The Zimmerman case may go to the jury
 

...tomorrow.

Remembering that by law the burden of proof is on the prosecution...and remembering that Zimmerman by law is not required to prove anything.

How many of you that actually watched the trial think that the prosecution proved its case against Zimmerman "beyond a reasonable doubt"...which is what the law requires?

Zimmerman will walk. The prosecution failed to prove its case against Zimmerman "beyond a reasonable doubt" imo.

:2 cents: same.

I think either a mistrial or recommendation for a lesser charge, possibly walk... it really all depends on how bias the jury is.

If he walks, I think he won't make it past the courthouse steps before someone ends his life.

I haven't watched/listened to the trial, but have been following it in the news. I think the jury will not find him guilty of 2nd degree murder. The evidence doesn't appear to be there for that. However, it is much easier to convict someone of manslaughter which I think will ultimately be what will happen. I 'm not sure how that procedure takes place, but I think that is what the jury will come back with.

If he is found not guilty of all charges I don't think he will be immediately killed in the streets, but he will go into hiding and then he will end up back in court for the civil trial.

Prosecution did not at all....

I am afraid though that they will hit him with the "manslaughter" charge though... thats 30 years in the can...

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh damn it would hit youtube fast!

I don't like that someone can be found guilty of a lesser charge. That gives the jury an out which defeats the guilty/non-guilty purpose of a trial. The district attorney should pick a charge then ask the jury to decide guilty or not.


.

Countdown is on

http://majorityrights.com/images/upl...looting.14.jpg

I think this is why often the DA will pick the biggest charges they can and throw as many charges as possible at someone so they can always fall back to lesser charges.

I don't know if the jury can just come back and say, "guilty of manslaughter," but they do have an option for lower charges if they want.

For what it's worth...

http://www.mediaite.com/online/even-...erve-25-years/

Very interesting.

Yeah the deck is stacked against you. Police lay on as many charges as they can when you are arrested. The prosecutor will lay on as severe a charge that he can and multiple lesser charges in an attempt to get you to plea to a lesser charge...in order to save the money that a trial costs. And if you do go to trial with the multiple lesser charges the jury will almost always convict you of something.

A very famous criminal trial defense attorney once stated that he never asks a client if he is innocent or guilty because he always considers them to be guilty as the police are to stupid to arrest anyone other than those that are obviously guilty.

Fortunately one of the only saving graces about our justice system is that the overwhelming majority of defendants are guilty.

A compromise verdict is a crutch for an indecisive jury to say he was sorta guilty. It allows them to walk away without really making a decision.

It allows a prosecutor to shoot for a big charge while hoping for a lesser conviction he might not have gotten if the lesser charge was what the defendant was actually being charged with.

The jury decision should be black/white not in the big gray area.

.

I agree. Sadly, this is the modern system. If you get arrested for something they often will throw every charge they can possibly think of at you in order to get you to plea down to one of the lesser charges. Crime is now big business in this this country. Prosecutors want to pad their numbers so they can get elected or get better paying jobs, jails wants convictions so they can bill the state/city/federal government and police want convictions so they can show that they are doing their job.

In this case the Public Pushed for his Arrest....

Question,

Doesn't manslaughter still have to be proven, just as if the prosecution started with only that charge and not second degree????

He will walk...but common sense says you can't claim self defense when the authorities told you not to pursue, and you did.

"some of" Please insert.

Yes it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt...but lesser charges often...wrongfully in my opinion...allow a jury to compromise.

No, the jury can find him innocent but then find him guilty of a lesser charge feeling a compromise best serves everyone. Guilty or not guilty of the charge against him should be all the jury decides.

At no time was he told not to pursue...and that is a fact in this case.

The charges against him at this point in time is 2nd degree murder and the lesser charge of manslaughter. I heard yesterday via attorneys saying that the prosecution can...if they choose to do so...add...even at this late date...multiple lesser charges in addition to the two charges he is currently charged with.

It's interesting that you are so excited.

Ok, I'm kidding about it being interesting.

:1orglaugh

It is more interesting to me why you think I am in the least bit excited. I really don't give a fuck about the outcome of the case one way or another. I am just killing time...sport.

This is exactly what is wrong with Murica, why is a court case entertainment?

They should not be televised or discussed in the news and should be like the British system...but they become like a circus here which is somewhat entertaining...at least to me...it is a way to kill the time.

Good point.
You are not excited :

This one : https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1115037
https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1115047
https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1113909
https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1114164



.

Not in the least...sport.

Zimmerman said he was following Trayvon, and the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that." You can twist it around all you want, but that means "don't pursue".

Wouldn't he be saying "help, someone is trying to kill me" to the dispatcher if he was in need of lethal self defense? He's guilty as hell. The call lays out everything. He was an overzealous punk with a gun, on the losing end of a brawl that he instigated by pursuing a thuggy black kid who probably would be a little jumpy if a white guy was following him.

Sure, he could get off because of technicalities, but that kid should still be alive. He just went to the fucking store for a snack and was going to a house he was visiting in that neighborhood. A man shot him for that. That man is guilty whether or not he ends up in jail.

It is you twisting it around to mean what you want it to mean. Words have meaning and in no way does "we don't need you to do that" equal "don't persue".

In addition he said "O.K." and he said he did not persue because he had lost sight of him... in the darkness and rain anyhow...and was walking back to his truck when Martin came out of the darkness and confronted him.

We know that it was Martin that confronted him and not Zimmerman confronting Martin...if you believe the girls testimony that Martin was talking to on the phone.

watched from start to finish... innocent on all charges by all means... this punk teen tried to be a baddass and got got... it's simple

I find it hilarious that you called someone a punk trying to be a bad ass.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

The thing is, your scenario is not what happened. :2 cents:

I'm going by what I heard on the phone call.

It sounds like some of you are going by what you want to be true. That guy carrying a gun carried out some kind of justice.

listen to the 911 call he confirms following him. anyway any prison time is good :2 cents:

:thumbsup:thumbsup

That is not what bronco said that I disagreed with. :2 cents:

So final results are?

Quite the fascist totalitarian system we have allowed to unfold. It's sad that Egyptians gathered 22 million signatures to remove a dictator and cheered when their military agreed to step in and keep order, keep peace...and some filth in our government balks at a "coup."

To me, the Egyptians are practicing democracy by getting rid of a tyrant who lied to them. We can now see what would happen if the American people tried to remove a tyrannic or criminal regime, say, accused of massive spying and other illegal activities.

American judicial system is an evil institution and the prosecutors in Florida are proving it.

I can almost bet if Zimmerman is found not guilty, government will see to his death. If nothing else, to make a point, "Don't fuck with our system."

Breaking news
 

Bomb threat called into civil courthouse. Police telling reporters they believed it was meant for the criminal courthouse where Zimmerman is being tried. LOL. Guess whose supporters fucted up? :upsidedow

Well said.

This the stupidest thing I've heard anyone say in a while.

They made it that way for exactly this reason.

fuck bombs just wait :evil-laug

Actually if people want to admit it or not, the " Burden of Proof " is upon both parties in a trial like this.

The state has to prove its charges, and the Defense has to prove the innocence.