• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon Mart

Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ThePlayDrive said:
All of the people you mentioned have talked publicly about "kids being murdered everyday". It turns out, however, that "everyday murderers" don't usually make national news so you don't see them as often when they're talking about that. Here's some info on Sharpton and Jackson.

Sharpton decries black-on-black violence *| ajc.com
Issues | Rainbow PUSH Coalition (Jackson's organization where some it's main issues is gun violence in "urban" aka black communities)

I would also appreciate it if you would answer the other question I asked: How do you know them so well as to know what they talk about when you're not around and when a camera isn't in their face?

Your posts seem to be classic case of "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" which is an illogical position to take.
Click to expand...

I know them well because I grew up and lived in Minnapolis in the 60s and 70s. I know how big city Black liberals operate very well. Talk is cheap. You can't logically deny that what happened here is not race hustling. I don't care if they love dogs and buy kids ice cream cones. They're still race hustlers. That's how they have made their living and still do.

This tragedy was used because of the SYG law. Why this tragedy over all the other murders happening every day? What's so special about this one? I know. Do you? Tell us.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

muciti said:
The only one assumed innocent is the person facing charges. To the best of my knowledge, Martin is not facing charges.
Click to expand...

Of course he isn't, he's dead. If that notion alone isn't enough to raise alarm bells towards the current justice system must I put it in simpler terms? For the living guy to be innocent lacking reasonable doubt, the dead guy has to be guilty lacking reasonable doubt.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

Burden of proof = There is a dead body and you made it that way. From that point, you have to prove that it was self defense.
Click to expand...

The prosecution doesnt just have to produce a dead body and get to call it a day. They have to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense never has the burden of proof placed upon them. That's just not the way it works. Our legal system is not set up that way.

The defense has to prove that it was self defense and in doing so, you have to prove that he was being attacked by Treyvon which would be a crime by Treyvon.
Click to expand...

Again, no. The defense has to make the jury beleive that there is a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed murder (or possibly manslaughter in this case from the rumors). They do not have to prove Zimmerman was being attacked by Martin they only have to make 1 out of 12 jurors reasonably believe he might have been attacked. The prosecution has to prove to 12 out of 12 jurors that there is no way Zimmerman acted in self defense.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

poweRob said:
There is evidence you want to believe then there is the body of evidence which is all the rest you wish to ignore. The jury doesn't get to ignore evidence or throw evidence out like you are doing.
Click to expand...

A body does not equal murder. You again seem to be confusing the legal system with the court of public opinion.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

Neal N. Bloeme said:
Sharpton of MSNBC, Jackson, Roland Martin of CNN, Karen Finney of MSNBC, Martin Bashir of MSNBC, etc. There are more, but that's a good enough start to make a point.
Click to expand...

You forget your name on that list. That is your real name --- as you have stated so many times - right?
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

poweRob said:
Except in this case the screaming stopped after the shot was fired... and Zimmerman has staked a claim that it was him screaming.



Then Treyvon should clearly have some of alllll that so-called abundance of blood Zimmerman was shedding from his head and broken nose on his & Zimmerman's clothes right? Or Treyvon's knuckles would show wear of the tremendous beating Zimmerman was getting at his hands right?



I'm not getting one bit emotional. I'm just stating that there is evidence that you are not considering all while saying "clear cut". It is not clear cut in any way.
Click to expand...

Your still not getting it. If you have evidence that supports both stories, then it defaults to work in favor of the defense. Guilt has to be proven. Not just likely. Or the defense questionable.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ThePlayDrive said:
I would also appreciate it if you would answer the other question I asked: How do you know them so well as to know what they talk about when you're not around and when a camera isn't in their face?

Your posts seem to be classic case of "if I don't see it, it doesn't exist" which is an illogical position to take.
Click to expand...

Get real

Jackson, Sharpton, NAACP and their ilk depend on "racism" for their raison d'etre. No racisim = no ****ing job. After all, careers have been built on this stuff. They need "whitey" and his perceived racism.

As regards Sharpton and Jackson, why do they have the salutation of *reverend*?

How often do they bring Biblical principles to the table in their public discourse?
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ThePlayDrive said:
Sure there is a difference, but that difference has no bearing on whether or not it is "rational" - unless you have some emotional ties to a murder case that make it upsetting when members of the public make assumptions about it. Moreover, lawyers in a murder case on both sides must make assumptions in order to even develop arguments. Judges and jurors must make assumptions in order to even come to conclusions. Everybody has to make assumptions. So again, still rational and necessary.

Another point for the public - it's perfectly rational to see a national news story and piece together your own hypothesis about what happened by making assumptions. In fact, I don't even know that's it's possible to be presented information and then turn your brain off in such a way that you wouldn't come to assumed conclusions about the information you've been given. Have you not made assumptions about the Zimmerman case?
Click to expand...
Re-post.

----
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ric27 said:
Get real

Jackson, Sharpton, NAACP and their ilk depend on "racism" for their raison d'etre. No racisim = no ****ing job. After all, careers have been built on this stuff. They need "whitey" and his perceived racism.

As regards Sharpton and Jackson, why do they have the salutation of *reverend*?

How often do they bring Biblical principles to the table in their public discourse?
Click to expand...
I did "get real". In fact, I got so real that I posted links to so support my position. The end.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

muciti said:
A body does not equal murder.
Click to expand...

I never said it was murder. When there is a dead body there has to be an explanation for that dead body. You can't shoot someone and it's over. Either Treyvon committed a crime by attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman evoked self defense and killed him, or Zimmerman wrongly killed Treyvon. One way or another, there was something illegal going on.

muciti said:
You again seem to be confusing the legal system with the court of public opinion.
Click to expand...

You are confusing... I have no idea what you are confusing but I guess it's fiction and non fiction. Dead bodies have to have an explanation. They can't just happen and that's that.


1st degree murder.
2nd degree murder.
Manslaughter.
Self Defense.
Wrongful Death.​


Help me lawyers but I think this is the run of it but I'm sure it can be summed up better or more clearly.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

Grim17 said:
The thought of them having a trial and finding him not guilty brings 2 words to mind... Rodney King.
Click to expand...

Not OJ Simpson?
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

muciti said:
Your still not getting it. If you have evidence that supports both stories, then it defaults to work in favor of the defense. Guilt has to be proven. Not just likely. Or the defense questionable.
Click to expand...

Listen. IF YOU KILL SOMEONE... YOU HAVE TO PROVE WHY YOU KILLED THEM.

And in this case, there is no doubt or question that Zimmerman killed Martin. Zimmerman isn't claiming innocence at killing Martin so the burden of proof isn't on the prosecutor to show that Zimmerman killed Martin. Zimmerman did in fact kill Martin. No if ands or buts about it. It's on Zimmerman to prove why he did it. He has to prove it was self defense.


I'm in here not saying one way or the other. I'm saying the facts and you are play a selective evidence game.
 
Last edited:
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

To make it simpler for you PoweRob. If you take a look at all the evidence that we have. Not people's opinions. Actual evidence that has been leaked.

The 911 call from Zimmerman.
The GF account of what happened.
Zimmermans injuries.
Various eye witnesses.
The 911 screams.
Zimmermans account of what happened.

No other evidence is coming to mind. Sorry if I missed something.

Think about the actual evidence that we have. We can reasonably come to a couple conclusions here.

Zimmerman was following Martin (not illegally) as NHW captain because he thought Martin was suspicious. Martin did not like being followed. An altercation happened. Martin was winning the fight. Martin was killed.

Just based on what we have here there is no way of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that a murder happened. At best for the prosecutions case its a 50/50 shot with that info. A prosecutor is not going to convince 12 out of 12 people that this is murder. There isnt enough here.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

Listen. IF YOU KILL SOMEONE... YOU HAVE TO PROVE WHY YOU KILLED THEM.
Click to expand...

Wrong. You have to explain why you killed them as your defense. The prosecution has to prove that you are lying. Read up on the law. The burden of proof is always with the prosecution.

I'm in here not saying one way or the other. I'm saying the facts and you are play a selective evidence game.
Click to expand...

How so man? What evidence am I selectively ignoring?
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

I never said it was murder. When there is a dead body there has to be an explanation for that dead body. You can't shoot someone and it's over. Either Treyvon committed a crime by attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman evoked self defense and killed him, or Zimmerman wrongly killed Treyvon. One way or another, there was something illegal going on.
Click to expand...

No you can't shoot someone and its over. But if the shooter says it was self defense, then the prosecution has to prove it wasnt. The burden of proof is never on the defense. The prosecution in this case cannot explain Zimmermans injuries. They cant explain the eye witnesses. They cant even produce a motive for killing Martin. The only thing they have is some holes in Zimmermans story. Which is not enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt when there is so much other evidence supporting his story.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ThePlayDrive said:
I did "get real". In fact, I got so real that I posted links to so support my position. The end.
Click to expand...

Again, get real...

As long as the NAACP, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton exist, racism will be alive and well - it is their meal ticket.

Thats, the end
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ric27 said:
Again, get real...

As long as the NAACP, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton exist, racism will be alive and well - it is their meal ticket.

Thats, the end
Click to expand...
It's actually the reverse. As long as racism is alive, the NAACP, Jack and Sharpton will exist (except not really because racism with probably exist after they die, but you get the picture). :)
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

This may help PoweRob.

