BS: George Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:23 AM

Ever hear the words "Neighborhood Watch"? What do you think they do? What do you think HE thought they did? WHAT HAVE THEY DONE IN THE PAST?????

Zimmerman was a one-man "Neighborhood Watch" who had been a bit of a pain to the local police in the past. This is what I read in the St. Pete Times in the weeks after the incident.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 10:38 AM

1. Neighborhood watch people are not permitted to carry firearms in most cases, and in ALL cases are subject to the oversight and direction of law enforcement personnel.

Bruce, without "stand your ground" He has no business following "suspected burglers."

"Stand your ground" laws do not apply to someone behaving as Zimmerman did, if you read up on their provisions. That's in all probability why it wasn't tendered he & his lawyers knew it wouldn't fly. Evem WITH "stand your ground" he had no business following "suspected burglars" especially after being told not to do so by law enforcement.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:05 AM

>>People do dumb things- that DOES NOT make them "murderers". <<

The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:44 AM

"The person picking the fight cannot claim "self defense" if it turns deadly. That is just common sense."

So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 11:59 AM

So if Zimmerman yelled "stop" and Martin swung at him??? Who picked THAT fight?

In the real world Zimmerman for stalking Martin and then confronting him for no real reason and even though he had been told by the dispatcher not to. In Florida, who knows?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:14 PM

"for no real reason"


There HAVE been reasons stated- but the lynch mob has ignored them.

. THOUGHT he was acting as a Neighborhood watch member. He saw someone HE thought was acting in a suspicious manner- WHICH HE CALLED IN. He made ( the bad) choice to follow the suspect, thinking he was in the process of committing a crime. Perhaps he yelled for him to stop- DO YOU KNOW OTHERWISE?

Z is now on the ground having his head beaten against the pavement.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO AT THAT POINT??????

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:21 PM

Bobert, Please go back and read YOUR first post, and my reply. It seems you have never =bothered to read my replies, nor have you addressed the point of this thread. I restate:


Date: 31 May 13 - 12:39 PM

So, Bobert,

YOU think that it is ok to violate the law when YOU think someone is guilty? YOU want to have him get off because that law was violated?

THAT is what this thread is about- NOT his innocence or guilt, but the illegal actions of those, like you , that have decided it does not matter if he gets a fair or legal trial.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:30 PM

Those aren't "reasons" Beardy - they're suppositions, BS and smoke.

As usual.

I suppose if he thought he was the Lone Ranger or Spiderman that would be just fine with you as well?

Does reality have no meaning for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:37 PM

As someone who has been horrified by lynchings and all sorts of murders perpetrated by racists and homophobes in my 72 years on earth, I deeply resent BB's continual use of the word lynching as applied to those of us who disagree with him. Christ, I don't even believe in capital punishment. I don't believe BB is using the word as a figure of speech. I believe he has some sort of fixation with lynching which needs to be addressed by mental health professionals.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 12:42 PM

The law matters.

IF you "lynch" Zimmerman, and violate the law, he can be released and get off EVEN IF HE IS FOUND GUILTY.

I do not believe that this is what so many posters here WANT, but it is what they are supporting.

Then they can scream about how unjust and racist the system is, while the real problem is that they were willing to go along with ANYTHING that looked like a way to convict Zimmerman, regardless of it's legality.

THAT is "lynching" - violating the law in order to punish someone YOU think is guilty.

I do not judge whether Z. is guilty, (probably) but regardless, he deserves the same legal protections that ANY accused person should get. Deny him those protections, and you have NO reason to complain when the next accused person is railroaded into jail, or hung.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:03 PM

Lynching. There he goes again. Poor BB.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:06 PM

You are the ones with the rope and the tree....

I just wonder if you will wear black sheets?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:21 PM

When one (like BB) is irrational and argumentative, that's indicative of some deep-seated hostility which, if not treated will worsen. Googled black sheets. Target is having a great sale on black sheets.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: olddude
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 01:40 PM

The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:46 PM

Elmore, Beardy's fixation with lynching is only one of a host of his problems which need to be addressed by mental health professionals.

Don't get him started calling anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag" - as if Jews were a "race".

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:50 PM

Greggie,

"anyone who disagrees with him a "racist scumbag""

NO. Only YOU, since you have proven by your posts that you think somneone who is "Black, and a Democrat" is a "dumb Ni**er".


YOUR words, NOT mine, you lying racist scumbag.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 02:56 PM

Greg F.:BB should be ignored, but that's not easy.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:03 PM

There, there BB, calm down . I can recommend a good shrink, if you'll mail me a SASE with $100 in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 03:06 PM

Actually, Elmore, he's amusing in small doses - kind of like a toddler throwing a tantrum.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:03 PM

Your penchant for foul language and personal
attacks is disgusting Greg.
People like you and Elmore ruin the Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:16 PM

Guest, Guest. Coming from a troll like you, that's a compliment. Is that you Bruce? Or Songwronger? Or the gone but not forgotten Henry Krinkle?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: catspaw49
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 04:19 PM

How? Are you here for this type of thread? If so you need to know they get raw. Don't come into these and you'll be a happy camper as there are lots of fine musical threads and some pretty fair jokes and other fun BS. If you think any thread relating to this case would be clean and pristine, you'd be wrong!

So as the old saying goes, "If you can't stand the heat you can fuckin' blow me." Now go off and have a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 07:20 PM

Wow... More shit than a manure factory...

First, bb...

1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly...

2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh???

3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin...

Do you get common sense, dude...

Quit with the BS games... They are retarded... No, not even that intelligent...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:40 PM

"
The reason for discovery is that no side knows what is relevant or not. All information must be given to the attorney that is the law and his constitutional right. I cannot stand Zimmerman from what I have read and heard, what occurred should not have occurred had he followed the police order. But .. the law is the law. He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed"

At last a reasonable human to debate with!!

I totally see what you mean, but doesn't discovery apply to relevant information? To evidence the prosecution will use in its case or evidence that weakens the prosecutions case? If Zimmerman is defending himself saying that he had reasonable fear for his life. He can't say he had based that fear based on deleted picture in the kid's cellphone. He is not alleging that the kid threatened him with the marijuana leaves or the gun in the picture. The essentials of the crime and his claim of self defense is what happened that night and how he came to be there in that deadly dangerous situation. The kids prior, private life have NOTHING to do with the crime.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 08:46 PM

Discovery isn't supposed to be an open ended fishing expedition...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Jun 13 - 09:02 PM

BTW, in my 7:20 post...

Correction: "Zimmerman would not have murdered Martin"...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 02:48 AM

Bah. Why don't people look shit up. From Cornell University: -

"Upon a defendant's request, the government must permit the defendant to inspect and to copy or photograph books, papers, documents, data, photographs, tangible objects, buildings or places, or copies or portions of any of these items, if the item is within the government's possession, custody, or control and:

(i) the item is material to preparing the defense;

(ii) the government intends to use the item in its case-in-chief at trial; or

(iii) the item was obtained from or belongs to the defendant".



So in the present case the key question is whether the item is material to preparing the defence. While the material MIGHT be evidential of Martin's character, it seems to me that that what may be in issue (that is not the same thing as what will necessarily be in issue) is what Zimmerman reasonably believed Martin's intentions to be that night. It is very hard indeed to see how month-old photos that Zimmerman had never seen could influence Zimmerman's belief on that night.

It looks to me therefore as if the photos were not discoverable.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:25 AM

""He will only get grounds for either a new trial or a dismissal if the law isn't followed.""

And that is the only consideration that should decide what is done with anything which might later be ruled admissible by a Court of Appeal.

It isn't about getting him falsely convicted, it's about ensuring that he cannot overturn a conviction on a technicality.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 05:35 AM

Hadn't seen that when I answered Dan's post Richard, but that would seem to make the whole thing a storm in a rather dirty teacup.

After all, one might suppose that both sets of lawyers should know this, so Bobert may be right about the shit stirring intentions of a dodgy defence brief.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:22 AM

Bobert,


"1. I challenged you to use your wildest imagination to explain a situation where Martin's pictures that were taken well before he was murdered amounted to evidence... You didn't answer that question at all... You just played silly..."


I GAVE you the text message that I thought would be significant evidence- which you ignored.



"2. Then you say that Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from getting his pounded in the ground... First, if you come at me with a gun and I can find a way to defend myself then guess what... If it means pounding your head in the ground I'm gonna do it... Duhhhhh???"


IF he had the gun out. IF he had it concealed, and called out, AND WAS ATTACKED by Martin, he WAS defending himself.




"3. Bottom line, had Zimmerman ************OBEYED************* the police and stayed in his fucking car then two things would not have occurred that night... First, there would have been no self-defense my Martin and, two, Martin would not have murdered Martin...


THIS I agree with. As do MOST here that you refuse to be reasonable in this discussion with.

I stated it was a BAD DECISION.



Now, about the thread topic.

1.
DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off,

2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG????


Two YES or NO questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM

BB: Could you please stop YELLING?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:04 AM

Elmore,

Could you please address the thread topic?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:08 AM

He not only YELLS but his answers/responses make no sense at all..,. He avoids common sense like it was a radiation pit...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:15 AM

Bobert, Try addressing the thread topic

YES or NO to my two stated questions???


Or are you saying you are just here to be a shithead about the topic, preventing reasonable discussion of the legal points involved?


Getting your hemp rope ready? Find a nice tall tree??

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:17 AM

In case you have problems scrolling :



1. DO YOU AGREE that the procecutor has now made it easier for Zimmerman to get off,

2. and that the ILLEGAL withholding of evidence from the defense was WRONG????


Two YES or NO questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 09:28 AM

O.k. BB the thread topic was introduced by someone who loves to cause trouble, and is nasty and profane when someone disagrees with him. This thread topic would be a total waste were it not for intelligent, thoughtful responses by many Mudcatters. For my thoughts on this thread topic, see my May 31 entry.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:04 AM

BB says "Address the thread topic." Okay. Hellooooooh thread topic. This thread topic, like pornography, has no redeeming social value.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:07 AM

Elmore,

In your first post, you were a wit.

By now, you are less than a nit-wit.




But a clever one, I will allow.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Elmore
Date: 06 Jun 13 - 10:31 AM

BB: This aged, clever nit-wit says good night and good luck. ( The good luck part may be overstated.)

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 09:42 AM

"SANFORD, Fla. (AP) -- For a second day in a row, a Florida judge is weighing whether to allow certain voice experts to testify at the trial of a neighborhood watch volunteer charged in the fatal shooting of an unarmed teen.

Circuit Judge Debra Nelson is listening Friday to testimony from voice experts about whether witnesses with expertise in speech identification should be allowed to testify when George Zimmerman's trial starts next week.

Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder for killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin during a struggle in a gated community. He is pleading not guilty, claiming self-defense.

Neighbors called 911 during the fight and cries for help can be heard on the recordings.

Martin's family claim the cries came from the teen while Zimmerman's father has testified they were those of his son.'

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 12:07 PM

So What, Beardy?

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 05:48 PM

First of all, who cares???

What we are getting is a a lot of noise which is being used as a smokescreen from the facts of the case... The facts do not bode well for Zimmermen so that means its time to...

...change the subject...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:13 PM

(posted this once already; it doesn't seem to have taken - so apologies if it eventually shows up twice...)

I've already made it pretty clear where I stand on this, i.e.:
I'm with BB (and a few others) in believing that you don't get to choose which bits of the law should apply to a case depending on who you think is guilty/innocent.

I'm with Bobert (and many others) in thinking that: this evidence is not/should not be considered admissible evidence; that the defense should not have been allowed to release it to the media/the media should not have been allowed to use it; this may well "poison the well"; and it seems all too likely that justice will not be served.

I don't see what was so terrible about the original post; it contained factual info that struck me as worth sharing.

In BB's third post, he says, "Regardless of one's opinion of the shooting, it deserves to be tried in a fair, legal fashion, without opening up unwarranted areas for appeals or declarations of mistrial."

To me, that is a pretty sensible assessment of the situation (one which I think even Bobert would agree with). In other words: if you feel Zimmerman should not "get off", you (logically) would not want the prosecution to be playing fast & loose with the law, because that increases the chance(s) that Zimmerman will get off due to a mistrial.

Seems to me that folks on this thread actually agree when it comes down to it - they just don't seem to be understanding what each other are saying (getting personal/saying nasty things doesn't help, of course).

When people keep saying the same things over and over and still not understanding each other, perhaps it's time to call it a day (or should that be "call it a thread"?). Just a thought...

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 07 Jun 13 - 08:26 PM

The problem here, YY, is that the judge is falling down on his job... His job is to insure that the trial will be untainted... He has allowed Zimmerman's attorney to use the media to poison the jury pool... That's exactly what Johnny Cochran did back in the early 90s when he got O.J. Simpson off when there was a mountain of evidence that O'J. did the crime...

My problem is with judges who sit in Southern states... The US has a history of looking the other way... Unfortunately, when it comes down to these kinds of crimes, the South has a very bad track record...

In 1979 in Greensboro, North Carolina, there was a non-violent, peaceful and legal civil rights march... The KKK set up shop on the march route and shot and killed 5 marchers... Not one ever was charged...

The South has a way of looking the other way when it comes to these kinds of things...

I know all too well... I was born in the South... Raised in the South... Educated in the South and still here... I've seen enough to suspect that one day we will look back on this trial as an injustice...

Oh, well???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: YorkshireYankee
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 08:43 AM

Wouldn't disagree with any of that, Bobert.

Suspect BB wouldn't, either...

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:23 AM

Works for me too!

I hate to say it, but I suspected things would go this way.

Zimmerman should have been tried somewhere far away from the town whose law enforcement tried to ignore the death of Trayvon Martin, and let his killer go without the circumstances even being investigated.

It took a public outcry to make them earn their pay, and even then the investigation was heavily slanted in the killer's favour, with some rather suspect cosmetically enhanced photos of dubious origin being published.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 09:26 AM

No, YY... I doubt if bb would agree with me... All along he has sounded as if it's Zimmerman who is getting the shaft...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 Jun 13 - 11:33 AM

Suspect BB wouldn't [disagree], either...

Oh, you kidder, you. That really IS amusing.

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Jun 13 - 09:37 PM

Seems that the people behind paying for Zimmerman's defense won't be happy until Zimmerman is elevated to sainthood...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Zimmerman defense-' Evidence withheld'
From: beardedbruce
Date: 10 Jun 13 - 09:00 AM

What **I** want to see is a fair trial, without lynching Zimmerman because of past injustices in the justice system.



"There had been a rash of recent break-ins at the Retreat, and Zimmerman was wary of strangers walking through the complex.
He was well-known to police dispatchers for his regular calls reporting suspicious people and events.
Martin was walking back from a convenience store after buying ice tea and Skittles. It was raining, and he was wearing a hoodie.
Zimmerman called 911, got out of his vehicle and followed Martin behind the townhomes despite being told not to by a police dispatcher.
'These a*******, they always get away,' Zimmerman said on the call. Zimmerman, who had a concealed weapons permit, was armed.
The two then got into a struggle. Zimmerman told police he had lost sight of Martin, and that Martin circled back and attacked him as he walked back to his truck. Prosecutors say he tracked down Martin and started the fight.
Zimmerman told police Martin punched him in the nose, knocking him down, and then got on top of him and began banging Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.
Photos taken after the fight show Zimmerman with a broken nose, bruises and bloody cuts on the back of his head. He said that when Martin spotted his gun holstered around his waist under his clothes, he said: 'You are going to die tonight.'
Zimmerman said he grabbed the gun first and fired. Martin died at the scene."