Trayvon Martin shooting: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him, then began hammering him

[MetalHead]

Angry prosecutor is angry.

Unless the jury is completely daft they have to sense the case is not going the direction the prosecution wanted.

There is no case here...none.

 

[MetalHead]

Anyone notice that everything used to harm Zimmerman is allowed and anything that helps his case is not allowed?
His phone calls to the cops are allowed.
Trayvon's criminal record,not allowed.

I fully understand that the trial focuses only on the events of Feb 26 2012,however,how come allowing Zimmerman
s behavior prior to the event is ok,but Trayvon's history of thuggery is not?

And still,they can't make a case for the prosecution.

 

[peplaw06]

At least he did not put his hands in his pocket. That is clearly a greater threat.

It's not about what is a greater threat. And I've never said putting your hand in a pocket is a greater threat than beating someone head on a sidewalk.

If you slam someone's head on the concrete and try to suffocate them expect to get shot if they have a gun.

I agree.

Unless it's peplaw, then you can expect an apology.

So GFY.

Anyone notice that everything used to harm Zimmerman is allowed and anything that helps his case is not allowed?

It's actually the stuff that is not compliant with the rules of evidence that is not allowed, and the stuff that is compliant is allowed.

 

[boozeman]

I am happy to say I have not watched a live second of this race-baiting idiotic made-for-TV trial.

 

[iceberg]

It's actually the stuff that is not compliant with the rules of evidence that is not allowed, and the stuff that is compliant is allowed.

can you clarify this? i'd like to better understand cause it "does" seem 1 sided, but then again, i don't know the rules.

 

[Jon88]

I agree.

Ok, so you have nothing to argue for the prosecution from now on then.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

It's race related in that zimm followed trayvon bc he's black and that you guys don't care bc he's black. But if he's acquitted it's not bc of race it's bc of the unclear facts.

I don't know the legality of killing someone for punching you in the nose and leaving a flea dick sized cut to the back of the head. Is there something between man slaughter an murder 2

 

[peplaw06]

can you clarify this? i'd like to better understand cause it "does" seem 1 sided, but then again, i don't know the rules.

I've posted like 5 times in this thread why Trayvon's history isn't being admitted. It's impermissible character evidence because it's offered for the sole purpose to show conduct in conformity with the past conduct, and it's prejudicial effect outweighs the probative value. Zimmerman's past history of calling the police isn't nearly as prejudicial.

Ok, so you have nothing to argue for the prosecution from now on then.

Incorrect. Your inability to comprehend these concepts is nothing new though.

 

[JBond]

Pep, thanks for the info you have provided in this thread. You and I have different presumptions. No big deal. How do you see this case playing out?

 

[iceberg]

I've posted like 5 times in this thread why Trayvon's history isn't being admitted. It's impermissible character evidence because it's offered for the sole purpose to show conduct in conformity with the past conduct, and it's prejudicial effect outweighs the probative value. Zimmerman's past history of calling the police isn't nearly as prejudicial.

history, to me, is history.

if you have a violent history of reacting to normal situations, i'd like to know.

if i can't admit martins history because it has a sole purpose, how many purposes does zimmermans history have?

 

[VTA]

It's race related in that zimm followed trayvon bc he's black and that you guys don't care bc he's black. But if he's acquitted it's not bc of race it's bc of the unclear facts.

I don't know the legality of killing someone for punching you in the nose and leaving a flea dick sized cut to the back of the head. Is there something between man slaughter an murder 2

Do you think there will be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted?

 

[Midswat]

It's race related in that zimm followed trayvon bc he's black

No he didn't.

~yawn~

 

[MetalHead]

It's race related in that zimm followed trayvon bc he's black and that you guys don't care bc he's black. But if he's acquitted it's not bc of race it's bc of the unclear facts.

I don't know the legality of killing someone for punching you in the nose and leaving a flea dick sized cut to the back of the head. Is there something between man slaughter an murder 2

Really..http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting
Oh,that last segment of your post is quite telling.
Your statement compares getting punched vs getting shot to death while dismissing everything in between.
In the version of events you prefer,Martin got shot just because he was black.

 

[MetalHead]

history, to me, is history.

if you have a violent history of reacting to normal situations, i'd like to know.

if i can't admit martins history because it has a sole purpose, how many purposes does zimmermans history have?

Exactly.

 

[peplaw06]

history, to me, is history.

if you have a violent history of reacting to normal situations, i'd like to know.

if i can't admit martins history because it has a sole purpose, how many purposes does zimmermans history have?

IMO, Zimmerman's history isn't being introduced to show conduct in conformity with the past police calls. It's habit evidence, which is admissible. He had a habit of calling the police. Calling the police isn't a crime.

Look, character evidence is one of those things that you spend a month on in law school. It's going to be impossible for me to teach everyone all the ins and outs of character evidence while this trial is going on.

If you're interested though, you can take a look at the wiki pages. They're not going to cover everything, but it will explain a little.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_evidence -- Character evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habit_evidence -- Habit evidence

 

[MetalHead]

IMO, Zimmerman's history isn't being introduced to show conduct in conformity with the past police calls. It's habit evidence. He had a habit of calling the police. Calling the police isn't a crime.

Zimmerman's history has been introduced.
It's Trayvon's history that has not.
You are correct,calling the police is not a crime,burglaries however are.
The burglar got shot.

 

[peplaw06]

Seriously. learn how to read.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

Do you think there will be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted?

No but maybe a cracker or two will get jumped

No he didn't.

~yawn~

A jewball isn't getting followed. If trayvon was a fat Jew he'd be alive.

 

[Midswat]

A jewball isn't getting followed. If trayvon was a fat Jew he'd be alive.

Speculation, your honor.

 

[Midswat]

As if this trial wasn't a joke enough....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIKppHDJSJc