Thursday, June 27, 2013

George Zimmerman Trial - Day 3



Yahoo News reports

Lawyers prosecuting the Trayvon Martin shooting case will have an opportunity to sketch a portrait of defendant George Zimmerman, now that the trial judge has decided the jury can hear five of Mr. Zimmerman's nonemergency 911 calls to police. The calls could help shape jurors' impressions of Zimmerman, who is on trial in Florida for second-degree murder, as either a seething vigilante or a stand-up community organizer.

The judge has previously ruled that the jury won’t be able to consider social media interactions by Trayvon that describe pot-smoking, guns, and a fascination with martial arts fighting. The defense had said that, similarly, the 911 recordings of Zimmerman are immaterial because they don’t pertain to the moments before Trayvon was shot.

But prosecutors say the 911 calls show what they characterize as Zimmerman’s zealous, angry mind-set and “ill will.” The calls “show the context in which [Zimmerman] sought out his encounter with Trayvon Martin,” prosecutor Richard Mantel told the judge before her ruling.

I can just hear all the pro-gun Zimmerman-defenders whining about how unfair it is to consider Zimmerman's past and not Martin's.

The difference is obvious, except to the extremely biased. As the judge ruled, the 911 tapes will show the mentality of the neighborhood watchman immediately prior to the killing.  Martin's alleged pot smoking has nothing to do with it.

What's your opinion?  Please leave a comment.

10 comments:

  1. As you and the judge say, there's a difference in immediacy here, and the Zimmerman calls should be allowed in.

    The only counterpoint that I can see the defense argue would not be against including the calls, but possibly including some of the Martin history based on immediate links--e.g. if toxicology screens were done and he had THC in his system, which could be used to suggest that maybe he was walking around like he was stoned as Zimmerman says in the call; similarly, noting any martial arts training (if such exists) to note the greater threat it would make Trayvon pose. No, Zimmerman wouldn't know this until he started getting his ass kicked, but it might make the ass kicking more effective, and more of a threat to his life, bringing us to the essential question of the case: who started fighting?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the kid had pot in his system, I don't think that would account for his "walking around like he was stoned," not visibly at least. Pot's not like that, didn't you know?

      I'm glad you agree about the 911 calls. You surprised me.

      Delete
    2. Depends on how stoned he was. I've seen people smoke pot and be barely affected, and I've seen them smoke it and start walking around like a space cadet, which is what you get from Zimmerman's 911 description about how he was walking around in the rain, just looking around. Maybe he was being observant of his surroundings, but if he was smoking pot, it's possible that he was slowly wandering home, taking in everything, which could be one explanation for the length of the period between the purchase of the tea and skittles and the shooting.


      As for your comment that I surprised you, you keep assuming I'm this cartoon character you've built in your mind. You assume that I'm twisting the law at various times, or twisting the facts to my benefit and am incapable of seeing or comprehending anything that doesn't fit into my preconceptions.

      In the past, you've accused me of making distinctions like a lawyer would when I've tried to describe the status of the law and you didn't like it. On those occasions, when I tell you what the settled law is, I'm really telling you what my understanding of the law is, and the common interpretations of it, not bending it.

      I'm going to honestly tell you what it is in these cases, whether you think it's good for my side or not. If I don't like the settled law, I may tell you that and tell you what I think it Should be, but you'll be able to see that's what I'm telling you from context. I'm not going to lie and tell you that what the law should be is what it is.

      If you want an example, go to some of Laci and my earlier fights, before he started slinging insults and I returned the volleys, and you'll see that at times I'm arguing over what the court did say, and at others moving on to what the law should be, or how court statements should be interpreted since they're vague, etc. Most of the fights with Laci are because there is little settled law on the matter as there aren't that many cases and the 2nd Amendment is pretty brief.

      In comparison, other areas where you and I have argued over what the settled law is have been defined by long statutes, hundreds of regulations, and hundreds of court rulings. There's still enough wiggle room for lawyers to argue for different interpretations, but there's enough statute, rule, and judicial precedent to say: This is how these are usually handled.

      Delete
    3. TL;DR version:

      Try to be less surprised in the future. I try to stick with the truth, whether it helps someone you've declared to be on my side or not.

      Delete
  2. Doesn't Martin's behavior go toward establishing credibility in Zimmerman's assessment? I've taught punks like him. They act as though they're tough criminals. The truth is that they're scared little children, but the sad reality is that sometimes, their act is good enough that a reasonable person wouldn't know the difference. And sometimes, they actually are aggressive thugs who are under the influence of a drug that in some people causes paranoia.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Greg, you've pointed out a reason that this information might be relevant, but bad behavior is generally not admitted to show a propensity toward further bad behavior unless an exception gets opened up--e.g. the prosecution makes a big deal of Trayvon being a good kid that would NEVER do something like Zimmerman is saying.

      Delete
    2. "Punks like him," Greg? Are you shittin' me? You have the nerve to characterize the dead guy like that when the truth is you know next to nothing about him. What you just did is much worse than the attempts by some to paint him as an innocent choir boy. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but your extrememly negative assessment says more about you than him.

      Would you like to take it back? Here's a good chance for you to gain some credibility for the other nonsense you spout. What do you say?

      Delete
    3. Back off of the sanctimonious accusations, man. Greg made an assessment based on the information from Trayvon's facebook and the other information that has been leaked to the media. The assessment could be in error because of incomplete data, but it's still his opinion based on the evidence at hand, not some type of evil, prejudiced characterization of Trayvon based on nothing but prejudice and assumption as you insinuate.

      Delete
  3. I think the solution to this would be fairly obvious since there is already plenty of evidence to disprove this. The federal government already investigated this aspect and found no instance profiling and bias. I'm guessing there might be a number of 911 recordings out of the many he made as part of his duties that would counter the ones used by the prosecution.

    ReplyDelete
  4. They should call in the NSA to testify to the character of Zimmerman and Martin.

    ReplyDelete