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.
If this ends up on appeal, we will certainly find out the rest of the story others are so willing to ignore. The Prosecution certainly set it up and timed it perfectly not to allow the information to be brought into court. They didn't give Defense time to depose witnesses, and the "whistleblower" in TM's phone data cover-up is fired.
I have no respect for any American who supports this dishonesty.
Martin's weed smoking are irrelevant in this case, any decent judge would not allow it.
But according to you, Martin was fearful when he attacked him, and under stand your ground, if you fear for your safety, you have a right to attack.
By the same token, GZ had the right to defend himself once attacked, IF he feared for his life or grave bodily injury.
GZ apparently had those fears, and he DID defend himself to the best of his ability.
So, "self defense".
That is how I would vote, if I were on the jury.
Martin's weed smoking are irrelevant in this case, any decent judge would not allow it.
His history is irrelevant at this point because, his phone data was tampered with. You want to bring up GZ's past, TM's should be brought up as well. But the State, including Angela Corey, wanted it scrubbed. It will be admissible in an appeal.
By the same token, GZ had the right to defend himself once attacked, IF he feared for his life or grave bodily injury.
GZ apparently had those fears, and he DID defend himself to the best of his ability.
So, "self defense".
That is how I would vote, if I were on the jury.
So was Martin justified in attacking Zimmerman??????
Isn't that 95% of what has taken place in this trial and every one of these Trayvon Martin threads?
Apparently none of these people have heard the attorney or the family explain that this case has NOTHING to do with race (after they found out their son made racists comments about GZ).
He was not obligated to listen to him. What other people would do in the same situation has no bearing on what the law is.
Yes it does. The law requires a person to do what a "reasonable" person would do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JanND
This is exactly what is in the law. Part of what the jurors are judging George on....is whether his action are what a reasonable person would do in the same situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiftymh
If that is the case, they should be replaced.
Are you serious? That is the essence of the law!
*************************************
This trial has never ceased to amaze me. I have no legal training whatsoever. I am a member of a profession that always has the lawyers looking over our shoulders, so I do know a little bit about what to do to keep them at arm's length. I am totally amazed that there are people on this forum who do NOT understand that a person can be convicted of a lesser charge, e.g. manslaughter instead of murder 2. I am totally amazed as well that people don't understand that the entire basis of the law is what a reasonable person would do under the circumstances.
More conspiracy theories about the liberal mainstream media.
In either case, the jurors are debating at least one of the charges, more than likely involuntary manslaughter.
The jury just wanted more information about manslaughter. This is on Saturday at 6 pm.
I don't see involuntary manslaughter on the table, unless I'm missing something.
"To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. Trayvon Martin is dead.
2. George Zimmerman intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.
George Zimmerman cannot be guilty of manslaughter by committing a merely negligent act or if the killing was either justifiable or excusable homicide:
Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to harm, that violation is negligence.
The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon George Zimmerman, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which George Zimmerman was at the time of the killing."
Jury asks a question: May we please have clarification on the instructions following manslaughter.
With an enhancement....use of a gun...Could mean 10-30.
Last edited by JanND; 07-13-2013 at 04:11 PM..
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.
