17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #31

[jjenny]

BBM: No they are NOT representing the victim in this case, they are representing the victim's family. The prosecution (State Attorney's Office) is representing the victim.

They still get on TV and give interviews in front of the potential jury pool.

 

[mercuriod]

The next name variation earns a 4 day TO.

Think we have all kept you too busy tonight, sorry :couch:

 

[m00c0w]

Now, yes. At the time, no.

Again, they never even bothered to test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol, they tried to coach witnesses to influence their statements in order to assist Zimmerman. I can turn on cartoon network and watch Scooby Doo do a more professional job.

Seriously, what more do you really need to know?

MOO etc

I guess we'll see.

 

[Chris_Texas]

I agree, and I keep seeing people asking why these people would lie and cover for GZ, and I just keep thinking that they did it because they could, because they really didn't think there would ever be an repercussions about it, after all what could the parents actually DO.

Then things blew up and by then there was no way they could say.," Ooopsie, made a mistake here, gee, we should have tested for drugs and alcohol, and perhaps we could have actually documented those injuries with photo's, and just maybe he should have been arrested, excuse me I'll just go do that now." By the time it all blew up, it was too late, they couldn't back down or go back, they had to keep covering to keep everyone from knowing that they had thought what they had was just a theif kid so they phoned it in instead of actually investigating like they were investigating the killing of a person who mattered. IMO JMHO and stuff.

Exactly. Well said!

 

[m00c0w]

It is Crump and Natalie Jackson. Name them of course unless others that are not subject to this thread's rules, are inferred.

I was referring to their entire legal team.

ETA: I understand the one you changed. I thought that "et al." would be the more appropriate abbreviation.

 

[mercuriod]

They still get on TV and give interviews in front of the potential jury pool.

They are not a party to the legal representation of the case State vs. Zimmerman, O'Mara is.

 

[m00c0w]

They are not a party to the legal representation of the case State vs. Zimmerman, O'Mara is.

So, therefore, jury tainting cannot happen as a result of their actions?

 

[Chris_Texas]

I guess we'll see.

Yep, gonna be interesting

 

[LynnM]

At this point we don't know what Chief Lee's role was in stopping the arrest of Zimmerman as lead investigator wanted to do or whether he short-circuited the investigation in any way so I will reserve judgment on that. I do object to the way he handled speaking about the case. IMO he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, not someone seeking the truth. On March 15, he said "“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.” He had only GZ's word that he said that and I would like to know just when that happened. It certainly didn't happen when he was on the phone with the police operator and Trayvon supposedly came up to his vehicle to check him out. So did it happen after GZ stopped his pursuit and turned back to the truck and Trayvon came up behind him and said "Do you have a problem?" or whatever the GZ story is about that?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2_trayvon-martin-case.html

 

[Aedrys]

Zimmerman will be acquitted... Like it or Not.

Unless a person has a crystal ball or a person is psychic, there is absolutely no way anyone can know that for sure. I thought surely Casey would be convicted, and look what happened in that case. We won't know anything until we go to trial and the hear the verdict. It's inflammatory to insist on outcome when the trial hasn't even started yet. I may want him convicted, and hope for it, but I cannot insist that is going to happen because there's no way to know that for sure. And after Casey's case, I learned the hard way than anything is possible.

 

[m00c0w]

At this point we don't know what Chief Lee's role was in stopping the arrest of Zimmerman as lead investigator wanted to do or whether he short-circuited the investigation in any way so I will reserve judgment on that. I do object to the way he handled speaking about the case. IMO he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, not someone seeking the truth. On March 15, he said "“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.” He had only GZ's word that he said that and I would like to know just when that happened. It certainly didn't happen when he was on the phone with the police operator and Trayvon supposedly came up to his vehicle to check him out. So did it happen after GZ stopped his pursuit and turned back to the truck and Trayvon came up behind him and said "Do you have a problem?" or whatever the GZ story is about that?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2_trayvon-martin-case.html

I will agree that his press conferences left a lot to be desired. He should have stayed out of the limelight.

 

[Sherbie]

My "bad", Crump <mod snip> are not involved in the prosecution or defense of this case. O'Mara expresses concern over media coverage in his request that GZ be allowed to wear a suit to court but HE is the one making all the media rounds making sure the jury pool is tainted.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/m_appear_in_civilian%20clothing.pdf

I don't think the jury pool could possibly be more tainted against a defendant than it has been from the beginning against Zimmerman. That is not a statement in support of GZ - if the evidence shows he's guilty of Murder 2, I want him to pay to the fullest extent.

But as a practical matter, the coverage I've seen has been extremely anti-GZ. Regardless whether it's attorneys, pundits, citizens, community rights activists or others speaking, the messages hit the jury pool. Any sort of rehab of GZ's image that his attorney might attempt is a mere drop in the bucket compared to all the anti-GZ sentiment portrayed in the media.

I will give O'Mara this - in the appearances I've seen (and in complete contrast to GZ's bombastic and ridiculous "legal advisors" earlier in the case), he's been professional, polite, respectful in his comments about the family and prosecutors, and he hasn't made wild claims or tried to grandstand. So I don't have a problem with him (at least at this point in time).

 

[Nova]

It is not an apple to apple comparision. Trial A ends in a mistrial. Defense doesn't want another trial they want the charges abandoned. Prosecution has the discretion to proceed or not to a second trial. The cases pursued to retrial by logical progression are going to the ones the prosecution thinks they can correct and win. They will abandon the ones that are hopeless or long shots.

Of the cases that make it to a retrial they probably do have a higher conviction rate, but they are by definition cases that they felt they would win in a retrial.

I'm sure you're right that the mere decision which cases to retry skews the stats.

I wish I had a link, because I swear I've heard DAs say the advantage is more than that. For example, if the O.J. Simpson trial had ended in a mistrial, the DA would have known (a) the DNA evidence was confusing jurors; and (b) the inner-city LA jury was not shocked and convinced by the prosecution's attempt to portray Simpson as a wife-batterer. The latter might have swayed a suburban jury, but the inner-city jury was less "politically correct" on the subject.

De-emphasizing those two prongs of the State's case would have allowed prosecutors to focus on something that might have successfully convinced a jury to convict. It certainly helped the lawyers who prosecuted the civil case. (I realize the criminal and civil cases aren't perfectly analogous for a number of reasons; I'm just saying the lawyers in the second trial had the advantage of knowing what did not work in the first.)

 

[mercuriod]

So, therefore, jury tainting cannot happen as a result of their actions?

The mods will not allow me to answer you in the way I want to.

 

[Sensei]

At this point we don't know what Chief Lee's role was in stopping the arrest of Zimmerman as lead investigator wanted to do or whether he short-circuited the investigation in any way so I will reserve judgment on that. I do object to the way he handled speaking about the case. IMO he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, not someone seeking the truth. On March 15, he said "“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.” He had only GZ's word that he said that and I would like to know just when that happened. It certainly didn't happen when he was on the phone with the police operator and Trayvon supposedly came up to his vehicle to check him out. So did it happen after GZ stopped his pursuit and turned back to the truck and Trayvon came up behind him and said "Do you have a problem?" or whatever the GZ story is about that?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2_trayvon-martin-case.html

I agree he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, but the little bit that we know about Trayvon being on the phone, it certainly sounds as if Zimmerman was the one to first approach Trayvon and not that there was any sucker punch that broke his nose and knocked him down...It sounds as if he stopped Trayvon in an attempt to make him answer questions....so who was standing their ground, because that rendition does not sound like a kid who was talking to his girlfriend would suddenly just punch or attack, and certainly an unarmed teen who is on the phone is not going to take you so much by surprise that you are flat on your back unable to land the first blow or defend yourself in any manner. IMO that statement while intended to help defend his stance on not arresting Zimmerman actually does the opposite for me, it make the whole claim incredible IMO JMHO and stuff.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

At this point we don't know what Chief Lee's role was in stopping the arrest of Zimmerman as lead investigator wanted to do or whether he short-circuited the investigation in any way so I will reserve judgment on that. I do object to the way he handled speaking about the case. IMO he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, not someone seeking the truth. On March 15, he said "&#8220;If someone asks you, &#8216;Hey do you live here?&#8217; is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?&#8221; Lee said. &#8220;It&#8217;s not.&#8221; He had only GZ's word that he said that and I would like to know just when that happened. It certainly didn't happen when he was on the phone with the police operator and Trayvon supposedly came up to his vehicle to check him out. So did it happen after GZ stopped his pursuit and turned back to the truck and Trayvon came up behind him and said "Do you have a problem?" or whatever the GZ story is about that?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2_trayvon-martin-case.html

BBM

It was also evidence in a case he was selectively leaking to bolster his position.

Very unprofessional.

and remember what SP Corey said about all the stuff leaked in the case and what a problem it was? IMO

 

[m00c0w]

The mods will not allow me to answer you in the way I want to.

I will respond to what you wrote:

You have officers of the court that hold a grave interest in the prosecution succeeding in this case. Intrinsically, it's no different. Ethically, I do not agree with any of it. I think they should all keep their mouths shut. However, if one side is doing it, I think that both sides should be able to.

 

[Chris_Texas]

At this point we don't know what Chief Lee's role was in stopping the arrest of Zimmerman as lead investigator wanted to do or whether he short-circuited the investigation in any way so I will reserve judgment on that. I do object to the way he handled speaking about the case. IMO he sounded like an advocate for Zimmerman, not someone seeking the truth. On March 15, he said "“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.” He had only GZ's word that he said that and I would like to know just when that happened. It certainly didn't happen when he was on the phone with the police operator and Trayvon supposedly came up to his vehicle to check him out. So did it happen after GZ stopped his pursuit and turned back to the truck and Trayvon came up behind him and said "Do you have a problem?" or whatever the GZ story is about that?

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2_trayvon-martin-case.html

Good catch!

Without in any way disrespecting Trayvon or his family, in my opinion the most troublesome part of this case is not the potentially sociopathic watchman gunning down the black kid because he thought he could get away with it, but the police conduct in this case.

IMO something happened there, something very very wrong, and that's the part of this story that really needs to be brought to light.

I happen to believe Zimmerman intended to kill Trayvon the moment he saw him. I believe he was setting up his alibi with the 911 call, and that this was a premeditated murder gone screwy. That's what I believe, but even so the most concerning part of the story is that the police acted more like accomplices than investigators.

MMO etc

 

[Ironhorse]

Unless you have a crystal ball or you are psychic, there is absolutely no way you can know that for sure. I thought surely Casey would be convicted, and look what happened in that case. We won't know anything until we go to trial and the hear the verdict. It's inflammatory to insist on outcome when the trial hasn't even started yet.

Actually I knew Anthony would not be found guilty. I happen to be at a bar the day the verdict was read. And before the jury ever spoke I said aloud she's going to be acquitted... You should have seen the looks I got after the Jury read it's verdict exactly as I said it would be...

It's the same thing here Zimmerman will be acquitted mark my words... He was attacked and defended himself it's going to be near impossible for the Prosecution to prove otherwise.

 

[suzihawk]

I will give O'Mara this - in the appearances I've seen (and in complete contrast to GZ's bombastic and ridiculous "legal advisors" earlier in the case), he's been professional, polite, respectful in his comments about the family and prosecutors, and he hasn't made wild claims or tried to grandstand. So I don't have a problem with him (at least at this point in time).

<snipped>

It wasn't respectful when he allowed and endorsed his client's very public apology to the family when they specifically made it clear that wasn't what they wanted.

IMO