Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 7/10/13 01:23 PM, Ceratisa wrote: Judge is so openly anti Zimmerman it isn't even funny.

Are you taking into account the relative merits of the motions from the defense?

She won't admit evidence like the fact that he smoked pot unless it would have effected him at the time.

Which is fine, because he had 1.5 ng/ml in his system. That is half the legal limit to drive in Colorado, which is nothing. THC stays in your system for weeks. It would be like saying Zimmerman got drunk 3 weeks ago, therefore alcohol was impairing his judgement the night of the incident.

At 7/10/13 03:08 PM, Ceratisa wrote: And the Expert later said he believes he had enough in his system to effect him at the time. Yes, remember I'm listening to the trail. Didn't you see the Judge sustain an objection on the defense that the prosecution itself opened the door to?
She came back saying his texts about street fighting, swinging at people, illegal purchase of a firearm as irrelevant to his character in this case.

That's not indicative of a bias against the defense. There is a lot of precedent for text messages being considered inadmissible on the basis of it being considered hearsay. Text messages have been inadmissible for a while now, now just during this trial unless there is a non hearsay purpose.

At 7/10/13 03:38 PM, Ceratisa wrote: Some were withheld and didn't you listen yesterday? The phone itself had a password to get into it, mentions specifically addressing TM about fighting and him talking about fighting. The chat program on his phone was a program designed to hide his messages, which was also locked and password protected. How is that not proof it came from TM?

You would need his phone, both passwords, know to look for the program, then respond to texts as someone else when the texts were specifically addressing TM.

You can't prove it was him because you can't prove he was the only one who knew the password and had access to it. It's still inadmissible as hearsay in the eyes of the court and has been for years.

At 7/10/13 03:44 PM, Ceratisa wrote: So known and confirmed school violence and suspensions, and typed messages to a secure phone are hearsay? Why exactly is that the case?

The suspension part isn't hearsay, that's just character evidence. Which the defense really shouldn't have (and didn't, for the most part) try to play around with, because then the jury can hear about Zimmerman assaulting a police officer.

At 7/10/13 03:54 PM, Ceratisa wrote: You mean the out of uniform officer (or was it undercover I forget) that he pushed off his younger friend? Is that what you consider assault?

Yes.

The prosecution actually opened up Zimmerman's past, which was mentioned after the defense was denied use of TM's. This was mentioned somewhere in one of the articles I linked I think.

Well then go find it.

At 7/10/13 01:26 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

Do I need a sledgehammer here? How many times do I have to say that THIS IS NOT GENERIC SELF DEFENSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In order to use lethal force in self defense one must reasonably (i.e. what a reasonable person intheri circumstances) believe that their life is in danger. They cannot simply be hit, or fear that they may get hurt or beaten up.

reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. a broken jaw, brain damage, or blindness would be considered great bodily harm.

It's not the severity of the injuries that are at issue. The lightness of the injuries here are indicators that the altercation was not as such a large person would fear for their life from a small person. It COULD mean that, but then again, it could not. It's not conclusive as many here so wish it was.

If Martin was small, that would be something you could say, however, Trayvon Martin was NOT small. at 5'11" he's taller than me by 2 inches. He also weighted 158 pounds. This is NOT a small person. he's 2 pounds short of being a middleweight boxer. He may or may not have had the physical strength of a middleweight boxer, but Martin was no shriveled 80 pound shrimp either.

The positioning of Martin in an MMA position above Zimmerman is not evidence that Martian planned to kill or nearly kill Zimmerman.

I've been in enough fights to know that when someone mounts, you, its to inflict as much harm on you as possible. If Martin wasn't trying to harm Zimmerman, he had ample opportunity to escape.

Subjective panic is not grounds to kill someone, especially when the facts skew HEAVILY away from the ability or intent to kill.

subjective panic would indicate an honest fear of death or great bodily harm. following someone on a street is not illegal nor is it a reason for someone to attack you.

Oh and another sledghammer moment. Prosecution doesn't have to prove against self defense.

Are you telling me Zimmerman, who outweighed Martin by close to 100 pound scouldn;t lift the scrawny kid off of him? That is proposterous.

you're either ignorant of the facts or just plain lying through your teeth (not surprising) to make your case. the weight difference between Martin (158) and Zimmerman (185) was only 27 pounds. You try lifting something that is almost your own body weight off of your chest while you're lying flat on your back. I bet you can't. Almost no one can. you don't have the leverage. Now factor in that Martin can move and adjust to counter your attempts to shove him off.

Zimmerman was helpless.

None of those amount to the serious injuries required for lethal force to be used.

blindness? death? permanent facial disfiguration? I beg to differ.

The evidence COULD be read to show this. Then again, its could reasonably be read to show that this was a simple garden variety fight that Zimmerman was in no danger and that his belief was not reasonable.

a stranger attacks you, takes you to the ground and mounts you. this is not an arranged regulated bout where you can tap out. At this point, anything can happen. Zimmerman didn't know if Martin was armed or not, neither did Martin. For all Zimmerman knew, Martin could pummel him until he's weak then slit his throat with a knife and take his belongings.

THAT is the crux here. How many times will I need to repeat myself to get you guys to understand?

Nowhere in the law does it say you have to be injured or killed before you can use lethal force. all you have to have is a genuine belief that your life and/or limbs (including your head) are in danger. Someone mounting you with the intention of pummeling your head (which contains 4 sensory organs (all 5 if you count touch) as well as your brain) should be sufficient. If Zimmerman just pulled the gun and shot Martin before he got the first hit in, I would say he's guilty of murder. However, this is not the case. Zimmerman was on the ground and Martin was on top. Martin could have easily dismounted and ran before Zimmerman got up.

Also, the screams for help lasted 10 seconds. what do you think was happening in that 10 second window? Martin sitting on Zimmerman's chest screaming for help while Zimmerman was steadying the gun? I highly doubt it. If Martin was confident enough to mount Zimmerman for a victory pummeling, he could have grabbed his gun away from him.

At 7/10/13 05:05 PM, Ceratisa wrote: if prosecutors start bringing up Zimmerman's past

If. They didn't.

At 7/10/13 05:16 PM, Ceratisa wrote: They did actually,

When?

and most recently they have moved to present a rebuttal witness.

Root and Pollack testified that Zimmerman wasn't the type of person to get aggressive, so it's a rebuttal to those statements. It hasn't been decided if it is usable by the judge yet.

But that wasn't the only time either.

Like?

At 7/10/13 06:53 PM, Ceratisa wrote: For TM supporters why are they obsessed with him leaving his truck? That action wasn't illegal
And I would like them to present their theory on the EXACT break down of the situation that matches expert testimony....

your first mistake is using facts and logic. you forget that you're dealing with people who go by emotion and not logic, people who can be whipped into a frenzy by master manipulators. You're wasting your time trying to deal with that kind of person, they're beyond help because they substitute emotions for logic, opinions for facts.

It's like trying to convince a starving dog to give up a piece of meat. It's not going to happen.

At 7/10/13 06:53 PM, Ceratisa wrote: For TM supporters why are they obsessed with him leaving his truck? That action wasn't illegal

If the judge comes back tomorrow and rules in favor of the prosecution w/r/t the jury being allowed to consider lesser charges (aggravated assault, possibly aggravated stalking) then him leaving the car is a big deal. I think the state knows they aren't getting murder 2 since they weren't able to prove Zimmerman assaulted Martin beyond a reasonable doubt so they're going to focus on him intentionally seeking Martin after he started running.

At 7/10/13 09:22 PM, Ceratisa wrote: How is it a big deal, it wasn't illegal and he wasn't told not to or even advised not to by the time he had left his vehicle. He was relaying information back to a non-emergency operator.
The judge will rule in favor of the prosecution, like they have consistently.

Because none of the self defense claims matter if the state can make the argument that Zimmerman assaulted Martin by pursuing him.

At 7/10/13 09:31 PM, Ceratisa wrote: pursuit=/= assault, sorry.

You don't have to apologize:

"The basic assault charge in Florida is classified as a second degree misdemeanor and carries a potential sentence of 60 days in jail and fines reaching $500.

You may be facing this charge if you are accused of intentionally threatening someone (by word or action) with physical harm. Whether or not you follow through on the threat, it must be possible and put the victim in fear that it is about to happen."

Yes, following someone can absolutely be considered assault in Florida. That is the law.

At 7/10/13 08:45 PM, Feoric wrote:

If the judge comes back tomorrow and rules in favor of the prosecution w/r/t the jury being allowed to consider lesser charges (aggravated assault, possibly aggravated stalking) then him leaving the car is a big deal. I think the state knows they aren't getting murder 2 since they weren't able to prove Zimmerman assaulted Martin beyond a reasonable doubt so they're going to focus on him intentionally seeking Martin after he started running.

you know she is. the state wants to get him with something, anything they can to put him away. Hopefully the jury sees through that move and acquits him on all charges.