• 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.

Important Rulings Made At Today's Hearing

Stardog said:
:naughty
Wrong. All the accusations are supported by court records. Motion denied.
Click to expand...

Yep. And the ever wrong ExCON is also wrong about the pre-trial diversion program -- it was for

ANGER MANAGEMENT -- and he even ****ed up with that, as he had to have his program extended by two more months.
 
sharon said:
George admitted the sexual molestation to her parents 7 years ago.
Click to expand...
You do not know that sharon.
That is also an allegation.

Do you really not understand that?
 
Paperview said:
Yep. And the ever wrong ExCON is also wrong about the pre-trial diversion program -- it was for

ANGER MANAGEMENT -- and he even ****ed up with that, as he had to have his program extended by two more months.
Click to expand...

This is simple. Prove it.

Or admit the reports state that it was an alcohol program.
 
Stardog said:
Wow, first Zimmerman's pull the race card and now they are playing the gay card. Shameful!
Click to expand...

Robert is an opportunist .............. looking for 15 minutes of fame.
 
Stardog said:
Wrong. The statements of the victim are evidence.

Wrong. Courts of law don't issue orders for unsupported allegations.

Wrong. The events are on the record and, if the defense opens the door to character evidence, the State can bring in reputation evidence that Z attacked a cop. (Seriously, people have been talking about this for over a year and you don't know how character evidence works? lol! Why is it I can never find a Z supporter to debate who's actually educated in the law. Very telling.)

Motion denied.
Click to expand...
iLOL
:doh

Yes you are wrong.
You are still showing that you know not of what you speak.
 
Excon said:
This is simple. Prove it.

Or admit the reports state that it was an alcohol program.
Click to expand...

George had to complete both.. anger mgmt... and alcohol intervention program.
 
sharon said:
George had to complete both.. anger mgmt... and alcohol intervention program.
Click to expand...

Like I said sharon.

This is simple. Prove it.

Or admit the reports state that it was an alcohol program.​


In 2005, Zimmerman, then 20, was arrested and charged with “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” both which are third-degree felonies. The charge was reduced to “resisting officer without violence” and then waived when he entered an alcohol education program. Contemporaneous accounts indicate he shoved an officer who was questioning a friend for alleged underage drinking at an Orange County bar.
Zimmerman accused of domestic violence, fighting with a police officer - U.S. News​
 
Last edited:
Excon said:
This is simple. Prove it.

Or admit the reports state that it was an alcohol program.
Click to expand...

Sheesh. I thought you read the evidence and watched the hearings.

Even his WIFE admitted he attended an Anger Management course.

Some people who claim to know everything about the case, don't know very much.
 
Paperview said:
Sheesh. I thought you read the evidence and watched the hearings.

Even his WIFE admitted he attended an Anger Management course.

Some people who claim to know everything about the case, don't know very much.
Click to expand...

They think motions are evidence! :lamo
 
Paperview said:
Sheesh. I thought you read the evidence and watched the hearings.

Even his WIFE admitted he attended an Anger Management course.

Some people who claim to know everything about the case, don't know very much.
Click to expand...

Like I said Paperview.

This is simple. Prove it.

Or admit the reports state that it was an alcohol program.​


In 2005, Zimmerman, then 20, was arrested and charged with “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” both which are third-degree felonies. The charge was reduced to “resisting officer without violence” and then waived when he entered an alcohol education program. Contemporaneous accounts indicate he shoved an officer who was questioning a friend for alleged underage drinking at an Orange County bar.
Zimmerman accused of domestic violence, fighting with a police officer - U.S. News​
 
Fisher said:
Why? It isn't that hard to get the information admissible. This just limits the opening statements. No more, no less.
Click to expand...

It does more than that. It limits the defense from mentioning any of the specific things in the prosecutions motions.

Now, if the prosecution mentions certain things about George's past life not specific to the night of the shooting, these motions are wasted. As it was the prosecution who filed these motions, I highly doubt they will shoot themselves in the foot.

It was planned. I have faith in Angela B. Corey's +90% conviction rate.
 
Stardog said:
They think motions are evidence! :lamo
Click to expand...
Figures.
Still just showing you are here to be disruptive.
Even being dishonest to do so. Which is the norm.
 
It was part of the very first Bond hearing....and it's been in subsequent evidence released wince then, of which I'm not going to dig up now.

It's there. I am certain.

But you can hear it straight from the mouth of good ole ShelLIE:

O'MARA: OK. Now, they arrested him that night, did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: They charged him with a couple felonies, battery on law enforcement officer and resisting arrest, on instruction of justice. Did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: OK. After having been arrested for that felony, do you know how the case was resolved?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I know that he did a pretrial diversion.

O'MARA: So, in effect, that event suggested to be a violent event, what the state actually did was let him plead --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Is this a question?

O'MARA: It is going to be. They let him plead to a misdemeanor and go to pretrial conversion, is that your testimony?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, it is.

O'MARA: Do you know what he had to do as conditions of that pretrial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I believe he had to go to anger management.

O'MARA: And do you have any indication that he didn't successfully complete that?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I don't.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication he didn't successfully complete the entirety of his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Say that one more time.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication that he did not successfully complete his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, he didn't.

CNN.com - Transcripts
 
Paperview said:
It was part of the very first Bond hearing....and it's been in subsequent evidence released wince then, of which I'm not going to dig up now.

It's there. I am certain.