Criminal Law: Defenses FAQs - Lawyers.com

The defense of "self defense" is what's called an "affirmative defense." The prosecution must disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

I am not wrong on this.

You can read more

Self Defence - Defence to criminal charges

or

Defending the Self-Defense Case

The best case I think, based on all of the evidence we have, for the prosecution to score a conviction is to prove the Zimmerman used excessive force in defending himself. They cannot (based on what we know) prove that he was not acting in self defense. But they may be able to prove that lethal was not needed.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

This is an excellent development. The persecution of George Zimmerman should come to an end. As citizens, we need to preserve our right to self-defense. The race of the decedent attacker ought to be irrelevant, however as Ric astutely points out, the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, and Al Sharpton exist to perpetuate racism and foment ethno warfare.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

ThePlayDrive said:
It's actually the reverse. As long as racism is alive, the NAACP, Jack and Sharpton will exist (except not really because racism with probably exist after they die, but you get the picture). :)
Click to expand...

Jackson, Sharpton and the NAACP are doing more to keep racism alive than they are to stopping it. Until the NAACP becomes the NAAP then they are a racist organization. And until Sharpton and Jackson start caring about the rights of all people then they too are no better than the KKK leadership.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

MaggieD said:
t
Because she probably intends to bring charges come hell or high water. It's not about truth now. Now about the law. Not about the regular standards the DA uses to decide whether or not to bring charges. It's about bringing Zimmerman to trial to satisfy the people who have already convicted him in their minds.
Click to expand...

Irony. She hasn't even done anything and you already "convict her in your mind". A Grand Jury wouldn't be a high bar to achieve since there's no defense.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

The standard action taken for self defense cases is the concept of an affirmative defense. The accused agrees to part of the charge (the actual killing), but puts for evidence to justify their actions. Exactly what standard of proof is required is quite variable depending on jurisdiction and circumstances.

For a decent legal analysis of Florida's stand your ground law an its application to the Martin case.

Florida's Stand Your Ground Law : Use of Deadly Force in Self-Defense

In summary, based on other cases involving the same law, the defense can file a motion for immunity in a pre-trial hearing. For the motion to succeed, the defense must meet the standard for "preponderance of the evidence". Barring such a ruling, the case moves to trial as usual.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

poweRob said:
I never said it was murder. When there is a dead body there has to be an explanation for that dead body. You can't shoot someone and it's over. Either Treyvon committed a crime by attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman evoked self defense and killed him, or Zimmerman wrongly killed Treyvon. One way or another, there was something illegal going on.



You are confusing... I have no idea what you are confusing but I guess it's fiction and non fiction. Dead bodies have to have an explanation. They can't just happen and that's that.


1st degree murder.
2nd degree murder.
Manslaughter.
Self Defense.
Wrongful Death.​


Help me lawyers but I think this is the run of it but I'm sure it can be summed up better or more clearly.
Click to expand...

I guess from my reading that this is what distinguishes the SYGL from traditional self defense.

Under SYG as it has been interpreted by the courts in Florida. The burden of proof rwmains entirely on the prosecution if the defendant simply RAISES or CLAIMS self defense.

All one needs to do is claim they killed in self defense and it becomes necessary to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they WEREN'T acting in self defense.

Another affirmative defense is insanity. You killed but were crazy at the time so aren't responsible. YOU are required to prove you're crazy.

So if there was an insanity version of SYG, you would simply have to claim you were crazy and the prosecution would have to prove you WEREN'T.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

muciti said:
Jackson, Sharpton and the NAACP are doing more to keep racism alive than they are to stopping it. Until the NAACP becomes the NAAP then they are a racist organization. And until Sharpton and Jackson start caring about the rights of all people then they too are no better than the KKK leadership.
Click to expand...
I don't think you know what "racist" means. And the rest of your comment is highly irrational. Does this mean that gay rights groups are anti-straight? That Asian organizations are racist? That women's and men's groups are sexist? I can't believe how irrational your posts are becoming. They get worse everyday.
 
Re: BREAKING NEWS: Special prosecutor says she won't use a grand jury in the Trayvon

muciti said:
Legally the prosecution can't make assumptions. Rational people probably shouldnt either. But yes, you can make all the assumptions you want. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

That's just dumb. The first assumption in criminal court is "innocent until proven guilty". The problem here is people who want to assume that Zimmerman is innocent also want to assume that Martin was guilty, and vice versa. The case is ****ed because the law is ****ed. No one should be able to shoot someone dead and then go home without a thorough investigation and setting all the facts straight. If Martin had killed Zimmerman in that altercation, surely people would want Martin to face a thorough investigation as well.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom