General Discussion

DrDan

(20,411 posts)

120. Zimmerman's woulds are big points for his side - if they can explain the lack of DNA/wounds on TM's

Sun Jun 30, 2013, 07:35 AM

Jun 2013

hands. If they can explain that successfully to the jury, then I think Z walks. All of the state's witness so far have also provided evidence for the defense. Having watched a good deal of the testimony, I would say it is pretty evenly split right now. And we have yet to get into the defense's case. I think second degree murder is a huge uphill battle right now.

But . . . weeks of testimony left.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

120 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Zimmerman has already been proved guilty, now it's just a question of punishment. [View all] last1standing Jun 2013 OP

IMO, no. eom uppityperson Jun 2013 #1

The jury will decide this question before much longer. The Velveteen Ocelot Jun 2013 #2

He's innocent until the prosecution can prove by the preponderance of the premium Jun 2013 #3

That is not true. last1standing Jun 2013 #8

Ok, that's a good point. premium Jun 2013 #12

thanks! Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #27

Glad I could help. last1standing Jun 2013 #31

maybe a different OP subject line Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #41

Yeah, it does, doesn't it? last1standing Jun 2013 #45

This is why the defense is so miserable and desperate. It seems truly that they've got nothing Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #46

We don't know what the defense has up its sleeve. last1standing Jun 2013 #52

Exactly. backscatter712 Jun 2013 #32

I'm not buying it either dmr Jun 2013 #47

if second degree murder charges are not proven - it's all over and he walks away DrDan Jun 2013 #102

I'm not going to try to make a firm statement concerning Florida law again. last1standing Jun 2013 #104

The defense has not even put on their case yet... davidn3600 Jun 2013 #4

and the prosecution rips them all to shreds in cross examination. Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #28

The prosecution witnesses have done the work for the defense already WhataKnight Jun 2013 #67

Says Who? HangOnKids Jun 2013 #87

You seem to be jumping the gun. (Pun intended.) ManiacJoe Jun 2013 #5

Thank you Professor Corey. rug Jun 2013 #6

Sound to me like you are ready to strap him in and pull the switch. oneshooter Jun 2013 #7

Not at all. I'm merely asking a question based on the evidence so far presented. last1standing Jun 2013 #10

He faces a maximum sentence of life in prison. elleng Jun 2013 #11

Not exactly. elleng Jun 2013 #9

I agree they might have a hard time getting 2nd degree murder. last1standing Jun 2013 #13

From what I've heard so far, elleng Jun 2013 #14

It's not a reasonable doubt standard for affirmative defenses. last1standing Jun 2013 #16

I don't think so. elleng Jun 2013 #19

Do you have any backup for that belief? last1standing Jun 2013 #20

OK, you've got it! elleng Jun 2013 #38

Yep. That's what they taught me in Crim Law. last1standing Jun 2013 #51

I didn't fail either, elleng Jun 2013 #53

If you don't practice crim law it can slip away very easily I'm told. last1standing Jun 2013 #54

OH, you're a newbie! elleng Jun 2013 #59

Lol! Yeah, I'm a returning student. last1standing Jun 2013 #62

TRUE that you never know, elleng Jun 2013 #65

Let's hope. last1standing Jun 2013 #68

Markets constantly change, elleng Jun 2013 #74

That does give me hope. last1standing Jun 2013 #76

I'm happy that my story gives you hope. elleng Jun 2013 #79

I will. Thanks. last1standing Jun 2013 #80

VOILA! elleng Jun 2013 #82

Thanks very much! last1standing Jun 2013 #84

This message was self-deleted by its author COLGATE4 Jun 2013 #110

Charge should be more like voluntary manslaughter davidn3600 Jun 2013 #23

I agree. last1standing Jun 2013 #25

' Contrast second degree murder with manslaughter. elleng Jun 2013 #26

Right, so long as the state does in fact ask for the lesser degree. last1standing Jun 2013 #29

several people have said (you can take that with a grain of salt) Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #33

That's exactly what I think. last1standing Jun 2013 #34

It also seems obvious -- I would be VERY surprised if the jury thought otherwise -- Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #44

LOL! You may change your mind after hearing the defense. last1standing Jun 2013 #73

This is a joke, right? n/t Azathoth Jun 2013 #15

Nope. I'm just looking for some reasoned discussion on the subject. last1standing Jun 2013 #17

Well, your premise is simply wrong Azathoth Jun 2013 #21

Then my crim law professor needs to re-read his law books. last1standing Jun 2013 #24

I would ask for a refund from your law school if I were you Azathoth Jun 2013 #36

