• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Trayvon Martin’s social media posts may come up at trial [W: 980]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Grim17 said:
I based that on the cleaned up audio from CNN, where it absolutely sounded like "cold"... When I listened to the other version of the audio that someone had linked to, I acknowledged that it did indeed sound like "punks", and apologized... And that my friend, is what an honest person does when they have made a mistake, and is certainly not the actions of a person who puts their political beliefs above the truth.
Click to expand...

And just in case you doubt me, here's what I said:

Grim17 said:
After listening to the other version of the audio, it does sound like "punks' so I apologize for what I have said to you and retract my previous posts.
Click to expand...
 
lpast said:
This post says it all...doesnt matter what really occurred now...all the conjecture and speculations means nothing...the gamesmanship has begun between the prosecutor and CDL to win the hearts and minds of the jury..who in the end are the only opinions that count....
Click to expand...
You should scurry back under your rock .... you're on a roll tonight.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
That may not be necessary. If both sides present contradictory evidence and neither side can prove it, members of the jury will likely decide for themselves whom they find more believable.

Personally, I would think like you in this regard and assume the person on trial, more than an eyewitness, has reason to lie. I suspect jury members will too.
Click to expand...

Thats cool, dude

Remember from the series...House. "Everybody lies"
 
ric27 said:
Very true, indeed
Click to expand...

From my experience there will be information that comes out during the trial that hasnt either been reported or reported and distorted...and what makes it more convoluted is the stand your ground law in florida...which in the end may determine the outcome of the trial.
 
lpast said:
From my experience there will be information that comes out during the trial that hasnt either been reported or reported and distorted...and what makes it more convoluted is the stand your ground law in florida...which in the end may determine the outcome of the trial.
Click to expand...

Stand your ground won't apply... because Trayvon also had a right to SYG..

This will go to self defense which will fail...... GZ is in for at least ten years.. With good behavior he could be out in 6.
 
sharon said:
Stand your ground won't apply... because Trayvon also had a right to SYG..

This will go to self defense which will fail...... GZ is in for at least ten years.. With good behavior he could be out in 6.
Click to expand...

I think your wrong..stand your ground will be a big part of the trial....syg is self defense
 
sharon said:
Stand your ground won't apply... because Trayvon also had a right to SYG..
Click to expand...

Why?

This will go to self defense which will fail...... GZ is in for at least ten years.. With good behavior he could be out in 6.
Click to expand...

Why?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Meanwhile, this was one of the first issues the prosecution raised in the bond hearing.
Click to expand...
You are attaching too much importance to it, it means nothing.


Sheik Yerbuti said:
She is an eyewitness to the shooting as she was watching them when the gun was fired. She didn't see the gun fired, possibly because the gun was pressed up against Trayvon's chest, but she was watching and saw when he was shot. She said she was watching and unless you were watching her, you can't contradict what she claims she saw.
Click to expand...
Talk about double speak all in the same paragraph.


She is an eye-witness who didn't actually see the shooting. Ridiculous.


Get over it dude.
She is not an eye-witness to the shooting, but an ear-witness to it.
Everybody else can see she isn't even a worthwhile witness.




sangha said:
The video of an eyewitness has been posted. Try to keep up
Click to expand...
You try to keep up.
You were the one who is wrong.




sangha said:
The eywitness was looking at the two of them when GZ shot TM. Your posts are filled with dishonest claims
Click to expand...
And as I have said, she didn't see the shot.
You are the one who is being dishonest.




sangha said:
Excon said:
sangha said:
Unfortunately, the only evidence of GZ's claim is his own self-serving testimony. Too bad he can't corroborate any of it.
Click to expand...
I guess, to bad for you!


Police: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him with one blow then began hammering his head
7:36 p.m. EST, March 26, 2012
By Rene Stutzman, Orlando SentinelWith a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law-enforcement authorities told the Orlando Sentinel.

That is the account Zimmerman gave police, [highlight]and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say[/highlight]. There have been no reports that a witness saw the initial punch Zimmerman told police about.

