There is also the case where he was bashing Zimmerman's head on the ground after jumping him when Zimmerman had disengaged that you're missing.
Missing what? That thing with no proof it actually happened?
Gashes on the back of his head and a broken nose, alongside a witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman while Zimmerman was yelling for help.
Oh, you mean the witness that hasn't come forward and the injuries that can't be verified?
Of course, I wouldn't come forward either. The Martin supporters sure seem to like taking potshots at the police, causing Zimmerman to go into hiding. I wouldn't doubt they would threaten physical violence or harm to your or your house if you stepped forwards and said anything other than "poor African-American boy".
The "witness" did come forward... it was a young kid (13 or so) who said he couldn't tell any details, they tried to pressure him into saying Zimmerman was on the ground He still says he couldn't see any details including race.
Why is this lady complaining about how difficult her job is?
She is trying to explain to an audience that varies greatly (educated/not so educated) how and why things have happened so far (or haven't). At least that is my guess.
Oh, you mean the witness that hasn't come forward and the injuries that can't be verified?
The witness came forward while the police where conducting their investigation. The witnesses report was in the police file on the case, and apparently was instrumental in backing up Zimmerman's claim of self defense. That the witness does not wish to be know to the media does not somehow make his testimony any less substantial.
As far as the injuries not being verified. You have the police report. You have the fireman that initially treated Zimmerman. You have the video that shows the police checking the back of his head at the police station. If his nose was broken an x-ray could prove it. An autopsy report of Martin will show some evidence if he was on the winning or losing side of the fight.
Just because some of this information has not been released to the media does not mean that it doesn't exist.
There is also the case where he was bashing Zimmerman's head on the ground after jumping him when Zimmerman had disengaged that you're missing.
Missing what? That thing with no proof it actually happened?
Gashes on the back of his head and a broken nose, alongside a witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman while Zimmerman was yelling for help.
Oh, you mean the witness that hasn't come forward and the injuries that can't be verified?
Of course, I wouldn't come forward either. The Martin supporters sure seem to like taking potshots at the police, causing Zimmerman to go into hiding. I wouldn't doubt they would threaten physical violence or harm to your or your house if you stepped forwards and said anything other than "poor African-American boy".
The "witness" did come forward... it was a young kid (13 or so) who said he couldn't tell any details, they tried to pressure him into saying Zimmerman was on the ground He still says he couldn't see any details including race.
If they are going for second degree they must have some evidence Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL fight. Which would need to be either unreleased evidence, eye witness testimony, or something Zimmerman said when he talked to the prosecution without his lawyers. Which might explain why they dropped him. Will be interested to see which it is.
What they could have to go after 2nd degree is a bullet entry wound in Martin's back, meaning that Zimmerman had shot Martin in the back. That would rise to the level of murder, but not 1st-degree.
Without a pre-existing relationship between Zimmerman and Martin, getting a 1st-degree conviction would be incredibly difficult. 1st-degree requires premeditation AND planning - Zimmerman would have had to been planning to kill Martin before the confrontation ever started.
2nd-degree covers murder in the heat of the moment. Like if you get into a bar fight and stab the other guy to death. Or say, if you start a fight with some teenager and said teenager beats you up on the sidewalk, then walks away while insulting you. And that pisses you off so much that you pull out your gun and shoot the teenager in the back.
No matter what I say, you're going to goose it up by taking some insane alternative meaning that has no application to prosecution or to the law to it. As the prosecution bringing charges against him, I hope, would evidence. But I will point this out for just how astoundingly fucked up the logic behind it is:
You realize the trial hasn't happened yet, right? I fail to see how "I try and avoid assuming I know things that I do not know because I have already made up my mind."
There was only one voice screaming. It was screaming so loud that it could be heard away from the sight of the murder, through the walls of the houses of the people who were calling 911, over the phone to the dispatcher on the other end. It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that that voice was not Zimmerman's after Zimmerman claimed self defense, and that he was the one screaming at the top of his lungs for help. Unless you're trying to tell me that a third party was present at the murder, there is only one person that can be.
and that proves Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL altercation how exactly?
Since Zimmerman is the only surviving first hand witness, guess what the defense lawyers and prosecution are going to be hinging their case over? I'll give you a hint, it won't be Zimmerman's word. There is substantial evidence discrediting anything he says. Evidence that I and others have posted, and you have waved off as not being at where you've placed your own personal moral goalposts. Which by the way, the law doesn't give a damn about.
If the evidence you have posted in this thread is what the prosecution goes with he will walk. Either they know something you do not, which is likely, or they know the case will fail.
