Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Trayvon Martin controversy « previous next »
Page: 1 ... 291 292 293 294 295 ... 399

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28964
Offline
« #4380 : July 09, 2013, 11:28:49 PM »

I'm not sure that you know the difference between manslaughter and murder 2.  You don't convict someone of a manslaughter just because you're not sure that their story is 100 accurate.  You don't just convict him of the manslaughter charge because of that.
Can you just give me one single inconsistency that should make it a manslaughter change and not a murder 2 charge?

I just don't think they have proven the hatred/ill will/depraved mind part. I could be wrong but I don't think the jury will buy that.  So, as many of the legal commentators have said, the prosecution will probably ask
the judge to allow the jury to consider lesser charges like manslaughter. The problem with that is they won't know that the sentence for aggravated (bc Martin was under 18) manslaughter is very tough in Florida
with the mandatory minimums Jeb Bush pushed for and got.

I'm only going to post one inconsistency because I've already posted all of the other ones on various days. If the jury doesn't believe Z on some major points, they can question all of his testimony and will think about what really could have happened. Did Martin think he was fighting for his life because Z already had the gun drawn? Is that why he was beating on Z?

I'll copy and paste it from one of my earlier posts...

* * * * *

During closing, I'm assuming prosecution will reiterate that Z said Martin was straddling him with Martin's knees up near Zs armpits. The prosecution will point out and the jury will question: How did Martin see the gun that was behind him (if we are to believe Z's account) and how did Z get at the gun so easily if Martin had actually gotten his hands on it and Martin's knees were pinning his arms down.

Try sitting on somebody with your knees up to their armpits and ask that person to grab something from your hip and then to point it directly at your chest. Not easy.

Below is an Op Ed column in the NYT that points out some inconsistencies in Z's story. He makes a few good points and some not-so-great, points, IMO...

I'm watching HLN so I'm behind a little. Maybe prosecution asked the MMA teacher this question about the knees to the armpits question? Or, maybe they can't since they're trying to say that Z was on top? If so, they may have painted themselves into a corner and can't make the argument below...


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/opinion/blow-questioning-the-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Excerpts:

This fight scene leaves me particularly incredulous, partly because of what Zimmerman is saying, partly because of the forensics and testimony and partly because of what Zimmerman demonstrates in the video — the idea that Martin, while straddling Zimmerman, would be able to see a gun that was presumably behind him, and the idea that Zimmerman would feel Martin’s hand snake across his body, pinch that hand underneath his arm and then reach for and retrieve the gun himself.

* * * * * * * * * *

But what if we back up to the cellphone moment, before any physical encounter occurred, when Zimmerman and Martin had their first verbal exchange. What if we dispense with Zimmerman’s version, revisit the order of things and ask a different set of questions?

In the video Zimmerman looks to his right front pocket when he says he’s looking for the phone. That’s the same area as the gun, which he says he has on his right hip.

Is it possible that Zimmerman didn’t go for his phone but for his gun? And even if he doesn’t retrieve it, is it possible that he exposed it? (In the video, Zimmerman demonstrates that he can expose the weapon without even using his hands to lift his jacket.)

Is it possible that Martin first saw the gun when they were standing and talking? Is it possible that the physical struggle was about the presence of a weapon: between a man trying to retrieve it and an unarmed teenager who had seen it? In that scenario, is it possible that Martin could be on top of Zimmerman and still yelling for help? Is it possible that Zimmerman wasn’t using his hands to fend off Martin because he was using them to go for, control, or aim a weapon?

And, what happened to the “cellphone” Zimmerman said he got out just before a prolonged struggle? He makes no mention of putting it away. His key and flashlights were photographed in the grass, as was Martin’s cellphone. They didn’t hold on to those things. What about Zimmerman’s phone? Where was it when the police arrived?

(By the way, the night of the shooting Zimmerman says he got the cellphone out. The next day, during the re-enactment he changes that part of his story, saying: “I went to go get my cellphone, but my, I left it in a different pocket. I looked down at my pant pocket, and he said ‘you got a problem now,’ and then he was here, and he punched me in the face.”)


CalcuttaRain

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 20270
Offline
« #4381 : July 09, 2013, 11:48:51 PM »

Can you just give me one single inconsistency that should make it a manslaughter change and not a murder 2 charge?

joe, either you did not understand or you ignored this question

Show the bravest of the brave kids that you have their back.  Go to http://www.childrenscancercenter.org/

Just check out the site or maybe like them on Facebook . .  or Share the site on Facebook, re-tweet one of their tweets.  Not everyone can give money to support this great cause, but its easy to give 10 seconds of your time to help spread the word about The Children\\\\\\\'s Cancer Center

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28964
Offline
« #4382 : July 10, 2013, 02:12:03 AM »


Even If George Zimmerman Is Found Not Guilty Of Murder And Manslaughter, He Could Still Serve 25 Years

http://www.mediaite.com/online/even-if-george-zimmerman-is-found-not-guilty-of-murder-and-manslaughter-he-could-still-serve-25-years


cyberdude558

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4031
Online
« #4383 : July 10, 2013, 06:38:53 AM »

Yeah but it wont matter if the jury believes Zimmerman was defending himself.

ONEBIGDADDY

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 4536
Offline
« #4384 : July 10, 2013, 06:48:10 AM »

You're telling me that multiple witnesses, under oath, verifying that those texts came from Trayvon wouldn't authenticate them? If that's the case our system is a complete joke, designed specifically for corruption. There's a reason countless innocent men sit in prison right now, and countless others who are actually guilty remain free, these kinds of loopholes and technicalities.

Let's look at the alternative. We can't verify Trayvon sent the text messages, so it's more logical to assume someone was pretending to be Trayvon, and sending literally thousands of pictures/texts? THIS is logic? To who? I'd be embarrassed if I actually associated myself with that line of thought.

Trayvon sent the messages, period. Literally every single person familiar with this case knows this. It's not "possible" or "likely" , it's fact.
Yup and the guy texting next to you in his car not paying attention isn't texting either....This Judge has framed this courtroom completely around the State....She has become the political Judge now....OBD


Bucman

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12539
Offline
« #4385 : July 10, 2013, 07:19:48 AM »

You're telling me that multiple witnesses, under oath, verifying that those texts came from Trayvon wouldn't authenticate them? If that's the case our system is a complete joke, designed specifically for corruption. There's a reason countless innocent men sit in prison right now, and countless others who are actually guilty remain free, these kinds of loopholes and technicalities.

Let's look at the alternative. We can't verify Trayvon sent the text messages, so it's more logical to assume someone was pretending to be Trayvon, and sending literally thousands of pictures/texts? THIS is logic? To who? I'd be embarrassed if I actually associated myself with that line of thought.

Trayvon sent the messages, period. Literally every single person familiar with this case knows this. It's not "possible" or "likely" , it's fact.
Yup and the guy texting next to you in his car not paying attention isn't texting either....This Judge has framed this courtroom completely around the State....She has become the political Judge now....OBD
Judge in this case sucks. Takes hours and hours to rule on things, then never rules on them. Cases like this need to take place in a different state.


Bucman

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 12539
Offline
« #4386 : July 10, 2013, 07:25:23 AM »




CalcuttaRain

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 20270
Offline
« #4387 : July 10, 2013, 07:39:48 AM »

I understand the frustration but the text message are not authenticated just because the came from TMs phone. Did any witness testify during trial "I received a tex message on x date and y time from TM"? Maybe an admitted expert?

I know it's frustrating but one should be able to imagine the type of abuse that could occur in cases if evidence did not have to be authenticated, particularly text messages.

Show the bravest of the brave kids that you have their back.  Go to http://www.childrenscancercenter.org/

Just check out the site or maybe like them on Facebook . .  or Share the site on Facebook, re-tweet one of their tweets.  Not everyone can give money to support this great cause, but its easy to give 10 seconds of your time to help spread the word about The Children\\\\\\\'s Cancer Center

BucsnNoles

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1222
Offline
« #4388 : July 10, 2013, 08:23:22 AM »

I'm not sure that you know the difference between manslaughter and murder 2.  You don't convict someone of a manslaughter just because you're not sure that their story is 100 accurate.  You don't just convict him of the manslaughter charge because of that.
Can you just give me one single inconsistency that should make it a manslaughter change and not a murder 2 charge?

I just don't think they have proven the hatred/ill will/depraved mind part. I could be wrong but I don't think the jury will buy that.  So, as many of the legal commentators have said, the prosecution will probably ask
the judge to allow the jury to consider lesser charges like manslaughter. The problem with that is they won't know that the sentence for aggravated (bc Martin was under 18) manslaughter is very tough in Florida
with the mandatory minimums Jeb Bush pushed for and got.

I'm only going to post one inconsistency because I've already posted all of the other ones on various days. If the jury doesn't believe Z on some major points, they can question all of his testimony and will think about what really could have happened. Did Martin think he was fighting for his life because Z already had the gun drawn? Is that why he was beating on Z?

I'll copy and paste it from one of my earlier posts...

* * * * *

During closing, I'm assuming prosecution will reiterate that Z said Martin was straddling him with Martin's knees up near Zs armpits. The prosecution will point out and the jury will question: How did Martin see the gun that was behind him (if we are to believe Z's account) and how did Z get at the gun so easily if Martin had actually gotten his hands on it and Martin's knees were pinning his arms down.

Try sitting on somebody with your knees up to their armpits and ask that person to grab something from your hip and then to point it directly at your chest. Not easy.

Below is an Op Ed column in the NYT that points out some inconsistencies in Z's story. He makes a few good points and some not-so-great, points, IMO...

I'm watching HLN so I'm behind a little. Maybe prosecution asked the MMA teacher this question about the knees to the armpits question? Or, maybe they can't since they're trying to say that Z was on top? If so, they may have painted themselves into a corner and can't make the argument below...


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/04/opinion/blow-questioning-the-struggle.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Excerpts:

This fight scene leaves me particularly incredulous, partly because of what Zimmerman is saying, partly because of the forensics and testimony and partly because of what Zimmerman demonstrates in the video — the idea that Martin, while straddling Zimmerman, would be able to see a gun that was presumably behind him, and the idea that Zimmerman would feel Martin’s hand snake across his body, pinch that hand underneath his arm and then reach for and retrieve the gun himself.

* * * * * * * * * *

But what if we back up to the cellphone moment, before any physical encounter occurred, when Zimmerman and Martin had their first verbal exchange. What if we dispense with Zimmerman’s version, revisit the order of things and ask a different set of questions?

In the video Zimmerman looks to his right front pocket when he says he’s looking for the phone. That’s the same area as the gun, which he says he has on his right hip.

Is it possible that Zimmerman didn’t go for his phone but for his gun? And even if he doesn’t retrieve it, is it possible that he exposed it? (In the video, Zimmerman demonstrates that he can expose the weapon without even using his hands to lift his jacket.)

Is it possible that Martin first saw the gun when they were standing and talking? Is it possible that the physical struggle was about the presence of a weapon: between a man trying to retrieve it and an unarmed teenager who had seen it? In that scenario, is it possible that Martin could be on top of Zimmerman and still yelling for help? Is it possible that Zimmerman wasn’t using his hands to fend off Martin because he was using them to go for, control, or aim a weapon?

And, what happened to the “cellphone” Zimmerman said he got out just before a prolonged struggle? He makes no mention of putting it away. His key and flashlights were photographed in the grass, as was Martin’s cellphone. They didn’t hold on to those things. What about Zimmerman’s phone? Where was it when the police arrived?

(By the way, the night of the shooting Zimmerman says he got the cellphone out. The next day, during the re-enactment he changes that part of his story, saying: “I went to go get my cellphone, but my, I left it in a different pocket. I looked down at my pant pocket, and he said ‘you got a problem now,’ and then he was here, and he punched me in the face.”)

