Recent content by faefrost

How many times did he slip and fall? Because IMO from looking at the picture of the back of his head I see what I would categorize as at a minimum 3-4 separate impacts. All from slightly differing angles. There is one large central area of bruising or swelling, possibly from when he first went...

Actually the "skipped" makes sense given some other testimony. Remember RJ was telling TM on the phone to run away and she said he claimed he would walk? What that tells me is he wanted to run, but pride wouldn't let him, so he was doing that fast walk / not quite run that teenage males are...

The moment the back of your head slams the concrete. The first time might be iffy. The second time your head hits pavement you are in a panicked fear for your life. I don't care who you are. At that moment you are completely justified in acting to save your life. Every instinct hard wired into...

I think once deliberations begin, that's it. An alternate cannot step into ongoing deliberations. Once the jury is charged the alternates get to go home. Any jury problems after that result in a mistrial.

I hate to say it. But there is probably a large number of "flash mobs" that are planning to do some late night partying and shopping regardless of any actual verdict. It's an excuse, nt a cause.

This was compounded in this case because TM was a guest of his father, who was in turn a guest of his girlfriend, and not a resident of record.

Okay? Why is the judge reading the same instructions and definitions over and over?

No, he killed someone. He pulled the trigger. That is a fact that both sides agree to. It is an action. It is not a crime. The crime is either Second Degree Murder or Manslaughter. The state must prove those crimes. There is more needed. The defense has to put forth a reasonable argument for...

The defense has the obligation to provide a prima facia case in support of self defense. They do not have to prove that it was self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense met their burden. The prosecution still has to prove that it was not self defense beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact...

Which would explain why the judge would not allow the unread acted video, and very little discussion about it.

What it comes down to is the state has to prove that Zimmerman attacked Martin. Not followed him. Not profiled him. Not wannabe copped him or whatever. Not that the situation could have been avoided if he dd not exit his car. The state has to prove that Zimmerman attacked. Initiated violence...

Not one piece of evidence witness testimony or expert testimony supports this. Plus he had multiple lacerations on the back of his head. This is caused by the head hitting the pavement multiple times.

The defense does not have the burden of proof. All they require is a reasonable explanation of events. That it could have reasonably happened other than how the prosecution presents it.

Actually they have at least one witness that did see TM laying a hand on GZ. We also have head and face trauma to GZ that could only have occurred before the gun was fired. We don't know who started the violence. That is the key question. But that is the States burden to prove. From the...

The judge kind of backed herself into being forced to allow the video when she refused the reasonable and common defense request for the jury to see the crime scene. The defense was a right to present a view of the crime scene and their theory in context. Especially since the prosecutor...