Trayvon Martin

Jason P

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I think Zimmerman is a piece of shit, but NBC fucked up, editing the 911 call.
So Zimmerman is suing NBC. Good for him.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/ap/ap/crim ... ers/nTPYr/

Yes, it was a huge screw up by NBC. Without that edited call, this thread does not exist, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton aren't leading rallies and we are not debating the racial divide in this country.

The focus on the case should have been the "stand your ground" law, but clearly that wasn't the focus.

gimmesometruth27

Trayvon Martin's Family Settles Wrongful Death Suit

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/0 ... 22300.html



Trayvon Martin's family has reached a settlement in a wrongful death suit they filed against the homeowners association of the sub-division where Martin was killed, the Orlando Sentinel reports.

Martin was shot to death just steps from his father's home on Feb. 26, 2012, by volunteer neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman. The case drew national attention last year as the Sanford Police Department vacillated on whether to file charges against Zimmerman, who indicated that he'd shot Martin only after being attacked. Zimmerman has been charged with second degree murder and is currently awaiting trial.

Portions of the settlement released Friday do not specify how much money Martin's family will receive, but according to the Sentinel, the figure is believed to be in excess of $1 million. The settlement does, however, state that Zimmerman is not part of the agreement. Lawyers for Martin's family have made it clear that they still plan to file a civil claim against Zimmerman at a later point.

Jason P

Fox is having "Gavel to Gavel" coverage of the Zimmerman trial ...

:fp:



Plywood and Czech hedgehogs should be going for a premium in Sanford right now.

gimmesometruth27

yeah they can't even seat a jury who has not been tainted by leaks and media coverage. they need a change of venue, but where else could the trial be held? anyone who has been halfway paying attention has heard about the leaks from the defense that are pretty much character assasinations of trayvon. these are not admissable in court, but i am sure that they biased potential jurors by portraying trayvon as a thug. unethical, but brilliant move by the defense team.

i think the crux of the case is going to be the question of stand your ground. if zimmerman pursued trayvon, how can zimmerman be standing his ground and defending himself if he gained ground by pursuing trayvon??

Jason P

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

yeah they can't even seat a jury who has not been tainted by leaks and media coverage. they need a change of venue, but where else could the trial be held? anyone who has been halfway paying attention has heard about the leaks from the defense that are pretty much character assasinations of trayvon. these are not admissable in court, but i am sure that they biased potential jurors by portraying trayvon as a thug. unethical, but brilliant move by the defense team.

i think the crux of the case is going to be the question of stand your ground. if zimmerman pursued trayvon, how can zimmerman be standing his ground and defending himself if he gained ground by pursuing trayvon??

the easy solution ... get these guys on the jury ...

PJ_Soul

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

yeah they can't even seat a jury who has not been tainted by leaks and media coverage. they need a change of venue, but where else could the trial be held? anyone who has been halfway paying attention has heard about the leaks from the defense that are pretty much character assasinations of trayvon. these are not admissable in court, but i am sure that they biased potential jurors by portraying trayvon as a thug. unethical, but brilliant move by the defense team.

i think the crux of the case is going to be the question of stand your ground. if zimmerman pursued trayvon, how can zimmerman be standing his ground and defending himself if he gained ground by pursuing trayvon??

I guess... Although I've been paying attention, and if I were on that jury I would already have decided that Zimmerman is guilty, which shows that the tainting very much goes both ways... Even Steven!

otter

I watched his police questioning video. He seemed believable. Evidence so far back up his story.

My Binaural for your Riot Act; he walks.

JonnyPistachio

otter wrote:

I watched his police questioning video. He seemed believable. Evidence so far back up his story.

My Binaural for your Riot Act; he walks.

The problem is, from what I've heard, there's no evidence on who confronted who, other than the word of the guy who survived. And that's not evidence, thats just testimony.

Its gonna be an ugly trial. And there's a good chance Zimmerman walks, although he's a dingbat and likely accosted the kid.

As i've always said, its too bad there was a gun involved and one person didnt just beat up the other like the old days. Bottom line is, with better judgement on behalf of Zimmerman, the kid would still be alive, Zimmerman wouldnt be in the shit he's in, and he might have not gained 142 pounds.

LloydXmas

Knock Knock?

Who's there?

Ben

Ben Who?

Ben Dover and welcome to prison

hedonist

Heard a thing on the news the other day about the gender and race make-up of the jury - why should it matter? Are we saying that there IS bias based on those factors but then it doesn't (or shouldn't) apply in other situations?

Ironic.

BinFrog

hedonist wrote:

Heard a thing on the news the other day about the gender and race make-up of the jury - why should it matter?

It most definitely matters. Much like the OJ trial, people are very divided on this issue, and it tends to run across race/ethnicity lines. The absolute last thing you want, sad to say, is a jury of all black women who may very well get emotionally tied up in the case (think of it as a motherly reaction). It's hard enough to fill a jury for this case. I think they chose the jury wisely.

hedonist

BinFrog wrote:

hedonist wrote:

Heard a thing on the news the other day about the gender and race make-up of the jury - why should it matter?

It most definitely matters. Much like the OJ trial, people are very divided on this issue, and it tends to run across race/ethnicity lines. The absolute last thing you want, sad to say, is a jury of all black women who may very well get emotionally tied up in the case (think of it as a motherly reaction). It's hard enough to fill a jury for this case. I think they chose the jury wisely.

I agree with you, but then it goes back to the second sentence of my previous post. I'm not saying it's right or wrong (I can't really, since I believe it's mostly human nature), but if it's applicable in one setting why is it unacceptable in another?

BinFrog

hedonist wrote:

BinFrog wrote:

hedonist wrote:

Heard a thing on the news the other day about the gender and race make-up of the jury - why should it matter?

It most definitely matters. Much like the OJ trial, people are very divided on this issue, and it tends to run across race/ethnicity lines. The absolute last thing you want, sad to say, is a jury of all black women who may very well get emotionally tied up in the case (think of it as a motherly reaction). It's hard enough to fill a jury for this case. I think they chose the jury wisely.

I agree with you, but then it goes back to the second sentence of my previous post. I'm not saying it's right or wrong (I can't really, since I believe it's mostly human nature), but if it's applicable in one setting why is it unacceptable in another?

Is this truly bias though? Jury selection had to be agreed upon by both the prosecution and defense...

PJ_Soul

LloydXmas wrote:

Knock Knock?

Who's there?

Ben

Ben Who?

Ben Dover and welcome to prison

PJ_Soul

BinFrog wrote:

hedonist wrote:

BinFrog wrote:

It most definitely matters. Much like the OJ trial, people are very divided on this issue, and it tends to run across race/ethnicity lines. The absolute last thing you want, sad to say, is a jury of all black women who may very well get emotionally tied up in the case (think of it as a motherly reaction). It's hard enough to fill a jury for this case. I think they chose the jury wisely.

I agree with you, but then it goes back to the second sentence of my previous post. I'm not saying it's right or wrong (I can't really, since I believe it's mostly human nature), but if it's applicable in one setting why is it unacceptable in another?

Is this truly bias though? Jury selection had to be agreed upon by both the prosecution and defense...

Exactly. There is a reason the defense made this happen, for better or worse.... of course, from what I can tell, the defense attorney is an idiot, so...

hedonist

BinFrog wrote:

hedonist wrote:

I agree with you, but then it goes back to the second sentence of my previous post. I'm not saying it's right or wrong (I can't really, since I believe it's mostly human nature), but if it's applicable in one setting why is it unacceptable in another?

Is this truly bias though? Jury selection had to be agreed upon by both the prosecution and defense...

I don't know, but it sure makes me wonder. I mean, it's OK to make certain assumptions based on the make-up of the jury but in everyday life it's frowned upon.

Again, I dunno. It was something that particularly struck me this morning.

gimmesometruth27

after yesterday's proceedings, if i were zimmerman i would be asking my attorney to make a plea deal...

JonnyPistachio

There are some interesting clips and maps on this site:

http://www.hlntv.com/interactive/2013/0 ... ?hpt=hp_t2

I think the map kinda makes it look more like Zimmerman was stalking Martin, although Zimmerman claims he was walking along in the dark with his gun behind martin to see the street signs. The street signs in his own neighborhood.

Afraid for his life? He got punched in the nose for stalking someone. I still think he'll get off, though I think he's guilty as shit. If he's found not guilty, some shit will hit the fan I fear.

PJ_Soul

JonnyPistachio wrote:

There are some interesting clips and maps on this site:

http://www.hlntv.com/interactive/2013/0 ... ?hpt=hp_t2

I think the map kinda makes it look more like Zimmerman was stalking Martin, although Zimmerman claims he was walking along in the dark with his gun behind martin to see the street signs. The street signs in his own neighborhood.

Afraid for his life? He got punched in the nose for stalking someone. I still think he'll get off, though I think he's guilty as shit. If he's found not guilty, some shit will hit the fan I fear.

I agree with everything you just said.

JimmyV

I too think he is guilty as sin but will most likely get off. Once the police/911 operator told him to stop following Martin and he did not...in my mind...that should be game over. He was stalking the guy.