Interesting take on the Zimmerman trial.

Taichiliberal

Shaken, not stirred!
10 Reasons Lawyers Say Florida's Law Enforcement Threw Away George Zimmerman's Case
A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts say Zimmerman didn't face anything like a serious trial.
August 6, 2013




Florida law enforcement, from the local police to the special prosecutor overseeing the Trayvon Martin case, did not want to see George Zimmerman convicted of murder and deliberately threw away the case, allowing their prosecution to crumble. A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts who know jury trials and courtroom procedure say this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the parade of otherwise incoherent missteps by George Zimmerman’s prosecutors.

“I find it personally difficult to believe it was not thrown,” said Warren Ingber, a New York-based attorney who has practiced law for decades. “I am far from alone in this assessment, and it reveals even harder truth why this case was a miscarriage of justice.”




http://www.alternet.org/civil-liber...w-enforcement-threw-ryan-zimmermans-case-away
 
they never gave the jury an alternative to what happened.

They could have compiled all the evidence to show how what the ear witness heard comported with the physical evidence and what Zimmy said happened did not.


yes they blew it
 
this is a complete liberal fabrication from start to finish. If you bozos hadn't whined about rushing the entire process because of your idiot ideology about anti self defense, you MIGHT have had a different outcome. you didn't, it didn't, and you lost. now you want to blame everyone else but yourselves, which is complete bullshit. typical lib thinking (it's not my fault)
 
they never gave the jury an alternative to what happened.

They could have compiled all the evidence to show how what the ear witness heard comported with the physical evidence and what Zimmy said happened did not.


yes they blew it


What would the alternative be....
Zimmerman beat himself up ?
Zimmerman attacked Martin yet never laid a finger on him in the fight ?
Zimmerman called the cops to set up an elaborate ruse ?
 
Imagine the public outrage in a small southern town after the killing of a young black male. A town so embroiled in it's history of racism by the police department it was still reeling from a recent scandal.

So what to do? Have the republican teabagger governor appoint a republican-appointed State Attorney from a large republican county and load the prosecution with white attorneys and a white jury, save one Hispanic, and secure a not guilty verdict for the judge's son with a prosecution so weak and flawed only a black could have been found guilty.

And there you have it. Justice, Florida style.
 
Imagine the public outrage in a small southern town after the killing of a young black male. A town so embroiled in it's history of racism by the police department it was still reeling from a recent scandal.

So what to do? Have the republican teabagger governor appoint a republican-appointed State Attorney from a large republican county and load the prosecution with white attorneys and a white jury, save one Hispanic, and secure a not guilty verdict for the judge's son with a prosecution so weak and flawed only a black could have been found guilty.

And there you have it. Justice, Florida style.

EXACTLY
 
ebony1.jpg


ebony_covers_3.JPG


ebony_covers_2.JPG


Ebony_covers_1.JPG
 
this is a complete liberal fabrication from start to finish. If you bozos hadn't whined about rushing the entire process because of your idiot ideology about anti self defense, you MIGHT have had a different outcome. you didn't, it didn't, and you lost. now you want to blame everyone else but yourselves, which is complete bullshit. typical lib thinking (it's not my fault)

Typical smoke blowing by a libertarian lunkhead......Note that STY IGNORES ALL THE POINTS put forth in the article. He doesn't have the brains or guts to honestly, rationally discuss them out of fear that they might lead to doubt as to the verdict of the trial. So like the typical teabagger/neocon parrot he swears he's not, STY just sticks out his tongue like a child who cheated but is happy with his victory none-the-less.
 
Originally Posted by evince View Post
they never gave the jury an alternative to what happened.

They could have compiled all the evidence to show how what the ear witness heard comported with the physical evidence and what Zimmy said happened did not.


yes they blew it

What would the alternative be....
Zimmerman beat himself up ? Zimmerman instigated/initiated the confrontation by tailing an innocent man and getting out of his vehicle to continue pursuit AFTER MARTIN RAN AWAY AND HE WAS INFORMING THE COPS SO.
Zimmerman attacked Martin yet never laid a finger on him in the fight ? No was said there wasn't a fight....the question remains as to why there was none of Zimmerman's blood or DNA on Martin...IF Zimmerman's tale was accurate.
Zimmerman called the cops to set up an elaborate ruse ? No stupid, he just killed a man he was on the phone to the cops describing his pursuit thereof. He was a prime suspect.

Read the article, you stupid bastard. Discuss the points put forth there, if you have the guts.
 
Zimmerman would have been found guilty of stalking and harassment in almost any other state. Florida laws changed the standard definition of these two where it has to re-occur. One time of harassing or stalking someone there isn't considered harassment by law.

The gun bangers in America want to prove that everyone with a gun is a good citizen because they are scared of their own lies. If it isn't that it's racism. No one can tell me why we have people literally CELEBRATING the verdict when everyone knows it was Zimmermans bad decision making that lead to a shooting. They only justify what he did because of one of the two reasons above.

All their arguments are "not in Florida law"...because they think that government is perfect in every way and can never be wrong.....:awesome:

I already saw them supporting the gunman in other stories where the gunman was completely wrong in their actions. They decided against background checks and now they are trying to smooth all these cases over.....making them look like idiots.......they have no clue what they are doing to their party.
 
Zimmerman would have been found guilty of stalking and harassment in almost any other state. Florida laws changed the standard definition of these two where it has to re-occur. One time of harassing or stalking someone there isn't considered harassment by law.

The gun bangers in America want to prove that everyone with a gun is a good citizen because they are scared of their own lies. If it isn't that it's racism. No one can tell me why we have people literally CELEBRATING the verdict when everyone knows it was Zimmermans bad decision making that lead to a shooting. They only justify what he did because of one of the two reasons above.

All their arguments are "not in Florida law"...because they think that government is perfect in every way and can never be wrong.....:awesome:

I already saw them supporting the gunman in other stories where the gunman was completely wrong in their actions. They decided against background checks and now they are trying to smooth all these cases over.....making them look like idiots.......they have no clue what they are doing to their party.

Did you some cheese to go with your sour grape whine, or would you rather just dry your tears?

NB0004_crying_towel__58508.1356419937.1280.1280.jpg
 
Did you some cheese to go with your sour grape whine, or would you rather just dry your tears?

Hi. I'm the English language. Learn me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Typical smoke blowing by a libertarian lunkhead......Note that STY IGNORES ALL THE POINTS put forth in the article. He doesn't have the brains or guts to honestly, rationally discuss them out of fear that they might lead to doubt as to the verdict of the trial. So like the typical teabagger/neocon parrot he swears he's not, STY just sticks out his tongue like a child who cheated but is happy with his victory none-the-less.
more denial of reality. the only difference between you and desh concerning your idiocy is you use more words to sound more educated. that is all.
 
Read the article, you stupid bastard. Discuss the points put forth there, if you have the guts.
OK ....lets start...

1. There was enough evidence to convict, despite biased police work. That assessment “is itself a miracle,” Ingber wrote, citing how the Sanford, Florida police handled the killing. “Martin’s body lay in the morgue as a John Doe for three days while his mother was asking for his whereabouts.

8 in the morning, 12 hours since the shooting that took place, police were with Martins mother...and she was informed of the shooting and death of her son

His cell phone records indicated he was on the phone as he was being killed. The person he was on with had no idea where he was.
Meanwhile his admitted killer was on the loose and allowed to produce exculpatory evidence while crime scene evidence was deteriorating. It appears from videos of Zimmerman ‘strolling’ into custody that he was not that badly hurt.

Zimmerman had every right to produce exculpatory evidence to defend himself...
Police were at the "crime" scene minutes after it happened and secured it
It appears ?...Strolling ?...obvious bias
He never claim to be "badly" hurt...the damage was plain for everyone to see and examine


But in Florida the right of self-defense includes, for whites, the freedom to exculpate oneself.

As it does everywhere in the entire United States

And when that wasn’t enough, the police stepped in, as when the lead detective Chris Serino told Zimmerman the screams for help were his, not Martin’s, over his objection.”

Bulllshit lie....Zimmerman did not object to the voice being his...he merely said "it didn't sound like him"....obviously, under the stress and screaming for someone to
help him, his normal voice and manner of normal speech is not natural...as it is for every human being on the planet...




2. The governor’s handpicked prosecutor enters with an agenda. “No account of this trial is complete if it does not start with how the deck was stacked before the trial took place,” Ingber said. “But it continues in the identity of the person that Florida’s [Republican] Gov. Rick Scott selected to prosecute the case: Angela Corey, the prosecutor who sentenced Marissa Alexander [a black woman] to 20 years for firing a gun into the air in her own garage in defense against a convicted abuser of women. I’ll leave it to Alan Dershowitz, who knows the law of defamation, to describe her professional lapses that ‘bordered on criminal conduct.’”

Gov's politics in irrelevant...
Prosecutor's DO NOT sentence the person on trial, and
Corey's case is irrelevant to the Zimmerman matter...
 
3. No change of venue was demanded. There were a series of decisions made by the prosecutors that incrementally lowered their chances of obtaining a conviction. The first concerned not seeking a jury trial in another county. The Seminole County district attorney and multiple judges recused themselves, “proof that the case was a political hot potato and that there was a fear that there would be negative political ramifications following a Zimmerman verdict,” Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry wrote. But the state did not want to move the trial.

No change of venue was demanded....
Are you seriously claiming the prosecutor was on Zimmerman's side ? or the judge ?.....whatever, I can't dispute your opinion....you can believe in ufo's if you want to...
State Attorney Angela Corey(the prosecutor)even withheld evidence from the defense to save her case...guess that makes no difference to you...

4. The early mishandling of the jury. Prosecutors meekly tried to remove two jurors with very strong pro-Zimmerman biases, but did not use more forceful “preemptory challenges,” DeBerry noted. “Juror B-37… should never have been let onto the jury after she said there were ‘riots’ in Sanford over this case,” Ingber added.

How does admitting a fact make you biased ?
How does reality make you biased ?....

“How was that allowed to occur? B-37’s interview is worth a listen.” She called Martin a “boy of color” (at 10.41) and mentioned “rioting” twice (12.12 and 14.32), calling it “organized” by Martin supporters and adding that she didn’t trust mainstream media.

Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al and many of "people of color" use that term often....why is it a problem ?
Mention rioting and that it was organized by Martin supporters?.....again, its the truth....its was the reality....does recognizing truth and reality make you biased ?
I think not....I'd call that an informed, educated, intelligent and aware citizen....not what you clowns want on a jury, and
only a fool would put 100% trust in msm after what we've seen for the last decade or more.....
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Typical smoke blowing by a libertarian lunkhead......Note that STY IGNORES ALL THE POINTS put forth in the article. He doesn't have the brains or guts to honestly, rationally discuss them out of fear that they might lead to doubt as to the verdict of the trial. So like the typical teabagger/neocon parrot he swears he's not, STY just sticks out his tongue like a child who cheated but is happy with his victory none-the-less.

more denial of reality. the only difference between you and desh concerning your idiocy is you use more words to sound more educated. that is all.

Translaltion: this intellectually impotent coward doesn't have the guts to discuss the details of the material provided...typical libertarian lunkhead smokescreen.

Unless STY grows a pair, I'll just ignore his foot stomping and oft repeated mantras, lies and smokescreen.
 
3. No change of venue was demanded. There were a series of decisions made by the prosecutors that incrementally lowered their chances of obtaining a conviction. The first concerned not seeking a jury trial in another county. The Seminole County district attorney and multiple judges recused themselves, “proof that the case was a political hot potato and that there was a fear that there would be negative political ramifications following a Zimmerman verdict,” Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry wrote. But the state did not want to move the trial.

No change of venue was demanded....
Are you seriously claiming the prosecutor was on Zimmerman's side ? or the judge ?.....whatever, I can't dispute your opinion....you can believe in ufo's if you want to...
State Attorney Angela Corey(the prosecutor)even withheld evidence from the defense to save her case...guess that makes no difference to you...


You're not too bright, are ya bunky? YOU even point out that the prosecution with held evidence. As the lawyers in the article show, that was (along with other actions) a rookie mistake that cost her the case. So either she's incompetent or just wasn't motivated enough (or motivated against) winning that case. And of course, you IGNORE the little ditty regarding the recusing of multiple local judges, etc.

4. The early mishandling of the jury. Prosecutors meekly tried to remove two jurors with very strong pro-Zimmerman biases, but did not use more forceful “preemptory challenges,” DeBerry noted. “Juror B-37… should never have been let onto the jury after she said there were ‘riots’ in Sanford over this case,” Ingber added.

How does admitting a fact make you biased ?
How does reality make you biased ?....



How does not comprehending what you read make you think you can ask stupid questions, Nova? Let me dumb it down for you...BIASED jurors should NOT be let unto the jury whether you are defense or prosecution. Yet this clown barely put up an objection.
“How was that allowed to occur? B-37’s interview is worth a listen.” She called Martin a “boy of color” (at 10.41) and mentioned “rioting” twice (12.12 and 14.32), calling it “organized” by Martin supporters and adding that she didn’t trust mainstream media.

Jesse Jackson and Rev. Al and many of "people of color" use that term often....why is it a problem ?
Mention rioting and that it was organized by Martin supporters?.....again, its the truth....its was the reality....does recognizing truth and reality make you biased ?

I think not....I'd call that an informed, educated, intelligent and aware citizen....not what you clowns want on a jury, and
only a fool would put 100% trust in msm after what we've seen for the last decade or more.....

Here's a truth you should recognize......the CONTEXT OF HOW THE TERM WAS USED REEKED OF BIAS...big difference between a white person referring to protests as "riots" because black folk are involved.

But you got one thing right...YOU DON'T THINK. Let me know when you do.
 
Back
Top