do you do? You go ahead and look up exactly what you say and then phrase YOUR question in a form of a bet. Par for the course for you.

Wait- I'm honestly confused here. What is the difference between what I just wrote and what you asked? Please explain it to me, because I'm mystified.

The first thing you've got right in this thread.

 

[Zow]

I still think about two full day sessions for deliberations though.

Any chance that the jury canvasses themselves, and finds five minutes into deliberations that all six of them agree to acquit (or convict of manslaughter, either way)? Thinking that this should be theoretically more likely with a 6-person jury rather than a 12-person one.

Are juries informally instructed, sotto voce: "Look, it's kinda weird if you all wrap up in ten minutes ... kill some time for a few hours, at least."?

Sure, that's possible. There's usually an instruction though (at least in AZ, where apparently our instructions take longer : p ) that the jury should review all the evidence and will get to physically go through all the exhibits. That and they'll probably want to take turns using the restroom.

Fastest verdicts I've ever had were about ten minutes (one not guilty on a theft, one guilty on a DUI). But those were misdemeanors in which the verdicts seemed incredibly obvious. Six should expedite things here, but this is a pretty serious murder case with some legit issues.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Here are my predictions, set firmly down so that you guys can make fun of me when I am wrong on all counts:

1. The jury will deliberate until Tuesday. On Tuesday late afternoon, they will come back into the courtroom and find George Zimmerman not guilty of all charges. When asked to explain, they will say that they suspect he was lying, but that they could not fully eliminate reasonable doubt.

2. The verdict will spark anger, especially among African-Americans. There will be peaceful protests, and a few acts of violence. There will be no widespread riots. However, Fox News will play up the violent acts.

3. George Zimmerman will disappear into obscurity. No talk shows, no books, no speaking engagements. He will simply vanish from public view.

Racist

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

They are done by 4:30 today. Not guilty on all charges that matter.

I'll take 3:30PM today

 

[kentric]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

I'm not suggesting this happened, but perhaps TM repositioned himself on GZ's body and felt the gun on the back side of his thigh? If that was the case, TM was likely to move down GZ's body to be able to grab the gun from in front of his thigh rather than awkwardly reaching back behind his thigh. Of course, if that was the case, you'd have to think that TM would be able to reach the gun before GZ since he was the one moving his body and thefore would have a better feel for when the gun was in range.

 

[The Commish]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

 

[Zow]

Possibly a dumb question, why are there only 6 jurors?

Just the law in Florida.

Florida is really ####ed up huh? I thought it was standard across the board that juries consisted of 12. Learn something new every day. Thanks.

It's really just a cost saving tool. I'm pretty sure capital murder 1 gets 12 jurors.

Oh so they can vary depending on the case? Is it like that in all states? I sat on a personal injury trial jury and we had a full 12 in PA. (fat lady sued the maker of a chair for pain and suffering because she fell out of it. 'Merica!)

Law requires a minimum of six. I think capital requires 12. A verdict must be at least 9-3. Otherwise the number between 6-12 (and whether it must be unanimous) is up to state law.

Cool thanks woz. I must've been sleeping that day in high school.

No worries, that issue is pretty confusing and TV/movies almost always just show 12. Most people have no idea it varies and I don't blame them.

 

[jon_mx]

If someone on the jury asks what the minimum/maximum sentences for Manslaughter is in the state of Florida will the judge tell them?

Judge: "shut up Tim"

 

[The Commish]

If someone on the jury asks what the minimum/maximum sentences for Manslaughter is in the state of Florida will the judge tell them?

I assume the jury has laptops and or cell phones with internet service, would it be against the rules for them to try to look up the answer themselves?

Have you watched any of this trial? Everyday the judge tells the jury they cannot use the Internet for any type of research on the case or terms.

 

[kentric]

Here are my predictions, set firmly down so that you guys can make fun of me when I am wrong on all counts:

1. The jury will deliberate until Tuesday. On Tuesday late afternoon, they will come back into the courtroom and find George Zimmerman not guilty of all charges. When asked to explain, they will say that they suspect he was lying, but that they could not fully eliminate reasonable doubt.

