What evidence does the prosecution have?

AJ Noiter · May 11, 2012

LiveLaughLuv said:
BBM

YES....they were not part of the investigation, therefore they don't know what the SP uncovered...so, yes...they don't know what they are talking about at this moment in time...

Given that the document should have enough evidence in it to convince a judge, I don't think them not having all of the evidence plays a factor. The judge would also not have all of the evidence. Given that the document itself is supposed to have SOME evidence, it falls back to what I stated before. At least three well known lawyers have called BS on this.

Edit: And no, I do not blame the judge. It must be hard for a judge to be put at the center of all this national attention where if he/she says "Nope, not enough" there could be an outrage, yet if he does say "Yeah, I'll take that" he'll have people like Mr. Alan Dershowitz saying he's full of crap. Which is the lesser evil?

LiveLaughLuv · May 11, 2012

gxm said:
I'm basing my opinion on the evidence available now. If the SA has an ace up her sleeve, that's a different story. IMO, every time some hot new "evidence" pops up, it fizzles out. So far, there is no publicly known evidence that provides a slam dunk.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

Then part of that investigation was the 911 call into the NEN...and part of that was used to determine the 'depravity' of GZ's actions..besides the horrific, wail which they also are using against GZ to show the 'depravity' in his actions..

Remember, the law supports GZ IF, TM was in the commission of a crime and TM was not commiting any crime...if walking on the grass is a crime, then GZ's got it..

If walking/running while black in America is a crime, then TM is guilty of that??? Same for wearing a hoodie during the rain...

GZ over zealous, over reacted to a situation his own mind created and was dead wrong in his assessment of TM....he killed a teen for no reason other than what his paraoid mind told him TM was up to...he did nothing wrong but try to get home...and could have NOT wanted GZ to know where he was staying which is why he took the option to try and hide from GZ..he might be one scary dude in the way his body language might have presented itself to TM that fateful evening..

LiveLaughLuv · May 11, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
Given that the document should have enough evidence in it to convince a judge, I don't think them not having all of the evidence plays a factor. The judge would also not have all of the evidence. Given that the document itself is supposed to have SOME evidence, it falls back to what I stated before. At least three well known lawyers have called BS on this.

Edit: And no, I do not blame the judge. It must be hard for a judge to be put at the center of all this national attention where if he/she says "Nope, not enough" there could be an outrage, yet if he does say "Yeah, I'll take that" he'll have people like Mr. Alan Dershowitz saying he's full of crap. Which is the lesser evil?

Not should, did have enough evidence to convice the judge for he issued the Capias for GZ...if they felt the SP didn't have the evidence to back it up, he would not have signed that warrant..

AJ Noiter · May 11, 2012

LiveLaughLuv said:
Not should, did have enough evidence to convice the judge for he issued the Capias for GZ...if they felt the SP didn't have the evidence to back it up, he would not have signed that warrant..

That is your opinion. I will stick with the opinion of those who know the ins and outs of the legal system, and don't just cater to public/political pressure.

Lovelymountains · May 11, 2012

IMO The prosecution will appeal to the common sense of the jury. While most juries do use common sense, I admit there was a recent case in FL where common sense was thrown out the window. I hope that was just an aberration.
To consider it normal for ANYONE to make a habit of following absolute strangers belies common sense. Normal people just do not do that. I doubt that any jury in the world would debate the absurdity of this. It is on it's face absurd and requires no debate. Common sense tells me that a jury would not consider running after a stranger for no apparent reason as normal. Therefore they will consider the reason GZ either followed by walking or ran after TM. Common sense demands recognition that GZ did this for the purpose of detaining TM because "These *advertiser censored**h*les always get away." A reasonable person would recognize that GZ was unable to carry out his plan to detain TM because TM resisted, and so he killed him. I don't think the judge will allow the defense (should they try) to blame TM because he didn't get home as quickly as some believe he should have. That's just utter nonsense and denies TM his freedom of movement, albeit posthumously.
What GZ did cannot be excused under any logical reasoning, and I think the prosecution will point that out to a jury which, hopefully, will use its common sense.
I believe that following someone with the intent to harrass them, imprison them, or harm them in any way is illegal and GZ should be made to pay for his actions. Because, IMO, that is exactly what he did.
And unless GZ can produce medical records showing he had a common sense reason to fear for his life or fear he would be seriously injured, (And not an "enhanced" version of a video or a dubious photo of an unidentified person with very minor puncture wounds on the back of his head,) self-defence or SYG is a non-starter.
In fact, a jury must decide using the criteria of what a "Reasonable person," would conclude. GZ's contention of necessity of killing TM, and if we use the the limited evidence which we now know, is not reasonable to a person with common sense.

Karmady · May 11, 2012

Lovelymountains said:
IMO The prosecution will appeal to the common sense of the jury. While most juries do use common sense, I admit there was a recent case in FL where common sense was thrown out the window. I hope that was just an aberration.
To consider it normal for ANYONE to make a habit of following absolute strangers belies common sense. Normal people just do not do that. I doubt that any jury in the world would debate the absurdity of this. It is on it's face absurd and requires no debate. Common sense tells me that a jury would not consider running after a stranger for no apparent reason as normal. Therefore they will consider the reason GZ either followed by walking or ran after TM. Common sense demands recognition that GZ did this for the purpose of detaining TM because "These *advertiser censored**h*les always get away." A reasonable person would recognize that GZ was unable to carry out his plan to detain TM because TM resisted, and so he killed him. I don't think the judge will allow the defense (should they try) to blame TM because he didn't get home as quickly as some believe he should have. That's just utter nonsense and denies TM his freedom of movement, albeit posthumously.
What GZ did cannot be excused under any logical reasoning, and I think the prosecution will point that out to a jury which, hopefully, will use its common sense.
I believe that following someone with the intent to harrass them, imprison them, or harm them in any way is illegal and GZ should be made to pay for his actions. Because, IMO, that is exactly what he did.
And unless GZ can produce medical records showing he had a common sense reason to fear for his life or fear he would be seriously injured, (And not an "enhanced" version of a video or a dubious photo of an unidentified person with very minor puncture wounds on the back of his head,) self-defence or SYG is a non-starter.
In fact, a jury must decide using the criteria of what a "Reasonable person," would conclude. GZ's contention of necessity of killing TM, and if we use the the limited evidence which we now know, is not reasonable to a person with common sense.

Take a look a the poll thread. I would say that WS skews in favor of the prosecution relative to the general public and, even here, the poll has been consistently hovering at 30% defense.

Just K · May 11, 2012

Karmady said:
And that the other at least 30% would vote to acquit -- whether or not they are lacking in common sense. And the number in the general population is likely to be higher, if not significantly higher, imo.

Or significantly lower given the fact that we know attorneys come here to farm for views and compare notes. We also know that the gun lobby also has a far reach and can have members post their views and arguments. I don't know what the temperature is like across the nation or across the State of Florida but I do know that whenever I speak to anyone in the general public about GZ and the Trayvon Martin Case, the response is always the same: That guy is just crazy. (Man on the street polls would be much more valid than a poll here at Websleuth's where members follow criminal cases and in general the public doesn't.)

LolaMoon08 · May 11, 2012

Just K said:
We really need a link for this:
Where is there any proof that GZ even handed out the letter, it wasn't a flyer, or that he tried to get folks to come to a special session of the town council? The City Commission checked their agenda and sessions notes. The Ware case was not addressed at either of the two session dates closest to the date on GZ's letter. Was he actually trying to rally people to bring the issue to the commission or council even though it was not on their official agenda? Because if that is the case then once again we see GZ doing what he pleases and playing outside of the rules...or trying to bend the rules for his agenda.

I don't think he ever handed out flyers. I do think he vented on the local news website about the situation. It wasn't so much about the innocent victim than it was about GZ being angry with the SPD. Which I find ironic since they were his biggest advocates when this case first hit the news.

He has a serious problem with authority and I see why he ignored the call for him to stop following Trayvon. He didn't like SPD and thought he could do a better job. If there ever was a Robert De Niro "Taxi Driver" GZ would be it!

MOO

LolaMoon08 · May 11, 2012

I just seen where GZ waived his right to a speedy trial. I've been busy on the Bain case. So we'll be waiting 3 years for this to go to trial! :banghead:

Karmady · May 11, 2012

Just K said:
Or significantly lower given the fact that we know attorneys come here to farm for views and compare notes. We also know that the gun lobby also has a far reach and can have members post their views and arguments. I don't know what the temperature is like across the nation or across the State of Florida but I do know that whenever I speak to anyone in the general public about GZ and the Trayvon Martin Case, the response is always the same: That guy is just crazy. (Man on the street polls would be much more valid than a poll here at Websleuth's where members follow criminal cases and in general the public doesn't.)

I doubt it would be significantly lower. But, in any case, when those men on the street become jurors, they will hear the evidence and, imo, at least 30% of them will say "oh, I didn't know that" and vote to acquit. Assuming that it gets to a jury, of course.

Lovelymountains · May 11, 2012

Karmady said:
And that the other at least 30% would vote to acquit -- whether or not they are lacking in common sense. And the number in the general population is likely to be higher, if not significantly higher, imo.

This poll is not a scientific poll. The voters are members or readers of WebSleuths who have true crime as a particular interest. It reflects in no way the opinion of the general public.

Lovelymountains · May 11, 2012

Just K said:
Or significantly lower given the fact that we know attorneys come here to farm for views and compare notes. We also know that the gun lobby also has a far reach and can have members post their views and arguments. I don't know what the temperature is like across the nation or across the State of Florida but I do know that whenever I speak to anyone in the general public about GZ and the Trayvon Martin Case, the response is always the same: That guy is just crazy. (Man on the street polls would be much more valid than a poll here at Websleuth's where members follow criminal cases and in general the public doesn't.)

I have found the same to be true. I can't remember a single person with whom I've discussed the subject who believes GZ was justified. I have a friend who's husband is a homicide detective and both of them feel GZ was at fault. You're right that a random poll would be much more accurate as to the feelings of the general public.

Omachka · May 11, 2012

AJ Noiter said:
That is your opinion. I will stick with the opinion of those who know the ins and outs of the legal system, and don't just cater to public/political pressure.

Do you mean legal analysts who depend on a paycheck from networks who may have their own agendas? The media isn't always unbiased and I really feel that in this case they are under a lot of pressure to lean one way or the other. Our legal system has it's flaws but it is the best there is. I will rely on it and those in it that have actually seen the evidence.

cityslick · May 11, 2012

LiveLaughLuv said:
Then part of that investigation was the 911 call into the NEN...and part of that was used to determine the 'depravity' of GZ's actions..besides the horrific, wail which they also are using against GZ to show the 'depravity' in his actions..

Remember, the law supports GZ IF, TM was in the commission of a crime and TM was not commiting any crime...if walking on the grass is a crime, then GZ's got it..

If walking/running while black in America is a crime, then TM is guilty of that??? Same for wearing a hoodie during the rain...

GZ over zealous, over reacted to a situation his own mind created and was dead wrong in his assessment of TM....he killed a teen for no reason other than what his paraoid mind told him TM was up to...he did nothing wrong but try to get home...and could have NOT wanted GZ to know where he was staying which is why he took the option to try and hide from GZ..he might be one scary dude in the way his body language might have presented itself to TM that fateful evening..

The law supports GZ if TM really did attack him to the point of GZ fearing for his life, whether TM was committing a crime or not. Precedent in previous cases bears this out.

Sun48shine · May 11, 2012

Recent Article -- dated today 5/11/12

Evidence in George Zimmerman case will be handed over

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/11/2794502/evidence-in-george-zimmerman-will.html

AJ Noiter · May 11, 2012

Omachka said:
Do you mean legal analysts who depend on a paycheck from networks who may have their own agendas? The media isn't always unbiased and I really feel that in this case they are under a lot of pressure to lean one way or the other. Our legal system has it's flaws but it is the best there is. I will rely on it and those in it that have actually seen the evidence.

Two of the three mentioned, sure, but I'm unaware of what network Mr. Dershowitz works for and that information isn't on his Wikipedia page. Could you fill me in?

Another that I can't seem to find a "network" for is Jeralyn Merritt. Sure, she's a guest commentator from time to time on: NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, CourTv and Fox News.. but she doesn't depend on a paycheck from them by being a guest, does she?

sleonardelli · May 11, 2012

Sun48shine said:
Recent Article -- dated today 5/11/12

Evidence in George Zimmerman case will be handed over

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/11/2794502/evidence-in-george-zimmerman-will.html

The first round of discovery documents in the George Zimmerman Case are most likely to be provided to OMara Law Group on Monday, May 14. Public release of the of the discovery may be delayed as we may be filing a motion to further redact information, and an opportunity to review the discovery is necessary to determine the applicability of that motion. While we understand the frustration of those who want to view the information as soon as possible, we believe that Mr. Zimmermans right to a fair trial, decided by an impartial, unbiased jury is paramount.

<Modsnip>

highflyer · May 11, 2012

LiveLaughLuv said:
I believe, like the Anthony family, they are all not truthful..

I have searched and searched and find nothing that remotely resembles GZ getting an award or a commendation of any sort..So, I take what his family states with a box of salt..I heard them misrepresent during the bond hearing..especially it's always someone elses fault GZ gets into violent altercations...

Future behavior depends on past behaviors..unless someone truely tries to change..I don't see GZ has since 2005...

Have also searched for a picture or article of GZ getting an award or commendation for this. Nothing.

Phoenixfla · May 11, 2012

Just K said:
Or significantly lower given the fact that we know attorneys come here to farm for views and compare notes. We also know that the gun lobby also has a far reach and can have members post their views and arguments. I don't know what the temperature is like across the nation or across the State of Florida but I do know that whenever I speak to anyone in the general public about GZ and the Trayvon Martin Case, the response is always the same: That guy is just crazy. (Man on the street polls would be much more valid than a poll here at Websleuth's where members follow criminal cases and in general the public doesn't.)

IMO that makes no sense. The media has been hugely biased against GZ in this case IMO. I was buying into the media line until I started looking into this case more thoroughly. The Jury is going to be privy to everything we have reviewed, and more.

Taking a poll of people who have probably followed this case very little, maybe reading a few articles or watching CNN, etc. is much less accurate than a poll of us here at Websleuths, who have taken time to really look at the evidence. Much of the evidence contradicts the "medial story" IMO.

The media is not there to tell you the actual news, they are there to sell advertisements. To do that they have to get readership/viewership up. To do that they put their own sensational spin on the story to draw in the audiences.

Phoenixfla · May 11, 2012

highflyer said:
I think the poll here is worthless. We have media relations people running rampant here shouting out about the media controlling things (which is funny). We have attorneys. We have...... There are more people with an agenda on this case than anyone else. The poll is pfffffffffffffft.

I can agree with that statement BIG TIME!

What evidence does the prosecution have?

Little Bunny FooFoo

New Member

New Member

Little Bunny FooFoo

New Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Verified Insider

Little Bunny FooFoo

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics