Second degree murder

Damocles said:
If they don't change venues, at the very least, the lack of a chance for a fair trial is likely to be the first reason for an appeal if he is convicted.
Click to expand...

I don't think changing venues helps, this is a national story now. To find a jury who hasn't heard anything about this case, is going to be difficult, if not impossible. Once was a time, you could have taken him out of the 'fishbowl' and held a trial in some area of the country that hadn't heard about the case, but those days are gone. At best, he'll get a jury of idiots who don't have sense to come in out of the rain, much less follow details of a case like this, and people who lie and convince the court they haven't heard about this. The good news is, they will have to be unanimous in their finding, and I don't think the prosecution can make that case. I don't know any of the details, I haven't followed the story, but just from the 'sides' I've heard, I think there is enough reasonable doubt to find him not guilty. If and when that happens, it will be interesting to see what the reaction is, will there be violence and riots? Probably so.
 
I don't believe he can get a fair trial. His name has been in the news for too long, and too many news outlets have convicted him already. If he has a decent lawyer, the lawyer will tell him this. He will explain that they have a pretty good chance on appeal, BUT that will keep him in prison for several years as the case makes its way through the appeals process. I think he will take a plea to involuntary manslaughter, with a short time incarcerated, probably in a jail, then long term of probation.
 
Yurt said:
OJ simpson..........
Click to expand...
OJ is not a good comparison. The DA in L.A. screwed that case up. He moved the trial to downtown Los Angeles where lots of people in the jury pool came from the rampart precinct where not long after OJ was acquitted several cops were brought up on charges resulting from framing criminal defendants. Had the OJ case stayed in Brentwood, he would have been tried by a jury of his peers and convicted of murder.
 
Socrtease said:
I don't believe he can get a fair trial. His name has been in the news for too long, and too many news outlets have convicted him already. If he has a decent lawyer, the lawyer will tell him this. He will explain that they have a pretty good chance on appeal, BUT that will keep him in prison for several years as the case makes its way through the appeals process. I think he will take a plea to involuntary manslaughter, with a short time incarcerated, probably in a jail, then long term of probation.
Click to expand...

Well, we shall see who comes the closest to the actual outcome.
 
Socrtease said:
I don't believe he can get a fair trial. His name has been in the news for too long, and too many news outlets have convicted him already. If he has a decent lawyer, the lawyer will tell him this. He will explain that they have a pretty good chance on appeal, BUT that will keep him in prison for several years as the case makes its way through the appeals process. I think he will take a plea to involuntary manslaughter, with a short time incarcerated, probably in a jail, then long term of probation.
Click to expand...

You may be right, but if the prosecutor offers a plea bargain, a good defense attorney may sense they don't have the chops to make the murder charge stick, and he may reject their offer and force them to prove their case against his client.
 
I think that in the interest of fairness we all need to remember that Trayvon didn't get a fair trial. This in no way means Zimmerman shouldn't get one. He should. But let's not forget, while we are busy weeping and crying and cursing the liberals and their vast army of New Black Panthers that a 17 yo boy never got a trial, fair or otherwise. He is in the dirt, never to laugh, never to fall in love, never to drive with his windows down listening to his favorite song on a new spring day.

Another view:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...pr/11/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-justice
 
Socrtease said:
I don't believe he can get a fair trial. His name has been in the news for too long, and too many news outlets have convicted him already. If he has a decent lawyer, the lawyer will tell him this. He will explain that they have a pretty good chance on appeal, BUT that will keep him in prison for several years as the case makes its way through the appeals process. I think he will take a plea to involuntary manslaughter, with a short time incarcerated, probably in a jail, then long term of probation.
Click to expand...

I thought that maybe the prosecutor was going for a manslaughter plea...but I'm not sure. None of us are in the room. There are a lot of politics at play here. The NRA and A.L.E.C. do not want nationwide scrutiny of these stand your ground laws. This guy walking around free was a huge liability to them. A manslaughter plea could make it all go away. THat's what they want.

But what does the prosecutor want? I really have no idea. As for his not getting a fair trial - well that cuts both ways. Yeah, most have made up their minds, but a lot of white people have decided Zimmerman is innocent and some have even concluded that Martin was a "thug". Cause you know, he's black and all. I don't know if you have noticed this soc, but a lot of white men are terrified of black men. You should see some of the things I hear when I mention that I am going out in Harlem or something. I would love to go into details with them about why I don't automatically fear black males but do sometimes fear some white males. But I don't like to tell people my business so I just look at them like they are crazy. And statistically, white people commit crimes against white people and black people commit them against black people. I know you know this. I am just trying to say I guess, that I feel that there will be people on that jury who won't be able to give Zimmerman a fair trial because they go in convinced he's innocent and nothing is going to change their minds. I'm not saying the reverse won't be true as well, but all anyone is talking about is the reverse. Let's not forget the double edged sword. Is Zimmerman really the underdog here???

If he gets USF and BRavo on his jury, that man walks even if they have Trayvon on tape begging for his life and Zimmerman yelling "You're dead n*gger".

Just some perspective.
 
Socrtease said:
I don't believe he can get a fair trial. His name has been in the news for too long, and too many news outlets have convicted him already. If he has a decent lawyer, the lawyer will tell him this. He will explain that they have a pretty good chance on appeal, BUT that will keep him in prison for several years as the case makes its way through the appeals process. I think he will take a plea to involuntary manslaughter, with a short time incarcerated, probably in a jail, then long term of probation.
Click to expand...

Which sucks, you can't appeal if you take a deal.
 
Darla said:
So you've gone from "waiting for all the facts" to actively desiring Zimmerman not be found guilty, or even plead guilty.

Can you explain what caused this change of heart?
Click to expand...
Nah, I was just talking about the system there. It sucks when you deal, because you can't appeal.

Basically I think he's overcharged purposefully to give more room on a deal. I hope he doesn't take one because the only way we'll get all the evidence is if he goes to trial. But I can certainly understand if he takes one. If I believed I would have no chance at a fair trial I may be convinced to take a deal.

:dunno:
 
Damocles said:
Nah, I was just talking about the system there. It sucks when you deal, because you can't appeal.

Basically I think he's overcharged purposefully to give more room on a deal. I hope he doesn't take one because the only way we'll get all the evidence is if he goes to trial. But I can certainly understand if he takes one. If I believed I would have no chance at a fair trial I may be convinced to take a deal.

:dunno:
Click to expand...

As I said earlier, if he has no chance at a fair trial, that sword cuts both ways. And I am in no way convinced he's the underdog in that "unfair trial" scenario. It only takes one...

Maybe they did overcharge, but I am interested in seeing the evidence. Maybe they didn't...maybe they feel they can prove depraved indifference.
 
Darla said:
As I said earlier, if he has no chance at a fair trial, that sword cuts both ways. And I am in no way convinced he's the underdog in that "unfair trial" scenario. It only takes one...

Maybe they did overcharge, but I am interested in seeing the evidence. Maybe they didn't...maybe they feel they can prove depraved indifference.
Click to expand...
They'd have a very difficult time proving that, but I too would like to see the evidence. Hence my hope he doesn't deal.
 
I'm not sure what people think we're going to see in a trial that we haven't seen yet in terms of evidence. We know the tape; we know there is some talk of an altercation but not real witnesses to that; we know that someone said "help" but there was no real consensus from voice experts on who said it.

The tape is the most incriminating thing, and the main reason people were outraged from the get go. On it, we hear a guy profiling and stalking a kid who he eventually kills, against the advice of 911.
 
Onceler said:
I'm not sure what people think we're going to see in a trial that we haven't seen yet in terms of evidence. We know the tape; we know there is some talk of an altercation but not real witnesses to that; we know that someone said "help" but there was no real consensus from voice experts on who said it.

The tape is the most incriminating thing, and the main reason people were outraged from the get go. On it, we hear a guy profiling and stalking a kid who he eventually kills, against the advice of 911.
Click to expand...

What are you referring to when you say profiling?
 
cawacko said:
What are you referring to when you say profiling?
Click to expand...

I think there is pretty clear profiling on the tape. What is he saying w/ "these guys?" To me, it's obvious. It's "these black guys." Because he wouldn't have said that about a white guy.

Some have argued that he's saying "these robbers," but again - unless Trayvon was holding a TV or emerging from someone's window, there is nothing to indicate that he's a robber. Except that he's black.
 
Onceler said:
I'm not sure what people think we're going to see in a trial that we haven't seen yet in terms of evidence. We know the tape; we know there is some talk of an altercation but not real witnesses to that; we know that someone said "help" but there was no real consensus from voice experts on who said it.

The tape is the most incriminating thing, and the main reason people were outraged from the get go. On it, we hear a guy profiling and stalking a kid who he eventually kills, against the advice of 911.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think we know any of that. Since the police never really investigated we don't know if there are other witnesses who have since come forward. And what I read about that tape is that voice experts say it's not Zimmerman, but they can't say whether it's Martin because they had no sample of his voice. Whoever the prosecution hires to make voice matches, may very well be provided with that sample. I think there are a lot of known unknowns here, and unknown unknowns, to coin a phrase. We'll see.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Which is where the system fails.
I hope he gets a ton of money and is able to hire a top notch lawyer; or he finds one that will take the case pro-bono, only because so many are convinced that he's guilty without waiting for any proof, one way or the other.
Click to expand...

He can always sue NBC, Spike Lee, the New Black Panthers etc...
 
Onceler said:
I think there is pretty clear profiling on the tape. What is he saying w/ "these guys?" To me, it's obvious. It's "these black guys." Because he wouldn't have said that about a white guy.

Some have argued that he's saying "these robbers," but again - unless Trayvon was holding a TV or emerging from someone's window, there is nothing to indicate that he's a robber. Except that he's black.
Click to expand...

Again, taken without the 40 or so other calls from him where they guys actually got away I may even agree with you. But after understanding how often he had called where the guy got away, and the likelihood they weren't all black dudes, it just doesn't seem realistic to assume that he meant "these black guys" like you say here.

To me it's obvious that you want it to be about race but it is less than obvious that it was about that.
 
Damocles said:
Again, taken without the 40 or so other calls from him where they guys actually got away I may even agree with you. But after understanding how often he had called where the guy got away, and the likelihood they weren't all black dudes, it just doesn't seem realistic to assume that he meant "these black guys" like you say here.

To me, it's obvious that you want it to be about race. But it is less than obvious that it was.
Click to expand...

What if they were all black guys? What if 90% of them were black guys? What if they have all of those prior calls on tape, have listened to them all, and in each case when he was asked what race the "suspect" was, he answered "he looks black"?

Let's wait and see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top