Justice for Zimmerman

Status
Not open for further replies.
BoldW

BoldW

Molten Core Raider
2,081
25
I don't think George bears any responsibility for bringing the gun, or it being some catalyst. He was 100% within his legal right to be carrying the firearm. Given he was a wanna-be cop, he was probably very careful with it's care and use like any police officer would be. He didn't have his weapon out as he was following Martin around playing commando or anything. The only time he took it out is when he was fearing for his life. He then used it. Once. He didn't unload on Martin screaming Die, N*GGER, DIE!!!.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,792
213,131
if they had any balls they would admit they have no case and are idiots so they are dropping all charges
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,792
213,131
so how does one call for a mistrial? does the judge decide there is one or does the defense have to ask for it first?
 
Tanoomba

Tanoomba

ジョーディーすれいやー
<Banned>
10,170
1,439
foddon_sl said:
This is a good point. So, once Zimmerman had control of the gun is he allowed to shoot Martin when the only reason he feared for his life was Martin getting control of the gun? Does Zimmerman's version of the story have Martin trying to wrestle the gun from him after it's in his control? Does that matter?

Also, after Martin allegedly completely physically dominated Zimmerman and was beating him down, wouldn't you think he'd be able to also get the gun if he was trying to get it BEFORE Zimmerman? How would Zimmerman even notice him looking at his gun if he's getting his head bashed into the ground?
Click to expand...
You just did a better job than the actual prosecution team.
 
Bows

Bows

Golden Knight of the Realm
102
-910
Maester Chuk_sl said:
so how does one call for a mistrial? does the judge decide there is one or does the defense have to ask for it first?
Click to expand...
From my reading I believe that after the state rests, the jury will be dismissed and the defense will call for a mistrial and cite whatever reasons/evidence they can. Based on how biased this judge has been, I do not expect a mistrial to occur.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
Maester Chuk_sl said:
so how does one call for a mistrial? does the judge decide there is one or does the defense have to ask for it first?
Click to expand...
Defense can ask or judge can declare it sua sponte. She won't, she's pretty clearly going to let this thing go to verdict, and I'll tell you why.

Its so obviously going to be an acquittal, that she doesn't want to make decisions pro-defense that will cause responsibility to be on her. Its not fair, but its how judges think.
 
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,656
Tuco_sl said:
I'd say none if he was lawfully carrying the gun.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and you're not wrong. But a liscence to carry isn't a liscence to kill and I do think you should ask the question every single time, even when the answer is even more obvious than it is here.
 
TrollfaceDeux

TrollfaceDeux

Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
<Bronze Donator>
19,577
3,743
Iannis_sl said:
Yeah, and you're not wrong. But a liscence to carry isn't a liscence to kill and I do think you should ask the question every single time, even when the answer is even more obvious than it is here.
Click to expand...
Did Zimmerman shoot in hopes that it will protect him or it will kill him? How does he make a rapid decision in the heat of the moment after, according to testimonies, he got his head banged to the concrete repeatedly? Should such conditions be considered when considering self-defense?
 
Arbitrary

Arbitrary

Tranny Chaser
27,231
72,230
Cad_sl said:
Its so obviously going to be an acquittal, that she doesn't want to make decisions pro-defense that will cause responsibility to be on her. Its not fair, but its how judges think.
Click to expand...
Although I found you grating in the years past I've really grown to like you, Cad. Quality infos for days about this shit.

Just wanted you to know.
 
Tuco

Tuco

I got Tuco'd!
<Gold Donor>
45,487
73,574
Cad_sl said:
Defense can ask or judge can declare it sua sponte. She won't, she's pretty clearly going to let this thing go to verdict, and I'll tell you why.

Its so obviously going to be an acquittal, that she doesn't want to make decisions pro-defense that will cause responsibility to be on her. Its not fair, but its how judges think.
Click to expand...
If the judge declares it a mistrial does that mean that GZ could have to do this shit all over again?
 
Jait

Jait

Molten Core Raider
5,035
5,317
Tuco_sl said:
If the judge declares it a mistrial does that mean that GZ could have to do this shit all over again?
Click to expand...
In California only if the evidence supports a second trial.

IE They have to be able to say this was an aberration and we can get a verdict with another jury.

edit: If there's a mistrial I would imagine it's not going to be hard for the defense to argue there's no way you can get a fair trial twice. Has there ever been a high publicity case tried twice after a mistrial?
 
vGrade

vGrade

Potato del Grande
1,680
2,579
Cad_sl said:
Yup
Click to expand...
A mistrial in a criminal prosecution may prevent retrial under the Double Jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits an individual from being tried twice for the same offense, unless required by the interests of justice and depending on which party moved for the mistrial. Typically, there is no bar to a retrial if the defendant requests or consents to a mistrial. A retrial may be barred if the court grants a mistrial without the defendant's consent, or over his objection. If the mistrial results from judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, a retrial will be barred. In United States v. Jorn, 400 U.S. 470, 91 S. Ct. 547, 27 L. Ed. 2d 543 (1971), the Supreme Court held that reprosecuting the defendant would constitute double jeopardy because the judge had abused his discretion in declaring a mistrial. On his own motion, the judge had declared a mistrial to enable government witnesses to consult with their own attorneys.
 
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
71,792
213,131
thanks cad. thats what i figured

Iannis_sl said:
Yeah, and you're not wrong. But a license to carry isn't a license to kill and I do think you should ask the question every single time, even when the answer is even more obvious than it is here.
Click to expand...
its a license to carry, but its also not a license just to have as a placebo. they let you carry in the chance that you are attacked and you use it to defend yourself. which is the case right here.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
24,498
45,439
vGrade_sl said:
A mistrial in a criminal prosecution may prevent retrial under the Double Jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment, which prohibits an individual from being tried twice for the same offense, unless required by the interests of justice and depending on which party moved for the mistrial. Typically, there is no bar to a retrial if the defendant requests or consents to a mistrial. A retrial may be barred if the court grants a mistrial without the defendant's consent, or over his objection. If the mistrial results from judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, a retrial will be barred. In United States v. Jorn, 400 U.S. 470, 91 S. Ct. 547, 27 L. Ed. 2d 543 (1971), the Supreme Court held that reprosecuting the defendant would constitute double jeopardy because the judge had abused his discretion in declaring a mistrial. On his own motion, the judge had declared a mistrial to enable government witnesses to consult with their own attorneys.
Click to expand...
Abuse of discretion is a huge bar, the example cited is obviously a huge WTF.

Judicial and prosecutorial misconduct are also high bars. Blatantly lying to the judge isn't prosecutorial misconduct in many cases.
 
Noodleface

Noodleface

A Mod Real Quick
37,961
14,508
If they tried to put me through a second trial I'd probably go on a murdering spree so there was irrefutable evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.