2. The verdict will spark anger, especially among African-Americans. There will be peaceful protests, and a few acts of violence. There will be no widespread riots. However, Fox News will play up the violent acts.

3. George Zimmerman will disappear into obscurity. No talk shows, no books, no speaking engagements. He will simply vanish from public view.

Racist

+1 on number two. I don't think there will be widespread riots, but the one which do occur will receive alot of attention (not only by FOX, but you know how FOX will spin it). I don't believe it will take until Tuesday. Likely sometime tomorrow (if kept over the weekend). George needs to pay his bills and that's not going to happen unless he gets in front of the camera as l can't see the job offers coming in for him.

 

[jon_mx]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

Yes, that and Zimmerman's screaming for help should convince the jury that it was self defense and not some killing out of ill will or negligent behavior

 

[kentric]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

The only reliable witness indicated TM was on top. That, together with the fact that TM had no injuries (other than to his knuckle) sure makes alot of noise.

eta. forgot about the screams for help.

 

[The Commish]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

I'm not suggesting this happened, but perhaps TM repositioned himself on GZ's body and felt the gun on the back side of his thigh? If that was the case, TM was likely to move down GZ's body to be able to grab the gun from in front of his thigh rather than awkwardly reaching back behind his thigh. Of course, if that was the case, you'd have to think that TM would be able to reach the gun before GZ since he was the one moving his body and thefore would have a better feel for when the gun was in range.

He only had two hands. He was "raining down punches MMA style", covering his mouth and nose AND grabbing for the gun?? The more I think about it, the more I believe GZ may have felt his shirt/jacket come up....that's about it.

 

[The Commish]

I fully expect a mis-trial here. The judge read the instructions WAY too fast...she can't be trusted!!!!

 

[The Commish]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

The only reliable witness indicated TM was on top. That, together with the fact that TM had no injuries (other than to his knuckle) sure makes alot of noise.eta. forgot about the screams for help.

Only means only....not only + a bunch of other things. You wouldn't find my position remotely odd if I told you, that I thought who was on top was the only thing that mattered and followed it up with an acknowledgement that their positions were constantly changing?

 

[Zow]

I really hate the redundant definitions of justifiable homicide.

It's true that a homicide is justifiable to prevent the commission of a felony against George Zimmerman. But that's just another way of stating the "death or great bodily harm" definition from later in the instructions. It's just an acknowledgment that it's justified to prevent an aggravated battery as opposed to a simple battery (which is a misdemeanor). I think it's almost certain to confuse the jury.

Probably needs to be done though for appeal reasons. I could see filing on this issue and, even if it seems picky and tedious, oftentimes picky and tedious are the requirements to ensure a fair trial and conviction of someone facing a serious felony.

 

[timschochet]

OK JoJo- here's the bet- earlier in the thread, I asked if jurors were allowed to ask about sentencing requirements for manslaughter. A discussion ensued. If I can find the post in which I asked this, you owe me $50. If I can't produce it, I owe you $50.

Do we have a bet?

Yeah like I figured, that is NOT what I asked. Nice try chump, you don't change the terms of a bet to suit what you posted. I asked you to look it up, you challenged me with a $50 bet. I asked you the terms to make sure it was clear to you what it was I asked? So what do you do? You go ahead and look up exactly what you say and then phrase YOUR question in a form of a bet. Par for the course for you.

Wait- I'm honestly confused here. What is the difference between what I just wrote and what you asked? Please explain it to me, because I'm mystified.

If you can go back 30 pages to refresh your memory of what you discussed, surely you can go back one page and see that I asked how a Judge would respond when a juror posed this question.

There is no substantive difference whatsoever. But that's fine. You don't want to lose money backing up your accusations. I get it. Carry on!

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I really hate the redundant definitions of justifiable homicide.

It's true that a homicide is justifiable to prevent the commission of a felony against George Zimmerman. But that's just another way of stating the "death or great bodily harm" definition from later in the instructions. It's just an acknowledgment that it's justified to prevent an aggravated battery as opposed to a simple battery (which is a misdemeanor). I think it's almost certain to confuse the jury.

Probably needs to be done though for appeal reasons. I could see filing on this issue and, even if it seems picky and tedious, oftentimes picky and tedious are the requirements to ensure a fair trial and conviction of someone facing a serious felony.

I don't know. I can't find that first construction in the statute. I'd think that it's sufficient to use the words in the statute. How is the jury supposed to know whether Zimmerman was acting to prevent a "felony." They don't have the criminal code with them.

 

[Ballstein]

boy did Travon had some good muscle definition

 

[roarlions]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

The only reliable witness indicated TM was on top. That, together with the fact that TM had no injuries (other than to his knuckle) sure makes alot of noise.eta. forgot about the screams for help.

Only means only....not only + a bunch of other things. You wouldn't find my position remotely odd if I told you, that I thought who was on top was the only thing that mattered and followed it up with an acknowledgement that their positions were constantly changing?

The other thing I wonder about with the fight scenario is if George heard that 911 was being called, why didn't he just try to protect himself until the cops arrived? His injuries weren't life threatening to the point where he shot Trayvon, couldn't he have just continued to protect himself and keep screaming while he waited a few minutes for the police to arrive? Actually I know the answer to this is that no one would count on the police arriving in a timely manner, but it is something to consider. Also, did Good testify whether he could see George doing anything to protect himself? If his arms weren't pinned down by Trayvon, wouldn't he try to punch/gouge Trayvon, or cover his own head to protect against the punches from Trayvon? If the prosecution didn't ask Good about this it was a mistake.

 

[ArbyMelt]

Some reports that a juror was wiping away tears when State was doing rebuttal. Who knows. Probably not good for defense.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

The only reliable witness indicated TM was on top. That, together with the fact that TM had no injuries (other than to his knuckle) sure makes alot of noise.eta. forgot about the screams for help.

Only means only....not only + a bunch of other things. You wouldn't find my position remotely odd if I told you, that I thought who was on top was the only thing that mattered and followed it up with an acknowledgement that their positions were constantly changing?

The other thing I wonder about with the fight scenario is if George heard that 911 was being called, why didn't he just try to protect himself until the cops arrived? His injuries weren't life threatening to the point where he shot Trayvon, couldn't he have just continued to protect himself and keep screaming while he waited a few minutes for the police to arrive? Actually I know the answer to this is that no one would count on the police arriving in a timely manner, but it is something to consider. Also, did Good testify whether he could see George doing anything to protect himself? If his arms weren't pinned down by Trayvon, wouldn't he try to punch/gouge Trayvon, or cover his own head to protect against the punches from Trayvon? If the prosecution didn't ask Good about this it was a mistake.

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

 

[tdoss]

How are we going to tell the usual inner-city violence from acts of rioting?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

 

[financewonk]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

I don't get why he wasn't able to move back into guard position, and apply his patented triangle choke. After all, he's an MMA expert and TM was a child.

 

[Joe McGee]

How are we going to tell the usual inner-city violence from acts of rioting?

The violence will all be due to a youtube video.

 

[tdoss]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

They are in a fight. Their positions are not static.

But somehow "who was on top" was the only thing that mattered...the rest was just noise, right?

The only reliable witness indicated TM was on top. That, together with the fact that TM had no injuries (other than to his knuckle) sure makes alot of noise.eta. forgot about the screams for help.

Only means only....not only + a bunch of other things. You wouldn't find my position remotely odd if I told you, that I thought who was on top was the only thing that mattered and followed it up with an acknowledgement that their positions were constantly changing?

The other thing I wonder about with the fight scenario is if George heard that 911 was being called, why didn't he just try to protect himself until the cops arrived? His injuries weren't life threatening to the point where he shot Trayvon, couldn't he have just continued to protect himself and keep screaming while he waited a few minutes for the police to arrive? Actually I know the answer to this is that no one would count on the police arriving in a timely manner, but it is something to consider. Also, did Good testify whether he could see George doing anything to protect himself? If his arms weren't pinned down by Trayvon, wouldn't he try to punch/gouge Trayvon, or cover his own head to protect against the punches from Trayvon? If the prosecution didn't ask Good about this it was a mistake.

Zim said he could feel Tray going for his weapon so that escalated the issue.

 

[roarlions]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

No evidence was presented to confirm that Trayvon was trying to suffocate George, all that was presented was muffled screams for help on the 911 call. Even if Trayvon was on top and covering George's mouth, it doesn't mean he was trying to suffocate him. Good testified that he saw Trayvon's arms moving up and down, not pressed over George's mouth and nose trying to suffocate George. There was no evidence that Trayvon was trying to do anything other than prevent George from screaming.

 

[squistion]

Limbaugh: Media Doesn't Want Quick Zimmerman Verdict Because The Rioters Aren't "Ready To Go" Yet

http://mediamatters.org/video/2013/07/12/limbaugh-media-doesnt-want-quick-zimmerman-verd/194855

 

[Joe McGee]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

I think this is where many of us disagree. Getting a broken nose from being sucker punched then having your head bashed into the concrete meets my definition of major injuries. I imagine that Zimmerman's eyes were watering, he was disoriented from the sucker punch to the nose, and his adrenaline was racing as he felt he was screaming for his life.

It seems to me that many of you think that George should have just let himself get killed.

 

[jon_mx]

If Zimmerman goes to jail, it will be for failure to follow Neighborhood Watch Guidelines.

 

[roarlions]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

I think this is where many of us disagree. Getting a broken nose from being sucker punched then having your head bashed into the concrete meets my definition of major injuries. I imagine that Zimmerman's eyes were watering, he was disoriented from the sucker punch to the nose, and his adrenaline was racing as he felt he was screaming for his life.

It seems to me that many of you think that George should have just let himself get killed.

None of that has ever happened to me, so I can't be sure how I would react in that situation. I do know that I would never be carrying a gun though, and in that case unless I was physically incapable of fighting back I'd be fighting for my life if I thought I was in a life threatening situation. And without a gun I'd be doing everything possible to either protect myself or retaliate against my attacker. I personally find it hard to believe that I couldn't retaliate if my arms weren't pinned down, and even then I'd use my legs to kick the assailant or try anything to get my assailant off me. My guess is that George didn't try very hard because he was counting on help in response to his screams and he was hoping he'd be able to use his gun.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

The other thing I wonder about with the fight scenario is if George heard that 911 was being called, why didn't he just try to protect himself until the cops arrived? His injuries weren't life threatening to the point where he shot Trayvon, couldn't he have just continued to protect himself and keep screaming while he waited a few minutes for the police to arrive? Actually I know the answer to this is that no one would count on the police arriving in a timely manner, but it is something to consider. Also, did Good testify whether he could see George doing anything to protect himself? If his arms weren't pinned down by Trayvon, wouldn't he try to punch/gouge Trayvon, or cover his own head to protect against the punches from Trayvon? If the prosecution didn't ask Good about this it was a mistake.

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

No I am not. The argument is: if Zimmerman didn't have life threatening injuries why was his use of deadly force justified as posted by roarlions, you purposefully cut out the post I was replying to. I've added it back in and bolded it for emphasis. You have a habit in this thread of moving the goal posts and quite frankly it is irritating. Your last line is a red herring, one in which you are leaving out vital facts of this case leading to a false conclusion.

 

[financewonk]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

I think this is where many of us disagree. Getting a broken nose from being sucker punched then having your head bashed into the concrete meets my definition of major injuries. I imagine that Zimmerman's eyes were watering, he was disoriented from the sucker punch to the nose, and his adrenaline was racing as he felt he was screaming for his life.

It seems to me that many of you think that George should have just let himself get killed.

Are you saying that GZ shouldn't have taken his beating like a man? Unfortunately, it seems that this sort of macho thinking is prevalent among those that think he should be convicted. I wonder if the women on the jury will be able to put themselves in GZ's shoes, or if they will deem GZ more than fit to defend himself from such an assault. Correct me if I'm wrong, Jon_MX, but isn't this the reason (i.e. women will be able to relate to feeling helpless/fearful under similar circumstances) why you think he will be acquitted?

 

[HERBERT THE HIPPO]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

I think this is where many of us disagree. Getting a broken nose from being sucker punched then having your head bashed into the concrete meets my definition of major injuries. I imagine that Zimmerman's eyes were watering, he was disoriented from the sucker punch to the nose, and his adrenaline was racing as he felt he was screaming for his life.

It seems to me that many of you think that George should have just let himself get killed.

Apparently...........George was supposed to calculate how much additional punishment he could take before it would qualify for self-defense.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

No evidence was presented to confirm that Trayvon was trying to suffocate George, all that was presented was muffled screams for help on the 911 call. Even if Trayvon was on top and covering George's mouth, it doesn't mean he was trying to suffocate him. Good testified that he saw Trayvon's arms moving up and down, not pressed over George's mouth and nose trying to suffocate George. There was no evidence that Trayvon was trying to do anything other than prevent George from screaming.

Have you ever tried breathing through a broken bloodied nose? If you cannot breathe through your nose and someone covers your mouth, do you consider that being suffocated? You admit there were muffled screams to support Zimmerman's account of what happened, you really do not have to go too much further to believe Zimmerman was having problems breathing and that is why he was not fighting back, he was fighting for air. After all if he wasn't fighting for air what exactly do you think he was doing with his hands for 40+ seconds? A reasonable person would draw the same conclusion.

The next time you get the back of your head smashed off of the concrete could be your last. 1 time is life threatening, and all professional fighting organizations penalize any strike to the back of the head for this reason.

 

[Widbil83]

Just when you though MSNBC couldn't sink any lower.

http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-msnbc-is-trayvon-martins-dead-body-753370712

 

[Mr.Pack]

The other thing I wonder about with the fight scenario is if George heard that 911 was being called, why didn't he just try to protect himself until the cops arrived? His injuries weren't life threatening to the point where he shot Trayvon, couldn't he have just continued to protect himself and keep screaming while he waited a few minutes for the police to arrive? Actually I know the answer to this is that no one would count on the police arriving in a timely manner, but it is something to consider. Also, did Good testify whether he could see George doing anything to protect himself? If his arms weren't pinned down by Trayvon, wouldn't he try to punch/gouge Trayvon, or cover his own head to protect against the punches from Trayvon? If the prosecution didn't ask Good about this it was a mistake.

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

No I am not. The argument is: if Zimmerman didn't have life threatening injuries why was his use of deadly force justified as posted by roarlions, you purposefully cut out the post I was replying to. I've added it back in and bolded it for emphasis. You have a habit in this thread of moving the goal posts and quite frankly it is irritating. Your last line is a red herring, one in which you are leaving out vital facts of this case leading to a false conclusion.

Not really following this trial, but this is the first I've heard that he had life threatening injuries. How long was he in the hospital? Life support at all? Surgeries?

If this is true, I can see the self defense argument.

 

[kentric]

Did John Good testify that he shouted that he was going to call 911 before heading back inside? Is it reasonable to assume that both Trayvon and Zimmerman heard that announcement?

There's no way they didn't know the police were on their way. Goes for both Trayvon and George.

If true, seems like it would have been a good time for Trayvon to have tried to get away before the police arrived.

Agreed if he didn't think getting up and running would mean him getting shot in the back or some such. I've struggled with this very point for a while now. It speaks to Martin's discretion as well as Zimmerman's discretion and the feasibility of him being genuinely scared for his life. He called the cops and knows others did to. Martin knew that others called the cops...not sure he knew Zimmerman had called the cops though.

Trayvon could have reacted to the announcement by Good that he was calling 911 by getting up off of George, leaning over him to taunt him, and giving George the chance to grab his gun and shoot him. Would still allow for the description of how he was shot (shirt hanging away from his body, shot at 90 degree angle), while also allowing for the idea that Trayvon was ending the fight (which I think the prosecution suggested). I still don't understand how George had access to his gun if Trayvon was straddling his abdomen.

I'm not suggesting this happened, but perhaps TM repositioned himself on GZ's body and felt the gun on the back side of his thigh? If that was the case, TM was likely to move down GZ's body to be able to grab the gun from in front of his thigh rather than awkwardly reaching back behind his thigh. Of course, if that was the case, you'd have to think that TM would be able to reach the gun before GZ since he was the one moving his body and thefore would have a better feel for when the gun was in range.

He only had two hands. He was "raining down punches MMA style", covering his mouth and nose AND grabbing for the gun?? The more I think about it, the more I believe GZ may have felt his shirt/jacket come up....that's about it.

Personally, I don't believe TM was going for Z's gun either, but rather, that TM hit the gun into Z and that was what drove Z to go for the gun and shoot. As to the punches/smothering, I don't fully discount those actions happening during the course of the altercation. You don't have to do all concurrently for them to be prevalent.

 

[-fish-]

Just when you though MSNBC couldn't sink any lower.

http://gawker.com/this-courtesy-of-msnbc-is-trayvon-martins-dead-body-753370712

Other than the headline, I don't understand the reference to MSNBC. Explain it to me like I don't care what network's news feed it came from.

 

[kentric]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

No evidence was presented to confirm that Trayvon was trying to suffocate George, all that was presented was muffled screams for help on the 911 call. Even if Trayvon was on top and covering George's mouth, it doesn't mean he was trying to suffocate him. Good testified that he saw Trayvon's arms moving up and down, not pressed over George's mouth and nose trying to suffocate George. There was no evidence that Trayvon was trying to do anything other than prevent George from screaming.

I believe GZ indicated that TM had his hand(s?) over GZ's mouth/nose. Good didn't see much from his angle. He did state that TM was on top and was apparently raining MMA style blows on GZ. He only saw a small part of the altercation however, so the two acts (blows/smothering) are not necessarily exclusive.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

3 minutes. Don't think I'm making it.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Have you ever had someone mount you and apply their body weight against your broken nose as they try to suffocate you to death?

People keep coming into the thread assuming the injuries Zimmerman had sustained up to that point HAD to be life threatening injuries, i.e. Zimmerman had to be on the verge of dying. This has been pointed out countless times as being wrong, that is not required in order to claim self-defense in order to be justified in using deadly force. Zimmerman did not need a scratch on him to support claiming self defense.

You're mischaracterizing the argument. It's absolutely true that Zimmerman could have a great self defense claim in the absence of any injuries. If Martin had pulled at a butcher's knife and had advanced on Zimmerman, that would be a great case where there's a reasonable fear of great bodily harm without any injuries.

The argument is that the totality of facts and circumstances, including the fact that Martin was unarmed and that Zimmerman did not, in fact, sustain major injuries, supports the conclusion that a reasonably prudent and careful person probably would not have feared such injuries.

I think this is where many of us disagree. Getting a broken nose from being sucker punched then having your head bashed into the concrete meets my definition of major injuries. I imagine that Zimmerman's eyes were watering, he was disoriented from the sucker punch to the nose, and his adrenaline was racing as he felt he was screaming for his life.

It seems to me that many of you think that George should have just let himself get killed.

In order to accept that George Zimmerman was having his "head bashed into the concrete" (as opposed to scratching his head against the concrete) you have to accept George Zimmerman's story. That aspect of his story is inconsistent with the injuries he sustained. And there's just no credible support for it unless you're inclined to believe his self-interested testimony.

I'm not Joe tough guy, but I have been sucker punched. I have been on the bottom of a fight I was losing. I have thought "Gee, I'm getting my *** kicked here." I have never thought "my life is in peril and the only way out is to shoot my attacker."

And again, my perspective is informed by the law itself. Deadly force is defined as force likely to cause "death or serious bodily injury." A "Deadly Weapon" is a weapon that is likely to cause "death or serious bodily injury." Unless you're Chuck Norris, your fists aren't a deadly weapon. Trayvon Martin's certainly weren't. The jury is not obligated to credit Zimmerman's account, particularly when it is inconsistent with the physical evidence (both Zimmerman's injuries and Trayvon's).