This is what i've been saying to you over many long-winded posts. This is what you've been ignoring in favor of making claims that I want to "burn him!" and such. Which I didn't. I don't expect this to keep you making wild and/or ridiculous claims. But I do wish you to know that i'm going to have to ignore your posts from now on. Since if I read through one more post like that, I think my skull's going to rocket off of my body in a fountain of blood and gore from the sheer rate my blood pressure rising every time I see you post about this case.
So yes, Zimmerman deserves to get railed.
If that means he has to live in fear free for the rest of his natural life over what he did then so be it
What was that racial he used Epithet again? You keep neglecting to cite it.
0
Options
ArchonexNo hard feelings, right?Registered Userregular
Oh, you mean the witness that hasn't come forward and the injuries that can't be verified?
The witness came forward while the police where conducting their investigation. The witnesses report was in the police file on the case, and apparently was instrumental in backing up Zimmerman's claim of self defense. That the witness does not wish to be know to the media does not somehow make his testimony any less substantial.
As far as the injuries not being verified. You have the police report. You have the fireman that initially treated Zimmerman. You have the video that shows the police checking the back of his head at the police station. If his nose was broken an x-ray could prove it. An autopsy report of Martin will show some evidence if he was on the winning or losing side of the fight.
Just because some of this information has not been released to the media does not mean that it doesn't exist.
Some of the most conclusive and definitive evidence has been lost, though.
A smart police department would have taken pictures of the wounds, or rather, gotten some form of verifiable media taken of it so that a jury wouldn't have to play "spot the pixel" if it came to a criminal case. Especially in the case of a murder. To roughly quote Detharin's logic in this, "just because we see them checking his head doesn't mean he was injured!". Especially if he was just hamming up his injuries after the fact. This actually may be a thing for the prosecution to point out, since the validity of the local police department's findings have been repeatedly called into question throughout this whole incident.
Unless they have some means of actually showing in a highly verifiable format that he was injured, I wouldn't bank much money on it being considered much when weighted against all the lies and suspicious crap Zimmerman and the PD did and perpetrated. Remember that in most cases, evidence needs to be very accurate to be considered applicable.
Example: The voice matching software used to confirm whether it was Trayvon or Zimmerman screaming at the top of his lungs, after Zimmerman claimed it was him, would require at least a 90 percent match to say that it was one person or another in a court case. They got something like a 38% match for Zimmerman. And logical deduction says who it was, since there was only one other party present at the scene. And he can't speak now.
Kid says he was pressured by police to side with Zimmerman. Murder charges. DOJ lawyers are involved.
Who's gonna be the first to say it's an Obama conspiracy?
Check out FreeRepublic.com and the Fox News comments. They beat you to it long before that point. There were people saying it was an Obama conspiracy on there before the issue of charges were even brought up.
What was that racial he used Epithet again? You keep neglecting to cite it.
Go back to my earlier posts, and look in the first couple where I posted the articles and transcripts. The same ones you are cherry-picking things out of context to make a bunch of claims. If you're not willing to read my posts, i'm not willing to repeat myself (multiple times) for your benefit. It was bolded, in quotes, and specifically highlighted out for your benefit. And yet you somehow missed it. Despite me telling you this multiple times.
If you're not willing to put the bare minimum amount of effort into debating this in a way that isn't very goosey, then i'm not willing to go about typing up another long-winded post explaining why cherry-picking stuff to suit your arguments is wrong and a bad thing to do from a debate standpoint. Or being taken seriously.
There was only one voice screaming. It was screaming so loud that it could be heard away from the sight of the murder, through the walls of the houses of the people who were calling 911, over the phone to the dispatcher on the other end. It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that that voice was not Zimmerman's after Zimmerman claimed self defense, and that he was the one screaming at the top of his lungs for help. Unless you're trying to tell me that a third party was present at the murder, there is only one person that can be.
Uh, where was it proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the voice was not Zimmerman's?
The audio expert, Tom Owens (who has his own issues regarding his history of in-court testimony*), said that a 90% match was needed to positively identify Zimmerman in a court of law. Owens said that he was able to get a 38% match, which was insufficient to positively identify the voice as Zimmerman's.
However, the inability of the expert to positively identify the voice as Zimmerman's does not "prove" the voice is not Zimmerman's. It just means that Owens wasn't able to prove that it was. Similar to how a Not Guilty verdict in a criminal case doesn't "prove" the defendant is Innocent. The failure to prove a positive claim does not in itself prove the opposite claim.
And at no point has Owens (or anyone else) "proven" that the voice was Martin's. As it stands, we don't know whose voice it is.
*Owens, in this case, claims he needs a 90% match to identify Zimmerman. But in a previous murder case he testified that he could positively identify the defendant with only a 68% match. That's a pretty big discrepancy for an expert to have when you're talking about convicting a person of murder.
BubbaT on
0
Options
EshTending bar. FFXIV. Motorcycles.Portland, ORRegistered Userregular
If they are going for second degree they must have some evidence Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL fight. Which would need to be either unreleased evidence, eye witness testimony, or something Zimmerman said when he talked to the prosecution without his lawyers. Which might explain why they dropped him. Will be interested to see which it is.
What they could have to go after 2nd degree is a bullet entry wound in Martin's back, meaning that Zimmerman had shot Martin in the back. That would rise to the level of murder, but not 1st-degree.
Without a pre-existing relationship between Zimmerman and Martin, getting a 1st-degree conviction would be incredibly difficult. 1st-degree requires premeditation AND planning - Zimmerman would have had to been planning to kill Martin before the confrontation ever started.
2nd-degree covers murder in the heat of the moment. Like if you get into a bar fight and stab the other guy to death. Or say, if you start a fight with some teenager and said teenager beats you up on the sidewalk, then walks away while insulting you. And that pisses you off so much that you pull out your gun and shoot the teenager in the back.
I feel like with a bullet to the back, his arrest would have happened A LOT sooner.
Go back to my earlier posts, and look in the first couple where I posted the articles and transcripts. The same ones you are cherry-picking things out of context to make a bunch of claims. If you're not willing to read my posts, i'm not willing to repeat myself (multiple times) for your benefit. It was bolded, in quotes, and specifically highlighted out for your benefit. And yet you somehow missed it. Despite me telling you this multiple times.
If you're not willing to put the bare minimum amount of effort into debating this in a way that isn't very goosey, then i'm not willing to go about typing up another long-winded post explaining why cherry-picking stuff to suit your arguments is wrong and a bad thing to do from a debate standpoint. Or being taken seriously.
What I am waiting for is you to either provide a non discredited source of the claim, or admit you were once again making shit up.The word he used was punks, as we had just covered in the thread you claim to have read. Not a racial epithet. Experts have confirmed this. So either once again there is a different racial Epithet he used somewhere else and you can cite it, or you have not been doing your research, reading the thread, or even paying attention. Which is it?
What is the maximum sentence second degree murder usually carries?
In Florida, it's life.
Looks like the minimum he faces if convicted is 25 years without parole.
Sadly with american prisons being the way they are, what he faces is being inside an american prison with lots of people that want to kill him for the glory of killing him. The chances he will survive 25 years in prison without protective custody and a lot of friends on the inside are slim.
That is not justice.
But that's for a discussion thread on why american prisons suck.
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
What is the maximum sentence second degree murder usually carries?
In Florida, it's life.
Looks like the minimum he faces if convicted is 25 years without parole.
Sadly with american prisons being the way they are, what he faces is being inside an american prison with lots of people that want to kill him for the glory of killing him. The chances he will survive 25 years in prison without protective custody and a lot of friends on the inside are slim.
That is not justice.
But that's for a discussion thread on why american prisons suck.
If he is convicted, I can't see him not being placed in a maximum security prison with how huge this case has been in the public eye.
Tried to check up on the witness thing. The one that I was referring to went by the name of John. The 13 year old was Austin. Not sure if they are the same person or not.
When police lead witnesses into giving testimony against the defense the testimony can get thrown out. Not sure what happens when it is the other way around. Seems unfair to the defendant if you can't use testimony that may have helped because the police messed up their investigation.
If they are going for second degree they must have some evidence Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL fight. Which would need to be either unreleased evidence, eye witness testimony, or something Zimmerman said when he talked to the prosecution without his lawyers. Which might explain why they dropped him. Will be interested to see which it is.
What they could have to go after 2nd degree is a bullet entry wound in Martin's back, meaning that Zimmerman had shot Martin in the back. That would rise to the level of murder, but not 1st-degree.
Without a pre-existing relationship between Zimmerman and Martin, getting a 1st-degree conviction would be incredibly difficult. 1st-degree requires premeditation AND planning - Zimmerman would have had to been planning to kill Martin before the confrontation ever started.
2nd-degree covers murder in the heat of the moment. Like if you get into a bar fight and stab the other guy to death. Or say, if you start a fight with some teenager and said teenager beats you up on the sidewalk, then walks away while insulting you. And that pisses you off so much that you pull out your gun and shoot the teenager in the back.
I feel like with a bullet to the back, his arrest would have happened A LOT sooner.
Sorry, I am not a lawyer, so does first degree murder require a plan to kill someone specific or can it be allowed if your planning to kill someone in general?
It would still be hard/impossible to prove but I wonder if a prior relationship is necessary.
Also, can the EMT testify to what treatment he gave Zimmerman? That would probably clear some of this confusion up without needing blurry pixels.
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
0
Options
EshTending bar. FFXIV. Motorcycles.Portland, ORRegistered Userregular
If they are going for second degree they must have some evidence Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL fight. Which would need to be either unreleased evidence, eye witness testimony, or something Zimmerman said when he talked to the prosecution without his lawyers. Which might explain why they dropped him. Will be interested to see which it is.
What they could have to go after 2nd degree is a bullet entry wound in Martin's back, meaning that Zimmerman had shot Martin in the back. That would rise to the level of murder, but not 1st-degree.
Without a pre-existing relationship between Zimmerman and Martin, getting a 1st-degree conviction would be incredibly difficult. 1st-degree requires premeditation AND planning - Zimmerman would have had to been planning to kill Martin before the confrontation ever started.
2nd-degree covers murder in the heat of the moment. Like if you get into a bar fight and stab the other guy to death. Or say, if you start a fight with some teenager and said teenager beats you up on the sidewalk, then walks away while insulting you. And that pisses you off so much that you pull out your gun and shoot the teenager in the back.
I feel like with a bullet to the back, his arrest would have happened A LOT sooner.
Sorry, I am not a lawyer, so does first degree murder require a plan to kill someone specific or can it be allowed if your planning to kill someone in general?
It would still be hard/impossible to prove but I wonder if a prior relationship is necessary.
Also, can the EMT testify to what treatment he gave Zimmerman? That would probably clear some of this confusion up without needing blurry pixels.
IANAL either, but I believe premeditation is needed and it doesn't matter if you had a target picked out specifically or if you're just heading out to kill someone. I think I see where you're going with this, and it'd be almost impossible to prove that he was out and about looking to gun someone down.
Posts
Also, ethics ethics ethics ethics.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Yeah...it's kinda rambly.
But she's handling the questions well.
:rotate:
Basically, yeah.
The witness came forward while the police where conducting their investigation. The witnesses report was in the police file on the case, and apparently was instrumental in backing up Zimmerman's claim of self defense. That the witness does not wish to be know to the media does not somehow make his testimony any less substantial.
As far as the injuries not being verified. You have the police report. You have the fireman that initially treated Zimmerman. You have the video that shows the police checking the back of his head at the police station. If his nose was broken an x-ray could prove it. An autopsy report of Martin will show some evidence if he was on the winning or losing side of the fight.
Just because some of this information has not been released to the media does not mean that it doesn't exist.
I'm so shocked.
What they could have to go after 2nd degree is a bullet entry wound in Martin's back, meaning that Zimmerman had shot Martin in the back. That would rise to the level of murder, but not 1st-degree.
Without a pre-existing relationship between Zimmerman and Martin, getting a 1st-degree conviction would be incredibly difficult. 1st-degree requires premeditation AND planning - Zimmerman would have had to been planning to kill Martin before the confrontation ever started.
2nd-degree covers murder in the heat of the moment. Like if you get into a bar fight and stab the other guy to death. Or say, if you start a fight with some teenager and said teenager beats you up on the sidewalk, then walks away while insulting you. And that pisses you off so much that you pull out your gun and shoot the teenager in the back.
You realize the trial hasn't happened yet, right? I fail to see how "I try and avoid assuming I know things that I do not know because I have already made up my mind."
and that proves Zimmerman started the PHYSICAL altercation how exactly?
If the evidence you have posted in this thread is what the prosecution goes with he will walk. Either they know something you do not, which is likely, or they know the case will fail.
What was that racial he used Epithet again? You keep neglecting to cite it.
Some of the most conclusive and definitive evidence has been lost, though.
A smart police department would have taken pictures of the wounds, or rather, gotten some form of verifiable media taken of it so that a jury wouldn't have to play "spot the pixel" if it came to a criminal case. Especially in the case of a murder. To roughly quote Detharin's logic in this, "just because we see them checking his head doesn't mean he was injured!". Especially if he was just hamming up his injuries after the fact. This actually may be a thing for the prosecution to point out, since the validity of the local police department's findings have been repeatedly called into question throughout this whole incident.
Unless they have some means of actually showing in a highly verifiable format that he was injured, I wouldn't bank much money on it being considered much when weighted against all the lies and suspicious crap Zimmerman and the PD did and perpetrated. Remember that in most cases, evidence needs to be very accurate to be considered applicable.
