Knock Knock. . .

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

I recently served on a Jury in the beginning of June for a week and wound up as foreman.

Thanks for doing that, seriously. Too many people would do anything they could to get out of jury duty. It really pisses me off when I hear people say the only people on juries are the ones who are too stupid to get out of it.

Quote

...do not be surprised no matter what the verdict.

I won't be, as I can see the arguments either way.

All I have ever objected to, in this particular case, is the presumption that Zimmerman's word (which is obviously self-serving) is golden, and that Martin was obviously a thug who needed killin' because of his attire, or some Facebook posting he made weeks before. I find the practice of combing through someone's past indiscretions to find some reason why they "deserved what they got" to be repugnant. If wearing a grill in a photo and talking smack is a death penalty offense, then who among us has never done anything that someone could use to justify killing them. "Crazy skydivers, they obviously have a death wish. They aren't like normal people, you can't predict what they'll do next so better shoot first."

In a broader sense I have reservations about "stand your ground" laws as they seem to be applied in Florida, though I realize Zimmerman is not applying an overt SYG defense. When a law is so loose that drug dealers can shoot it out on the street, and kill an innocent bystander, and no-one can be charged with a crime because police can't determine who fired the first shot, there is a problem. (see the link Rick posted, post #87 in the "Zimmerman jury" thread for many such examples). Kennedy says self defense no longer applies if one party turns their back and walks away, but that article details several cases where people were shot in the back as they left a confrontation, yet the shooter was not charged or was tried and acquitted under SYG. You can bring a concealed gun, provoke a fight, then use the gun, and subsequently walk. You can even shoot unarmed people checking the reading on your power meter and not be held accountable, as long as you claim you felt "threatened". Is it any wonder the police may just take the word of the survivor that it was self defense? Why make the effort to conduct a rigorous investigation if the odds are high that no charges will be pursued? It seems that judges and juries have no idea how broadly or narrowly to apply the law, so the same facts could result in a murder conviction in one jurisdiction and complete exoneration in the next. Is that "justice"? We might know more about what actually happened in the Zimmerman case, had the police not been so ready to take Zimmerman's word at face value.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[normiss 898]

That's the way I see it as well.

All emotion, public outcry, rally nonsense, all that aside, with only the law, the evidence, and the few witnesses - no case.

[turtlespeed 226]

Does anyone know what TM's reason for being in that specific area was?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

turtlespeed

Does anyone know what TM's reason for being in that specific area was?

My understanding is that he was staying at his father's house in that neighborhood. He had walked to the corner store and was going back to the house when GZ spotted him.
So he was at least sort of a resident of the area, although a new and perhaps temporary one.

And I could be wrong about this.
If anyone has better info, please correct me.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 898]

That's my understanding as well.
He was suspended for weed in school in the Miami area (although it was reported as an "empty marijuana bag - whatever that is).
Mom sent him to dad.


Just heard in the testimony of the local PD neighborhood watch coordinator that the pd had asked GZ to become a Citizen On Patrol. He declined. Interesting....

[livendive 8]

BIGUN

...But, until you've received 39 pages of instructions from a judge and told to follow them to the letter; you will never have any clue as to what happened or what the outcome will be. I will tell you this. One may be guilty; not guilty or not innocent.

My opinion in this matter is that neither one of them is innocent; but one of them is dead. And, that is the only fact we have. And, after being in the jury room as foreman in which the first vote was an almost even split... where both sides had good and well thought out discussions; do not be surprised no matter what the verdict.

I agree with all of this. We know that neither party was totally in the right, both were somewhat in the wrong. Whether the surviving combatant's wrongs are sufficient to justify a conviction is a question best decided by a judge and jury.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Andy9o8 2]

So after all is said and done...

Quote

Knock Knock...

... Who's there?

[NWFlyer 2]

BIGUN

But, until you've received 39 pages of instructions from a judge and told to follow them to the letter; you will never have any clue as to what happened or what the outcome will be. I will tell you this. One may be guilty; not guilty or not innocent.

My opinion in this matter is that neither one of them is innocent; but one of them is dead. And, that is the only fact we have. And, after being in the jury room as foreman in which the first vote was an almost even split... where both sides had good and well thought out discussions; do not be surprised no matter what the verdict.

I had a similar experience last year, where I served as a juror for a murder trial. The case was not highly-publicized, though it did get a bit of limited local media coverage. End-to-end, the process ran about 7 weeks, with a very large volume of evidence presented, much of it circumstantial.

