Breaking: Zimmerman judge ordered to step down

[tinydancer]

The appeals court agreed with Zimmerman's attorneys that they weren't going to get a fair trial. YAY! Smackdown for the jerk.

Appeals court: Judge in Trayvon Martin case must step down
By the CNN Wire Staff
updated 6:53 PM EDT, Wed August 29, 2012


From the article:

The court agreed with Zimmerman's attorneys that Lester "made gratuitous, disparaging remarks about Mr. Zimmerman's character; advocated for Mr. Zimmerman to be prosecuted for additional crimes; offered a personal opinion about he evidence for the prosecution; continued to hold over Mr. Zimmerman's head the threat of future contempt proceedings, and ultimately set a bond at $1,000,000."

The appeals court also agreed that Lester's remarks "created reasonable fear in Mr. Zimmerman that the court is biased against him, and, as a result of this prejudice cannot receive a fair and impartial trial or hearing by the trial court."

Appeals court: Judge in Trayvon Martin case must step down - CNN.com

 

[eflatminor]

Well clearly, the appeals court is full of racist haters.

 

[tinydancer]

Well clearly, the appeals court is full of racist haters.

I can't rep you again but you're on a great roll today.

 

[Ariux]

That malicious c*** Angela Corey has been trying to get Zimmerman's medical records. And, of course, she'll share it all with the media, regardless of relevancy. Want to know if Zimmerman ever had an STD? The old judge agreed to review the records for relevancy. I guess we'll never know if the old judge considered STDs to be relevant to George Zimmerman's self-defense case against that Afro Animal.

The old judge seemed to have no objection to Angela Corey trying to taint the jury pool with inflammatory and irrelevant public disclosures, as well as downright illegal violations of Zimmerman's privacy.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - poor ol' George Zimmerman had a right to defend himself after dat bloody beatin'...

Zimmerman's lawyers release bloody nose photo
December 3, 2012 - The defense team for George Zimmerman, charged with killing unarmed black teen Trayvon Martin in February, released a color photo of Zimmerman with a bloody nose.

Zimmerman's lawyers say the photo was taken by a police officer on February 26, the night 17-year-old Martin was shot and killed nearby his father's home in Sanford, Fla. The 29-year-old has pleaded not guilty to the second-degree murder charges and was released from Seminole County Jail on $1 million bond in July. The photo was published on GZlegalcase.com, a website created by Zimmerman and his defense attorneys. Although the same picture was made public earlier this year as black-and-white photocopy, this high-resolution version comes shortly after the same website announced a "thank you" card defense fund to raise money for Zimmerman.

This photograph shows George Zimmerman, accused of killing unarmed teen Trayvon Martin, the night of their confrontation. It was made public by Zimmerman's lawyers on December 3, 2012.

Lawyers on both sides of the case disagree on the picture's significance. "It's not a game changer," Zimmerman lawyer Mark O'Mara told Reuters, adding its only importance was how it vividly showed the injuries Zimmrman sustained during his confrontation with Martin. "Does it really show what happened that night to George? Yes," O'Mara said. An attorney who represents Martin's family, Ben Crump, told Reuters the photo adds nothing new to the case. "Trayvon Martin was defending himself. He had every right to stand his ground to defend himself," Crump said.

Source

 

[Noomi]

They released that photo only to gain sympathy for Zimmerman.

 

[eflatminor]

They released that photo only to gain sympathy for Zimmerman.

What's wrong with that?

 

[jillian]

They released that photo only to gain sympathy for Zimmerman.

What's wrong with that?

well, maybe because it's intended to sway the jury pool?

and it's irrelvant in any event... there was no reason to follow the kid and threaten him. the fact that he may or may not have been punched (deservedly) in the face doesn't justify him killing an unarmed kid.

for all you know, he fell on his face running after his prey.

 

[eflatminor]

They released that photo only to gain sympathy for Zimmerman.

What's wrong with that?

well, maybe because it's intended to sway the jury pool?

Was releasing Martin's picture as a young, innocent looking kid meant to sway the jury pool?

Regarding the rest of your rant, you weren't there, so you know squat.

 

[Katzndogz]

They released the photo because it is part of reciprocity. The prosecution gets their evidence, and the defense gets to use their evidence too. Liberals just don't want the defense to use any evidence. Releasing the photo of Trayvon Martin when he was 12 years old wasn't evidence. It was a lie.

 

[jillian]

They released the photo because it is part of reciprocity. The prosecution gets their evidence, and the defense gets to use their evidence too. Liberals just don't want the defense to use any evidence. Releasing the photo of Trayvon Martin when he was 12 years old wasn't evidence. It was a lie.

exchange of evidence has nothing to do with publication of evidence pre trial.

moron.

 

[Katzndogz]

That's what this whole thing is about and if you were a lawyer, you would know that. But, you aren't, as you have made abundantly clear time and time again.

The judge didn't find a reason to seal the evidence. It is a matter of public record.

Moron. And something else too.

 

[jillian]

That's what this whole thing is about and if you were a lawyer, you would know that. But, you aren't, as you have made abundantly clear time and time again.

The judge didn't find a reason to seal the evidence. It is a matter of public record.

Moron. And something else too.

no it isn't... discovery is for the other side to prepare their case.

and if YOU were a lawyer you'd know that.

and honestly, i'm shocked you'd pretend that i don't do what i do for a living...

shocked... i'm afraid i'll just fall apart with sadness....

loony toon.

p.s. there hasn't BEEN any evidence yet BECAUSE THERE HASN"T BEEN A TRIAL YET. you don't even know what's admissible until then.

again... you'd know that if YOU were a lawyer.

 

[Katzndogz]

I've been watching you promote your ignorance for months. It is obvious you aren't a lawyer, maybe a year of paralegal school, but no lawyer. You prove it over and over again.

I'm content to just let you continue showing how ignorant you are. Please go on.