[...]​
Trayvon Martin: George Zimmerman's account to police of the Trayvon Martin shooting. - Orlando Sentinel​
Click to expand...
The quote doesn't say that the claim that TM threw the 1st punch has been corroborated. It doesn't specify that anything in particular has been corroborated
Click to expand...
Talk about dishonesty on your part.

Much of his account has been corroborated.
Deal with it.




sangha said:
c) You're not supposed to ignore the plethora of additional facts which incriminate GZ, like the fact that GZ pursued TM
Click to expand...
lol
:doh :lamo :doh :lamo :doh
There is no "plethora" of additional facts.




sharon said:
That's why Zimmerman is going to trial..
Click to expand...
You do not know that at this time.


sharon said:
It doesn't matter whether or not Trayvon threw the first punch.
Click to expand...
As previously pointed out, yes it does matter.


sharon said:
You simply don't get it..
Click to expand...
That would be you.
 
sharon said:
No.. Zim won't beat the rap..
Click to expand...
Most likely he will walk.



Thunder said:
sorry bud, but no matter how much you love Zimmerman and hate Martin, Zimmerman is going DOWN!
Click to expand...
You do not know that.



Thunder said:
your faith in the evidence presented by Zimmerman, is striking.
Click to expand...
Your faith in Zimmerman words is striking.



sangha said:
And another GZ defender admits that he made dishonest claims without having the facts
Click to expand...
The one making claims was you.
The one making dishonest claims was you.
The one lying was you.


sangha said:
You're wrong. Self-defense is an affirmative defense which must be proven by the defense
Click to expand...
How idiotic.
You were already shown to be wrong by the very information you provided.
And yet you still make the same claim.
That's crazy talk.




sharon said:
I don't know..
Click to expand...
Exactly!


sharon said:
... but it may be the reason that Chris Serino didn't believe GZ's account the night of the incident.
Click to expand...
You do not know if that is true.



Sheik Yerbuti said:
What I don't see is evidence of his injuries being consistent with with Trayvon repeatedly "bashing" his head on concrete.
Click to expand...
He has two separate injuries on the back of his head.
Two times is "repeatedly'.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
More like 99%.
Click to expand...


Code: 
[B]Plea and Charge Bargaining[/B]
[INDENT]Research Summary[INDENT][SIZE=1]

[...]

[/SIZE]According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2005), in 2003 there were 75,573 cases
disposed of in federal district court by trial or plea. Of these, about 95 percent were
disposed of by a guilty plea (Pastore and Maguire, 2003). While there are no exact
estimates of the proportion of cases that are resolved through plea bargaining,
scholars estimate that about 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state court cases
are resolved through this process (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005; Flanagan and
Maguire, 1990).[SIZE=1]
[...][/SIZE][/INDENT][/INDENT]
[SIZE=1][url=https://www.bja.gov/Publications/PleaBargainingResearchSummary.pdf]Plea and Charge Bargaining; Research Summary[/url][/SIZE]


[B]To Plead or Not to Plead?[/B]
[INDENT]Reviewing a Decade of Criminal Antitrust Trials
F. Joseph Warin, David P. Burns, and John W.F. Chesley

[INDENT]Over the last ten years, the success rate achieved by the U.S. Department of Justice

(DOJ) in convicting criminal defendants at trial is staggeringly high—over 77 percent

of those who elect to go to trial are found guilty.1 In fraud trials, that number is

even higher—nearly 80 percent.[SIZE=1]
[...][/SIZE][/INDENT][/INDENT]
[SIZE=1][url=http://www.gibsondunn.com/publications/Documents/Warin-Burns-Chesley-ToPleadorNottoPlead.pdf]To Plead or Not to Plead?[/url][/SIZE]


"... in 2003 there were 75,573 cases disposed of in federal district court by trial or plea.
Of these, about 95 percent were disposed of by a guilty plea (Pastore and Maguire, 2003)."​


That leaves just 5% going to trial. (with the exception of any not-guilty pleas, not going to trial)


"... over 77 percent of those who elect to go to trial are found guilty."​


Which means of the 5% that elect to go to trial, over 77% of those are convicted.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Thread exceeds 2000 posts, locking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom