![]() |
|
Debating with the enemy Discuss politics, current events, and other hot button issues here. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Zimmerman will not testify. Defense has rested. Case goes to the jury Thursday.
Court denies Defense motion for acquital, Judge says "there's substantial evidence, both direct and circumstantial, that allows this case to go to the jury." [FWIW, I agree].
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,700
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
If you're 'soft' and take a pop to the head who's to say that you don't immediately fear for your life?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
So, in this case, if you take every good fact for GZ made and every favorable inference reasonably flowing from them and accept them as 100% correct, would the legal requirements ( the five elements) of GZ's self defense claim be met? If so, a prima facia case is made, the defense is properly raised, the above instructions are given and the State's duty to rebut one or more of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt is invoked.
It is essentially saying "If we believe EVERYTHING favorable fact and inference as the god's honest truth, could a jury legally find you innocent?"
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
MVP
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 45
Posts: 10,069
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Quote:
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder." -Jenkins |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
Because the prosecution has submitted all the necessary facts to establish the defense during their case in chief. -- They didn't have to put GZ' s statements to the cops in, the didn't have to play the Hannity interview, they didn't have to play the reenactment, they didn't have to put Zimm's author friend on the stand. They didn't have to call Good or the EMT to testify.
But they did. In light of all that evidence, GZ has no legal obligation to present anything more.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
MVP
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 45
Posts: 10,069
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Quote:
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder." -Jenkins |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
You want GZ on the stand testifying and he simply has no legal burden to do so.
Even if the prosecution DIDN'T put the evidence listed on, GZ could and leave it at that. In light of the evidence presented by the prosecution, what need be shown to establish a prima facia case?? Short of taking the stand himself what could he possibly present that has not been brought out by the prosecution?? It's always the defendant's option/risk of resting your case without testifying. Even when you are arguing an affirmative defense is applicable. This is true in any case. Civil or criminal (although in a civil trial you can be subpoenaed by the other side).
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,604
|
Taking the points JR summarized and putting them up as the defense closing statement using facts already in evidence would seem to satisfy what you are saying the defense needs to do. Not quite sure what else you are saying they would need to do.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
He is absolutely allowed to "piggy back" the prosecution case. The evidence is the evidence. It doesn't "belong" to anyone.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 34,860
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Of course Zim's not gonna take the stand and give the world his side of the story, because thats what a man does and he's a straight up bitch. its his mo at this point
If he's gets off, Id like to go ahead and go old skool and exile him.
__________________
My pronouns: King/Your ruler He Gets Us |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Playmaker
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,754
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Serious question: Why do you think we have the 5th amendment?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,604
|
I would hesitate to say for certain, but I would be shocked if more than a small percentage of defendants took the stand. One wrong word or wrong appearance might just be enough to sway a juror or jury against you. You pay a lawyer to present your case and the smartest defendants shut the hell up and don't say anything unless their lawyer tells them to.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
So, instead of "lawyering up", GZ meets and cooperates with police when he was under no legal compulsion to do so (at any point, all he has to say is, "I refuse to answer on the grounds it may incriminate me" ), giving multiple statements - including a videotaped moment by moment description - all of which he likely knew could be (and ultimately were) used against him. That counts for nothing.
Exercising your 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination at trial? What a wuss.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
Warpath Hall of Fame
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 34,860
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
oh no I agree, lying to cover his ass has worked just fine to this point. "We just gotta make it look like your life was in danger" that's the out in this case. brilliant stuff
Lets give him a gun and send'm back into the neighborhood to get his job as neighbor patrol officer career going again. outstanding country. Anybody let'm patrol their street first? Lets give'm a cape too, he's a super hero by all accounts
__________________
My pronouns: King/Your ruler He Gets Us |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
Re: Trayvon Martin Case
Also, saden1 ...
The youtube clip is simply the prosecutor's response to GZ's motion for acquittal. In that instance, the standard of review by the judge is just the opposite of that needed for a jury instruction on self defense. In opposing a motion for acquittal the prosecution is the one entitled to having the facts viewed in a light most favorable to them. It's all about generating a question of fact and only tangentially related to the closing. Hell, he argues that in front of the jury, it's a concession speech - Just one example, the prosecutor says forensics concerning the bullet wound "is, at least, as consistent with [the State's] version of the events as it is with the Defendant's". Equally consistent versions comporting with provable forensic evidence? How can that not be reasonable doubt? I am just not getting it. If there were two plausible stories with TM as the survivor - would you convict him?
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|