• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Judge rules out Treyvon Martin's past

randian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
380
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Throwing out both Trayvon's text messages and the toxicology report is clear evidence, IMO, that Zimmerman is being railroaded.
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
So he will likewise not allow testimony regarding Zimmerman's past, also; right? Ha!
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
Throwing out both Trayvon's text messages and the toxicology report is clear evidence, IMO, that Zimmerman is being railroaded.

I would say it's clear evidence that neither thing is relevant to the issue at hand, which is whether Zimmerman was justified. Martin's actions and Zimmerman's perception are relevant; what texts Martin had sent, or substances he had consumed in the past, are not relevant to what happened that night.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I would say it's clear evidence that neither thing is relevant to the issue at hand, which is whether Zimmerman was justified. Martin's actions and Zimmerman's perception are relevant; what texts Martin had sent, or substances he had consumed in the past, are not relevant to what happened that night.

Then I would think there will be no photos at trial of Martin at 12 years old, the prosecution will not attempt to paint him as a model citizen, and no references to Skittles and Arizona iced tea. Anything to convict a innocent man to appease the outraged mob.
 

randian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
380
Location
Phoenix, AZ
Martin's actions and Zimmerman's perception are relevant; what texts Martin had sent, or substances he had consumed in the past, are not relevant to what happened that night.
I assume the prosecution wanted the texts suppressed, not out of abstract notions of "relevance", but because they cast doubt on the prosecution's theory of the crime. That makes them very relevant. If Trayvon was drugged up on something it would similarly tend to support Zimmerman, not the prosecution.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
IMHO - the past/history of both goes to motivation/intent as well as state of mind. The character of both should be considered.

Gotta stop throwing Christians into the lions den to entertain the populous.
 

PFC HALE

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
481
Location
earth
the media went nuts and pushed for blood because a black kid was killed. zimmerman shouldnt have pursued and martin shouldnt have attacked him plain and simple. zimmerman defended himself against an attacker who was bigger than him and that was hellbent on beating his a$$.

the kid got what he deserved, problem solved.

in the great words of eye... moving on lol
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
the media went nuts and pushed for blood because a black kid was killed. zimmerman shouldnt have pursued and martin shouldnt have attacked him plain and simple. zimmerman defended himself against an attacker who was bigger than him and that was hellbent on beating his a$$.

the kid got what he deserved, problem solved.

in the great words of eye... moving on lol

I agree, but IMO Z will be convicted, it is what the vocal masses want. The jury will be from the community, and they will vote out of fear.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
I agree, but IMO Z will be convicted, it is what the vocal masses want. The jury will be from the community, and they will vote out of fear.
I have a greater faith in the people and our system than to go there at this point.

One of us will be right :( :uhoh:
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I believe that Z will be acquitted. If the State has to prove it was NOT self-defense (which I believe, IANAL, is the case in Florida), they have zero evidence that it wasn't. If Z has to prove it was, he has all manner of evidence that it was--all of this other fluff notwithstanding. If the prosecution paints M as some innocent 12-yo, they will have opened the door, and the other evidence could well become admissible. Therefore, I think they will assiduously avoid the character issue and go after the self-defense justification--which will fail miserably.

No amount of media-induced public frenzy will change the way this will play out in court. What the media will accomplish is to foment riots when Z is acquitted.

Mark my words. Poke me if I am wrong. Give me props when I turn out to be right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

shastadude17

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
150
Location
United States
I believe that Z will be acquitted. If the State has to prove it was NOT self-defense (which I believe, IANAL, is the case in Florida), they have zero evidence that it wasn't. If Z has to prove it was, he has all manner of evidence that it was--all of this other fluff notwithstanding. If the prosecution paints M as some innocent 12-yo, they will have opened the door, and the other evidence could well become admissible. Therefore, I think they will assiduously avoid the character issue and go after the self-defense justification--which will fail miserably.

No amount of media-induced public frenzy will change the way this will play out in court. What the media will accomplish is to foment riots when Z is acquitted.