It ain't like TV, folks. There's not always a "smoking gun." There's not always the "a-ha" moment. There's a prosecutor who is (hopefully) fair and hard working who is doing the best to prove his/her case beyond a reasonable doubt, using the evidence collected by the human beings involved in investigating the case. Those human beings are most definitely flawed (they're human after all), most likely overworked, and possibly biased in one way or another. Sometimes there's "scientific" evidence in a case (like DNA evidence), but again it's rare that it'll provide the "a-ha" moment... at least in the case I was on, it was another piece of evidence that we stacked up along with the other 25-30 pieces of evidence presented to decide whether we believed all those things added up to the prosecution proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant murdered the victim.

It was 12 people doing their best to make sense of all this, and using ONLY the information presented to us in court as evidence, and nothing else. It's not 12 Angry Men where the jury brings in additional evidence and speculation from their own experiences. The way we approached it was to review each and every piece of evidence presented and agree whether all 12 of us thought each piece was proven to be a fact. If it was, it went into the facts pile. If it wasn't it went into the "not facts" (or not proven to be facts) pile. At the end we looked at the things in the facts pile and said "Does this prove that the guy did it?" We also looked at the things in the "not facts" pile and asked ourselves if any of them were proven NOT to be true, would it show that the guy couldn't have done it?

And once we'd decided that the facts as presented in court showed that the guy did it, we then tested out whether the same facts could be applied to any other person (defendant's brother, a relative of the victim, random person) and concluded they could not.

Then and only then, we decided that he was guilty of 2nd degree murder.

I have no idea what kind of information that jury's going to get. I have no idea what type of people will be on that jury. But hopefully they'll take their job as seriously as I and my fellow jurors did. And, as BIGUN says, there's two options: Guilty and Not Guilty. Not Guilty doesn't always mean innocent, but it does mean that the prosecution didn't convince the jury. Our system isn't perfect by a long shot, but I'll take it over the alternatives any day. And I'll always prefer it to trial by media or vigilante justice.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

The way we approached it was to review each and every piece of evidence presented and agree whether all 12 of us thought each piece was proven to be a fact. If it was, it went into the facts pile. If it wasn't it went into the "not facts" (or not proven to be facts) pile. At the end we looked at the things in the facts pile and said "Does this prove that the guy did it?" We also looked at the things in the "not facts" pile and asked ourselves if any of them were proven NOT to be true, would it show that the guy couldn't have done it?

And once we'd decided that the facts as presented in court showed that the guy did it, we then tested out whether the same facts could be applied to any other person (defendant's brother, a relative of the victim, random person) and concluded they could not.

Then and only then, we decided that he was guilty of 2nd degree murder.

Thanks for the overview. I hope I can remember it if I'm ever called to serve on a jury for a murder trial.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[NWFlyer 2]

GeorgiaDon

Thanks for the overview. I hope I can remember it if I'm ever called to serve on a jury for a murder trial.

Don

Helped that we had a crazy-analytical group of jurors. There were a couple who were ready to say "I don't think the prosecution proved their case" and be done with it, but once we went through the evidence methodically (rather than having bits and pieces floating through our head - it's very hard to recall everything over that long of a trial), we reached unanimous agreement with everyone fully on board.

"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

[Kennedy 0]

normiss

***My understanding is that he was staying at his father's house in that neighborhood. He had walked to the corner store and was going back to the house when GZ spotted him.
So he was at least sort of a resident of the area, although a new and perhaps temporary one.

And I could be wrong about this.
If anyone has better info, please correct me.

That's my understanding as well.
He was suspended for weed in school in the Miami area (although it was reported as an "empty marijuana bag - whatever that is).
Mom sent him to dad

I seem to recall reports that TM drew GZ's attention not just for being a new face but for skulking around houses and acting like he was looking for a place to B&E. Remember TM was suspended at the time for weed, but there was also that possession of women's jewelry...

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

Remember TM was suspended at the time for weed, but there was also that possession of women's jewelry...

And Zimmerman was fully aware of this, of course. How else could he have known that Martin was an "asshole" who "always gets away"?

Or maybe it's post-hoc reasoning about why he "deserved what he got"?

Does every skydiver who ever smoked a little weed know that that is justification should some wannabe cop shoot them? Life is indeed cheap.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

GeorgiaDon

Does every skydiver who ever smoked a little weed know that that is justification should some wannabe cop shoot them? Life is indeed cheap.

Pretty crappy if he wants to be a cop.

I really hope cops in my area are able to contain a situation, including shooting someone, if necessary, BEFORE they are getting their skulls pounded into the pavement.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[normiss 898]

And not having a witness change her story when she goes on the stand.
WTF?

One of the witnesses for the state is changing her story from her sworn depositions.

Interesting...

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

Remember TM was suspended at the time for weed, but there was also that possession of women's jewelry...

