George Zimmerman is a piece of crap

[Rage Against the McKee]

TM's family has a better case in the civil suit because of GZ getting out of the vehicle and following TM.  GZ was specifically told not to do that and did so anway, an action that was the catalyst for this whole situation.  With the lower burden that fact helps largely in getting to 51%

Plus, Martin ran away and then was chased down and gunned down by GZ.

[CNS]

was getting much fatter a defense strategy?  like to make him look non-threatening?

I think it was. especially since they brought in his trainer to make fun of his fatness.

Yeah, do what they can to make him seem harmless and give the subconscious impression that this man isn't chasing anyone down and surely isn't going to go around starting fights.

[EllRobersonisInnocent]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

[Dugout DickStone]

Defense will rest tomorrow.

Thank god, I'm so over this sham. Ready to get to the civil trial that will be much more fun. Also will be excited to see Trayvon's parents get their hands on the money that all the racists and gun nuts donated to the Zimmerman Defense Fund.

Why was this a sham?

Also, self defense will still apply in a civil suit, so I'm not sure why you think that case is a surefire winner for TM's parents? Even with a lower burden of proof, this evidence probably doesn't support wrongful death by a preponderance of the evidence. And while GZ's prior brushes with the law are more likely to be admissible, so will TM's much more recent and abundant texts regarding fighting, so it's probably a net negative for TM.

They will dust GZ's ass in a civil suit where they can hire a top notch attorney and not depend on the state (no offense to state prosecutors).

What should they have done differently?

Let me review the entire transcript when I have free time and get back to you.

[CNS]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

You are being dumb if you think that specific impressions aren't consciously controlled by ppl in such situations.

[Trim]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

I don't know what the final jury instructions will end up being in this case, but here are a couple examples of common introductory instructions.

In determining the facts, you may draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. You may make
deductions and reach conclusions which reason and common sense lead you to draw from the facts
shown by the evidence in this case. But you should not speculate on any matters outside the evidence.

You should use common sense in weighing the evidence and consider the evidence in
light of your own observations in life.

In our lives, we often look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists. In
law we call this “inference.” A jury is allowed to make reasonable inferences. Any inferences
you make must be reasonable and must be based on the evidence in the case.

[AbeFroman]

GZ is pretty lucky Trim doesn't work for the state of Florida.

[EllRobersonisInnocent]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

I don't know what the final jury instructions will end up being in this case, but here are a couple examples of common introductory instructions.

In determining the facts, you may draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. You may make
deductions and reach conclusions which reason and common sense lead you to draw from the facts
shown by the evidence in this case. But you should not speculate on any matters outside the evidence.

You should use common sense in weighing the evidence and consider the evidence in
light of your own observations in life.

In our lives, we often look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists. In
law we call this “inference.” A jury is allowed to make reasonable inferences. Any inferences
you make must be reasonable and must be based on the evidence in the case.

Welp

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

TM's family has a better case in the civil suit because of GZ getting out of the vehicle and following TM.  GZ was specifically told not to do that and did so anway, an action that was the catalyst for this whole situation.  With the lower burden that fact helps largely in getting to 51%

First, I think GZ was told "you don't need to do that," which is not exactly the same thing as an order not to follow, but it doesn't really matter anyway. The same evidence was presented here. You really think that based on the evidence presented, GZ is guilty by a preponderance of the evidence? Seems like a real stretch.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I'm not predicting that GZ gets convicted, but if he does KSU is going to be glorious.

Yeah, it would be amazing.

Yup, amazing and glorious. I'll probably say something like "well, the jury was the wildcard" just like I already have.

And speaking of empathy, I'm going to revise my prediction. I still think there's zero chance of murder, but I now think there's a maybe 50/50 chance of manslaughter. From a legal standpoint, it would not be justified based on the evidence, and would probably even be tossed on appeal, but I can't rule out the impact of the all woman jury. Women tend to be a bit more favorable in general to prosecution. They're also less likely, or capable, of putting themselves in GZ's shoes during the fight while he's pinned to the ground, instead judging the reasonableness as a more passive observer. Finally, women are more empathetic, and may want to give TM's mom at least something. Not saying it will happen, but I wouldn't be surprised either.

[420seriouscat69]

GZ is pretty lucky Trim doesn't work for the state of Florida.

He's licensed there, I think.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

I don't know what the final jury instructions will end up being in this case, but here are a couple examples of common introductory instructions.

In determining the facts, you may draw reasonable inferences from the evidence. You may make
deductions and reach conclusions which reason and common sense lead you to draw from the facts
shown by the evidence in this case. But you should not speculate on any matters outside the evidence.

You should use common sense in weighing the evidence and consider the evidence in
light of your own observations in life.

In our lives, we often look at one fact and conclude from it that another fact exists. In
law we call this “inference.” A jury is allowed to make reasonable inferences. Any inferences
you make must be reasonable and must be based on the evidence in the case.

Instructions like these are very common, and some form of them will almost certainly be used here. We expect jurors to weigh the evidence presented and use common sense. Not sure why you think this necessarily helps the state's case.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

They will dust GZ's ass in a civil suit where they can hire a top notch attorney and not depend on the state (no offense to state prosecutors).

What should they have done differently?

Let me review the entire transcript when I have free time and get back to you.

Only if you have time. Otherwise, let's just assume the prosecutors are idiots.

[Trim]

Instructions like these are very common, and some form of them will almost certainly be used here. We expect jurors to weigh the evidence presented and use common sense. Not sure why you think this necessarily helps the state's case.

Quoting them because, as I mentioned pages back, they often have to be highlighted for jurors like ERII who think "beyond a reasonable doubt" means that the prosecutor needed to teleport the jury back in time to first-hand witness the crime, and to address the post he made.

[Trim]

GZ is pretty lucky Trim doesn't work for the state of Florida.

He's licensed there, I think.

The way attorneys, or law students, become prosecutors there is really strange.

[The Tonya Harding of Twitter Users Creep]

 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Florida authorities have a message as the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial looms: raise your voice, not your hands.

Anticipating that the outcome of the very public, and racially-tinged, case is likely to disappoint one swath of the population or another, law enforcement agencies have set up a response plan.

Part of it is a public service announcement that the Broward County Sheriff's Office released this week. In it, a black teenage boy and a Hispanic girl urge viewers to "stand together as one. No cuffs, no guns."

Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who is on trial for last year's shooting death of Trayvon Martin, a black teen, in Sanford city. Sanford is in Seminole County.

Millions of Americans have already made up their minds about what should happen. And no matter how the verdict falls, authorities worry passions will be inflamed. That's where the video comes in -- a plea not to resort to violence.

"Freedom of expression is a constitutional right," the sheriff's office said. "While raising your voice is encouraged, using your hands is not."

In the video, the boy says, "Let's give violence a rest, because we can easily end up arrested." The girl adds, "Let it roll off your shoulders. It's water off your back, don't lack composure. Because in one instant it could be over."

I like how PSAs treat people like kindergartners.

[Trim]

Florida authorities have a message as the verdict in the George Zimmerman trial looms: raise your voice, not your hands.

Anticipating that the outcome of the very public, and racially-tinged, case is likely to disappoint one swath of the population or another, law enforcement agencies have set up a response plan.

Part of it is a public service announcement that the Broward County Sheriff's Office released this week. In it, a black teenage boy and a Hispanic girl urge viewers to "stand together as one. No cuffs, no guns."

Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who is on trial for last year's shooting death of Trayvon Martin, a black teen, in Sanford city. Sanford is in Seminole County.

Millions of Americans have already made up their minds about what should happen. And no matter how the verdict falls, authorities worry passions will be inflamed. That's where the video comes in -- a plea not to resort to violence.

"Freedom of expression is a constitutional right," the sheriff's office said. "While raising your voice is encouraged, using your hands is not."

In the video, the boy says, "Let's give violence a rest, because we can easily end up arrested." The girl adds, "Let it roll off your shoulders. It's water off your back, don't lack composure. Because in one instant it could be over."

I like how PSAs treat people like kindergartners.

[AbeFroman]

Florida is BITB at racism. T's & P's to Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Georgia, etc.

[Dugout DickStone]

They will dust GZ's ass in a civil suit where they can hire a top notch attorney and not depend on the state (no offense to state prosecutors).

What should they have done differently?

Let me review the entire transcript when I have free time and get back to you.

Only if you have time. Otherwise, let's just assume the prosecutors are idiots.

It's the default presumption in the great state of Florida.  See State v. Anthony, Casey

[Dugout DickStone]

On him getting all fat.  It has to be a strategy and one that the defense knew was easier to pull off than "get super skinny and waste away to nothing"

[michigancat]

White Hispanics are a thing

[OregonSmock]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

The actual evidence shows that Zimmerman acted irresponsibly in hunting down an unarmed civilian and killing him.


edit - in celebration of #7000:

[OregonSmock]

By the way, how much of a joke was that 3D cartoon video that showed the defense's preferred scenario?  I couldn't believe the judge would even consider that as evidence.

[EllRobersonisInnocent]

Yea, it'd really be amazing for a man to be convicted based on assumptions and not the actual evidence. Just amazing

The actual evidence shows that Zimmerman acted irresponsibly in hunting down an unarmed civilian and killing him.


edit - in celebration of #7000:

jfc, that's a GPC post if I've ever seen one