You didn't answer my question.  I was looking for one inconsistency that supports a charge of manslaughter, but not murder 2.

CalcuttaRain

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 20270
Offline
« #4389 : July 10, 2013, 08:38:18 AM »

He will not answer your question

Show the bravest of the brave kids that you have their back.  Go to http://www.childrenscancercenter.org/

Just check out the site or maybe like them on Facebook . .  or Share the site on Facebook, re-tweet one of their tweets.  Not everyone can give money to support this great cause, but its easy to give 10 seconds of your time to help spread the word about The Children\\\\\\\'s Cancer Center

CalcuttaRain

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 20270
Offline
« #4390 : July 10, 2013, 08:40:07 AM »

On the text messages - given the delayed disclosure she might lean on the prosecution to stipulate to their authenticity. She might threatened to continue things so the proper witnesses can be obtained if they don't stipulate

Show the bravest of the brave kids that you have their back.  Go to http://www.childrenscancercenter.org/

Just check out the site or maybe like them on Facebook . .  or Share the site on Facebook, re-tweet one of their tweets.  Not everyone can give money to support this great cause, but its easy to give 10 seconds of your time to help spread the word about The Children\\\\\\\'s Cancer Center

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28964
Offline
« #4391 : July 10, 2013, 09:50:01 AM »

You didn't answer my question.  I was looking for one inconsistency that supports a charge of manslaughter, but not murder 2.

There isn't one inconsistency in this case that I can think of that helps support manslaughter and not murder 2.

Overall, the various inconsistencies in Z's accounts of what happened are enough to make the jury question Z's claim of self defense. If they don't believe him, they can convict
on either murder (assuming they believe the ill will part) or manslaughter.

If that doesn't answer your question, oh well.

The current witness is going to testify on what is the proper use of deadly force. And if the prosecution is paying attention, they'll ask:

Is it proper to fight for your life if somebody you don't know pulls a gun on you?

Are you here to testify on who started the altercation? Do you know?
« : July 10, 2013, 09:54:02 AM ufojoe »

ufojoe

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 28964
Offline
« #4392 : July 10, 2013, 10:30:58 AM »


Another good look at the various charges the jury may be presented with, Jury instructions included...

http://www.elisabethepps.com/gz-murder-vs-manslaughter

Escobar06

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 2565
Offline
« #4393 : July 10, 2013, 10:47:57 AM »

I understand the frustration but the text message are not authenticated just because the came from TMs phone. Did any witness testify during trial "I received a tex message on x date and y time from TM"? Maybe an admitted expert?

I know it's frustrating but one should be able to imagine the type of abuse that could occur in cases if evidence did not have to be authenticated, particularly text messages.

The main issue is that Nelson is well aware that the state intentionally hid this information from defense. She's well aware that they only had it for a few days before the trial began. She's well aware that they requested the trial be delayed and that she turned them down. Then she sits there and repeatedly says "but they aren't authenticated" as if she gave them any time at all to do so? It's ridiculous and proves what I've been saying all along, she's corrupt. As I said before, if she gave them adequate time to line up witness testimony on this matter and they failed to do so, that would be different. This is one of those areas where she had the opportunity to do the right thing and CHOSE not to, she CHOSE to favor the state yet again even though she knows defense wasn't given proper time to prepare. This isn't some black and white law where her hands are tied, it's a grey area where she had some flexibility and she used it to push her agenda yet again. I don't see how anyone can be okay with a judge running a trial like this, as West said last night it's a violation of the constitution and I hope this comes back to bite her on that huge ass of hers.

Bucfucious

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 3797
Offline
« #4394 : July 10, 2013, 11:25:07 AM »

"I don't see how anyone can be okay with a judge running a trial like this"

Out of curiosity, how many trials have you actually seen? You seem to be suffering from the delusion that the system works the way it was intended.
  Page: 1 ... 291 292 293 294 295 ... 399
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  Pirate's Cove (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Trayvon Martin controversy « previous next »
:  

Hide Tools Show Tools