I was polite enough to provide you a link. last1standing Jun 2013 #42

Are you for real? Azathoth Jun 2013 #81

I'm very much for real. Thanks. last1standing Jun 2013 #83

Ah! I think I see where we're in disagreement. last1standing Jun 2013 #85

That's quite interesting. Incidently, I apologize for my initial assumptions, although Azathoth Jun 2013 #114

I did use a term that was more inflamatory than I expected. last1standing Jun 2013 #118

As a seasoned lawyer to a new one COLGATE4 Jun 2013 #94

LOL! I appreciate the advice last1standing Jun 2013 #96

So you, as a seasoned lawyer, agree that Zimmerman is "already proved guilty"? n/t Azathoth Jun 2013 #112

No - what I said is that the issue of whether he killed Trayvon has COLGATE4 Jun 2013 #113

So we are in agreement Azathoth Jun 2013 #115

The ONLY "reasoned discussion" on the subject would include the fact that the jury hasn't decided cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #58

Then please feel free not to join in. last1standing Jun 2013 #72

Florida has a history of "over charging" to insure russspeakeasy Jun 2013 #18

That I could believe. last1standing Jun 2013 #22

I'm no sort of lawyer but I have been told by one who should know that the Bluenorthwest Jun 2013 #119

His doctor hit his self defense claims pretty hard Nevernose Jun 2013 #30

I didn't watch or hear the actual trial but it sound like the prosecution did its job. last1standing Jun 2013 #35

Eyewitness testimony is awful Nevernose Jun 2013 #39

That does seem a clever move in hindsight. last1standing Jun 2013 #75

Mark O'Meara, at the end, showed many blown up photos of Zimmerman's head taken nenagh Jun 2013 #90

except that he showed "depraved mind" by Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #40

I agree wholeheartedly Nevernose Jun 2013 #43

Based on what we've heard it doesn't look good for Zimmerman. last1standing Jun 2013 #49

I was just reading on the Findlaw site and Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #50

Thanks. last1standing Jun 2013 #56

this is another source with different info about the affirmative defense Voice for Peace Jun 2013 #95

Why ask us? RudynJack Jun 2013 #37

Because this is a discussion forum and I wanted to discuss the case. last1standing Jun 2013 #48

The discussion would be better RudynJack Jun 2013 #60

I'm a law student. It's my job to obsess over every nuance. last1standing Jun 2013 #66

Back up your post. Show proven, and of what. flvegan Jun 2013 #55

Ok. Zimmerman has admitted that he killed Martin. last1standing Jun 2013 #61

How is that "proved guilty" and please be specific, thanks. flvegan Jun 2013 #86

I was using "guilty" in the sense that he admits he did it. last1standing Jun 2013 #88

I love that you leverage your own "guilty" v an unknown to you affirmative defense. flvegan Jun 2013 #89

Ok. Nice to meet you. last1standing Jun 2013 #91

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think Zimmerman has the burden of proof. Vattel Jun 2013 #57

Florida could have a lesser standard. last1standing Jun 2013 #63

Ok. I just skimmed that case and it doesn't sound as bad as I thought. last1standing Jun 2013 #71

I don't think you are reading the opinion correctly. Vattel Jun 2013 #97

I wasn't. last1standing Jun 2013 #99

Acquitted or convicted customerserviceguy Jun 2013 #64

Nope. last1standing Jun 2013 #70

Come on customerserviceguy Jun 2013 #92

Not that I disagree with that, but I remember people saying the same about OJ Simpson. last1standing Jun 2013 #93

OJ had enough money and fame customerserviceguy Jun 2013 #98

Make him neighborhood watch dude of... mindwalker_i Jun 2013 #69

I would hate to be on this jury. Contrary1 Jun 2013 #77

I've posted proof to the contrary several times in this thread. last1standing Jun 2013 #78

Florida law: defense does not have burden proof ctaylors6 Jun 2013 #100

The first line of your quoted text disagrees with your title. last1standing Jun 2013 #103

burden of presenting evidence ctaylors6 Jun 2013 #106

Yes, and I stated that was wrong in my last post to you. last1standing Jun 2013 #108

huh? so what about those second degree murder charges? DrDan Jun 2013 #101

I understand you wouldn't have read through every comment in this thread. last1standing Jun 2013 #105

well - I was immediately confused when I read he was "proved guilty" DrDan Jun 2013 #107

Again, please check out my many other posts where I explain it. last1standing Jun 2013 #109

well- a lot of posts to read - but it is certainly my understanding DrDan Jun 2013 #111

You're correct that the prosecution still has to prove each element of the crime. last1standing Jun 2013 #117

Zimmerman's woulds are big points for his side - if they can explain the lack of DNA/wounds on TM's DrDan Jun 2013 #120

It is premature to ask for a verdict. GreenStormCloud Jun 2013 #116