But you can hear it straight from the mouth of good ole ShelLIE:

O'MARA: OK. Now, they arrested him that night, did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: They charged him with a couple felonies, battery on law enforcement officer and resisting arrest, on instruction of justice. Did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: OK. After having been arrested for that felony, do you know how the case was resolved?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I know that he did a pretrial diversion.

O'MARA: So, in effect, that event suggested to be a violent event, what the state actually did was let him plead --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Is this a question?

O'MARA: It is going to be. They let him plead to a misdemeanor and go to pretrial conversion, is that your testimony?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, it is.

O'MARA: Do you know what he had to do as conditions of that pretrial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I believe he had to go to anger management.

O'MARA: And do you have any indication that he didn't successfully complete that?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I don't.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication he didn't successfully complete the entirety of his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Say that one more time.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication that he did not successfully complete his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, he didn't.

CNN.com - Transcripts
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for posting. Now, that I've come to realize that all Z supporters do is lie, it is making me really angry.
 
"Zahra Umansky, who represented Zimmerman after a 2005 arrest on an assault charge, said the severity of the count came as a surprise to many lawyers.
"We, as a legal community, thought that the charge would be only manslaughter," Umansky told CNN's "Starting Point."

In the 2005 case, Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program and took an anger-management class, Umansky said."

Experts argue appropriateness of murder charge in Martin case - CNN.com

Good enough?
 
Paperview said:
It was part of the very first Bond hearing....and it's been in subsequent evidence released wince then, of which I'm not going to dig up now.

It's there. I am certain.

But you can hear it straight from the mouth of good ole ShelLIE:

O'MARA: OK. Now, they arrested him that night, did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: They charged him with a couple felonies, battery on law enforcement officer and resisting arrest, on instruction of justice. Did they not?

S. ZIMMERMAN: They did.

O'MARA: OK. After having been arrested for that felony, do you know how the case was resolved?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I know that he did a pretrial diversion.

O'MARA: So, in effect, that event suggested to be a violent event, what the state actually did was let him plead --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection. Is this a question?

O'MARA: It is going to be. They let him plead to a misdemeanor and go to pretrial conversion, is that your testimony?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes, it is.

O'MARA: Do you know what he had to do as conditions of that pretrial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I believe he had to go to anger management.

O'MARA: And do you have any indication that he didn't successfully complete that?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I don't.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication he didn't successfully complete the entirety of his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Say that one more time.

O'MARA: Do you have any indication that he did not successfully complete his misdemeanor pre-trial diversion?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, he didn't.

CNN.com - Transcripts
Click to expand...

Holy ****!
:doh
Really?
You present a transcript of what she is saying she believes which indicates she isn't exactly clear on the issue.
Holy ****in ****!
How pathetic.

It is reported as an alcohol program.
Prove it wasn't.


Paperview said:
"The court ordered Zimmerman to attend anger management classes. "

Years before Trayvon Martin case, Zimmerman had run-in with police - U.S. News
Click to expand...

Thank you!
Was that so hard?

Now we have conflicting evidence both from NBC.
Now prove which one is correct.

I am going with the one most widely reported until evidence proves otherwise.
 
I heard that O'Mara suggested the jury could be allowed to go to the scene of the crime if they couldn't be identified by wearing white sheets and hoods. Judge Nelson didn't buy it.
 
I read the documents. It was Anger Management.

It's in the Discovery. I'm not going to dig through them now. When I make a point of fact that I've seen it, you can take it to the bank.

Well, you won't, cause you don;t believe anything that doesn't fit your fixed notions, but others here will, and know my word is solid.

You think Shellie would offer up Anger Management instead of Alcohol if she could?

They knew damn well what program it was, and she knew it too. Files are in Discovery. Look it up.
 
Stardog said:
Wow, thanks for posting. Now, that I've come to realize that all Z supporters do is lie, it is making me really angry.
Click to expand...

I can only imagine how mad you must be at Sharon. You must be absolutely seething.
 
Excon said:
Now we have conflicting evidence both from NBC.
Now prove which one is correct.

I am going with the one most widely reported until evidence proves otherwise.
Click to expand...

I would probably side with Zimmerman's own lawyer at the time and his wife Shelie....
 
Paperview said:
I read the documents. It was Anger Management.

It's in the Discovery. I'm not going to dig through them now. When I make a point of fact that I've seen it, you can take it to the bank.

Well, you won't, cause you don;t believe anything that doesn't fit your fixed notions, but others here will, and know my word is solid.

You think Shellie would offer up Anger Management instead of Alcohol if she could?

They knew damn well what program it was, and she knew it too. Files are in Discovery. Look it up.
Click to expand...
If you are going to make a claim, prove it.

It is that simple.

You are not special and have not proven anything about what you say.

What you think about yourself is irrelevant and unproven.
And actually, I think you have proven otherwise in your initial engagement here.

So start supporting what you say.

If you can prove actual records, of course I will believe it, because unlike Traybots, that is my bias, the truth.


As it stands, we have two different reports.

Logically a Judge would not sentence one to anger management for a non-violent incident, (which is what that Judge, Miller, W Michael, was dealing with, a non-violent case) but since it contained alcohol, an alcohol program would be more than likely be the PTD program.



Here is the link for the Felony case that was dropped down to a misdemeanor.
http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=5782626

Here is the link to the Misdemeanor case that was waived in-lieu-of the PTD program. It doesn't state which program it was. So you still have to provide proof.
http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=5797428
 
Last edited:
JackFrost said:
I would probably side with Zimmerman's own lawyer at the time and his wife Shelie....
Click to expand...
Shelli makes it clear she is unsure.
What did his lawyer say?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom