17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #21

[rossva]

BBM IMO, that is the understatement of the year.

I worry about this 72 hours thing. That is a long time. He could be long gone at that point, or take his life by that point. The SA is taking a huge gamble by waiting 72 more hours. Or maybe she knows something we don't know and it will all be okay, I don't know. I just hope he didn't promise to turn himself in and then doesn't turn around and kill himself instead.

Thinking about it, why would they trust anything he says to them anyway? As a show of good faith? This whole thing doesn't make any sense.

And I seriously think these two lawyers took a page from Cheney Mason's book. What is it with lawyers near retirement age acting like this? You'd think they'd want to go out with a good reputation, not destroy their reputation. Or maybe it's just lawyers near retirement in Florida.

 

[gxm]

Two things I check the paper for each morning:

1. GZ's arrest
2. SCOTUS throwing out the Affordable Care Act

IMO, it's just a matter of time.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

 

[Isabelle]

um....Isn't there something about the burden shifting when you claim the SYG defense?

Talking about that on HLN now. You are right about burden of proof in SYG it is on the defense.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Imo, there is no way she would have talked to him. Charges or not. You are not permitted to have any ex parte contact with a represented individual, particularly in connection with the very matter they are being represented on, regardless of whether there are charges coming. Just for example, if there is a non-party witness to a case and that non-party is represented by counsel, you still cannot contact that party directly -- even to discuss a matter as trivial as when or where their deposition will take place. That is true whether or not there is any basis whatsoever for potential civil or criminal liability on the part of the witness. jmo

Yep you are right.

 

[Velouria]

Thankfully the justice system is not set up where one has to prove their innocence.

Except when you claim you killed someone in self-defense. There should be more than just your word as a defendant to support the use of deadly force.

 

[nursebeeme]

my thoughts on the tox test results: (moo)

I bet dimes to donuts they are back and we just are not privy to them. I do not think the prosecutor will move on anything until they are back and figured into the decision making process of charges vs no charges.

(moo and all that)

 

[nancdru]

FWIW, attorneys "fire" their clients all the time, usually for lack of cooperation. I can certainly see criminal defense attorneys throwing in the towel on a client who contacts the prosecutor's office directly without their advice and consent, conducts an interview with a national pundit, or, even if only hinted at, has some hinky financial accounting related to his case. Regardless of the attorneys' unconventional ad lib during the press conference, I can't blame them for their CYA actions.

 

[gxm]

Except when you claim you killed someone in self-defense. There should be more than just your word as a defendant to support the use of deadly force.

I completely agree. That's why these laws need to be fixed. People are getting away with murder.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

 

[mysteriew]

Even if he is unrepresented, the SA's office cannot speak to him unless he executes a specific waiver of his right to Councel, otherwise that is denying him his Miranda rights

You have a right to remain silent
You have a right to an Attorney ect..

They can't get around that, he has to legally waive that right before they can speak to him without an Attorney.

It sounds to me like he did legally waive his rights to an attorney. From what I have read he said they weren't really his attorneys, just advisors. And that he wanted to represent himself. Under those conditions he can talk to them.

As far as the attorneys, he may have had a verbal agreement with them. But he has the right to fire them at any time. As long as he is considered competent he can even act against his attorney's advice.

And I would guess the special prosecutor probably called the attorneys to advise them as a "professional curtesy." Letting them know that the person they thought was their client, really wasn't.

 

[jaded cat]

Well, the tox tests were (and still are) out.

The problem with that is tox tests weren't done on GZ, only TM. Unless of course, the SPD report is wrong :what:

 

[atthelake]

I knew better than to follow another case in Florida.:banghead:

Understand where you are coming from, but I am so very glad that I did as I now can light a candle for someone often and keep the *after*case alive for the "other" case, in addition to meeting and getting to know many fellow :websleuther: and mods VERY well over the years that now are here in this thread. :grouphug:

Perhaps more of such through this case as I'm getting to know folks much better in this case it seems.

 

[Aedrys]

Except when you claim you killed someone in self-defense. There should be more than just your word as a defendant to support the use of deadly force.

Exactly. All we have is GZ's word, and that's just not good enough. That is the point here, that GZ should have to prove that excessive force was necessary to save his life from Trayvon. It just hasn't appeared to be that way at all, actually the opposite, all IMO.

 

[waltzingmatilda]

Well, the tox tests were (and still are) out.

JennaT, Do you, or anyone else, know if GZ was drug/alcohol tested at the police station? I have heard that toxicology tests were performed on Trayvon but haven't heard anything definate about GZ.

IMO, GZ's speech sounds slurred in the 911 call as opposed to his speech in his voicemail to his neighbor that was reported in MSM.

I am not intending to bash GZ, just saying that IMO there was a notable difference in the speech and voice inflections in the two recordings and searching for answers.

If SPD didn't test GZ for drugs or alcohol then that was a major fail on SPD's part.

moo

wm

 

[HiHater]

Exactly. All we have is GZ's word, and that's just not good enough. That is the point here, that GZ should have to prove that excessive force was necessary to save his life from Trayvon. It just hasn't appeared to be that way at all, actually the opposite, all IMO.

GZ will have to prove that if there are charges. He will either have to convince a judge or a jury. MOO

 

[Adrienne37]

When former Inmate CA had the Grand Jury indicted, they told her to turn herself in..but they were following close behind her and thought she was running so they stopped her dead in her tracks on the interstate...It does happen..folk are given the opportunity to turn themselves in, which also looks good for them..so, it can and does happen..sorry you don't think so...:what:

It was the same thing with Scott Peterson. When they indicted him on the murder charges for Laci and Connor, he was picked up after undercover cops followed him and realized that he was probably about to bolt. He had all sorts of supplies and money in the trunk of his car.


~jmo~

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

The problem with that is tox tests weren't done on GZ, only TM. Unless of course, the SPD report is wrong :what:

Yep, distrubing...SPD should have...

Some think GZ sounded 'drunk' on those 911 calls..his speech was slurred and yet, the police didn't test him? Shouldn't that be standard???

I think SPD botched this from the start..they should have treated GZ as a suspect ... tox reports, GSR...blood splatter, bullet entry...autospy...he should have been told the investigation was still ongoing and that he should not attempt the leave the state of Florida...Now, he might be gone...would his family know where he's at and would they give him up?

This is getting really frightening...I certainly hope someone has a handle on GZ..

 

[Sensei]

It sounds to me like he did legally waive his rights to an attorney. From what I have read he said they weren't really his attorneys, just advisors. And that he wanted to represent himself. Under those conditions he can talk to them.

As far as the attorneys, he may have had a verbal agreement with them. But he has the right to fire them at any time. As long as he is considered competent he can even act against his attorney's advice.

And I would guess the special prosecutor probably called the attorneys to advise them as a "professional curtesy." Letting them know that the person they thought was their client, really wasn't.

I could be entirely wrong, but I do believe an arrest is coming. IF he could and did waive his rights over the phone, (which I don't believe that she would accept because it may end up being problematic, how do you know who you are talking to on the phone?) If she did talk to him, and he said something that she could use to charge him, or use in Court I can see a huge legal wrangle over it, and it possibly being tossed....

You would never take that chance if you want to charge someone and take them to Court since there is a less than fifty percent chance that it would survive and ever be heard anyway, let alone the challenge to his Miranda rights and so forth.

 

[Aedrys]

GZ will have to prove that if there are charges. He will either have to convince a judge or a jury. MOO

Yes, sorry, that is what I meant. There should be charges and then he should have to prove excessive use of force. It all depends on what the SA decides.

 

[grandmaj]

my thoughts on the tox test results: (moo)

I bet dimes to donuts they are back and we just are not privy to them. I do not think the prosecutor will move on anything until they are back and figured into the decision making process of charges vs no charges.

(moo and all that)

I agree nurse. On average 4 to 6 weeks generally for final results. It has been that, but also, priority can be assigned for cases when they need the results sooner. IMO evidence in this case is not going to be released by anyone but the special prosecutor .

 

[JeannaT]

The problem with that is tox tests weren't done on GZ, only TM. Unless of course, the SPD report is wrong :what:

My guess is, the tox tests were part of the autopsy, not part of the criminal investigation. Not to try to prove TM might have been acting oddly, but to decide if drugs in his system contributed to his death.

Since GZ was living, no autopsy was performed and no need to discover cause of death. Since he was treated by paramedics at the scene I think they would have noticed impairment or smelled alcohol if that were the case.