And Zimmerman was fully aware of this, of course. How else could he have known that Martin was an "asshole" who "always gets away"?

Or maybe it's post-hoc reasoning about why he "deserved what he got"?

Or maybe you left out the important part about why TM caught GZ's eye. I did include it, afterall. Why leave it out of your quote?

Quote

I seem to recall reports that TM drew GZ's attention not just for being a new face but for skulking around houses and acting like he was looking for a place to B&E.

Lets be honest. GZ saw a teenager he didn't know walking around the gated community in the rain looking into houses. It's not probable cause for any charges, but totality of the circumstances supports a bit of investigation. GZ called the cops, and after being told response would be "when available", he got pissed and vocalized his frustration that criminals seem to always get away even when folks call the cops. No one ever accused GZ'S of being a genius.

Quote

Does every skydiver who ever smoked a little weed know that that is justification should some wannabe cop shoot them? Life is indeed cheap.

Congratulations on using your own post hoc ergo propter hoc and on creating a strawman. TM smoked weed and TM was shot. They're not even temporaly related, let alone causally.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

TM smoked weed and TM was shot. They're not even temporaly related, let alone causally.

Indeed. So why did YOU bring it into the discussion? It was relevant then, but not now?

Quote

I seem to recall reports that TM drew GZ's attention not just for being a new face but for skulking around houses and acting like he was looking for a place to B&E.

Quote

Lets be honest. GZ saw a teenager he didn't know walking around the gated community in the rain looking into houses.

This is an interesting example of the old game "telephone", about how things change with retelling. Here is the start of the transcript of Zimmerman's 911 call. I have taken the liberty of underlining the relevant bits.

Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman:

He looks black.

911 dispatcher:

Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]

911 dispatcher:

He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK.

Zimmerman:

Now he’s staring at me. [00:48]

Notice that Zimmerman did not use the term "skulking". Skulking is quite different from "walking around", as it implies an effort to evade detection. Skulking is indeed suspicious, walking around is not.
Zimmerman did not say "looking into windows" or "looking for a place to B&E". He did say Martin was "walking and looking around", and the dispatcher said "looking at houses" which Zimmerman did not correct. Walking and looking around, even looking at houses, is not suspicious or unusual, especially in the dark, in the rain, and if you are in a neighborhood you aren't really familiar with, especially a townhouse community where all the buildings are similar.

So let's see what you have done here:
1. change "walking around looking about" to "skulking and looking into windows" and "looking for a place to B&E"
2. retroactively use the changed (and highly prejudicial) language to justify Zimmerman's suspicion and turn Martin into a thug
3. use the newly created "thug" persona to imply that it is highly likely that Martin initiated an unprovoked attack on Zimmerman.

If you care to read the transcript I linked, you will also see that the dispatcher told Zimmerman police were on the way. "When available" was never said. You made that up. Zimmerman's comment "these assholes always get away" had to do with Martin running from him, it was in no way precipitated by any statement from the dispatcher about the arrival time of the police.

The transcript is really quite revealing, about Zimmerman. You should go back and read what was really said, as opposed to the distortions and fabrications promulgated by the "Zimmerman is a saint" crowd.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[turtlespeed 226]

Andy9o8

So after all is said and done...

Quote

Knock Knock...

... Who's there?

Knock knock. Who's there? George Zimmerman. George Zimmerman who? Good, you're on the jury

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

normiss

That's my understanding as well.
He was suspended for weed in school in the Miami area (although it was reported as an "empty marijuana bag - whatever that is).
Mom sent him to dad.


Just heard in the testimony of the local PD neighborhood watch coordinator that the pd had asked GZ to become a Citizen On Patrol. He declined. Interesting....

I believe the "empty" bag was basically one with enough crumbs in it to determine what it was, but not really a measurable quantity.

What would a "Citizen On Patrol" be? What kind of duties/privileges/powers would one of those have?

And I am really impressed at how civil and reasonable this discussion has been. Far better than the usual "I know you are but what am I" crap.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 898]

Sanford PD COP info

[Kennedy 0]

GeorgiaDon

Quote

TM smoked weed and TM was shot. They're not even temporaly related, let alone causally.

Indeed. So why did YOU bring it into the discussion? It was relevant then, but not now?

I didn't bring it up. Others did when talking about why he was there instead if at school. He was suspended. The weed had nothing to do with getting shot. You're the one that implied it did with that stupid comment about skydivers and how life is cheap.

Quote

Quote

I seem to recall reports that TM drew GZ's attention not just for being a new face but for skulking around houses and acting like he was looking for a place to B&E.

Quote

Lets be honest. GZ saw a teenager he didn't know walking around the gated community in the rain looking into houses.

This is an interesting example of the old game "telephone", about how things change with retelling.

Notice that Zimmerman did not use the term "skulking". Skulking is quite different from "walking around", as it implies an effort to evade detection. Skulking is indeed suspicious, walking around is not.
Zimmerman did not say "looking into windows" or "looking for a place to B&E". He did say Martin was "walking and looking around", and the dispatcher said "looking at houses" which Zimmerman did not correct. Walking and looking around, even looking at houses, is not suspicious or unusual, especially in the dark, in the rain, and if you are in a neighborhood you aren't really familiar with, especially a townhouse community where all the buildings are similar.

So let's see what you have done here:
1. change "walking around looking about" to "skulking and looking into windows" and "looking for a place to B&E"
2. retroactively use the changed (and highly prejudicial) language to justify Zimmerman's suspicion and turn Martin into a thug
3. use the newly created "thug" persona to imply that it is highly likely that Martin initiated an unprovoked attack on Zimmerman.

Plenty of things point to the idea that TM actually was a thug, and if evidence suggests he was on the days before he was shot, why shouldn't people think he was acting like one on the day he was shot?

Quote

If you care to read the transcript I linked, you will also see that the dispatcher told Zimmerman police were on the way. "When available" was never said. You made that up. Zimmerman's comment "these assholes always get away" had to do with Martin running from him, it was in no way precipitated by any statement from the dispatcher about the arrival time of the police.

I've listened to it and read it. I've also looked into police and witness statements. GZ's statement has been pretty clear from day zero: that TM looked suspicious and walking walking around houses. Why do you think GZ started by bringing up recent burglaries? GZ was not articulate or precise with the 9-1-1 operator, but like I said, no one ever accused him of being a genius.

Quote

The transcript is really quite revealing, about Zimmerman. You should go back and read what was really said, as opposed to the distortions and fabrications promulgated by the "Zimmerman is a saint" crowd.

I've read both sides and sources that try not to take a side. Being someone who's carried a gun as part of employment, I try to follow highly publicized shootings as often as I can, especially ones claiming self defense. I'm not saying Zimmerman is innocent. I'm not even saying he is not guilty. I'm saying I don't see enough to find him guilty in a criminal court, so by default he should be held not guilty. Not because he necessarily is, but because the prosecution cannot prove he isn't.

And you need to get away from the "Trayvon is a saint and Zimmerman is the devil" crowd.

Why are you so stuck on giving TM the benefit of the doubt and presumption of innocence but refuse to give it to GZ?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[turtlespeed 226]

Kennedy

Why are you so stuck on giving TM the benefit of the doubt and presumption of innocence but refuse to give it to GZ?

Seriously?
Presumed innocent is only for the one you want it to be for.

Remember OJ?
Was he presumed innocent (in reality), or was he vilified by some and worshiped by others.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 898]

"Pop pop pop!"
"I saw two people laying on top of each other and they were vertical."
Seriously???
This witness is an emotional bag of confusion!!
She is trying to say she heard 3 gunshots - and her 911 call is just crying hysteria.

The state thinks she is a good witness????

[Kennedy 0]

turtlespeed

***

Why are you so stuck on giving TM the benefit of the doubt and presumption of innocence but refuse to give it to GZ?

Seriously?
Presumed innocent is only for the one you want it to be for.

Remember OJ?
Was he presumed innocent (in reality), or was he vilified by some and worshiped by others.

OJ was guilty as hell, but LAPD screwed up so bad and so often that I think if I were or the jury, I would have had to vote not guilty. I wrote a paper on the incident from homicide to opening arguments. My professor called it thesis level and submitted it to a peer reviewed journal. Trust me, he was guilty. And trust me, a conviction was almost impossible. And finally, Shapiro and Cochran made sure there was no jury of his peers, just a jury that would acquit.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[mirage62 0]

Quote

Why are you so stuck on giving TM the benefit of the doubt and presumption of innocence but refuse to give it to GZ?

+1
It seems to me that a few people here basically have the mind set that someone died therefore it has to be the shooters fault. At the begainning I was totally sure that GZ should go on trail, I now am very comfortable that he is on trail BUT I am FAR from comfortable that he is guilty.

One thing that concerns me - a lot. Imagine if you were on trail for something like this and the PRESIDENT made a comment related to it. Or the threat of civil unrest hanging over the verdict. Would you feel at all sure that the jury would be fair? Straight up I WOULDN'T.

Be interesting to see what happens if he is found not guilty. Will the president comment on the fairness of the jury system?

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[normiss 898]

Not just a comment, a phone call to the State's prosecutors!


At least there are plenty of seemingly valid appellate issues...