The future George Zimmerman Acquittal Trial Megathread!

[katmai]

Machism is extremely retarded as I understand people do, like showing up what they don't have, or humiliating females, or talking trash. I was taught since I was a kid that machismo was a negative trait that made men commit mistakes.

And you call yourself a Spaniard. 

Sefaradi, persecuted by Spaniards.

They didn't do a good enough job

[derspiess]

Machism is extremely retarded as I understand people do, like showing up what they don't have, or humiliating females, or talking trash. I was taught since I was a kid that machismo was a negative trait that made men commit mistakes.

And you call yourself a Spaniard. 

Sefaradi, persecuted by Spaniards.

They didn't do a good enough job

Too soon.

[11B4V]

I doubt there will be riots in Sanford.  It's a small town; so small that there isn't even a Koreatown to ransack.

And it's just simply too goddamned hot out.

Yes they will. Needs a new Flat screen.

[Capetan Mihali]

Heard on NPR that the prosecution has asked the judge to instruct the jury about the lesser included charge of murder 3, something about child abuse.  Defense is raising a fit apparently.

So murder 3 and possibly child abuse was included in the indictment?  Is that common?  Is it fair to the defense to make them defend against multiple degrees of the same charge, or two move the goalposts at the end of the game?

Looks like they argue over lesser-includeds at the end of the trial in Florida.  I explained the general concept of lesser-includeds above.  Is it fair?  From a defense perspective it can suck real bad, or be a tremendous boon.  Yes, it is very common.

From my limited experience, a big part of lesser-includeds is the jury's desire to 1) compromise (and not deliver a mistrial); 2) not really follow the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard of proof; and 3) punish perceived morally blameworthy behavior or people without taking on the moral burden of fully convicting him.  "Splitting the difference" and coming back with a lesser-included, even when it doesn't really make much sense, is pretty common.

So maybe 8 jurors are ready to convict a guy of 2nd degree murder, but 4 tend to believe his self-defense claim.  But he's not a good guy; he had to testify to make out his defense, and once you testify, the prosecution can bring in your criminal record from the last 10 years, so the jury knows he has a robbery conviction from 2004, and drug & domestic violence convictions in the last couple years.  And his story isn't great, but it does raise reasonable doubt.  So they should hold fast and acquit on everything.  But then they say, "what about manslaughter?"  And the 8 think, well, we'll take that, he'll get locked up and we can go home and we don't have to argue with the other nice people in the jury anymore; and besides, I did have *some* doubt so it's really better I don't have to commit to putting him away for life anyways.  And the 4 think, well, he's definitely a violent guy and probably was doing something bad that night, and maybe he shouldn't just get out on the streets anyway, and somebody did get killed after all, and those other nice people have been trying to persuade us all day, and it's OK to have *some* doubt, the prosecutor said that, and we'd get to go home and not fight anymore...  So they split the difference, come back with manslaughter, and they're done.

As the defense, if you feel like you've got a real loser of a case, you jump for joy when that verdict comes in.  You may even spend the whole trial attempting to get a lesser -- like if it's a trial for drug distribution, and you say "Ladies and gentleman, my client smokes crack.  He'd addicted to crack cocaine and he has been for the last 7 years.  And he's not proud of it, but he had crack cocaine in his house on July 12th and he had quite a bit of it.  But, as you'll see, he had just won a scratch-n-win that morning, and was treating himself to a crack binge.  The evidence will show that he only had that cocaine for his own personal use."  With the goal of getting a conviction for the lesser-included of simple possession (which is probably not subject to mandatory minimum sentencing).

On the other hand, it really sucks when you feel like the jurors who really believed in an acquittal caved in, or the whole jury just split the difference because they weighed the evidence at a 51% standard rather than really taking "beyond a reasonable doubt" seriously.  It's funny, for everyone's talk of being tough on crime and being willing to flip the switch, the conventional defense lawyer wisdom is that jurors with a conviction usually come in with their heads down looking sad and embarrassed, whereas if they're smiling and able to look at your client, they're probably acquitting.

But, channeling CDM, it's not like y'all gave a shit whether it was fair to "move the goalposts" or "defend against multiple degrees" when it was poor black men they were putting away, did you?

As an update, I hear the judge is allowing manslaughter as a lesser-included but denying the child abuse one.

[derspiess]

But, channeling CDM, it's not like y'all gave a shit whether it was fair to "move the goalposts" or "defend against multiple degrees" when it was poor black men they were putting away, did you?

The reason anyone is talking about this case is that it's so high profile & has been all over the news.  I was totally ignorant on the concept of lesser included charges up until this week, which is why I was asking how they work and if they tend to affect the defense.  Unlike Seedy, I don't have any skin in the game with the Zimmerman verdict, just as I don't when "poor black men" are on trial, outside of wanting to see justice served of course.

Thanks for the explanation, btw.

[Capetan Mihali]

But, channeling CDM, it's not like y'all gave a shit whether it was fair to "move the goalposts" or "defend against multiple degrees" when it was poor black men they were putting away, did you?

Unlike Seedy, I don't have any skin in the game with the Zimmerman verdict, just as I don't when "poor black men" are on trial, outside of wanting to see justice served of course.

Well, that's kind of the point for me (who also doesn't have skin in this game); popular hysteria about crime, drugs and sex crimes especially, has led to the legislating of crazy-high possible -- and even mandatory -- sentences, after which everyone goes back to their business.  And most people from the middle class up don't have to pay any attention to the injustice of how it actually plays out, unless there's a high-profile case, which usually hurts their understanding rather than helps it.  Even though 1/4 of Americans have criminal convictions.

[CountDeMoney]

Unlike Seedy, I don't have any skin in the game with the Zimmerman verdict,

I'm not a Florida resident, dipshit.

[derspiess]

Unlike Seedy, I don't have any skin in the game with the Zimmerman verdict,

I'm not a Florida resident, dipshit.

You still seem to have some emotional need to see him hang, regardless.

[Scipio]

The prosecutor is a histrionic poseur, ain't he?

[CountDeMoney]

You still seem to have some emotional need to see him hang, regardless.

I like to see all wannabe cops perpetratin' the fraud and private citizens wrongly using handguns they shouldn't be allowed to have in the first place hang.

[derspiess]

You still seem to have some emotional need to see him hang, regardless.

I like to see all wannabe cops perpetratin' the fraud and private citizens wrongly using handguns they shouldn't be allowed to have in the first place hang.

Whether or not there is enough evidence to convict, of course.

[CountDeMoney]

Whether or not there is enough evidence to convict, of course.

When you finally get the chance to shoot your very own nigger, I'll be there in your corner, man.

[Scipio]

Whether or not there is enough evidence to convict, of course.

When you finally get the chance to shoot your very own nigger, I'll be there in your corner, man.

That's n-word to you, Mr. No Ghetto Pass.

[Savonarola]

So close:

George Mason University Offers Class on Trayvon Martin, Misspells His Name

By Sarah Rae Fruchtnicht, Fri, July 12, 2013


George Mason University in Virginia announced it will offer a three-credit class this fall called "Race & Politics, Trevon Martin."

According to Campus Reform, the GMU course will actually cover 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.

GMU did not disclose the specifics of the course, but sociology and anthropology professor Rutledge Dennis, who is set to teach the class, has a background in race and ethnic studies. One of his nine books, written with Charles Jarmon, covers "social science perspectives on Afro-Americans."

Dennis is the former president of the Association of Black Sociologists and is currently the editor of Elsevier Publishing Company's Series on Research in Race and Ethnic Relations.

A heated trial is currently underway in the murder of the 17 year old. Martin was shot and killed by George Zimmerman in 2012. Zimmerman was charged with murder, but his judge is considering the lesser charge of manslaughter. Speculations on whether or not the verdict could cause rioting in African-American communities has been called uninformed and even racist.

[CountDeMoney]

George Mason would've been very disappointed.