Search results

Yeah, they can change laws going forward, sure. But the Constitution forbids Ex Post Facto Laws, so a change would have no effect on this trial

If you guys want some severe jimmie rustlage check this out. Apparently the DOJ helped organize protests against Zimmerman http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/07/10...rtin-protests/

Likely because the prosecution and the judge in the Casey Anthony trial failed to give the jury an instruction that they could find her guilty of something less than murder. Bet they don't make that mistake in this one.

Nah, by charging murder, they already charged everything lower. It'd be nice though, if they had to actually pick a mental state and be locked in with it for the duration. Something to take to your legislators, I think...

BTW, this is just a generic laying out of the Model Penal Code Homicide statute. Texas has very different requirements for capital murder than this lays out, but the idea is the same.

OK, here's why they can charge that. Homicide is a two part offense that requires a mens rea (mental state) and actus reus (action). If someone kills someone else, its homicide, because of the killing, the actus reus. Punishment is dependent upon the mental state at the time of the offense...

This. Also, the United States is really 51 different jurisdictional entities (governments). So even if an appeals court in Florida upheld this cellphone nonsense, it wouldnt be binding on any other state in the country. Sure, other states could look to that appellate decision for guidance, but...

This right here. If the state can't disprove this, then everything else is irrelevant.

BTW, there is a mercy rule in the courts, but the defense has to ask for it. Its called the "Directed Verdict," and it more or less is the defense asking the court to stop the trial because the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof. Asked for it in Mock Trial during school. Nothing...

Public Policy Disputes that. The laws and statutes of a state override all other considerations, including private policies. Thus, a private citizen legally authorized to carry a firearm may do so, unless the area in which he carried the arm is a no-gun area as defined by the law.

You all realize that even after this trial, Zimmerman still has the right to appeal if he loses and could possibly have the verdict set aside by the Florida Appellate Courts for lack of evidence, right?

Long Live Tie Fighter...Long Live SNES Zelda!