• 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.

Is Zimmerman Getting a Fair Trial?

C

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Every headline seems to read that his defense can't do this, can't raise that, and the judge really seems to be on a vendetta since the fund raising fiasco and his court presentation in the bail hearing. I have a hard time understanding why his defense can't use Martin's character issues since they would support him being an aggressive thug capable of exactly what Zimmerman claims he did. It just seems like the fix is in against Zimmerman and I see people who know very little about the case just happy as all get out that is the case?

Do you think his trial is going to be fair?
 
Simple answer; yes.
 
Grim17 said:
Translated: If it screws Zimmerman, that's what I call fair.
Click to expand...

Its a fair trial. To say otherwise is insane. Just because a trial is well publicized does not make it not a fair tiral.
 
CalGun said:
Every headline seems to read that his defense can't do this, can't raise that, and the judge really seems to be on a vendetta since the fund raising fiasco and his court presentation in the bail hearing. I have a hard time understanding why his defense can't use Martin's character issues since they would support him being an aggressive thug capable of exactly what Zimmerman claims he did. It just seems like the fix is in against Zimmerman and I see people who know very little about the case just happy as all get out that is the case?

Do you think his trial is going to be fair?
Click to expand...

1. What exactly can't they do, specifically?
2. Judge Debra Nelson had nothing to do with the bail bond hearing. Judge Lester presided over that. Why would Nelson have a vendetta regarding the fund raising/bail?
 
Thanks for the clarification on the judges I thought they were one in the same,

As for what they can't do, specifically, as I read in our media the orders from the judge
last week prevent the defense from telling the jury about indescretions in Martin's past
including drug use, connections to a local gang, dealing drugs, a school suspension over
drugs I believe, and some reported fights he was involved in. In otherwords the state
can project the victim as an innocent little kid with the cute little picture they've run
for a year and the defense can't say otherwise? How is that fair?


JackFrost said:
1. What exactly can't they do, specifically?
2. Judge Debra Nelson had nothing to do with the bail bond hearing. Judge Lester presided over that. Why would Nelson have a vendetta regarding the fund raising/bail?
Click to expand...
 
CalGun said:
Thanks for the clarification on the judges I thought they were one in the same,

As for what they can't do, specifically, as I read in our media the orders from the judge
last week prevent the defense from telling the jury about indescretions in Martin's past
including drug use, connections to a local gang, dealing drugs, a school suspension over
drugs I believe, and some reported fights he was involved in. In otherwords the state
can project the victim as an innocent little kid with the cute little picture they've run
for a year and the defense can't say otherwise? How is that fair?
Click to expand...

To be clear, Judge Nelson ruled the defense can't open with Martin's "indiscretions", unless the prosecution first brings in any of Zimmerman's.

Someone else used an example of killing a CEO, and finding out after the fact he embezzled millions of dollars.

Let's say I kill a businessman under similar circumstances, and after the fact police find the following on his cell phone:

-Child Pornography
-Drug Use
-Embezzling funds from his clients
-Video of him breaking a dog's legs
-Ripping up a parking ticket
Click to expand...

The judges ruling means my defense team can't open with any of it, because I did not know about any of it before the incident. Nor can I use it as part of an affirmative defense, because I did not know the guy.

But if the prosecution brings up anything about my character, I can bring these in as character evidence.

Also, the state never projected any of what you said regarding Trayvon Martin to the media.
 
Its the SPD and Porky's dads fault that this is even a story. A normal arrest after this killing would have prevented a media firestorm. Beyond that Porky is dumber than a camp fire to put himself into this position anyway. What he expected is that Trayvon would thug up and pull a knife on him or something but Trayvon whimped out as any non-gang banging child would do and he screamed. All of you defending someone involved in such a high level of straight up dumb jackassery really puzzle me.
 
State / Media really not much different to me - not any more. But you are right the "state" itself did not project that image of Martin the media did.

Thank you for the clearance. Let me ask you this; if the "state" in its prosecution where to show "THE" image of Martin (you know the one) would
that in itself open the door for Zimmerman to counter that image? If so I would find that fair; if not I would find that unfair.


JackFrost said:
To be clear, Judge Nelson ruled the defense can't open with Martin's "indiscretions", unless the prosecution first brings in any of Zimmerman's.

Someone else used an example of killing a CEO, and finding out after the fact he embezzled millions of dollars.

Let's say I kill a businessman under similar circumstances, and after the fact police find the following on his cell phone:



The judges ruling means my defense team can't open with any of it, because I did not know about any of it before the incident. Nor can I use it as part of an affirmative defense, because I did not know the guy.

But if the prosecution brings up anything about my character, I can bring these in as character evidence.

Also, the state never projected any of what you said regarding Trayvon Martin to the media.
Click to expand...
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Its a fair trial. To say otherwise is insane. Just because a trial is well publicized does not make it not a fair tiral.
Click to expand...