Mark my words. Poke me if I am wrong. Give me props when I turn out to be right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

This.
 

transam86

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Messages
18
Location
hudson forida
no loss to the world

why is it when ever it is white on black ITS RACEISIM!!!!!!!!!! but when its black on white its allways a crime??????????? the punk got what he deserved
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
why is it when ever it is white on black ITS RACEISIM!!!!!!!!!! but when its black on white its allways a crime??????????? the punk got what he deserved

We should not stoop to such a level as to further fan the flames.

I would have said the result was reasonably predictable.
 

ADulay

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
512
Location
Punta Gorda, Florida, USA
I believe that Z will be acquitted. If the State has to prove it was NOT self-defense (which I believe, IANAL, is the case in Florida), they have zero evidence that it wasn't. If Z has to prove it was, he has all manner of evidence that it was--all of this other fluff notwithstanding. If the prosecution paints M as some innocent 12-yo, they will have opened the door, and the other evidence could well become admissible. Therefore, I think they will assiduously avoid the character issue and go after the self-defense justification--which will fail miserably.

No amount of media-induced public frenzy will change the way this will play out in court. What the media will accomplish is to foment riots when Z is acquitted.

Mark my words. Poke me if I am wrong. Give me props when I turn out to be right.

I believe that sums it up nicely. I would tend to agree.

AD
 

arentol

New member
Joined
Apr 10, 2009
Messages
383
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
I believe that Z will be acquitted. If the State has to prove it was NOT self-defense (which I believe, IANAL, is the case in Florida), they have zero evidence that it wasn't. If Z has to prove it was, he has all manner of evidence that it was--all of this other fluff notwithstanding. If the prosecution paints M as some innocent 12-yo, they will have opened the door, and the other evidence could well become admissible. Therefore, I think they will assiduously avoid the character issue and go after the self-defense justification--which will fail miserably.

No amount of media-induced public frenzy will change the way this will play out in court. What the media will accomplish is to foment riots when Z is acquitted.

Mark my words. Poke me if I am wrong. Give me props when I turn out to be right.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

The only thing I know of that Zimmerman seems to have in his favor is the timeline, which seems to indicate Martin could have made it home but instead hung around in the area between the apartments. Aside from that we have only Zimmerman's word on the fact that he was attacked rather than being the attacker, and given his known actions vs Martin's known actions in the 10 minutes prior to the physical altercation I have no reason at all to believe anything Zimmerman says. Especially given he is facing prison regardless of what happened.

As to the timeline question, which seems to be a favorite of the Zimmerman defenders these days, let me propose a scenario that explains the timeline discrepancy....

Martin is being chased by an adult man of unknown size (unknown because he was in his car) for no apparent reason what-so-ever. Being scared for his life (which he is, and which means Zimmerman has criminally assaulted him, check Florida law on that one, you will see I am correct), he begins to head back to his home along the path he normally uses. However, as he gets to the path between the backs of the various homes in the complex he realizes he has made a mistake. It is a broad open path and the pursuer will be able to see him and chase him all the way to his home if he stays in the open on the path. So instead Martin decides to hide behind some bushes and/or patio dividers along the side of the path until the creeper goes away. At first it looks like the creeper is going to go down the other path and Martin will get away, but then the guy comes up the same path Martin went down and passes his hiding spot. When the creeper turns back around to return to his car he is facing Martin and now spots him. The attacker is now between Martin and his home, but Martin sees the man is a shorter than him and doesn't seem to have a weapon out. Martin decides to try to run past the man, figuring he is younger and faster. However, Zimmerman is faster than Martin thinks and gets an arm on Martin as he passes by and takes him to the ground. Fight ensues, Martin is murdered (Yes he is murdered, doesn't matter if it Zimmerman is eventually acquitted, under Florida law it is still murder, it is just justified murder if there is an acquittal based on self defense).

Do I think this is what really happened? Quite frankly I think it is no more or less likely than any of a dozen scenarios I could come up with that all cover pretty much all the known information. My point is only to show that the the timeline issue can EASILY be explained with Martin not being the aggressor, and that really we have absolutely NO evidence at all that Martin was the first to initiate physical contact (Not that I consider that very important because in my mind Zimmerman has already admitted to committing assault, justifying self defense on Martin's part).

How about I put this all another way though. What if we had all the same evidence and information, only Zimmerman never did, and never does, make a statement about what happened that night after he hung up with 911 other than to say "I shot him because I was in fear for my life"? So all we have to rely on is the physical evidence, 911 recordings, and witness statements. What do you honestly think at that point (and keeping in mind that his failure to testify should in NO WAY be held against Zimmerman)? I am sure we all come away with different ideas when the case is viewed in this manner, and I am sure some people say innocent and others guilty still. That is to be expected. I don't expect people to be swayed by any of this, I just want to express that this needs to be looked at in an open and honest manner.

Also, as someone lawfully carrying a firearm Zimmerman should have forseen the greatly increased chance that he would need to use it if he continued to follow Martin, unnecessarily, on foot. Given that likelihood, even if Zimmerman didn't directly start the physical fight, he is still at least equally responsible for what happened thereafter and as such he arguably should be found guilty of manslaughter at the very least. If you are armed and you provoke a fight, sorry but you just simple should NOT get away Scott Free with shooting the other person no matter who actually swings first, and a decision of anything less than manslaughter in a case like this is basically saying that you should be able to do just that.
 

notalawyer

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2012
Messages
1,061
Location
Florida
The only thing I know of that Zimmerman seems to have in his favor is the timeline, which seems to indicate Martin could have made it home but instead hung around in the area between the apartments. Aside from that we have only Zimmerman's word on the fact that he was attacked rather than being the attacker, and given his known actions vs Martin's known actions in the 10 minutes prior to the physical altercation I have no reason at all to believe anything Zimmerman says. Especially given he is facing prison regardless of what happened.

As to the timeline question, which seems to be a favorite of the Zimmerman defenders these days, let me propose a scenario that explains the timeline discrepancy....

Martin is being chased by an adult man of unknown size (unknown because he was in his car) for no apparent reason what-so-ever. Being scared for his life (which he is, and which means Zimmerman has criminally assaulted him, check Florida law on that one, you will see I am correct), he begins to head back to his home along the path he normally uses. However, as he gets to the path between the backs of the various homes in the complex he realizes he has made a mistake. It is a broad open path and the pursuer will be able to see him and chase him all the way to his home if he stays in the open on the path. So instead Martin decides to hide behind some bushes and/or patio dividers along the side of the path until the creeper goes away. At first it looks like the creeper is going to go down the other path and Martin will get away, but then the guy comes up the same path Martin went down and passes his hiding spot. When the creeper turns back around to return to his car he is facing Martin and now spots him. The attacker is now between Martin and his home, but Martin sees the man is a shorter than him and doesn't seem to have a weapon out. Martin decides to try to run past the man, figuring he is younger and faster. However, Zimmerman is faster than Martin thinks and gets an arm on Martin as he passes by and takes him to the ground. Fight ensues, Martin is murdered (Yes he is murdered, doesn't matter if it Zimmerman is eventually acquitted, under Florida law it is still murder, it is just justified murder if there is an acquittal based on self defense).

Do I think this is what really happened? Quite frankly I think it is no more or less likely than any of a dozen scenarios I could come up with that all cover pretty much all the known information. My point is only to show that the the timeline issue can EASILY be explained with Martin not being the aggressor, and that really we have absolutely NO evidence at all that Martin was the first to initiate physical contact (Not that I consider that very important because in my mind Zimmerman has already admitted to committing assault, justifying self defense on Martin's part).

How about I put this all another way though. What if we had all the same evidence and information, only Zimmerman never did, and never does, make a statement about what happened that night after he hung up with 911 other than to say "I shot him because I was in fear for my life"? So all we have to rely on is the physical evidence, 911 recordings, and witness statements. What do you honestly think at that point (and keeping in mind that his failure to testify should in NO WAY be held against Zimmerman)? I am sure we all come away with different ideas when the case is viewed in this manner, and I am sure some people say innocent and others guilty still. That is to be expected. I don't expect people to be swayed by any of this, I just want to express that this needs to be looked at in an open and honest manner.

Also, as someone lawfully carrying a firearm Zimmerman should have forseen the greatly increased chance that he would need to use it if he continued to follow Martin, unnecessarily, on foot. Given that likelihood, even if Zimmerman didn't directly start the physical fight, he is still at least equally responsible for what happened thereafter and as such he arguably should be found guilty of manslaughter at the very least. If you are armed and you provoke a fight, sorry but you just simple should NOT get away Scott Free with shooting the other person no matter who actually swings first, and a decision of anything less than manslaughter in a case like this is basically saying that you should be able to do just that.

:uhoh:
Not sure if serious.
You obviously have not read any of the information that has been released.
The physical evidence supports Zimmerman's statement of the events, and that is all that matters with respect to Florida law. There is only one witness and he's the one that done the shooting.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
arentol said:
The only thing I know of that Zimmerman seems to have in his favor is the timeline
And his injuries, and the ever-changing story of the prosecution's star witness, and the known violent & drug-using history of the attacker, and their disparity in size/strength/age, and the witness who saw Martin sitting on Zimmerman's chest beating him, and...

This blog has about 30 posts (so far) about the case, the persecution, the facts, the geography, Zimmerman's injuries, etc., most done in great detail, very thoughtful. Many link to more official sources, also to people who have done other/different/more analysis on the issues.
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/courts-and-cops/the-trayvon-martin-case/page/4/
Those are the first/oldest posts; work your way through to the latest.

Of particular interest:
geography (with pictures)
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpre...se-update-4-geography-and-narrative-analysis/

Martin's drug use that night (with pictures)
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpre...case-update-9-of-tea-and-skittles-and-blunts/

pictures of Zimmerman's head injuries (yes, in color)
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpre...rayvon-martin-case-update-17-black-and-white/

seems to indicate Martin could have made it home
If you look at the pictures of the area, the maps, you'll see how close to his dad's apartment he was. A young strong person (he played football) could run that distance in maybe 10 seconds. Then he'd be at home, going in the door, when Z walked along the sidewalk to tell police where M was.

[Zimmerman] is facing prison regardless of what happened
No, he's not. Since the state can't prove it was not self-defense, unless there are more grave "errors" by the persecutor or judge (both of whom should be disbarred for incompetence IMO) he will remain free, and rightfully so. I only hope M's family is well-insured, because there will be quite the civil suit to recover damages.

It is a broad open path and the pursuer will be able to see him and chase him all the way to his home if he stays in the open on the path
Wrong. This happened at night. It was dark & raining. M could have been at his dad's door, in the dark, well away from where Z last saw him, in seconds.
Look at the first picture in update 9.
Plenty of places to hide, no lighting, very dark.

The attacker is now between Martin and his home
Z was not between M & his dad's apartment, and Z did not attack.

under Florida law it is still murder, it is just justified murder if there is an acquittal based on self defense
Murder is wrongful killing.
Self-defense is not wrongful killing.
Therefore self-defense is not murder.
The state has to prove that Z was not acting in self-defense.

this needs to be looked at in an open and honest manner
Read through those blog posts, read through the things he links to.
He does a really good job of looking at what's happened "in an open & honest manner".

even if Zimmerman didn't directly start the physical fight, he is still at least equally responsible for what happened thereafter
Wrong.
Looking at someone is not reasonable cause to attack them, to hit them, to beat their head against the sidewalk, to break their nose.
Even if you completely ignore Z's claim that once M saw the gun in his waistband (after M had knocked Z to the ground & started beating him), M said he would take it & kill Z with it, having his head bashed against the sidewalk is serious bodily harm and could lead to death.
There are pictures (see update 17) of Z's facial & head injuries. There are grass stains & wetness on the back of his clothes. Not on every surface - the back.

If you are armed and you provoke a fight
Z did not provoke a fight.
Watching someone is not provoking a fight.
(Well, at least not for normal people. Apparently for drug-using violent teenagers it can be.)
 
Top