Judge: Trayvon Martin’s Pot Use Can Be Included In Trial

[CatWoman]

SANFORD, Fla. (AP) — A Florida judge has ruled that jurors at George Zimmerman trial may be told that Trayvon Martin had small amounts of marijuana in his body when he died.

Judge Debra Nelson on Monday denied a prosecution request to keep out parts of a toxicology report that shows Martin had small amounts of marijuana in his system.

Prosecutors argued the information would be prejudicial.

But defense attorneys said it was relevant since Zimmerman believed Martin was under the influence at the time he spotted him in his neighborhood.

Zimmerman is pleading not guilty to second-degree murder. He is claiming he fatally shot Martin in self-defense.




http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/judge-trayvon-martins-pot-use-can-be-included-in-trial.php?m=1

[hlthe2b]

1. How abhorrent is this, given they didn't even drug/alcohol test Zimmerman, his killer?

Assholes.

[premium]

3. They didn't have probable cause for a warrant

to test Zimmerman that night, they could ask him, but they couldn't force him.

[hlthe2b]

4. underscores the insanity of Florida laws (as though we didn't already know that) and the

abhorrence of the judicial system to so prejudice the jury this way by allowing this irrelevant information on Martin's THC measurement in.. It is automatic that police officers who fire their weapons are tested in most states--should also be the case for civilians.

Hopefully those women on the jury are smart enough (and experienced enough in life) to know that miniscule THC measurements mean NOTHING.

[premium]

10. This isn't just FL

it's federal, 4th Amendment prevents this unless there's probable cause for a warrant.

[hlthe2b]

11. Had the racist cops not covered for him that night, there was probable cause to arrest him

They certainly could have blood tested him, had they charged him with a gun related charge with respect to Trayvon's death.

[premium]

19. I'm sorry, but that's just not true,

unless there is probable cause to believe that he was impaired, there would be no way any judge would sign a warrant for a test. Just because someone is arrested for a shooting doesn't give police free rein to blood test without a warrant backed by probable cause evidence.

[hlthe2b]

21. An unxlained fatal shooting of an unarmed teen by someone arguing that he was attacked...

but whose story was inconsistent, COULD well have given them probable cause--again, I know you are determined to defend Zimmerman and the entire process, but if one were in a less racially charged environment--a more professional police department that gave a damn about investigation and justice, with a deputy DA that likewise gave a damn, Zimmerman, could have been tested.

[tblue]

53. So right, hlthe2b.

The Law wasn't even going to INVESTIGATE this killing. They took Z's word for it and they closed the book. Because it was a black man and the Law had already decided he deserved whatever he got. Just making me so mad.

[premium]

56. I'm not defending Zimmerman

and I find it offensive that you keep saying that I am, what I'm defending is his right, under our constitution, the same constitution that would defend you and I should we find ourselves in legal trouble, to due process and a fair trial, nothing more, nothing less.

[customerserviceguy]

85. I appreciate that

And I notice that you catch a lot of crap for it. I think some here believe that the Constitution should protect only the people we "like". The ACLU has defended unpopular parties when they were getting the short end of the stick, and taken a lot of grief for it.

I appreciate the factual basis of your posts, and I've observed you using your great experience in most of them.

[premium]

89. I greatly appreciate that.

Yes, it does seem that the only ones that the constitution should protect are the ones we agree with.
But, I don't give up trying to correct wrong assumptions on the law.

[customerserviceguy]

96. You do a service to us all

Of course, as we're not on the jury, or even at the trial, we get to speculate wildly without harm, except as to damage to our own expectations when we convince ourselves that we're really good armchair lawyers from having watched enough TV and movies!

[premium]

98. Yep,

and I've said time and again, you just never know what a jury is going to decide.

[gopiscrap]

59. Agreed

[RBInMaine]

76. If they had probable cause, they could probably take it as an exegency because by the time you'd get

a warrant written up and signed the person could sober up, depending on what the person took. But you are correct that there would have to be some probable cause that he was under the influence incident to a criminal investigation.

[premium]

81. Actually, what they would do is get a telephonic warrant,

there's usually a judge on call for just such a situation, the police will call the judge, give the reason for the application for a warrant, be put under oath, provide the probable cause for the warrant and the judge will either approve it or deny it.

[RBInMaine]

186. Interesting. Doesn't happen like that in all states. Need a written warrant.

[Skittles]

94. so you think it is normal for someone to stalk and kill someone for no reason?

[premium]

100. Where the hell did you come up with that?

Of course not, and that's offensive to think that I would ever think that's ok.

[Skittles]

105. Zimmerman's actions that night were NOT NORMAL

HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRUG TESTED

[premium]

108. Whether or not his actions were normal

is irrelevant to the law, no police officer on scene that night expressed any concerns of impairment and without probable cause for a drug/alcohol test, then they cannot force him, they can ask, but they cannot force him to, even if he was arrested for suspicion of murder, the drug test is a separate issue and a separate warrant.

Sometimes the law sucks, but it is the law.
No need to yell at me, I've said several times that, IMHO, he's guilty of Manslaughter, but he prosecutor has dicked this case so badly, I'll be surprised if the jury votes to convict.

But, you just never know what a jury is going to do.

[Skittles]

145. they didn't express concerns because they FAILED to see him as what he was

they FAILED all the way around

[premium]

148. Oh yeah, they failed the investigation big time,

but, absent probable cause to believe he was impaired, even if arrested for suspicion of murder, that still doesn't meet the legal threshold for a warrant for a drug/test.

I know, it sucks, but that's just the way it is.

[bettyellen]

152. they should have seen he was involved in an assault in a bar, among others....

and should have realized the adrenaline released during such an incident will make the drunkest person act sober, real quick.
but they would have to have been acting like they gave a shit.

[MADem]

51. Every person I know who uses weed isn't the sort of person who would pounce on a "poor, innocent

neighborhood watch guy" -- they are the types to avoid confrontation and conflict.

Pot makes you mellow, it doesn't make you want to attack people.

[gopiscrap]

60. Yup that's been my experiencewith pot also

[Honeycombe8]

82. We were posting about this a few days ago. I agree with you.

I'm not on the jury, but based on my pot use many years ago (and it was significant! I had a good time!), as well as being around a lot of potheads during that time, the trace of pot in TM's system MIGHT lend credence to GZ's cause for calling 911 to check TM out (GZ had several reasons...TM acting like he was on drugs was one)....BUT past that, I can't see anyone who had recently been smoking pot attacking anyone, or even if he did, capable of moving quickly or getting in accurate hits.

Pot tends to make people slooooooow and mellow, even when it's wearing off. Ask 'em anything, they'll say, "Whatever."

[premium]

84. I remember that,

I kept trying and trying to explain the law without much luck, I got accused of not knowing the law, defending Zimmerman, even though I explained it in simple terms. Pretty much like here.

[customerserviceguy]

88. I'm going to assume that these are moms

who would find it distasteful to hear that their seventeen year olds are smoking pot, and it wouldn't endear TM to them. I expect a full assassination of TM's character before this whole thing is done.

[Honeycombe8]

101. Could be. But maybe not. I'm a conservative looking mature woman....

yet, as I said, I had a goooood time in my day, & know a bit about drugs, and which ones are dangerous. You'd never guess by looking at me. I looked wholesome then, too. Don't let the fact that they are female fool you. You never know. Plus, with all the info out in recent years about pot becoming legalized, used for medical reasons, etc., a lot of people have gotten the message that pot is different.

[customerserviceguy]

114. I predict that before the defense is done

They will destroy TM's character so much, that the women on the jury will be saying to themselves, "Well, I wouldn't have raised my kid that way," which is the first step in "blame the victim"

I learned about the "just world" hypothesis in Psych 101 back in fall quarter, 1974, and just couldn't believe that real people could think like that. Well, the intervening decades have taught me that it is exactly what operates in the human mind to shield people from thinking that bad stuff should happen to them, that it only happens to people who "deserve" it. I fully expect that O'Mara will play it to the hilt.

[MADem]

154. I am hoping there are a few moms who did a little herb themselves in high school and college. nt

[hlthe2b]

103. I agree, but in allowing it in, it will give the defense license to

once again try to portray Martin as a "drug-abusing thug looking for trouble".... One would hope the women on the jury would know better, but the point is that it is irrelevant and should NOT have been allowed in.

[premium]

107. I agree, it shouldn't have been allowed in,

but the blame for it's allowance is squarely on the prosecutions own witness.

[Demo_Chris]

8. Shooting an unarmed kid isn't probably cause? nt

[premium]

14. No.

1. He wasn't arrested that night.
2. No LE expressed any concern that he was under the influence of anything.
3. To obtain a warrant for a test, the police have to prove they have probable cause to believe that a person is under the influence.

[hlthe2b]

16. Again, they HAD probable cause but intentionally chose to ignore their duty & COVER FOR HIM

[premium]

34. I agree that they had probable cause to arrest for the shooting

but not for a blood test. Two different issues.

[hlthe2b]

39. Not had they bothered to fully investigate... His "full of holes" explanation for the killing

SHOULD have had a proficient ADA asking "why" and making the determination to test him--just as is routinely done in auto-related deaths and officer-involved shootings.

Probable cause exists only when one looks for it--when one fully investigates circumstances--not when you predetermine the outcome one wishes to result and are influenced by racism and/or ugly blinded allegiance to fellow gun owners. I see you self identify as FLEO... I guess that says it all. Count me unimpressed.

[premium]

41. I'm sorry, but that's just not true, despite what people see on Law & Order,

the DA can ask why all he wants, but, once again, there has to be a clear probable cause to believe he was impaired that night, and I don't mean just one cop saying so, when police apply for a warrant, they have to show convincing evidence that there was probable cause that Zimmerman was impaired, without that, no judge worth his salt is going to sign a warrant.

[hlthe2b]

42. Again, one can not make the case when they hold biases that disincentivize them from doing so.

I am convinced that is the case here and with your explanation as well.

While we work in Colorado to educate law enforcement and have achieved considerable success in the prevention of their unwarranted killing of family DOGS--in the course of conducting their duties-- it seems that Florida and several other similar states are hell bent on allowing gun owners to murder PEOPLE at will.


I find it highly offensive--as do most here. I find your defense of these practices even more so. Contemptible.

[premium]

45. What am I defending besides the Constitution?

I'm sorry you feel that way, but that's just the way it is.
Don't get hostile, I'm convinced that he's guilty of Manslaughter, but because of the ineptness of the prosecution, he may very well walk.

[hlthe2b]

46. I've read your hidden posts, so count me skeptical... but if you have changed your views good n/t

[premium]

47. You can check all my posts on the Zimmerman case,

I've consistently said that IMO, he is guilty of Manslaughter, my hidden posts have nothing to do with Zimmerman, they have to do with the 2A.

[rufus dog]

131. and based upon your posts

I suspect you will be elated when he walks.

[premium]

138. Then you haven't been reading my posts,

do that and then get back to me.

[rufus dog]

146. read them

getting back to you, pleased to see replies between the O'Really and AssHannity show though.

[premium]

149. Thank you.

I've said very consistently that, IMHO, he's guilty of Manslaughter, which, in FL, carry's the same sentence as 2nd Murder, 25 to life in prison, so, here's my question, why the hell didn't the state charge him with the easier provable offense of Manslaughter?

I know Manslaughter is the lesser included charge, but, IMO, the prosecution has so dicked up this case, they'll be damned lucky to get a conviction for anything.

[Honeycombe8]

86. Premium is just telling you factual things, not giving opinion.

It's illogical to get upset for telling you how the system works. I see what he's saying. He's saying that cops in that state, as well as in other states, cannot forcibly test you for drugs unless there's probable cause FOR USING DRUGS. I don't think Ted Bundy was tested for drugs, either, so maybe that'll help you tell the difference between crimes.

The cops have to have reason to believe someone is on drugs or drunk..unable to stand, slurring speech, etc. Having reason to believe the person committed some other crime is a totally DIFFERENT set of signs.

It's the reason you don't get tested for drunk driving or drugs when you are stopped for a traffic ticket...unless you do something that gives the cops probable cause to think you've been drinking or using drugs.

It's the rights of the private citizen that is the basis of those laws. No reason to get upset at someone who's just telling you what the law is.

[hlthe2b]

106. I know that is not the case... The ADA COULD have made a case for cause & gotten a warrant

for testing--had they merely bothered to investigate and not fallen all over for a fellow racist gun toter.

NO, I DO know better! So do others here.

[premium]

112. The DA cannot just make up a cause for a warrant for a test,

this isn't Law & Order, any DA did that and they would be sanction by the court and might possibly lose their law license and the defendant could very well walk.

I had never met any DA who operated like that, they knew better and it would very much piss off a judge if any DA tried that.

[hlthe2b]

118. The DA would not HAVE to, if there had been a proper investigation. THAT IS THE POINT...

I had the opportunity to run this by close friend who happens to be an ADA in a large CO county.... So, while FL may be its own ugly little world, legally speaking, in Colorado--or at least in their county, an unexplained shooting death of an unarmed teen, absent any gang circumstances would have been a drop everything and fully investigate kind of situation. In the absence of an air-tight case for self-defense, she indicated she has requested and received warrants for drug and alcohol testing... At least in that county, judges DO consider use of deadly force--whether via an automobile, or a firearm-- to similarly justify drug and alcohol testing.

And, yes, WE DO FOLLOW THE US constitution in Colorado, premium and Honeycombe8... We also think murder of unarmed youth to be a damned serious offense, worthy of full investigation--even among those RKBA obsessed.

[premium]

122. And to get that warrant, she would have to present probable cause evidence

that the suspect was under the influence of drugs/alcohol, you can't just drug test for the sake of drug testing, there has to be evidence of it.
Sorry, it's that whole 4th Amendment thingy.

[hlthe2b]

135. Not if a proper investigation had been conducted... THAT would have provided the CAUSE>

Defend these racist gun excusing backwoods LEO all you want. It is clear to those who give a damn what happened (and their peers in LEO know too)

[premium]

140. You're amazing,

I've never defended those cops, and, once again, that's highly offensive that you would accuse me of that without any evidence, you know, that pesky thing that proves an accusation.

And, once again, even if Zimmerman had been arrested for suspicion of murder that night, unless he exhibited signs and symptoms of being impaired, the police cannot compel him to take a drug/alcohol test and without probable cause evidence to back up the application for a warrant, a judge will laugh them out of his office.

You don't like it or believe it, I get that, that doesn't change the elements of the law.

[hlthe2b]

144. I will believe someone I KNOW to be both qualified and experienced in the issue...

and who fully agrees that this case was egregiously mishandled. The threshold for probable cause to drug and alcohol test under the circumstances here would not have been a high bar to meet. You don't like it or believe it, well, fine.. you have lots that will agree with your view of law enforcement in Florida, that's for sure. I may just be fortunate to live where both the law and the need for unbiased justice are respected--at least most of the time.

If you haven't defended the cops, your posts seem to have reflected otherwise. Nonetheless, I'm glad to hear that and I give you due credit for that. .

[premium]

147. And I'll trust my 30+ years as a FLEO.

I've always believed, judging from my experience, that the cops rushed to judgement, that the shooting was too quickly ruled as a justifiable homicide and they completely botched the crime scene investigation, there was no legitimate reason for that, and because of that and the complete ineptness of the prosecution, Zimmerman is probably going to walk free, and that, IMO, is a tragedy, but the fault won't be on the jury, it'll be on the prosecution for not proving the elements of the state's case to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Honeycombe8]

129. I give up. You just don't want to understand. Was his speech slurred? Did he look drunk to you?

Was he falling down? Unable to walk a straight line? Those are the signs that indicate cause for a drug or alcohol test.

It's why you don't get drug tested for not fully stopping at a stop sign. Committing a crime does not in and of itself indicate you are on drugs or alcohol. The two things are not related.

The other poster was saying that's the law in FL and some other states. You have to take it up with Florida, if you want citizens to be drug and alcohol tested when they're questioned for other crimes, even if they don't exhibit drug/drunk signs.

[hlthe2b]

134. You should give up because I know better... see my post

#118. You won't do so, so HERE, I'll copy it into this post:
The DA would not HAVE to, if there had been a proper investigation. THAT IS THE POINT...

I had the opportunity to run this by close friend who happens to be an ADA in a large CO county.... So, while FL may be its own ugly little world, legally speaking, in Colorado--or at least in their county, an unexplained shooting death of an unarmed teen, absent any gang circumstances would have been a drop everything and fully investigate kind of situation. In the absence of an air-tight case for self-defense, she indicated she has requested and received warrants for drug and alcohol testing... At least in that county, judges DO consider use of deadly force--whether via an automobile, or a firearm-- to similarly justify drug and alcohol testing.

And, yes, WE DO FOLLOW THE US constitution in Colorado, premium and Honeycombe8... We also think murder of unarmed youth to be a damned serious offense, worthy of full investigation--even among those RKBA obsessed.


It is Bullshit that a proper investigation could not have provided cause to request a testing warrant for drugs/alcohol.... That is if they had WANTED to do their jobs.

[galileoreloaded]

151. your emotion clouds your judgement.

deep breaths.

[hlthe2b]

166. Knock it off.

I related what someone who actually is qualified to respond to the issue and does it on a daily basis--not that from someone who claims to be LE in a state that is paramount to the problem.

[galileoreloaded]

167. i think its great that you want to abdicate your rights under the fourth amendment

but i think i'll keep mine, thanks.

innocent until proven guilty, probable cause, things that while sometimes can get muddy and a guilty person goes free, ensures that the innocent aren't persecuted.

you position on this is irresponsible at best, juvenile at worst, and i am very, very glad that there are rational, thinking individuals with adult social skills that for the most part work within the guidelines for sane behavior guaranteeing that authoritarian ideals like yours don't promulgate in our society.

you knock it off, and educate yourself.

[hlthe2b]

168. I abdicate no rights... Including the right not to be murdered by the gun-obsessed paranoid racists

among us (and those who would defend them or turn a blind eye to their crimes).

And, yes, knock it off and educate YOURSELF.

[galileoreloaded]

169. you dont have that right nor guarantee

as the police have no obligation to ensure your safety. we live in a dangerous world full of individuals with different issues and agendas.

fortunately for you, violent crime is dropping precipitously so you should be ok, but your responses seem to indicate quite a bit of fear. so maybe i would look into that. its been proven that when your fight/flight/freeze response kicks in, the IQ drops almost 30 points.

in simple terms, fear clouding your judgement can make you do stupid things.

[hlthe2b]

170. with a name that includes "reloaded" it is not me that is fearful

Enjoy your day.

[galileoreloaded]

180. "reloaded" has nothing to do with guns. I have none.

its a reference to the lack of intelligent discourse that surround issues such as these and the need for an individual to assert, correctly, that in fact NO the universe doesn't revolve around the earth. its a rejection of solipsism that the world truly needs otherwise we get bogged down in the "feelings" of an issue and not the logical issues of one.

[WinkyDink]

28. What is your source? Capt. MacDonald was drug-tested (not for speed, tho') in the hospital, and he

had not been arrested.

[premium]

36. My source is my extensive experience as an FLEO

and testifying in numerous criminal cases.

Was there evidence that Capt. MacDonald suspected of being impaired?

[Honeycombe8]

90. MacDonald? You mean the Green Beret who killed his family? That was military law, I think.

And it was North Carolina.

[premium]

97. Is that who he meant?

Really? You and I both know that the Military can do random drug tests without any probable cause. As part of my condition of employment with the Fed. Govt., I could be randomly tested also without probable cause.
There are certain jobs that fall under the 4A exclusionary rule, Law Enforcement, Firefighters, Medical First Responders, etc.

[Honeycombe8]

99. I think that's who he meant. No, I didn't know that about the military. Just that....

it has its own set of criminal procedures. Even if it weren't military law (but as I recall, the military handled this from the start for years...it was the army who handled the crime scene, etc.), that was in North Carolin (Fort Bragg), and it was in 1970 (I had to look the year up...I'd forgotten...wow, that was a long time ago).

[premium]

102. Yes, it was Army CID

who botched the crime scene investigation but they still convicted him. I'm still not 100% convinced that he committed the murders.
I remember when it happened, I was still in the Army stationed at Ft. Leonard Wood in MO. and we were all shocked at the news.

[WinkyDink]

133. My only point (I'm a "she") was that in at least one other famous case a wounded person on the

scene, not yet a suspect officially, was drug-tested.

If that conflicts with Florida law, I'm not surprised.

[premium]

143. Ok, but the Military falls under the exclusionary rule of the 4A,

any Military personel can be randomly tested, no probable cause needed, I know, I was still in the Army in 1970 when this happened.

[LanternWaste]

44. He was as sober that night as when he attempted to commit wire frau

I'm sure he was as sober that night as he was when he attempted to commit wire fraud while in jail. Quite sober indeed,,,

[hlthe2b]

9. "Didin't have probable cause"--only because they were too busy covering for him.

At least that one who overruled the others.

[uponit7771]

24. This is false on it's face, the inconsistent stories and the lack of defensive wounds on his arms...

...and a dead kid infront of him

[premium]

38. No, it's not,

for the police to obtain a warrant for a test, there has to be probable cause to believe the person is impaired.
You can deny it all you want, but I'm telling you that's the law.

[MH1]

54. Probable cause??? A child is dead and he admits shooting him?

"Oh, a dead kid? Minor detail, we don't see any likelihood that the person who shot him might have been impaired in any way ..."

What a fucking bad joke.

[premium]

61. I'm sorry you don't like it,

but until the law is changed, that's just the way it is.
Not one police officer expressed any concern that night that Zimmerman was under the influence of anything, no probable cause, no warrant for a drug/alcohol test.

[MH1]

70. Hopefully the law will be changed.

This case should spark some outrage.

ANYTIME someone shoots another person, the shooter should have their blood tested for drugs/alcohol. Maybe keep the results sealed if it seems like an "obviously justified" shooting, unless and until their is a court case.

[premium]

73. I think that's a reasonable compromise, although you can bet

the ACLU and other civil liberties org. would scream like hell.

[Honeycombe8]

79. Did they ask him, do you know? Just curious. I get your point, though. nt

[premium]

83. Good question, any cop worth his salt would have,

but it seems, IMHO, these cops rushed to judgement that this was a justified shooting and seemed to leave it at that.

[NoOneMan]

2. "since Zimmerman believed Martin was under the influence"

Has Zimmerman taken the stand yet to state this belief? Oh, thats right....

[premium]

6. The prosecutions own witness open the door for

the toxicology report to come in, the ME said that Trayvon had THC in his system.

[NoOneMan]

12. Which he said, may have no to little effect at the present levels

But the OP claimed its relevant based on what Zimmerman said, not what toxicology report said.

The presence alone is not actually relevant unless it is claimed to have an impact on the events that transpired. Its being thrown out there so the jury assumes it has an impact. These red herrings are just irrelevant seeds being planted to obfuscate the fact that a man ran a boy down and fatally shot him.

[Hoyt]

31. Quit with legal BS. Med Examiner did not open door because jury was not present when THC mention.

Only thing worse than a gun toting police wannabe (Zimmy), is a policeman trying to act like a judge.

Why didn't police ask him for a voluntary blood sample?

You think the judgement impairing drugs Zimmy was on should be presented to jury?

[premium]

43. Legal bs is the law Hoyt,

I don't care if you believe it or not, it's the LAW.
So, when did you become an LEO? How long have you been a lawyer? When did you pass the Bar Exam in GA?

What's you knowledge of Federal Law on 4th Amendment search and seizure?

[premium]

50. Couple of other things

how do you know that the police didn't ask him for a blood/alcohol test?

How do you know that Zimmerman was on those RX drugs that night? He wasn't, after all, tested that night, so that's not admissible in court, otherwise the prosecution would've already presented it into evidence.

[Hoyt]

62. Premium, you are also not a physician. Those drugs are long acting, And underlying

medical condition should prevent you from even visiting gum porn sites, much less owning guns.

[premium]

68. That's irrelevant Hoyt,

he didn't exhibit any signs that he was under the influence of drugs/alcohol, so no warrant for a drug/alcohol test, so none of his RX's come in as evidence.
Sorry you don't like it, but that's the law, which, for some reason, you have a hard time understanding.

Don't get hostile with me, I didn't write or pass the laws, take it up with the Legislative Branch.

[Hoyt]

72. BS. I guess Martin lying lifeless in the friggin rain trumps Zimmerman on mind altering,

albeit prescription, drugs taken by gun wielding bigot.

[premium]

75. Once again Hoyt,

you can rant and rave all you want, the law is the law, and you, me, the man on the moon have no idea if he was on those drugs that night, he wasn't tested as per the LAW.

Don't like it, then work to get the laws changed, until then, it's the law of the land.

[Hoyt]

78. Premium, I bet you threw the book at jay walkers. It's the law you don't shoot unarmed kids too.

[premium]

87. Uh Hoyt,

I was a Federal Cop, jaywalking didn't enter into my duties unless I was backing up local LE and then I wouldn't become involved unless requested, and I believe that local cops could handle the ever so dangerous jaywalker.

[Hoyt]

93. The law says you don't shoot unarmed kids, with few exceptions. And this ain't one of the

You have to take these things in totality, and the jury will decide what the law means, and to some extent it will determine what it should mean.

And it should mean that georgie goes to jail.

[premium]

104. What part of the police didn't have probable cause to test

Zimmerman that you don't understand Hoyt? No drug/alcohol, no enter into evidence of his RX drugs.

[Hoyt]

109. What happens if there were evidence? You can bet your rear if Trayvon had shot Z, M would be tested.

[premium]

113. More wild unfounded accusations from Hoyt.

You have no idea if that's true or not.

[Hoyt]

120. I bet it is.

[premium]

123. Ok Hoyt,

Here's your chance to shine and prove me wrong,
List your vast experience in LE, and if not LE, then tell us how long you've been a criminal defense lawyer or a Prosecutor and when did you pass the Bar Exam and what state.

[Hoyt]

127. Officer Premium you cracking me up. Hell, Zimmerman was hearing voices, "you got me,"

"you are going to die tonight," Shoot, he was friggin messed up - probable cause for drug test and charges of shooting unarmed teen while under influence.

[premium]

128. Why are you evading the question Hoyt? nt.

[anneboleyn]

156. Z wasn't even tested for alcohol, correct? I would think that fundamental when a lethal

fight occurs (and an adult male kills a minor...) as the police had NO IDEA at that point whether or not his story was true.

[Hoyt]

159. They went easy on him. But, they do know what prescription medicines he was taking.

And a responsible gun owner would not have been carrying a lethal weapon while on those meds.

[TorchTheWitch]

132. he admitted to police that he took this medication

Both medications are daily meds that he admitted he took. Adderall was for his ADD and is an anphetamine. Common side effects are anxiety, jitteryness, hypervigilance and paranoia but can also include irritability, aggression, anger, logorrhea, dermatillomania and paresthesia.

He was likely taking Temazepam likely due some of these side effects as well as that of insomnia and difficulty staying asleep. Temazepam is in the same family as Valium and Xanex and can produce the same sort of side effects. Neither medication can be started and stopped at will. Temazepam in particular takes a long time to be weaned off of often with debilitating withdrawal symptoms. Both medications remain in the system for about two weeks after being completely weaned off.

Personally, I don't think his taking these medications is any more relevant than the minute amount of THC that was found in Martin's system. With that small amount he would not have been currently under the influence, and as we all know marijuana creates a mellowing lazy relaxed state. Though some people react to it differently in that it can cause increased anxiety and agitation (which is exactly what it did to me) since Martin was a fairly regular pot smoker had it created such unpleasant results like myself he'd have no reason to want to use it.

I have no doubt that the defense using this marijuana nonsense is going to fall completely flat with the jury. Even non-marijuana users are well aware of the type of feelings it creates none of which the jury is going to give a poop about even if his blood level showed he was high as a kite at the time. It's very much likely that every single person on the jury have smoked pot before, know from personal experience what it's like and may very well be users right now. Trying to use this minute amount of THC in his system as some kind of character flaw that would have shit in shinola to do with this case is just more petty stupidity from the defense that will very likely go over like a lead balloon. If even one person on that jury was a recent or current pot user the attempt to use this to make Martin look like he was some drug addled vicious crazy will be personally offensive. Had they found crack or heroin or coke or anything along those lines, well that would be a different story. The defense using this looks like desperate grabbing at straws that will likely backfire on them.

[naaman fletcher]

7. Are you of the opinion

That refusal to take the stand should be allowed to be an issue at trial?

[NoOneMan]

15. I am of the opinion that it is a fact that Zimmerman chased down and shot a boy to death

And that this fact is far more relevant to the case at hand than trace amounts of a harmless, yet highly beneficial, substance whose usage is a social taboo.

[naaman fletcher]

27. I agree

But what does that have to do with the question I asked you?

[NoOneMan]

33. No, as long as his unvoiced assertions aren't used to justify irrelevant testimony

If Zimmerman cannot tell the court why/how Trayvon acted in a manner that suggested he was influenced by an illicit substance, then it should not be implied that Trayvon's trace levels of THC had any influence on the events that transpired that night. If this finding is not substantially relevant by any testimony to his death, why is it being allowed? Why not introduce his blood sugar level while we are at it and cholesterol levels?

We all know that a young person who smokes pot is perceived to be high-risk (yet we know more and more young children are trying drugs, especially upper and middle class kids who are trying opiates like oxycotin).

Of course they will say, well, he could have been under the influence and let the jury decide (by putting it in their head). But there is only 1 person whose testimony could suggest that it was actually factor in the events, and this person is not giving this matter any relevance by staying silent.

So the defense is throwing taboo shit at a wall. It will stick since pot is taboo. And they don't even have to back up their claim it had an impact. The fact that trace amount are there are enough to indite Trayvon as a "punk". Oh yeah, none of these mother's children would try pot...right...

What the fuck was Zimmerman on?

[naaman fletcher]

37. Ok I agree totally nt

[Bjorn Against]

5. Reefer Madness in the courtroom

The defense probably thinks that if they can show he had pot in his system that the jury will conclude pot makes people violent. Expect they will throw all kinds of bullshit out about the "devil weed", but unfortunately for them it is more likely than not that at least one member of the jury has smoked pot before and they know that the propaganda against it is greatly exaggerated. If they try to act as if pot makes people violent it could easily backfire on them as the jury will lose trust in them if they think they are just pulling shit out of their ass.

[pokerfan]

13. I remember hearing a few weeks ago

that the defense has an "expert" prepared to testify that weed makes people prone to violence. Complete bull shit, of course, but it will be their experts vs. the state's.

[Bjorn Against]

20. If I were on a jury and they called an "expert" who made such a claim...

I would immediately lose trust in whichever side called that "expert". They don't understand that a huge percentage of Americans have smoked pot at some point in their lives, many of them on a regular basis. There is a pretty strong possibility that at least one member of the jury is a current pot smoker, when they hear this "expert" testimony they are not likely to be impressed.

[SamKnause]

17. Judge ???

I very strongly disagree with the decision of the judge to allow this testimony.

The deceased was tested for drugs and alcohol.

The shooter was not.

Something seems ass backwards to me.

At a bare minimum anyone who shoots another person should be given a drug and alcohol test. This rule should include police, security, and military.

[Rex]

174. So the deceased was tested for drugs, but the potential murderer wasn't?

Funny, I would think murdering someone in cold blood (as it would seem initially) would be cause enough to test someone for drugs. I mean if the standard is to test a dead body for drugs, why not a live body?

Oh well, this desperate act won't change the verdict one bit and might actually sway the jury even more imo.

[tavernier]

18. Well, that should clinch it!

I have never seen anyone violent while under the influence of pot, although the Skittles speak volumes.

Seriously ? Do they think this jury is totally uninformed and from a different century?

[gollygee]

23. They could be

They're trying to push a stereotype, and marijuana use is part of a stereotype. If they push the stereotype, the jurors might buy that this skinny teenage kid was a legitimate threat and that he really needed to be shot.

[tblue]

52. Pot makes you mellow, hungry, and sleepy.

Please let that come out in the trial too then.

[SomethingFishy]

65. Bingo. If the prosecutors have even the slightest clue

they will hammer home the fact that smoking grass would make you LESS LIKELY to get into a confrontation.

This is a mistake by the defense, assuming that the U.S. still thinks that Reefer Madness was a documentary. I bet at least half the jury knows better.

[tavernier]

66. And a touch paranoid.

Circling a strange car containing a dude who is stalking you?

Not in my life time.

[Bay Boy]

119. I know at least one person who

gets rather mean when high on pot.

[premium]

125. I met some rather mean people

when I would find their pot plants in our national forests.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

161. Trayvon had a very small amount of it in his system. Can't be enough to make someone MEAN...

Zimmerman Cheerleaders are something else.

[avebury]

22. I just don't think that this is such a big deal.

If you want to say that someone is a thug because they have smoked pot you are going to be calling millions of Americans thugs.

I would like to see the Prosecution find away to get the list of Zimmerman's medications before the Jury as well.

[uponit7771]

25. black and smoked pot = thug to unexposed people

[Ruby the Liberal]

26. MJ is illegal in Florida. Zippy's adderall use is covered by HIPAA

even though widely publicized....

[Spazito]

30. Adderall and Temazipam are, indeed, legal and have very serious possible...

side effects like aggressiveness, delusions, mood swings, hostility, etc. The defense is raising the trace levels of THC and the possible effects on Trayvon Martin that night so the prescription drugs in Zimmerman's system should also come into evidence as to the possible effects on Zimmerman that night.

The testimony is not about legality, it is about effects. The intent, by the defense, is to do a character assassination by the back door. They have now opened the door, imo, into the drugs Zimmerman had in his system that night as well and how they may have played a part in his killing of Martin.

[Hoyt]

32. He should not have been carrying a gun on those drugs.

[MH1]

55. If he was carrying a loaded gun he shouldn't have put himself in a situation where a single teenager

could cause him to feel "in fear of his life" (if you believe that and I don't) so that he had to shoot him.

This guy should never be allowed to carry a gun again. But I suppose that if he gets off scot-free, they can't stop him.

[Hoyt]

58. He will become a lobbyist with NRA for Stand Your Ground (aka, lynching) laws.

[premium]

137. Once again,

Zimmerman was not tested that night, so, there's no evidence that he was on those drugs, ergo, not admissible as evidence.

[TorchTheWitch]

155. he told police he took these meds

See my post #132 up thread.

They are daily meds. One has to be weaned on and weaned off of them and they stay in your system for around 14 days after having completely stopped taking them. The Adderall is for his ADD and the Temazepam is likely for side effects (usually for insomnia and difficulty staying asleep) from the Adderall. The Adderall is an amphetamine and the Temazepam is in the same family as Valium and Xanex. Temazepam like it's family members can be very difficult to finally be weaned off of and can cause debilitating withdrawal symptoms.

These meds are nothing like aspirins that you take when you need to and are out of your system in a few hours. He took them for a medical condition that he has and is not going to go away.

I believe that it would be a good idea that if you're going to make claims about what evidence there is or is not in this case it would be prudent to actually find out whether or not that evidence has been presented in court already so you don't end up looking like an idiot in claiming that it hasn't and doesn't even exist. What meds Zimmerman was taking and his telling the police that he did has been known for ages.

[anneboleyn]

157. Yes. The prosecution should have someone testify about the adderall.

It is a stimulant that has all the possible side-effects you describe, some quite severe in certain people.

[WinkyDink]

29. I'd like to meet the pot-smoker who can put up the fight Z claims happened.

[LittleBlue]

35. Another blow for the prosecution

It's yet another issue that muddies the case.

If there were a mercy rule at court, it would have been invoked by now.

[Nye Bevan]

40. I feel bad for the prosecutor.

He knows it's a doomed case, but he has to go through the motions anyway.

[premium]

48. I feel bad also,

the state was pushed to file 2nd Murder when they had to know the elements of 2nd Murder weren't there.
IMHO, Manslaughter would have been an easier charge to prove.

[customerserviceguy]

95. I've read several places here

Last edited Mon Jul 8, 2013, 10:05 PM - Edit history (1)

that manslaughter is the lesser included charge. Do you have any information on that, as regards Florida law?

I'm thinking that the prosecution may have aimed for the stars, and really wants the moon. If they had aimed at the moon, they might not even have gotten into orbit. Of course, if the overcharging makes this prosecution look political, that could backfire dramatically.

[felix_numinous]

49. ...

[gopiscrap]

57. That's so fucked up

you know this trial is rigged....if Zimmerman walks, then it's time for his supporters to rise up and show their displeasure in the community

[Dawson Leery]

64. I have no problem

boycotting Sanford Fl. The place is the core of the old south.

[gopiscrap]

67. Thank you

also some one should (I don't know) should put up a petition to call on the justice department to charge him with a civil rights violation

[Travis_0004]

91. Would that be legal?

If he is found not guilty, then charging him with anything else would be double jeopardy, right?

[naaman fletcher]

111. It's legal

A federal charge for a civil rights violation would be a different crime and therefore no double jeopardy. It's what the government did to the guys who beat Rodney king after they were acquitted on state charges

[premium]

115. You are 100% correct.

The Fed. Govt. can charge him with violation of Trayvon's civil rights, but the chances of that are pretty slim, the Feds. usually don't like to get involved in state cases.
But it is a possibility if Zimmerman is acquitted.

[customerserviceguy]

116. The Obama Administration

would have to make that call, I don't expect them to, do you?

[naaman fletcher]

117. Nope nt

[Kingofalldems]

63. Republican Zimmerman supporters are loving this one

He's their boy.

[RedCappedBandit]

69. "Zimmerman believed Martin was under the influence"

And just what the fuck makes Zimmerman some sort of authority on detecting marijuana intoxication?

Ridiculous.



"Prosecutors argued the information would be prejudicial. "

Obviously, that's the POINT. Amazing that people CONTINUE to argue that we live in some sort of post-racial society.

[Dawson Leery]

74. Yet the judge allowed it.

Southern justice.

[premium]

77. The judge is allowing because the prosecution's own witness,

the ME, opened the door by mentioning that Trayvon had THC in his system, I find that ironic that the DA had at first successfully kept it out then have their own witness open the door to admit it.
How much more inept can this prosecutor be?

[customerserviceguy]

121. What's race got to do with this?

I would have expected it had the victim been white or a fellow Hispanic person. You go after the victim, and get the jury to think that he had it coming to him.

Standard defense technique, regardless of the races of the victim and the defendant.

[Hugabear]

71. So they're going with the Reefer Madness defense

[mzteris]

80. just more proof

he wouldn't have been looking for fight, ya know?

[customerserviceguy]

124. Only if one or more of the women in that jury room

admit to the others to having smoked it, and gotten mellow from it. To those trying to put up a false front to the others (or who have never really had enough MJ to get a buzz) then it's a big negative when they discuss it.

We've entering the "blame the victim" part of the trial, and I predicted that we'd surely see it.

[mzteris]

184. What's the age spread

on those women do you think?

Where did they grow up? Go to school/college/work...Do we know that?

[customerserviceguy]

185. I don't know that much about them

other than they are female, as I recall two of them are gun owners, and five of them are white, with the remaining woman being Latino.

The only thing other than that, that I know about them is that they decided to live in Florida, and were probably registered to vote.

[uppityperson]

92. I sure as hell hope they point out that Z was never tested for ANY drugs. Someone who shots and kill

kills someone else should be tested, as well as the victim.

[hifiguy]

110. They are going to go to any lengths to make sure

this piece of human sewage walks, aren't they.

There is no way this can possibly be relevant to anything.

[Blue_In_AK]

126. So now it's open season on teenaged pot smokers?

This is only meant to prejudice the jury and is totally irrelevant to Zimmerman's mens rea. I don't know what the judge is thinking letting in this evidence.

[premium]

130. The prosecution's own witness, the ME, is the one

opened the door for admittance of this toxicology report.

[Blue_In_AK]

139. Was the info offered in response to a particular question

or did it just accidentally come out of his mouth? I haven't been paying real close attention to the trial.

I really don't see how they can get a murder conviction out of this, unfortunately. Manslaughter at most. Will they offer the jury instructions for lesser includeds?

I was a criminal law paralegal for several years and also worked for about a decade as a court transcriptionist, so i've "sat through" hundreds of trials. People don't like some of your responses above, but you are correct about probable cause.

[Nevernose]

142. That's not true. Total fabrication.

If you honestly didn't understand: the ME was explicitly forbidden from mentioning the toxicology report until the hearing on said toxicology report. Today they had the hearing on said toxicology report and the judge (wrongly, IMO, but that's just my opinion) decided that the toxicology report could be admitted.

But what you said isn't even close to right.

[rufus dog]

136. Sorry CatWoman

Couldn't make it through your thread. Another tag team non-defense/DEFENSE of Zimmy hijacked the thread.

[CatWoman]

176. *hugs*

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

141. People here on DU are so pissed off at Obama for cracking down on pot. Let's see how

consistent they are when it comes to a young black man who had small traces in his system. Will they defend Trayvon's alleged use of marijuana? Pot doesn't make one aggressive or "THE BIG SCARY BLACK MAN"!!

This country still has a long way to go on the race issue.

[premium]

150. True that. nt.

[markpkessinger]

172. I am pissed that the Obama Administration has been so aggressive on cracking down on pot AND . . .

. . . I am disgusted that that the judge allowed this. I'm not at all sure why you think folks here would be inconsistent on this point.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

175. Many Zimmerman supporters have been inconsistent. Why stop now? Thanks for being consistent.

[markpkessinger]

181. I see. Well, I am not a Zimmerman supporter! n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

182. I was not referring to you. n/t

[markpkessinger]

183. I get that . . .

. . . cheers!

[Azathoth]

153. Z says on 911 call he thinks M might be on drugs. Toxicology report shows small amount of weed.

Medical examiner testifies that the level of THC in Martin's blood might have had "some effect" on him. Toxicology report therefore gets admitted and now the jury has evidence supporting Zimmerman's observations on the 911 tape. Even more reasonable doubt is heaped upon the prosecution's theory that Z is a depraved racist out to murder a black kid.

This wasn't exactly unforeseeable, folks.

[Ken Burch]

158. Since pot makes people LESS violent and confrontational....

how can Zimmerman's mouthpieces possibly think it helps their case for the jury to find out that Trayvon was slightly baked?

It's not like the tox results turned up "bath salts" or PCP.

[Freddie Stubbs]

160. It makes some people paranoid. Paranoid people can panic and do stupid things

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

162. Yeah, cuz Trayvon was paranoid that a scary white (Hispanic or whatever he calls himself) man...

...was following him, confronted him, and didn't identify himself.

Yeah, Trayvon was really paranoid.

[Dawgs]

163. Are you suggesting that he shouldn't have already been paranoid?

Because TM was the one that wasn't doing anything wrong.

[Nevernose]

164. It's the equivalent of slut shaming a rape victim

Trace amounts were in his system, but not enough to meet the threshold of "under the influence." He had 1.5 nanograms in his system. For comparison's sake, Colorado's marijuana-DUI law says the minimum for impairment is 5 nanograms, and experts argue that five is too low.

This is the equivalent of calling a rape victim a slut because she'd had sex in the past.

[avebury]

165. I just don't think that this is the big issues that

people are trying to make it. If the Defense wants to insinuate that smoking pot makes a person bad, they need to remember that there are millions of people out there who have smoked pot in their younger days and turned out perfectly fine.

It as if the Defense thinks that if they throw enough mud on the wall, some will stick and their guy won't look like such a dirt bag. I look up on it as a Hail Mary Pass.

[AtomicKitten]

171. What are the results of Zimmerman's drug testing?

Oh wait, he wasn't tested ...

Police seemed to accept Zimmerman's account (of the shooting) at face value that night and that he was not tested for drugs or alcohol on the night of the shooting, even though it is standard procedure in most homicide investigations, ABC News reported.

link: http://www.ibtimes.com/trayvon-martin-shooting-why-wasnt-george-zimmerman-given-drug-alcohol-tests-travyon-was-428096

[Octafish]

173. Blame the Victim.

Works too often and too well, unfortunately.

[Cleita]

177. Maybe this might back fire on them. I was listening to a local LA radio host this morning

and he brought up that anyone who has used MJ knows that it makes people more tranquil and peaceful. It does not make them want to go out and pick a fight.

[HockeyMom]

179. Better hope the members of the jury are under 50

because if they aren't and came of age in that generation, they fully well know personally what the effects of weed are. Defense can talk themselves blue in the face when the jury knows from personal experience what the effects are, and it is not AGGRESSION.

Want a toke? No thanks, I don't want to fall ASLEEP. zzzzzzzzz