or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 275

post #4111 of 6250
Found not guilty by a jury of his peers, this is all that matters. Get back to work now and pay your taxes.
post #4112 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post

Of course you are correct.

But you are an odd one. You followed the case, you have a lot of knowledge about self defense, and you seemed to always try to be objective.

Very odd for this case.

Yes it was an odd one for sure. The most important part of this is over. Since this has been so high profile I don't think any judge would allow a civil suit to proceed. There's a lot of dirt that's been drug out and made public with this case which is going to explode in the face of the prosecution and then there's Lee's firing and so on. IMO the piranha, I mean media, is looking for blood and that's the next feeding ground.
post #4113 of 6250
facepalm.gif I could not resist and went over to DU.



Yes, this is the perfect way to express your displeasure with someone that is partially Jewish.
post #4114 of 6250
Quote:
In the last few days, Latinos in particular have spoken up again about Zimmerman’s race, and the “white Hispanic” label especially, largely responding to social media users and mass media pundits who employed the term. Watching Zimmerman in the defense seat, his sister in the courtroom, and his mother on the stand, one can’t deny the skin color that informs their experience. They are not white. Yet Zimmerman’s apparent ideology—one that is suspicious of black men in his neighborhood, the “assholes who always get away—” is one that adheres to white supremacy. It was replicated in the courtroom by his defense, whose team tore away at Rachel Jeantel, questioning the young woman as if she was taking a Jim Crow–era literacy test. A defense that, during closing, cited slave-owning rapist Thomas Jefferson, played an animation for the jury based on erroneous assumptions, made racially coded accusations about Trayvon Martin emerging “out of the darkness,” and had the audacity to compare the case of the killing of an unarmed black teenager to siblings arguing over which one stole a cookie.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175260/white-supremacy-acquits-george-zimmerman#ixzz2Z22ghvvb
post #4115 of 6250
LOL, you just got that link off DU, didn't you? The closing is vile:
Quote:
People will take to the streets, and with good reason. They’ll be there because they know that, yes, some people do always get away—and it tends to be those strapped with guns and the logic of white supremacy at their side.
post #4116 of 6250
People are just embarrassing themselves at this point. DU is mostly youth (some of them probably tiny baby boys and girls of the tender age of 17) so I can forgive their cognitive dissonance, but the people writing articles like that are ostensible adults.
post #4117 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

So other than a few broken windows in Oakland, there are no riots? That's reassuring.

As reassuring as it might be it still gives Oakland a bad rep. The city is a PR nightmare.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-oakland-protesters-damage-transit-police-car-newspaper-offices-20130714,0,56071.story
post #4118 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post

"776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1)."

He can still be prosecuted federally. But T's parents already got a million dollar payday from the HOA in exchange for their dead son.

True, but I suspect the wrinkle here in a civil action would be that Zimmerman can be forced to testify in state court, now that double jeopardy does not apply at the state level.
post #4119 of 6250
Comment from San Francisco Chronicle:

"Foot Locker just went to DEFCON 4."
post #4120 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoVaguy View Post

True, but I suspect the wrinkle here in a civil action would be that Zimmerman can be forced to testify in state court, now that double jeopardy does not apply at the state level.

But can he be forced to answer if it will result in self-incrimination?
post #4121 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

But can he be forced to answer if it will result in self-incrimination?

State would say double jeopardy. No risk of incrimination at the state level.

Second wrinkle is the possible federal action, not sure how a court would resolve that.

That being said, for any of the hypotheticals that involve Zimmerman bringing an action as a plaintiff (such as the libel/slander suits), he's almost certainly waiving any risk of self incrimination.
post #4122 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey_birdman View Post


I bet you $1 they settle. NBC is firmly in the wrong here, this isn't a 1st Amendment issue.

I bet'cha the lint at the bottom of my right pocket, Z will not see 2014!

post #4123 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoVaguy View Post


State would say double jeopardy. No risk of incrimination at the state level.

Second wrinkle is the possible federal action, not sure how a court would resolve that.

That being said, for any of the hypotheticals that involve Zimmerman bringing an action as a plaintiff (such as the libel/slander suits), he's almost certainly waiving any risk of self incrimination.

 

This, btw, is why I don't see his lawyers being prepared to sue anyone for defamation. I don't see how they could make any sort of defamation case without putting him on the stand. While testifying at all doesn't waive his right to refuse to self-incriminate, I don't see how he'd avoid it. Part of proving the defamation case would require him getting on the stand and testifying that the defamatory statement wasn't true, at which point he's really opened the door to a lot of questions he probably doesn't want to answer.

post #4124 of 6250
Interesting assumptions a lot of you people make.
post #4125 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshuadowen View Post

This, btw, is why I don't see his lawyers being prepared to sue anyone for defamation. I don't see how they could make any sort of defamation case without putting him on the stand. While testifying at all doesn't waive his right to refuse to self-incriminate, I don't see how he'd avoid it. Part of proving the defamation case would require him getting on the stand and testifying that the defamatory statement wasn't true, at which point he's really opened the door to a lot of questions he probably doesn't want to answer.

I would have to look it up, but my understanding of the case was that it centered around the selective editing of the whole "he looks black" bit from the 911 call. To the extent that his testimony would be necessary, he would only testify about the actual call. Anything about the actual shooting would be irrelevant.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon