Your Opinion Of Zimerman Now?

[cal50]

And which side was the one that turned this case into a racial matter? It wasn't conservatives or libertarians or even the pro-gun crowd.

 

Bingo.

 

Here is a fact ( statistically anyway).

 

Most young black males who are shot, are shot by other young black males, who are using illegal unlicensed weapons.

They are not shot by law-abiding Hispanic neighborhood watch patrols with legal CCW licenses.

 

 

If you want to interject a racial angle or bias listen to the states witness describe a bias or labeling someone by color.

 

 

[Langston Hughes]

And which side was the one that turned this case into a racial matter? It wasn't conservatives or libertarians or even the pro-gun crowd.

 

Cal50. This thread had no racial overtones nor a discussion of race until his remarks.

 

I can clearly see who has a racial bias but everyone knows ONLY white people are racist.

 

Then he comes back later with a jab at the First ladies hips using a fairly common African American body attribute to attack her eat healthy program. So if I were to say who has racial issues going within this thread I would say Cal50.

[GaryG]

Wow, I forgot about all the video of Zimmerman lying today about Martin that was played today in Court. The prosecution might just prove 2nd degree murder with all those unbelievable stories Zimmerman told in those videos.

 

Gary

[Langston Hughes]

I don't understand how Z-man could have caught Martin in the first place unless Martin stopped and confronted him. He had a headstart, was clearly faster and Z-man was already out of breath. Z-man had already called the police so he would have had no motive to attack Martin - just hold him until Police arrived. Had Martin been shot from a distance or Z-man had no injuries then I would feel differently but at this point - to me - I don't see any rational explanation other than Martin attacked him and was on top of him beating his head into the ground.

 

Are you still wondering how Martin got caught by Zimmerman? Because they played Zimmerman's video statement and he told the cops that Martin was hiding in the bushes and jumped out at him. So Martin hides and thinks he loses Zimmerman and when he goes to leave there is Zimmerman again. Your going to run right? Your not going to possible defend your self are you? Your somewhere your SUPPOSED to be and being followed by someone you don't know, who doesn't tell you why he's following you when he catches up to you so you would just run?

[cal50]

The lead detective testified that he thought Zman was truthful and believed his police statement / his account of the events.

 

Clearly damaging for the prosecution.

[GaryG]

The lead detective testified that he thought Zman was truthful and believed his police statement / his account of the events.

 

Clearly damaging for the prosecution.

 

The lead detective was demoted and put on the third shift for not arresting Zimmerman in the first place.

 

Gary

[Mark B. Morrow]

 

The prosecution had little choice and had to call him ( Good) as a witness.

If not the defense would have claimed the prosecution withheld eyewitness testimony to facts that do not support their case and actually support the defense.

 

They chose to take the hit up front and hope its forgotten than at closing arguments is my guess.

That's nonsense. The defense could have called Good in its case. There is no obligation for the prosecution to call any particular witness in its case. They certainly have no obligation to call a witness they do not believe to be credible or truthful. A prosecutor is only liable for withholding evidence if it fails to disclose the identity of a witness or the existence of a witness statement to the defense in discovery.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Perhaps with another knock knock joke?

That would forever guarantee Mr. West's place in law school trial tactics classes as the dumbest man to ever practice law.

[BlackHorse]

The lead detective was demoted and put on the third shift for not arresting Zimmerman in the first place.

 

Gary

 

 

You know this how?

[cal50]

The lead detective was demoted and put on the third shift for not arresting Zimmerman in the first place.

 

Gary

 

 

Please explain how that changes his testimony in the case?

 

In the detectives own words:

 

Serino insisted to the Orlando Sentinel that there wasn't enough evidence to defeat Zimmerman's self-defense claim. And in an interview with the FBI, he told agents that superior officers pressured him to file charges in the case, though he didn't think the evidence was there.

 

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-cops-20130701,0,3451421.story

[cal50]

That's nonsense. The defense could have called Good in its case. There is no obligation for the prosecution to call any particular witness in its case. They certainly have no obligation to call a witness they do not believe to be credible or truthful. A prosecutor is only liable for withholding evidence if it fails to disclose the identity of a witness or the existence of a witness statement to the defense in discovery.

 

 

Regardless of how or when witness testimony comes in (its coming in) and a calculated guess of when or where it does the least damage to the prosecutions case.

Mr.Good was a pretty solid witness.....for the defense.

 

 

Cut & paste ~

 

Some people wondered why the prosecution called Good at all, given the damage it does to the case they want to make of second-degree murder. Generally speaking, the prosecution has an obligation to address all of the evidence in a case, not just the pieces they like best. Practically speaking, the prosecution knew that the defense would call Good to the stand if they did not, so the best strategy would be to take the surprise out of the testimony, and hope that a direct examination could possibly put this in a better context.

 

 

 

It really is unfortunate for the hundreds of black youth killed by other black youth that gets zero news coverage. When a Hispanic (white looking or close enough) is involved in a fatal shooting its covered by everyone.

 

Who is guilty of the race baiting ? Look to some of these idiot elected "lawmakers".

(The FBI found none / zero / nada profiling involved from Zman)

 

I doubt ANY of them will apologize or acknowledge sending the wrong message when the evidence heads the other direction.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2013 by cal50

[NickF1011]

Then he comes back later with a jab at the First ladies hips using a fairly common African American body attribute to attack her eat healthy program. So if I were to say who has racial issues going within this thread I would say Cal50.

That's only racial if you perceive it that way. I didn't. I know plenty of white ladies with large posteriors. :shrug:

Edited July 2, 2013 by NickF1011

[grbeck]

Cal50. This thread had no racial overtones nor a discussion of race until his remarks.

 

 

Then he comes back later with a jab at the First ladies hips using a fairly common African American body attribute to attack her eat healthy program. So if I were to say who has racial issues going within this thread I would say Cal50.

 

I thought we were talking about the discussion on the national stage, not just on this thread.

[grbeck]

The lead detective was demoted and put on the third shift for not arresting Zimmerman in the first place.

 

Gary

 

That was a political move, not in response to any lapse of duty on his part. There is no indication that he failed to handle the case properly.

Edited July 2, 2013 by grbeck

[grbeck]

It really is unfortunate for the hundreds of black youth killed by other black youth that gets zero news coverage. When a Hispanic (white looking or close enough) is involved in a fatal shooting its covered by everyone.

 

Who is guilty of the race baiting ? Look to some of these idiot elected "lawmakers".

(The FBI found none / zero / nada profiling involved from Zman)

The Zimmerman-Martin shooting happened on February 26, 2012.

 

Since that date, there have been several cases in Harrisburg, Pa., where young African-American men have been murdered. In each case, these victims were murdered by someone from a particular racial/ethnic group.

 

Were they murdered by:

 

1. Racist white Klan members from rural Pennsylvania.

2. Overzealous Hispanic-American Neighborhood Watch volunteers.

3. Middle-aged white women who have their own cooking shows.

4. Other African-American males.

 

Anyone want to take a guess? There is only one correct answer.

Edited July 2, 2013 by grbeck

[FiredMotorCompany]

The Zimmerman-Martin shooting happened on February 26, 2012.

 

Since that date, there have been several cases in Harrisburg, Pa., where young African-American men have been murdered. In each case, these victims were murdered by someone from a particular racial/ethnic group.

 

Were they murdered by:

 

1. Racist white Klan members from rural Pennsylvania.

2. Overzealous Hispanic-American Neighborhood Watch volunteers.

3. Middle-aged white women who have their own cooking shows.

4. Other African-American males.

 

Anyone want to take a guess? There is only one correct answer.

I have no doubt you suggest #1.

 

I do not doubt the possibility that was true. But, relatively, where do those acts of violence fit in the total acts of black on black murder?

Isn't that the point previously made?

[grbeck]

I have no doubt you suggest #1.

 

I do not doubt the possibility that was true. But, relatively, where do those acts of violence fit in the total acts of black on black murder?

Isn't that the point previously made?

 

Sorry, but the answer is #4. My point is that there IS a problem with African-American males being murdered. The real threat, however, is from OTHER AFRICAN-AMERICAN males (statistics back this up not only for Harrisburg, but the nation as a whole). Which makes the hysteria and focus on the Zimmerman case somewhat ridiculous (aside from the fact that it clearly looks like a case of justified self-defense).

 

Jailing the George Zimmerman's of the world, or threatening them with jail, isn't going to solve the crime problem among the African-American community.

Edited July 2, 2013 by grbeck

[FiredMotorCompany]

Sorry, but the answer is #4. My point is that there IS a problem with African-American males being murdered. The real threat, however, is from OTHER AFRICAN-AMERICAN males (statistics back this up not only for Harrisburg, but the nation as a whole). Which makes the hysteria and focus on the Zimmerman case somewhat ridiculous (aside from the fact that it clearly looks like a case of justified self-defense).

 

Jailing the George Zimmerman's of the world, or threatening them with jail, isn't going to solve the crime problem among the African-American community.

My apologies. I jumped to the conclusion, from the framing of your question.

We are in agreement.

[cal50]

I thought we were talking about the discussion on the national stage, not just on this thread.

 

 

Some of us.

[chevys]

Sorry, but the answer is #4. My point is that there IS a problem with African-American males being murdered. The real threat, however, is from OTHER AFRICAN-AMERICAN males (statistics back this up not only for Harrisburg, but the nation as a whole). Which makes the hysteria and focus on the Zimmerman case somewhat ridiculous (aside from the fact that it clearly looks like a case of justified self-defense).

 

Jailing the George Zimmerman's of the world, or threatening them with jail, isn't going to solve the crime problem among the African-American community.

Spot on. The media has created this circus to play the race card. What I have seen so far is that it appears to me at least that the prosecution must have felt pressure to bring murder charges against Z when their case is as weak as water but what do I know. I thought OJ was guilty as sin for murdering his wife also.

[napfirst]

Spot on. The media has created this circus to play the race card. What I have seen so far is that it appears to me at least that the prosecution must have felt pressure to bring murder charges against Z when their case is as weak as water but what do I know. I thought OJ was guilty as sin for murdering his wife also.

My thoughts exactly...I watched a few minutes earlier today and it almost seems as though they are just going through the motions.....but we could be surprised.

[hermans]

My thoughts exactly...I watched a few minutes earlier today and it almost seems as though they are just going through the motions.....but we could be surprised.

I work within the legal system and have a lot of contact with juries. You never know what they are thinking.

[cal50]

I work within the legal system and have a lot of contact with juries. You never know what they are thinking.

 

 

A LOT of truth in that statement.

Its not over until the jury verdict is handed to the judge & read.

 

After serving regular jury duty & grand jury its amazing what some people key in on and process differently.

[chevys]

I work within the legal system and have a lot of contact with juries. You never know what they are thinking.

No doubt. I never dreamed you could convince 12 people DNA evidence was a scam and if the gloves didnt fit you must acquit!

[Langston Hughes]

I thought we were talking about the discussion on the national stage, not just on this thread.

 

I thought we were talking about "Your Opinion of Zimmerman Now", not what might be bothering you racially somewhere else.