Example: The voice matching software used to confirm whether it was Trayvon or Zimmerman screaming at the top of his lungs, after Zimmerman claimed it was him, would require at least a 90 percent match to say that it was one person or another in a court case. They got something like a 38% match for Zimmerman. And logical deduction says who it was, since there was only one other party present at the scene. And he can't speak now.
Kid says he was pressured by police to side with Zimmerman. Murder charges. DOJ lawyers are involved.
Who's gonna be the first to say it's an Obama conspiracy?
In Florida, it's life.
So, Zimmerman is in florida.
Looks like the minimum he faces if convicted is 25 years without parole.
Check out FreeRepublic.com and the Fox News comments. They beat you to it long before that point. There were people saying it was an Obama conspiracy on there before the issue of charges were even brought up.
Go back to my earlier posts, and look in the first couple where I posted the articles and transcripts. The same ones you are cherry-picking things out of context to make a bunch of claims. If you're not willing to read my posts, i'm not willing to repeat myself (multiple times) for your benefit. It was bolded, in quotes, and specifically highlighted out for your benefit. And yet you somehow missed it. Despite me telling you this multiple times.
If you're not willing to put the bare minimum amount of effort into debating this in a way that isn't very goosey, then i'm not willing to go about typing up another long-winded post explaining why cherry-picking stuff to suit your arguments is wrong and a bad thing to do from a debate standpoint. Or being taken seriously.
Uh, where was it proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" that the voice was not Zimmerman's?
The audio expert, Tom Owens (who has his own issues regarding his history of in-court testimony*), said that a 90% match was needed to positively identify Zimmerman in a court of law. Owens said that he was able to get a 38% match, which was insufficient to positively identify the voice as Zimmerman's.
However, the inability of the expert to positively identify the voice as Zimmerman's does not "prove" the voice is not Zimmerman's. It just means that Owens wasn't able to prove that it was. Similar to how a Not Guilty verdict in a criminal case doesn't "prove" the defendant is Innocent. The failure to prove a positive claim does not in itself prove the opposite claim.
And at no point has Owens (or anyone else) "proven" that the voice was Martin's. As it stands, we don't know whose voice it is.
*Owens, in this case, claims he needs a 90% match to identify Zimmerman. But in a previous murder case he testified that he could positively identify the defendant with only a 68% match. That's a pretty big discrepancy for an expert to have when you're talking about convicting a person of murder.
I feel like with a bullet to the back, his arrest would have happened A LOT sooner.
What I am waiting for is you to either provide a non discredited source of the claim, or admit you were once again making shit up.The word he used was punks, as we had just covered in the thread you claim to have read. Not a racial epithet. Experts have confirmed this. So either once again there is a different racial Epithet he used somewhere else and you can cite it, or you have not been doing your research, reading the thread, or even paying attention. Which is it?
I looked. I am sad.
"I wonder what will be racial makeup of the jury."
I hear Corey is shipping in the New Black Panther party just for the job.
Sadly with american prisons being the way they are, what he faces is being inside an american prison with lots of people that want to kill him for the glory of killing him. The chances he will survive 25 years in prison without protective custody and a lot of friends on the inside are slim.
That is not justice.
But that's for a discussion thread on why american prisons suck.
If he is convicted, I can't see him not being placed in a maximum security prison with how huge this case has been in the public eye.
When police lead witnesses into giving testimony against the defense the testimony can get thrown out. Not sure what happens when it is the other way around. Seems unfair to the defendant if you can't use testimony that may have helped because the police messed up their investigation.
Sorry, I am not a lawyer, so does first degree murder require a plan to kill someone specific or can it be allowed if your planning to kill someone in general?
It would still be hard/impossible to prove but I wonder if a prior relationship is necessary.
Also, can the EMT testify to what treatment he gave Zimmerman? That would probably clear some of this confusion up without needing blurry pixels.
IANAL either, but I believe premeditation is needed and it doesn't matter if you had a target picked out specifically or if you're just heading out to kill someone. I think I see where you're going with this, and it'd be almost impossible to prove that he was out and about looking to gun someone down.
They're lamenting how difficult it is to kill black people and get away with it.
Oh, society.
Who is they? What are you on about?
That made me laugh quite a bit.
Do we still have the ignore function?
Oh look, we do.
God that is much better.
I'm sure there's quite a bit of evidence that we don't know about.
Link? I don't recall a bounty being issued.
Who is "they"? Why are they in a position to convict, and get voted for?