The Zimmerman Trial

Following someone is not unlawful, but assaulting someone is, oh yeah, instructing a jury is unlawful too..

This stuff is such a joke!.

In a jury trial, the judge is nothing more than a referee, the law and everything are nullified in lieu of the judgment of the jurors, the judge is breaking the law by instructing the jurors to decide in any specific way considering any law or ordinance, that is why one has a trial by jury.

Nobody ever pays attention to that, or the fact this whole thing is really nothing more than a sick joke and a waste of time and money.

People die every day, especially when they are violent juvenile delinquent types.

You do know these lawyers and judges are nothing more than actors, yes?, must be why it looks kinda like a soap opera.........

reply to post by freedom12


when 911 dispatch said 'you dont need to do that.' he said ok... and stopped following him.

TM had 4 1/2 minutes to get home and he didn't, why?

Zimmerman (according to him) he was getting the address number/street name. as he was heading back to his truck, he got confronted by TM.

reply to post by freedom12


GZ didn't break any laws. He was attacked. He defended himself. He should walk.

MOTF!

I wonder if they are whining, please let us do this again , I swear I will do better next time, its not fair! I bet the judge wants this over just as quick as everyone else.

reply to post by TKDRL


I agree on that, zimmerman is not a racist.
Besides that, hes not white, he is hispanic, so its not like "the whites are after the blacks" situation.

And yes TM was no saint by the way, all the "scared teenager with candy" clearly indicated lack of interest and background checks to this case.

By the law its clear to me that ZM should go free - the defense showed alot of reasonable doubt, and the prosecutor actually did that as well

reply to post by freedom12

You didn't watch the trial, did you? If you had, you would have been educated on the facts. The facts that clearly stated that Zimmerman broke no laws when he called dispatch and he broke no laws when he observed/followed Martin. Oh ... and dispatch didn't tell him 'not to follow'. He was told two things ... 'we don't need you to do that' and 'let us know what else he does'.

You should go and watch the trial on Youtube so you can catch up and educate yourself on the actual information instead of what the MSM has spun over the past year.

reply to post by freedom12


When a case goes to trial, facts are what matter not emotions.

The only reason why there is a trial is because Sharpton and friends made this an emotional story that wasn't based on facts.

If Zimmerman is found guilty of anything, then our legal system has failed.

Life is not fair, Martin had ample time to go home when that 'creepy cracker' was following him. Remember guilt has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

reply to post by thesaneone

Not in Zimmerman's case. He had to ask Trayvon to pass it to him, as he was having trouble reaching beneath his back.

Originally posted by freedom12
For those insinuating I'm somehow on Trayvon's side, you're flatout wrong.

Hahahahaha. Excuse me. Am I supposed to buy that? Do you expect anyone to, after what you just posted?

This is the world we live in. People hate others, based solely upon their race.

Indeed. A prime example would be this case. Why would there be riots by people unrelated to TM if GZ walks? Why are so many people automatically hating GZ based on his color? Why are people labeling GZ supporters as racist people?

Zimmerman violated his own neighborhood watch rules.

Nope.

Zimmerman ignored instructions from 9/11 dispatcher to "not follow" and "stay in the vehicle".

Nope.
The "not follow" part was an advice. Nobody ordered him not to follow, and it wasn't an instruction of any kind.

If he had done what he was supposed to, Martin was no threat to an armed man inside a vehicle.

Oh yeah, IF.
If TM wouldn't have attacked an armed neighborhood watch guard, slamming his head on the concrete, he wouldn't have gotten shot. It's not like TM was attacked, he was being followed, simple as that. Are you in any way implying that it's okay to jump on people who follow you and try to beat them to death?

I like how he said, reasonable doubt is not what you think it is, if you have doubt, dont let that sway your decision...really? I just pray that , and I hate to use his term...but I hope those jurors have common sense and do the right thing.

Can't be found guilty

Definition of conjecture (n)
1.guesswork: the formation of judgments or opinions on the basis of incomplete or inconclusive information
2.something guessed: a conclusion, judgment, or statement based on incomplete or inconclusive information

Anyone else notice the role reversals of the prosecution and the defense, a role the prosecution has never taken, by defending Martin ?

If there is not a verdict of Not Guilty, it will be because of emotion.
And if it is not a verdict of Not Guilty, it could only be a hung jury.
I don't believe for a heart beat, that they will come back with a Guilty verdict.

Click here for more information.

the judge will read the jury 27-pages of instructions. after lunch. I'd fall asleep!!

reply to post by thesaneone


Just noticed your quote. You a Megadeth fan? Or did Dave steal that from somewhere else?

Originally posted by MyHappyDogShiner
... instructing a jury is unlawful too..

In a jury trial, the judge is nothing more than a referee, the law and everything are nullified in lieu of the judgment of the jurors, the judge is breaking the law by instructing the jurors to decide in any specific way considering any law or ordinance, that is why one has a trial by jury.

Nobody ever pays attention to that, or the fact this whole thing is really nothing more than a sick joke and a waste of time and money.

Source

Instructions to the Jury

The judge instructs the jury about the relevant laws that should guide its deliberations. (In some jurisdictions, the court may instruct the jury at any time after the close of evidence. This sometimes occurs before closing arguments.) The judge reads the instructions to the jury. This is commonly referred to as the judge's charge to the jury.

In giving the instructions, the judge will state the issues in the case and define any terms or words that may not be familiar to the jurors. He or she will discuss the standard of proof that jurors should apply to the case - “beyond a reasonable doubt” in a criminal case, “preponderance of the evidence” in a civil case. The judge may read sections of applicable laws.

The judge will advise the jury that it is the sole judge of the facts and of the credibility (believability) of witnesses. He or she will note that the jurors are to base their conclusions on the evidence as presented in the trial, and that the opening and closing arguments of the lawyers are not evidence. Sometimes judges will explain what basic facts are in dispute, and what facts do not matter to the case.

The judge will point out that his or her instructions contain the interpretation of the relevant laws that govern the case, and that jurors are required to adhere to these laws in making their decision, regardless of what the jurors believe the law is or ought to be. In short, the jurors determine the facts and reach a verdict, within the guidelines of the law as determined by the judge.

Many states allow the lawyers to request that certain instructions be given, but the judge makes the final decisions about them. Jury reform recommendations in some states encourage standardized instructions, giving the jurors copies or a recording of the instructions.

I honestly don't know if I am more amazed by the shear ineptitude of the prosecution team, or the utter lack of knowledge pertaining to US law many of the posters here have...

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Nope.

Doesn't make since. Why?

Who jumps on a man with a gun pointed at them?

Perhaps the gun was not pulled on him at the time; but maybe Zimmerman was reaching for the gun; and Trayvon tried to stop him and defend himself; because he may have been afraid if he ran a shot would have hit him.

Of course we all know he was shot anyway. Zimmerman did commit murder; and I really don't think it was necessary; he should have minded his own business and not followed Trayvon in the first place.

The jury is made up of 6 women and I know 5 of them are mothers; I really think Zimmerman is going to do time.

reply to post by InstantRemedy


"Nope.
The "not follow" part was an advice. Nobody ordered him not to follow, and it wasn't an instruction of any kind. "

Oh okay. LMAO