Weed, fights and guns: Trayvon Martin’s text messages released

[Joseg]

I venture that if Martin had killed Zimmerman there would be no issue with the prosecution getting the last word.

 

 

Sure, but the issue is that Prosecution dropped the ball yesterday, today gets to hear what defense has outlined, and rectify his mistakes. Why is it an issue now? The trial should have never existed in the first place and prosecution has not provided enough evidence to prove they even have a case. 

[RobertNashville]

You must be kidding... really I don't see how you wrote that sentence with a straight face.

Everyone here is doing the exact thing you're saying, only opposite, suggesting that Treyvon could have done a number of things differently. My post was to point out how that goes both ways. I'm sorry you did not pick up on that subtly, I thought it was obvious.

At any rate, this isn't a website aimed at 17 year old, intercity black youths. It is a firearms website with the majority of members carrying firearms. To not point out Zimmerman's stupid behavior is, well stupid.

On this board alone there is a year and a half of threads and hundreds of posts where the "should have stayed in his truck" mantra has been repeated ad nauseum -  I think pointing out all the things Martin could have done is only proper and fair.

 

There was a thread here that attempted to look at what lessons could be learned from this whole incident...unfortunately it didn't take long for the the thread to go off course.

 

Yes; I'm sure that there are plenty of lessons that can be learned from this but at this point I'm doubting that an internet forum (this one or any other) will be the place that will dissect if fairly so I'll be waiting to hear from the folks who have followed this stuff for a lifetime and hopefully, can give an analysis that isn't dripping with emotion and ax grinding.

[RobertNashville]

Agreed, I'd go so far as to say that was the case with regards to the initial findings of the original investigation as well.

Yes it was; that's why the original DA decided not to charge and why FL had to go shopping for a DA/prosecutors that would do the will of the race-baiters and the media.

 

At least now I know that Zimmerman is a "white-Hispanic" and Obama is a "white-African American".

Edited July 12, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Mark@Sea]

Using TMF's standards of evidence and testimony, I'm thinking we should also convict Zimmerman for Hoffa and JFK.

[TMF]

Using TMF's standards of evidence and testimony, I'm thinking we should also convict Zimmerman for Hoffa and JFK.

Do what? Please read my posts instead of being a dick. I clearly posted not a few minutes ago that there isn't enough evidence to convict.

[jgradyc]

Sure, but the issue is that Prosecution dropped the ball yesterday, today gets to hear what defense has outlined, and rectify his mistakes. Why is it an issue now? The trial should have never existed in the first place and prosecution has not provided enough evidence to prove they even have a case. 

 

This case has scared the cr*p out of me. Legal experts have said they have never seen in twenty years anything like this case. This trial should have never happened.

 

I had assumed the prosecution must have had some major evidence not publicly known in order to indict GZ. The prosecution had nothing... NOTHING except speculation as to what happened. That was evident when the prosecution rested.

 

What really scares me is:

 

1. The continuing attempts by the prosecution to distort the LAW.  For example, by strongly implying that following is illegal. That drives me nuts. Following is NOT stalking.

2. The judge disallowing significant evidence from being presented to the jury about TM's fighting, others asking TM to teach them how to fight, drug use, toxicology report, multiple suspensions, punching a bus driver, texting that he wanted to see blood by punching people in the nose, pictures of him getting ready to fight, possession of jewelry and burglary tools.

[TMF]

On this board alone there is a year and a half of threads and hundreds of posts where the "should have stayed in his truck" mantra has been repeated ad nauseum - I think pointing out all the things Martin could have done is only proper and fair.

There was a thread here that attempted to look at what lessons could be learned from this whole incident...unfortunately it didn't take long for the the thread to go off course.

Yes; I'm sure that there are plenty of lessons that can be learned from this but at this point I'm doubting that an internet forum (this one or any other) will be the place that will dissect if fairly so I'll be waiting to hear from the folks who have followed this stuff for a lifetime and hopefully, can give an analysis that isn't dripping with emotion and ax grinding.

I have no ax to grind other than folks like you and others that take my opinion personally and make it personal. If you don't think there is something to learn from Zimmerman's behavior you are, once again, being disingenuous. Whether Martin was black, white, white-Hispanic or purple, Zimmerman would have found himself under EXTREME scrutiny if not in the defense seat. At a minimum he'd be getting sued into poverty.

So yeah, I think my attempt at contributing to "lessons learned" so that responsible gun owners would not do the same thing as this dummy is warranted. But did I make the mistake of ending up in another thread where an opinion is not valid unless you're part of the group stoking one another to completion? Edited July 12, 2013 by TMF

[Guest nra37922]

Do what? Please read my posts instead of being a dick. I clearly posted not a few minutes ago that there isn't enough evidence to convict.

So what does evidence have to do with this political show trial?  This fiasco has been tainted and pushed from the beginning by the race baiters, upto and including the current resident in the WH, that the chances of GZ being set free are slim to none.  Jury isn't stupid, we hope, but even a brain dead zombie could have seen the writing on the wall before being picked to sit on this jury. 

[RobertNashville]

This case has scared the cr*p out of me. Legal experts have said they have never seen in twenty years anything like this case. This trial should have never happened.

 

I had assumed the prosecution must have had some major evidence not publicly known in order to indict GZ. The prosecution had nothing... NOTHING except speculation as to what happened. That was evident when the prosecution rested.

 

What really scares me is:

 

1. The continuing attempts by the prosecution to distort the LAW.  For example, by strongly implying that following is illegal. That drives me nuts. Following is NOT stalking.

2. The judge disallowing significant evidence from being presented to the jury about TM's fighting, others asking TM to teach them how to fight, drug use, toxicology report, multiple suspensions, punching a bus driver, texting that he wanted to see blood by punching people in the nose, pictures of him getting ready to fight, possession of jewelry and burglary tools.

Actually, there are plenty of cases where what should have been clearly seen as an appropriate use of deadly force, charges were still brought against the victim (the SD shooter) and they don't always end well for the victim...I don't have the case at my fingertips but there was a cop (off duty) who, on his own property, defended himself against a drunk armed aggressor but the city cop was charged by the county sheriff because that cop has pissed off that sheriff...the cop died in jail.

 

There is another case where a woman shot her husband while she was hiding it the basement with her children...the husband had promised to "kill here and the kids' and the husband was busting his way into the basement door from the kitchen and and clearly had the ability to kill here and had made his intent clear...she was still charged with murder. Fortunately for her, she was acquitted.

 

My point is that even if you do everything right, you may still be charged and you may even still be found guilty…there simply are no guarantees. That’s why choosing to carry a firearm is a tremendously serious decision; far more serious than, I’m afraid, many people understand.  So many just cry about it being their “right” (which it is) but seem very willing to brush aside the responsibility that comes with it…they are the ones who never get training on how and when to deploy the weapon or garner any understanding of the rules of engagement (which for the armed citizen are vastly different than for the military or the police).

 

After a SD shooting we are all subject to political and societal pressures…a DA looking for a feather in his/her cap…a corrupt system and a dozen other variables that we simply cannot control.  While we cannot control that we can at least be aware of it and the ramifications.

At the end of that day, before you strap on that Glock or Sig or whatever you use for a carry weapon, do so understanding that you are strapping on a huge amount of responsibility too.

[jgradyc]

This case has scared the cr*p out of me. Legal experts have said they have never seen in twenty years anything like this case. This trial should have never happened.

 

I had assumed the prosecution must have had some major evidence not publicly known in order to indict GZ. The prosecution had nothing... NOTHING except speculation as to what happened. That was evident when the prosecution rested.

 

What really scares me is:

 

1. The continuing attempts by the prosecution to distort the LAW.  For example, by strongly implying that following is illegal. That drives me nuts. Following is NOT stalking.

2. The judge disallowing significant evidence from being presented to the jury about TM's fighting, others asking TM to teach them how to fight, drug use, toxicology report, multiple suspensions, punching a bus driver, texting that he wanted to see blood by punching people in the nose, pictures of him getting ready to fight, possession of jewelry and burglary tools.

Oh, and I forgot to mention...

 

Allowing the prosecution to change the charge after the presentation by both sides has finished. This should not have been allowed. The charge of murder two OR manslaughter should have been made at the start of the trial. Otherwise, the defense has had no chance to present an argument against a new charge.

[RobertNashville]

...If you don't think there is something to learn from Zimmerman's behavior you are, once again, being disingenuous.

:confused:    Did you, maybe, miss this part in the post you quoted...

 

...Yes; I'm sure that there are plenty of lessons that can be learned from this but at this point I'm doubting that an internet forum (this one or any other) will be the place that will dissect if fairly so I'll be waiting to hear from the folks who have followed this stuff for a lifetime and hopefully, can give an analysis that isn't dripping with emotion and ax grinding.

Edited July 12, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Joseg]

Oh Damn, he brought a block of cement (side walk) to show it to jury.. BRILLIANT!!!

[TMF]

:confused: Did you, maybe, miss this part in the post you quoted...

...Yes; I'm sure that there are plenty of lessons that can be learned from this but at this point I'm doubting that an internet forum (this one or any other) will be the place that will dissect if fairly so I'll be waiting to hear from the folks who have followed this stuff for a lifetime and hopefully, can give an analysis that isn't dripping with emotion and ax grinding.

Yes, forgive me for missing that. My eye gets distracted by buzzwords like emotion and ax grinding.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Defense is doing a good job, as was expected.

 

So will any argument in the closings rise to the genius level of the chewbacca defense?

 

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103454/the-chewbacca-defense

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3ic9sOcU7s

[Hozzie]

I know it has been said before, but if this jury finds him guilty of anything, what a carriage of injustice.  I can't imagine how any self respecting juror could bring themselves to convict someone with essentially no evidence.  They may not like Zman personally, but I can't imagine how you could justify convicting him. 

[npgunner]

Sadly ...
I think in the future these emotion based closing arguments will carry more weight to the jury than will facts. Especially considering the education system is systematically ruining people's ability to think logically. Watching this guy makes me sick. He isn't presenting facts. He's clearly playing to the motherly-instinct of the women on the jury and hoping to get a sympathy conviction. He should be embarrassed of himself.

[Oh Shoot]

Sadly ...
I think in the future these emotion based closing arguments will carry more weight to the jury than will facts. Especially considering the education system is systematically ruining people's ability to think logically. Watching this guy makes me sick. He isn't presenting facts. He's clearly playing to the motherly-instinct of the women on the jury and hoping to get a sympathy conviction. He should be embarrassed of himself.

 

The judicial logic of FL giving the prosecution two closing arguments and the defense only one escapes me.

 

- OS

[JayC]

Unfortunately it's like that in more places than just Florida.  In what debate setting does one side gets the opening statement, and the closing statement?

 

 

The judicial logic of FL giving the prosecution two closing arguments and the defense only one escapes me.

 

- OS

[RobertNashville]

The judicial logic of FL giving the prosecution two closing arguments and the defense only one escapes me.

 

- OS

I thought that in most states, the defense always gives its closing argument first, then the prosecution...apparently, like a lot of other things, FL does things a bit differently.

 

This judge is even letting the prosecution go over the time they were supposed to be held to.  :shrug: 

[Guest Lester Weevils]

The judicial logic of FL giving the prosecution two closing arguments and the defense only one escapes me.

 

- OS

 

Are there places that do it some other way? Do some places give both sides one shot, and maybe flip a coin who goes first? I recollected that most tv and movie courtroom dramas do it thataway (prosecution gets two shots at it). It seems somehow wrong but had assumed it is fairly standard?

[npgunner]

"This case isn't about race"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Is telling jokes in your closing argument normal?

[TMF]

The judicial logic of FL giving the prosecution two closing arguments and the defense only one escapes me.

- OS

Is this a Florida thing? I seem to remember the Casey Anthony closing arguments going on for a couple of days, and that was the next county over.

[TripleDigitRide]

There is absolutely zero evidence that tells us definitively how this started. You're being disingenuous to suggest that you're doing anything other than "guessing".

You are absolutely correct. And that doubt must be in favor of Zimmerman. 

[Hozzie]

I think it is pretty standard for the prosecution to always go first.  They get to give their closing, then listen to the defense, and then respond to the defense.  Essentially, the defense gets to use the prosecutions words against them in their closing, so this just gives the prosecution the ability to do the same.  I don't really have a problem with this, I think there would be a definite disadvantage to not have the ability to respond to some things.  

 

This case is so ridiculous due to the lack of facts, but in a lot of cases, it isn't like this.

[Oh Shoot]

Are there places that do it some other way? Do some places give both sides one shot, and maybe flip a coin who goes first? I recollected that most tv and movie courtroom dramas do it thataway (prosecution gets two shots at it). It seems somehow wrong but had assumed it is fairly standard?

 

Didn't realize that. Thought standard procedure was to give each one shot in criminal trials, with defense going last, with theory being that prosecution must have convinced jury beyond a reasonable doubt from the gitgo.

 

Maybe the better theory is that the prosecution (the state/county/city) is paying for the thing, so they get double emphasis? :)

 

- OS