Judge: Zimmerman Lawyers Can't Put Trayvon Martin on Trial

[bigtree]

____________________________

The Associated Press ?@AP 9m

Judge: Zimmerman lawyers can't mention Trayvon Martin's marijuana use, school suspension or past fighting: http://apne.ws/11mMseN -DC

A Florida judge has placed limits on what George Zimmerman's lawyer can say about the 17-year-old he fatally shot during the neighborhood watch leader's murder trial next month.

Circuit Judge Debra Nelson ruled Tuesday that Zimmerman's attorney won't be able to mention Trayvon Martin's marijuana use, his suspension from school and his past fighting during opening statements.

The judge also ruled that some of the Martin's texts and other social media statements won't be allowed in opening statements, though some of his personal material could be allowed later depending on how the case progresses.


read: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/judge-consider-texts-photos-martin-case

[MrScorpio]

1. Excellent! nt

[JustAnotherGen]

2. Makes me hopeful then

The judge allowing him to be the victim of murder that he is is very, very good.

[Starry Messenger]

3. Awesome news.

That whole thing with the cell phone texts was making me vomit.

[JimDandy]

4. That's the appropriate ruling.

Zimmerman's lawyers knew this wouldn't be allowed, which is why they've been dumping the info in the public forum in the expectation that potential jurors would get it anyway.

[customerserviceguy]

7. You think they've leaked all they had?

I'm sure there's way more to come out in the trial. Besides, O'Mara's setting up all kinds of things for the appeal, if one is necessary.

[WinkyDink]

12. 1. You are ASSuming, "there's way more"; 2. Appeal?! On what grounds?! NONE of this "leak" is

PERTINENT TO THE CASE AT HAND.

[freedom fighter jh]

14. Sounds like Customerserviceguy is saying the defense it trying to cover all its bases.

Regardless of what happens with this leak, it's possible that Zimmerman may be convicted; in that case, he will want to be in a good position to appeal.

Did I get that right, CSG?

[customerserviceguy]

50. You did

Also, a lot of folks here think this case is open and shut regarding GZ's conviction, it's my contention that O'Meara did not take this case on to preside over losing it. He knows that if he can win an eventual acquittal for GZ, his fees would be in the tens of millions of dollars. If we ever do get around to prosecuting banksters, they'll pay whatever he wants for his representation services.

I've long thought that there was enough manufacturable "reasonable doubt" here to get at least a hung jury. The evidence leaked this week showed that O'Meara is willing to play whatever cards he can pull from whatever part of the deck. I don't think he's shown his strongest cards quite yet, he's just trying to unnerve the prosecution. He may even be trying to trick them into spending their time showing that Trayvon Martin was an angel, while O'Meara does the same thing with GZ. Then, it becomes a case of "two people, who met under unfortunate circumstances, who each thought they were in the right in their actions." That could lead to acquittal.

[JimDandy]

22. What I think is that

the judge should issue a gag order and jail the defense team if there are any further leaks.

[Pelican]

52. Wow..

In any case that would just lead to another reason for appeal on the chance of conviction.

[JimDandy]

54. Why? Judges often issue gag orders

in order to have a chance at a fair trial. The judge in the recent mass shooting in the Aurora CO issued gag orders and I have heard of many such judge orders. The parties right to free speech always must be tempered by the right to a fair trial.

[JimDandy]

55. Not true. In fact the Zimmerman

prosecutor has twice had to ask the judge for a gag order against the defendant's lawyer, O'mara, because of his extremely aggressive tactic of trying this case in the public media and putting out info on Travon that was a lie.

O'mara set up a facebook page, twitter feed and an entire website dedicated to slanting this case in Zimmerman's favor. The facebook page was taken down, but the website and twitter account remain.

If I understand it correctly, this kind of tactic is apparently against the rules of the Florida Bar (or implicity frowned on at least). While O'mara has publically apoligized for disseminating lies about Travon, the damage has already been done, which was O'mara's intent. THAT is why the Bar disapproves of such tactics and why gag orders are available to the parties.

So far, the judge has denied both gag order requests, but without prejudice, which will allow the prosecutor to refile if the defense attorney gets even more media aggressive during this pre-trial, juror selection phase.

[Bettie]

5. That is wonderful

The victim won't be on trial, the man who killed him will!

[winterpark]

6. That's great and all, but they leaked all that crap to the local media already and the

poor kid's already been vilified in the local media and the jury pool is already tainted. I'm not happy to say it, but he's walking. This is Florida after all. Black kid killed by white dude? It's the kids fault. White dude gets killed same manner by a Black dude? He's up for life.

[arthritisR_US]

11. This reality is the sinking feeling in the pit of my

stomach.

Edited for a brain fart.

[JimDandy]

24. The prosecution has a good case

and Zimmerman is going to jail.

[davidn3600]

48. Same was said about Casey Anthony

[JimDandy]

53. Very different cases.

Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:45 PM - Edit history (1)

As far as evidence goes, the Zimmerman prosecutors have a much stronger case.

They can prove Travon Martin's cause of death, whereas with Caylee, her cause of death is still listed as "by undetermined means".

The Anthony case was based entirely on circumstancial evidence...there is a lot of direct evidence in this case.

Zimmerman has admitted to killing Travon, whereas Anthony denied killing her daughter.

[tavernier]

33. So if the circumstances had been switched

and Martin had beat Zimmerman's head into the pavement and killed him instead, you don't think a jury would consider all the facts and evidence? I've served on several juries in Florida and all of the people I've served with have been conscientious and sincere and extremely aware of their job, so the Florida crack is unappreciated.

[winterpark]

34. I'm a Floridian. I can crack on Florida. n/t

[Whisp]

8. excellent.

there still is a smidgen of justice thinking judges.

[malaise]

9. Good

Only Zimmerman is on trial for murder

[wercal]

10. The AP story is very vague

Going to the original story from a paper in Orlando:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-trial-stay-hearing-20130528,0,1951849.story

"The attorneys also cannot mention during their opening arguments that the active ingredient of marijuana was found in the teen's system, the judge ruled."

This doesn't rule out bringing it up when the medical examiner testifies.

[WinkyDink]

13. Anybody with a BRAIN knows that marijuana doesn't make a person violent! And the prosecutors have

BRAINS.

[wercal]

21. Well I don't think the prosecution would ever bring it up.

But the defense will. They petitioned the judge for permission to bring it up...so it seems fairly certain that they will, if given the opportunity.

Their angle will be that it makes you paranoid.

This is 2nd Degree Murder, and my interpretation of the law is that one of two hurdles must be cleared. One is stalking, and the law is quite explicit that stalking has to occur at least twice, to be considered.

So, this leaves the 2nd hurdle...which is extreme and willful negligence. Essentially it has to be proven that a reasonable person would have known that death was a likely outcome from following Martin. The defense is going to argue that a reasonable person could not have known that Martin had THC in his system, and that his paranoia would contribute to the confrontation occuring.

Now, they can only make this argument if the judge allows the drug evidence...and she essentially did. They can't make opening arguments about it, but she didn't rule out bringing it up altogether...so the autopsy report will be brought out, and the medical examiner will be questioned about it....and then it will be fair game for the closing argument.

Do you see how that strategy makes no claim that marijuana makes one violent?

In my conspriratorial mind, the state deliberately overcharged (2nd degree murder). That is very hard to prove, and manslaughter would have been alot easier case. Its almost as if they want to lose the 2nd degree case...and flame me if you like, but I just don't see a way they can win the 2nd degree murder case.

[uppityperson]

25. Maybe they'll show the movie Reefer Madness also.

[JimDandy]

36. Zimmerman and every reasonable

person knows death was a very likely outcome as soon as the gun-toting Zimmerman left his vehicle, against the instructions of 911 personnel, to track down a teenage residential pedestrian simply because he was black (and tapes indicate he was a racist).

Nothing forseeable here.

[wercal]

38. Really

What if they put him on the stand and he says he has followed other people sans homicide. It is a very difficult standard to prove.

[JimDandy]

39. You have a *what if...*

What I recounted REALLY happened. And it puts Zimmerman in a truly bad light.

If he followed other Black people in that neighborhood in the dark I hope they come forward. Would be really interesting to hear what they might say.

And if it was only non-blacks that he ever followed, and none of them died, well then that looks Extremely Bad for Zimmerman.

ETA: there's a reason neighborhood watch people are trained to patrol in a car and in PAIRS with a phone and to not leave the car--so exactly this situation doesn't happen. That Zimmerman ignored all that safety training is a huge reason this was forseeable. The prosecution has an abundance of neighborhood watch people and literature they can use to show that this was incredibly forseeable.

[wercal]

42. Where do I start

"What I recounted REALLY happened"

Actually I didn't want to mention it before, but that is not entirely true. Your statement: "Zimmerman left his vehicle, against the instructions of 911 personnel" is not true. If you listen to the tapes, the operator asks him if he is following Martin, and tells him not to ("you don't need to do that&quot . So its not true that he was admonished from leaving the vehicle, and he violated that order. I hope we can agree on that, ok? The only open question is whether or not Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin...and there are no witnesses to that, other than Zimmerman.

And "and tapes indicate he was a racist" will have to be backed up with an actual quote from the tapes...as I suspect you are referring to the edited version used by the media, while the original recording is far less damning. So I believe that to be an innaccurate statement as well.

On to whether or not he followed other people in the past...black, white whatever. Zimmerman's history of being a nosey busy body who called 911 at the drop of a hat is going to work in his favor, as far as a 2nd degree murder charge is concerned - not the other way around. If the defense can establish that he has indeed followed other people in the past, without a homocide, the litmus test for gross negligence is blown out of the water.

Your final paragraph presumes that Zimmerman has gone through some sort of formal neighborhood watch training...and his violation of that training establishes willful negligence. However, the general concensus is that he was not part of an official watch program, and I have never read that he had any training. As screwed up as it sounds, this works in his favor.

I believe that if this had been a manslaughter charge, the defense would have been sufficiently spooked enough to seek a plea deal, Zimmerman may have spent 15 years in prison, and there never would have been a trial. However, now that they are going all in on a 2nd degree murder charge, the state is very much at risk of not winning...and Zimmerman goes free.

[JimDandy]

46. Thinking about what you wrote...

I'll get back to you on this.

[WinkyDink]

37. I meant in prosecutorial rebuttal!

[Warpy]

20. That only explains why he went out for those Skittles

and a soft drink.

Zimmerman's lawyers have tried and convicted Martin in the press. Now they will piss and moan about not being able to get a fair trial for poor misunderstood Zimmerman.

[catbyte]

15. That's good, but I still have a bad feeling about this one.

I hope I'm wrong, though. I just don't see a Florida jury giving an African American kid the benefit of the doubt over a much lighter defendant. Isn't that a sad commentary on our society?

[Warpy]

19. Zimmerman's lawyers will use every filthy trick in the book

and have probably honed their skills over years of trying to pillory a rape victim to get his or her scumbag attacker off Scot free.

Let's hope this judge is as wise to that as he is to the initial smear campaign against Martin in the press. Let's hope he carries out a threat of contempt citations against the defense team.

[rhett o rick]

47. I am disappointed that you would disparage the defense. Not an attitude I expect

from a "politically liberal person". Our system of justice works because the defense can try everything legal to get an acquittal. The prosecutors have the same obligation. And the judge is to see that they both stay within the rules of law.

Nancy Grace thinks there should be no defense allowed. Is that what you think?

[Warpy]

49. I respect the defense when they earn it

I absolutely do not approve of Zimmerman's defense team trying to try a dead kid in the press, which is what they're currently doing. Shame on them.

And shame on anyone who can't tell the difference.

[treestar]

16. Good

The victim should not be on trial.

[Warpy]

17. That's what I was hoping the judge would say

Who Martin was is irrelevant to the case.

[libodem]

18. Good

Wonder if Zim's history of domestic and public tantrums, prescriptions for psych meds, spotty employment history, and failure to complete school, will be admissible? He is a worthless scum with a giant ego. Hope he rots in prison for a good 20, years.

[defacto7]

32. and Zim's daddy, the former judge

is helping direct traffic in the background I'm sure. Why don't we hear about him anymore?

[libodem]

40. Exactly

I hope he also has a civil suit thrown at him, for depriving the family of seeing Travon, live out his life.
Zimmerman, should not get one dime from perpetrating this crime. No way should he prosper by sitting on his ass and having donations sent to him. That money needs to go to Travon's surviving family.

[freshwest]

43. +1,000. If any laundry comes out, put it all out. But I'm betting neither will be permitted.

[Quixote1818]

23. Of course, what does his marijuana use have to do with anything?

75% of kids in HS have tried marijuana. We have presidents who have done drugs. Big fucking deal.

[polly7]

26. Good! I couldn't believe what I was hearing re bringing all of this stuff in. Yay Judge! nt.

[Savannahmann]

27. I suppose I'm going to be the odd man out here.

First, let me say that the shooting of Travon Martin was in no way justified by any stretch of the imagination IMO.

That aside, the defendant has the right to a fair trail, and a right to introduce factual information in his defense. What the Judge has just done, is give Zimmerman years of appeals and claims of a biased trial. The argument is predictable. Because they could not bring the character of the victim into evidence, the defendant was denied a fair trial because his story could have been supported by the history of Martin.

The Prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the crime to the Jury. I don't think that the information suppressed would have made much if any difference, but the appeals process will be argued that Zimmerman was denied a fair trial because of that.

Also, if the evidence is allowed later, the Jury will learn that the evidence was suppressed, and then allowed. Or worse, hear from the media that evidence was suppressed. In their place, I would wonder what else I wasn't being told. What else am I not allowed to consider or be made aware of.

Conclusion. The evidence would not have affected the outcome, and would most likely not have been enough to create a reasonable doubt. The obvious answer to that evidence was that no matter what someone has done in the past, he didn't deserve to die. He was unarmed, and not violating any laws when he was confronted by the hyper aggressive self appointed vigilante who disobeyed instructions from the 911 dispatcher and instigated a conflict resulting in the death of the victim. Since there was no way that Zimmerman could have known the history of Martin, there is no way that could have affected his judgment on that fatal night. Half an hour on cross examination of Zimmerman on if he knew the information at the time to clearly show he did not. Then a strong closing argument on the part of the Prosecution, and the ground for an appeal, and possible retrial are gone.

You don't shoot unarmed people in the middle of the street. That is not by any stretch of the imagination self defense.

[CincyDem]

28. Great ruling

Anything less is effectively saying that the defense can pick and chose from the sum total of an individual's life to warrant them being murdered.

The illogical endpoint of letting this kind of crap into a court room would be "...and it fifth grade, Billy said he took his lunch money...and that's why my client shot him in the back 10 years later".

Good to see a judge in Florida can see through these shenanigans.

[ZRT2209]

29. their plan was to poison the jury pool with info they knew would not be admissible in court

[freshwest]

44. With Fox Noise playing the same tune in the background, jury selection will be hard.

[Blue_Tires]

30. Finally...That's all I've been trying to say from the start...

[Terra Alta]

31. Good.

Trayvon isn't the one on trial here. He is the victim and should be treated as such.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

35. I don't think they ever intended it to be used at trial --

I think this was strictly a "poisoning the jury pool" move on Defense's part.

[uponit7771]

41. Yeap, the victim wasn't perfect so they deserved to die defense...it's overtly stupid

[Cha]

45. Thank Goodness.. because it really is irrelevant to this

trail.

thanks bigtree!

[Atman]

51. It's all about poisoning the jury pool.

Any first year law student would have known none of that stuff would have been admissible, but by merely asking, it's now all over the news before jury selection has even begun. They knew what they were doing.