Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Very moving speech. Let's not forget that he killed an innocent 17 year-old. What if Martin was your son?
That is a tragedy. I am very saddened about his death . I am commenting on how the legal system will fail...JMO. If TM had been my son I would not be able to go in public for a long time. I do have a son so I can only imagine how painful losing him would be. I am very surprised how well the parents keep their composure but people grieve differently.
Seems to me that the immunity hearing is like a civil hearing, and the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence; the Defendant has to put on a case, and then, just like in a civil trial, the State can, I think, put on whatever they want, as well as cross examine each of the defendant's witnesses during the defense case.
The burden of proof for the defendant is actually easier than it is in a criminal trial. A preponderance of the evidence just means if the Judge is convinced 51% to 49% that it was self defense, he can rule that way. Beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof in a criminal case is a much higher standard and harder to reach.
The defense can submit motions to dismiss at any time, so there doesn't have to be an immunity hearing for that. As a matter of fact, in a trial when the State finishes their case, the defense almost always makes a motion to dismiss because of lack of evidence. And almost always they are denied. I could be very wrong about this, but I think politically the judge would be hesitant to throw this case out. If it goes to trial, I think Zimmerman can be found guilty of manslaughter rather than 2nd degree as a lesser included offense. And don't forget, if the State's case is really weak, there is always the possibility of a guilty plea from Zimmerman to a lesser charge and a much lighter sentence. Those kinds of negotiations could be going on behind the scenes throughout discovery.
Even though the "burden" of proof for the defense in an immunity hearing is greater (whereas in a trial the burden is greater for the prosecution), it makes sense that the defense will have to prove to the judge his client indeed was "standing his ground" and the judge could come to a decision without much evidence from the prosecution...
Yes, the defense will motion to dismiss at every opportunity...I would hope a judge does not make a decision based on political reasons, that would be wrong on so many levels...and as far as "accepting a plea", I don't think GZ will do this especially since (it would appear) he is steadfast in his self-defense claim...O'Mara did say he would plead Not Guilty at the arraignment...
Seems to me that the immunity hearing is like a civil hearing, and the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence; the Defendant has to put on a case, and then, just like in a civil trial, the State can, I think, put on whatever they want, as well as cross examine each of the defendant's witnesses during the defense case.
The burden of proof for the defendant is actually easier than it is in a criminal trial. A preponderance of the evidence just means if the Judge is convinced 51% to 49% that it was self defense, he can rule that way. Beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard of proof in a criminal case is a much higher standard and harder to reach.
The defense can submit motions to dismiss at any time, so there doesn't have to be an immunity hearing for that. As a matter of fact, in a trial when the State finishes their case, the defense almost always makes a motion to dismiss because of lack of evidence. And almost always they are denied. I could be very wrong about this, but I think politically the judge would be hesitant to throw this case out. If it goes to trial, I think Zimmerman can be found guilty of manslaughter rather than 2nd degree as a lesser included offense. And don't forget, if the State's case is really weak, there is always the possibility of a guilty plea from Zimmerman to a lesser charge and a much lighter sentence. Those kinds of negotiations could be going on behind the scenes throughout discovery.
I will always think that the original plan is for him to be actually charged with manslaughter. By doing this it would have satisfied the mob with a conviction and it would pacify the gun trolls with a lighter sentence
According to the Seminole County Clerk of Courts GZ's arraignment hearing has been set for May 8, 2012 @ 1:30pm changed from the original date of May 29, 2012
Seems like the case is being pushed through the court system rather quickly...
I believe at the arraignment the judge could ask the prosecution for additional facts to support the charge...It may benefit the defense (especially since O'Mara seems to believe the charging document is weak) to have the arraignment ASAP, so the prosecution does not have time to gather more evidence to support the charge...
I believe at the arraignment the judge could ask the prosecution for additional facts to support the charge...It may benefit the defense (especially since O'Mara seems to believe the charging document is weak) to have the arraignment ASAP, so the prosecution does not have time to gather more evidence to support the charge...
Arraignments are just a formal reading of the charges to the defendant, required by law, and the defendant then pleads guilty or not guilty to the charges. I don't think there will be any further questions asked of the prosecution about the charging document at the arraignment. Zimmerman will plead not guilty, and that will probably be it for that hearing.
Zimmerman has already been charged with the crime. Any concern about the charging document will have to be addressed via a different pre-trial hearing.
Even though the "burden" of proof for the defense in an immunity hearing is greater (whereas in a trial the burden is greater for the prosecution), it makes sense that the defense will have to prove to the judge his client indeed was "standing his ground" and the judge could come to a decision without much evidence from the prosecution...
Yes, the defense will motion to dismiss at every opportunity...I would hope a judge does not make a decision based on political reasons, that would be wrong on so many levels...and as far as "accepting a plea", I don't think GZ will do this especially since (it would appear) he is steadfast in his self-defense claim...O'Mara did say he would plead Not Guilty at the arraignment...
I think the way this works is that an immunity hearing is triggered by the stand your ground law. Self defense does not always haveto involve stand your ground. However, the defendant has to request the immunity hearing; they are not forced to take that route.
If the defense requests an immunity hearing, the burden of proof in that hearing is shifted to the defendant to prove stand your ground. A preponderance of the evidence is the burden of proof required of the defendant and is not as high as the beyond a reasonable doubt standard in criminal cases. A preponderance of the evidence means that the judge (or jury in a civil trial) determines that the defendant gave, say, 51% more evidence than the other side (the State) who gave, say, 49%. It can be very, very close, so the burden is not as high as it is in a criminal case of beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, if the Judge in the immunity hearing determines that the State actually presented, 51% evidence that the incident was not a stand your ground self defense, the defendant loses, and the matter goes to a criminal trial; then the burden is upon the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt their charge. However, if Zimmermen asserts self defense in the criminal trial, then that is an affirmative defense, and Zimmerman does have the burden of proving that defense, rather than remaining silent and relying on the presumption of innocence.
These things tend to get rather complicated and if you google affirmative defenses, there are some good explanations out there.
As for a guilty plea, when it gets down to being charged with a crime with a very harsh punishment, like life, and the state offers a plea deal with, say, maybe time served or only a year or so, then probation, many defendants decide it is not worth taking a chance on what a jury might do, and they take the plea, even though they are adamant they did not do the crime. Juries do in fact convict innocent people sometimes, and it's a chance few people want to take. But you never know. IMO, Zimmerman would be wise to take a good plea deal if offered.
Last edited by FancyFeast5000; 04-23-2012 at 11:37 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