It is not insane. The critical part will be if a impartial jury can really be seated. With all the pre trial publication, heck all the opinions posted on this forum. I am highly suspect if a impartial jury can be found. IMO, some will lie to get on the jury, some will lie just to not be selected.
 
JackFrost said:
Translation: Zimmerman never being charged or investigated = "fair"...:lamo
Click to expand...

Thats one take.

Let me ask you. If you were to be selected for the jury, could you be fair and impartial?
IMO, highly unlikely, you have made up your mind and it was formed using information that will not be allowed in at trial.
At least I have stated that GZ may be found guilty of manslaughter, that m2 is a bit of a long shot, and he may walk.
 
CalGun said:
Thanks for the clarification on the judges I thought they were one in the same,

As for what they can't do, specifically, as I read in our media the orders from the judge
last week prevent the defense from telling the jury about indescretions in Martin's past
including drug use, connections to a local gang, dealing drugs, a school suspension over
drugs I believe, and some reported fights he was involved in. In otherwords the state
can project the victim as an innocent little kid with the cute little picture they've run
for a year and the defense can't say otherwise? How is that fair?
Click to expand...

She also ruled against using George's prior bad acts. This trial will be fair and strictly by the book. Ignore the crybabies.
 
mike2810 said:
It is not insane. The critical part will be if a impartial jury can really be seated. With all the pre trial publication, heck all the opinions posted on this forum. I am highly suspect if a impartial jury can be found. IMO, some will lie to get on the jury, some will lie just to not be selected.
Click to expand...

That's why you have voir dire and each side gets the same number of challenges.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Simple answer; yes.
Click to expand...
The simple answer is actually no.
Not providing a continuation when clearly the Prosecutor has been obfuscating the evidence and therefore not allowing the Defense to prepare for it, is just one example of his not getting a fair trial.

The judge has shown her bias. But because of the rules she is allowed to get away with it.

But as we know, the Appellate Court is aware of her shenanigans.

Zimmerman chances of being acquitted is high, but if convicted, he stands a much better chance on appeal.
 
mike2810 said:
Thats one take.

Let me ask you. If you were to be selected for the jury, could you be fair and impartial?
IMO, highly unlikely, you have made up your mind and it was formed using information that will not be allowed in at trial.
At least I have stated that GZ may be found guilty of manslaughter, that m2 is a bit of a long shot, and he may walk.
Click to expand...

I know my role and can be fair and impartial on a jury. Regardless of what one has said on these forums, I expect anyone else not directly involved with the case capable of being fair and impartial. To show bias towards Zimmerman in a courtroom would be...just evil.
 
Excon said:
The simple answer is actually no.
Not providing a continuation when clearly the Prosecutor has been obfuscating the evidence and therefore not allowing the Defense to prepare for it, is just one example of his not getting a fair trial.

The judge has shown her bias. But because of the rules she is allowed to get away with it.

But as we know, the Appellate Court is aware of her shenanigans.

Zimmerman chances of being acquitted is high, but if convicted, he stands a much better chance on appeal.
Click to expand...

A Zimmerman supporter explaining how abiding by the rules = bias toward Zimmerman...

:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo
 
JackFrost said:
A Zimmerman supporter explaining how abiding by the rules = bias toward Zimmerman...
Click to expand...
You seem to be confused as to what i said means.


:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo:lamo
 
On NBC News tonight, they talked about the choice of the jury starting tomorrow and that it might take a couple weeks....then added, we have been sued by George Zimmerman for defamation of character and then alluded to why he has little chance of winning (can't remember the exact words) did anyone else hear it?
 
lilly said:
On NBC News tonight, they talked about the choice of the jury starting tomorrow and that it might take a couple weeks....then added, we have been sued by George Zimmerman for defamation of character and then alluded to why he has little chance of winning (can't remember the exact words) did anyone else hear it?
Click to expand...

I did not see/hear it.
 
lilly said:
On NBC News tonight, they talked about the choice of the jury starting tomorrow and that it might take a couple weeks....then added, we have been sued by George Zimmerman for defamation of character and then alluded to why he has little chance of winning (can't remember the exact words) did anyone else hear it?
Click to expand...

I missed that... but several months ago NBC "answered" George's suit in writing.. I agee that he can't win defamation.
 
Excon said:
The simple answer is actually no.
Not providing a continuation when clearly the Prosecutor has been obfuscating the evidence and therefore not allowing the Defense to prepare for it, is just one example of his not getting a fair trial.

The judge has shown her bias. But because of the rules she is allowed to get away with it.

But as we know, the Appellate Court is aware of her shenanigans.

Zimmerman chances of being acquitted is high, but if convicted, he stands a much better chance on appeal.
Click to expand...

What? What does Trayvonn Martin's marijuana use in his past have to do with anything during the incident? (i assume that is what your talking about)
 
sharon said:
I missed that... but several months ago NBC "answered" George's suit in writing.. I agee that he can't win defamation.
Click to expand...

Did you see post #22, I found the video of tonight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom