General Discussion

uponit7771

(93,505 posts)

89. +1

Reply to Capt. Obvious (Reply #38)

Sat May 25, 2013, 06:31 AM

May 2013

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

141 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Defense in Trayvon Martin Case Raises Questions About the Victim’s Character [View all] Purveyor May 2013 OP

First why is that admissible? still_one May 2013 #1

IDK. Because it may be a death penalty case? IMO, Zim belonged in his car. EOM. freshwest May 2013 #4

The question is was he threatening zim or was zim threatening him still_one May 2013 #8

Rape shield law is different newmember May 2013 #23

Agree, it is not treestar May 2013 #32

Ummm..... jberryhill May 2013 #70

It won't be. WinkyDink May 2013 #46

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2013 #98

second, why was the defense given access to martin's cell phone records? niyad May 2013 #2

Don't they have to do that in discovery? The cell phone record is part of the prosecution's case. freshwest May 2013 #5

Prosecution can't withold evidence that could assist the defense davidn3600 May 2013 #6

I can see the phone records from the night of the murder--but NOT from months prior to that. niyad May 2013 #16

We have this stupid rule.... jberryhill May 2013 #102

Totally fucking irrelevant MotherPetrie May 2013 #3

Post removed Post removed May 2013 #129

Mr. Martin, who had no criminal record........... lunasun May 2013 #7

Golly gee whiz! Then what is all the fuss about? curlyred May 2013 #9

Bad If it shows his intention of buying an illegal weapon newmember May 2013 #10

How is that bad? Iggo May 2013 #12

Its bad for anybody to be found out doing this. newmember May 2013 #13

I meant for the case... Iggo May 2013 #14

It's irrelevant to the case newmember May 2013 #15

Exactly. Iggo May 2013 #33

Thanks iggo JustAnotherGen May 2013 #39

Kewl story bro! Rex May 2013 #96

He was not carrying an illegal weapon. Irrelevant. Totally. Buzz Clik May 2013 #128

I doubt any of this will be admissable but I am no expert Demo_Chris May 2013 #11

Defense will claim... Pelican May 2013 #18

Yeah, I don't know how admissable any of that is.... Demo_Chris May 2013 #20

It's going to depend on the judge and what the prosecution has admitted newmember May 2013 #19

If so, then one hopes Zimmerman's past is also admitted. If so he's finished. nt Demo_Chris May 2013 #21

I don't know about that , he wasn't convicted of domestic violence newmember May 2013 #22

He was also terminated from a job for assault Demo_Chris May 2013 #25

I agree , the only thing that matters is what happened those few minutes newmember May 2013 #26

What I wanted to ask you is are you convinced newmember May 2013 #28

Having been stalked JustAnotherGen May 2013 #41

Zimmerman stalked Trayvon. Why should Zimmy get to defend himself, yet Trayvon not? uppityperson May 2013 #43

Self defense is protected and allowed in every state newmember May 2013 #44

This did not happen "at 3:00 am in the morning" Cal Carpenter May 2013 #48

Thank you for the correction , it's been a while since I followed this but newmember May 2013 #49

Wow, I didn't realize we had a witness as a DU member. Cool! uppityperson May 2013 #50

Like I said you are convinced Zimmerman is guilty of racism and murder newmember May 2013 #54

I am amazed you didn't tell us before now that you were an eye witness. Too modest perhaps? uppityperson May 2013 #55

search it your self newmember May 2013 #56

Claims made without supporting links = nonsense. eom uppityperson May 2013 #58

you are conveniently overlooking a tiny little fact. zimmerman was told by the police dispatcher to niyad May 2013 #131

Do you have a link to prove Zimmerman continued following Martin after newmember May 2013 #136

right after you present your proof for all your assertions, which you have not done. but you niyad May 2013 #137

So you don't have one...gotcha newmember May 2013 #138

oh, sweetie, you have to try a lot harder than that. as I said, as soon as YOU produce links niyad May 2013 #140

already did sweetie newmember May 2013 #141

Also the very first wittiness that came forward on this was a african american male child newmember May 2013 #51

You claim "wittiness" but don't give links, just rely on your memory. Did you know that eyewitnesses uppityperson May 2013 #57

Are you kidding me , this whole thing is about racism newmember May 2013 #71

You gave me no links. I will go search and see if you gave them to someone else. Yup. uppityperson May 2013 #72

Do you have a link to any of that? Hoyt May 2013 #59

I don't newmember May 2013 #62

Most folks know Zimmerman grabbed his gun and stalked Martin. Are you sure Hoyt May 2013 #63

Read this newmember May 2013 #64

Hahahaha. You are claiming all sorts of contradictory things. Funny, that. uppityperson May 2013 #73

I said he said that to the reporter , which he did newmember May 2013 #75

So the 13 yr old is your "Two eye witnesses that said the same thing". OK uppityperson May 2013 #76

And you know what her hind sight was???? Al Sharpton newmember May 2013 #77

Holy crap! I didn't know Al Sharpton was a police investigator too. Cool! Thanks for the information uppityperson May 2013 #78

why don't you admit I'm right and you were wrong on this newmember May 2013 #80

Link to Al Sharpton being a police investigator is needed otherwise, again, it is just words. uppityperson May 2013 #81

Like I said you know I'm right newmember May 2013 #83

I've met Al and never knew he was a police investigator. Your claim is the only one I've ever read uppityperson May 2013 #84

Ii don't have a problem that he was charged . my problem is let the facts convict or acquit newmember May 2013 #65

Your "facts"? uppityperson May 2013 #74

Not mine ....they are what they are newmember May 2013 #79

the 13 yr old is "Two eye witnesses that said the same thing" and that's a Fact(tm)? uppityperson May 2013 #82

We went through this in another thread newmember May 2013 #85

If it's not racism, what is your explanation for Zimmerman following Martin? reusrename May 2013 #113

That is a lot of assumptions there. Is it within reason that Trayvon felt he was going to be seriou uppityperson May 2013 #52

It's clear you have zero fucking idea Blue_Tires May 2013 #133

But it is irrelevant to Zimmerman's vigilantism. morningfog May 2013 #24

Never going to happen. WinkyDink May 2013 #47

Translation: HE'S BLACK!!! muntrv May 2013 #17

This. N/t backscatter712 May 2013 #116

The victim's 'character' is 'deceased.' And Justin Frigging Beiber is "enamoured of the gangsta MADem May 2013 #27

I question the character of someone who roams his neighborhood day and night with a gun Incitatus May 2013 #29

+1. And has a record of violent behavior a mile long. freshwest May 2013 #66

Apparently people don't understand teens and bravado once again. hollysmom May 2013 #30

Sometimes teens go through a dark period defacto7 May 2013 #31

Agreed. All of this could have been avoided if Z had stood his ground inside his truck. freshwest May 2013 #68

I think the defense is just HappyMe May 2013 #34

character assasination. that's all the defense has and they know it. cali May 2013 #35

Exactly. HappyMe May 2013 #37

So now being interested in guns is bad? Nine May 2013 #36

Interesting point. nt ZombieHorde May 2013 #53

Next, the defense will enter his race into the record Capt. Obvious May 2013 #38

+1 uponit7771 May 2013 #89

George Zimmerman murdered an unarmed Trayvon Martin malaise May 2013 #40

I agree. Problem is that Zimmerman only has to convince one bigot/gun nut on jury. Hoyt May 2013 #61

And that's all this is about malaise May 2013 #87

I have never said Trayvon was a good person. NCTraveler May 2013 #42

Not surprising sarisataka May 2013 #45

So Zimmerman is trying to show that Trayvon was a teenager? Starry Messenger May 2013 #60

Yup, the ol' 'he needed killing' defense. Doesn't work as well as it once did. Hope it won't work. freshwest May 2013 #69

Message auto-removed Name removed May 2013 #124

Martin is not on trial. Zimmerman is. Warpy May 2013 #67

The point of this release isn't to smear Martin's character but to paint a picture of a person who dkf May 2013 #86

Then let ZMan submit his voice for anaylsis and case closed, no one's goin to argue that the uponit7771 May 2013 #91

I'm sure they will. dkf May 2013 #100

marks on knees that "look like grass stains" which of course the ONLY way a teen boy could get those uppityperson May 2013 #105

But it's a plausible explanation. dkf May 2013 #107

I would expect a LOT more stains from someone kneeling in the grass over a struggling person. uppityperson May 2013 #109

But you would admit if one person has grass stains on their knees and the other has none.... dkf May 2013 #111

Given that Zimmerman's defence is that Martin attacked him, this seems entirely relevant. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #88

how? tia uponit7771 May 2013 #90

Because the plausibility of that defence partially depends on Martin's character. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #92

It works both ways. When Zimmerman stuck his gun in his pants and went after a Black teen, Hoyt May 2013 #93

Do you think that should be concealed from the jury? Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #97

I suspect one or more bigoted folks steeped in guns will be on jury. Hoyt May 2013 #104

I think the reverse is also a serious worry, possibly more so. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #106

I think Zimmerman did the prejudging, then executed an UNARMED teenager. Hoyt May 2013 #108

By "support" do you mean "lack of certainty that he is guilty"? Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #114

MY contempt for him comes from my certainty he was not acting in self defense, based on evidence. uppityperson May 2013 #122

What makes you so certain? Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #123

He shot and killed Trayvon. He followed him, shot and killed him. He is guilty of that. uppityperson May 2013 #110

That is neither in dispute, nor in itself grounds for a conviction. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #112

If he did, it was self-defense on Martin's part. I hope he kicked the murdering gun wielding bigot. Hoyt May 2013 #115

This message was self-deleted by its author Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #117

Absolutely not - being followed is not an excuse for physical assault. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #118

Nope. Stuffing a gun in your pants and taking off after an unarmed teen Hoyt May 2013 #119

Desert is irrelevant to the law, and it scares me that you think it is. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #120

I do not think there are many deserts in Florida and not sure why you bring one up. uppityperson May 2013 #125

Right, it's getting too late for me (it's nearly midnight here). I'll check back in the morning. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #126

The jury can look at this as bigots, or as citizens who don't tolerate Hoyt May 2013 #134

I wouldn't call a propensity to fight a "character issue" necessarily. dkf May 2013 #101

It's irrelevant to the case legally tavernier May 2013 #94

No, it's not a two equal sides scenario. Moses2SandyKoufax May 2013 #99

Not if it shows a pattern of behavior that Trayvon was getting into fights recently dkf May 2013 #103

SO guns are scary and dangerous, UNLESS Rex May 2013 #95

I fail to see the strategy here shawn703 May 2013 #121

Oh, shit. I love lawyers -- not! Buzz Clik May 2013 #127

Jesus fucking christ... Blue_Tires May 2013 #130

If it were a white teenager would it matter? Moses2SandyKoufax May 2013 #132

Exactly. Hoyt May 2013 #135

He still murdered an innocent person in cold blood madokie May 2013 #139