Skip to main content

View Diary: Judge Nelson's *Missing* Instructions To The Zimmerman Jury (446 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I agree with this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Victor Ward, Avila, R30A

    The state of Florida is the real culprit here.  They give out concealed carry permits like candy it seems.  I disagree with most of you about the verdict, I think it was the right verdict, but the state of Florida carries at least a part of the culpability here.

    •  the "right" verdict because of FL law (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Avila, R30A

      and the judge's instructions or because you believe poor good-hearted George was justified in killing someone for some scratches?

      •  Both, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Avila

        The issue is whether GZ was reasonably in fear of serious physical injury or death.  The evidence in the case, from both the prosecution and defense experts was that repeated impacts of his head on concrete created the real danger of subdural hematoma and other brain injuries which would be life threatening.  If you look at the evidence in this case, not what you wish it to be, but the evidence, it is clear by at least a preponderance of the evidence, that TM initiated the physical fight, broke GZ's nose, and hit GZ's head on the concrete at least three times, Dr. Rao for the prosecution, and four times, Dr. Di Maio for the defense.  That is enough to put a reasonable person in fear of serious physical injury or death.  Brain injury can get very serious very quickly.  

        •  I must have missed this... (8+ / 0-)
          it is clear by at least a preponderance of the evidence, that TM initiated the physical fight
          Who testified to that besides TM's killer in his statements? I thought no one else was present at the initial altercation apart from Rachel who was on the phone with Trayvon.

          Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

          by Ian S on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 01:22:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just from the physical evidence (0+ / 0-)

            Ignore GZ's statements.  GZ has injuries, TM does not.  This alone makes it more probable than not that TM initiated the contact or at least the violence.  

            The problem with the arguments that GZ initiated the violence is that there is no evidence for it and there is evidence against it, the injuries.  The same reasoning applies to the screams for help.  Three people said it was TM, his mother, father and brother.  Two  at first hearing said it was either not TM or they weren't sure, TM's father and brother.  It wasn't until the mayor called them all in with the press waiting outside that they all heard the tape together and said it was TM.  This creates tremendous pressure for them to say it was TM.  This weakens the credibility of that testimony.  The witnesses that said it was GZ did not have these issues.  But even if you discard all testimony about whose voice it was, who is more likely to be yelling for help, the one who is losing or the one who is winning.  This alone gives the preponderance on this issue to the defense. And that's without even considering Good's testimony.

            The prosecution had the burden to disprove justification beyond a reasonable doubt.  As I said, the defense proved this issues by a preponderance.

            •  Well, you're discounting Rachel's testimony... (6+ / 0-)

              but I suppose you would argue she made up the "get off get off" claim. But frankly, if I was going to make up something to suggest that TM's killer was the instigator, I'd do a lot better than that. The thing about the injuries is you don't have any idea about when they actually occurred. The closest thing to an eyewitness to the initial confrontation aside from GZ is Rachel but you dismiss her testimony.

              As for the screaming, I know it wasn't admitted as evidence but two voice experts determined that it was not GZ. AFAIK, the defense had no experts claiming that it was GZ although there was one who didn't believe it could be be determined one way or another.

              I'm not arguing that there was guilt beyond a reasonable doubt - there are many cases where the guilty go free - but I simply don't accept GZ's version since it really doesn't make sense in light of what more reasonable alternatives there are.

              Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

              by Ian S on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 02:07:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I'm not entirely clear about this (0+ / 0-)

                but I thought that GZ was on the phone with the dispatcher at the same time that TM was on the phone with Rachel, so the dispatcher should have heard any confrontation that she heard. No?

                We decided to move the center farther to the right by starting the whole debate from a far-right position to begin with. - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

                by denise b on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 05:35:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  that makes no sense and in fact is backward (0+ / 0-)
              GZ has injuries, TM does not.  This alone makes it more probable than not that TM initiated the contact or at least the violence.
              because of the supposed difference in physical fitness of the two people involved.

              if I, a person in poor physical shape, provoke a fight with someone who is in better physical shape, I am more likely to end up with injuries!

              Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D.
              Drop by The Grieving Room on Monday nights for support in dealing with grief.

              by TrueBlueMajority on Wed Jul 17, 2013 at 08:44:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Except for that little bullet hole in his heart? (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              merrywidow
              Ignore GZ's statements.  GZ has injuries, TM does not.
              Seriously?
            •  Z claimed his head was smashed 20-30 times (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WakeUpNeo

              so he is a liar because yes, having you head bashed against concrete causes severe injuries and his were superficial and EMT techs tell us that head injuries are major bleeders and he did not have injuries consistant with his 20-30 times story

    •  On the basis (5+ / 0-)

      of his prior conviction for attacking a cop and for having had a protective order written against him, Zimmerman had no legal right to carry a concealed weapon. At least that's my understanding.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site