Yet another turn in the Zimmerman/Martin Case!

[imbalance]

Look at "b" in your post.

Yes and the burden is on Zimmerman to present evidence to prove (b) was indeed the case. Whether Zimmerman meets this burden is for a judge to rule on, not the police.

No, innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.

When you assert an affirmative defense the burden is first on the defendant to prove he was justified in using deadly force. It then becomes the state's burden to prove the defendant's evidence doesn't meet the legal standard to mitigate murder.

 

[Lovebears65]

All this is doing is causing more race problems .. There is going to be a race riot. I can feel it coming and I blame the MEDIA and Obama , Sharpton and JACKSON if it happens. Of course Obama wants it to happen so he can call Marshall law.

 

[Vast LWC]

People having seen Martin on top of Zimmerman is not necessarily evidence that Martin started the confrontation. It does not tell us what happened in the lead up to the part of the incident that the witnesses observed.

The thing with 'grainy' images is that there is technology that can clean up those images. That is not altering in the images - it is enhancing them... ie making grainy images clear. SOP for many agencies.

While this is a good point.

Since the police in question have a lot to lose if it is proved Zimmerman was lying, and they behaved improperly...

"Enhancement" can easily be used to produce "enhancements" that are more amenable to what the person performing the enhancements wants to see.

 

[Lovebears65]

I want to know why Sharpton and Jackson was not in a uproar when OJ simpson was found Not guilty when EVERYONE knows he was guilty as sin..

 

[PredFan]

how do you prove Trayvon tried to kill anyone?

There's 2 witnesses that state Martin was beating up Zimmerman....there are NO witnesses that say Zimmerman did anything at all to Martin.

Other than his comment about the boy being a "Fucking Coon", following him, and finally shooting him to death with his 9 mm, nothing at all,

He didn't say "fucking Coon" prove he did.

 

[PredFan]

Yes and the burden is on Zimmerman to present evidence to prove (b) was indeed the case. Whether Zimmerman meets this burden is for a judge to rule on, not the police.

No, innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.

When you assert an affirmative defense the burden is first on the defendant to prove he was justified in using deadly force. It then becomes the state's burden to prove the defendant's evidence doesn't meet the legal standard to mitigate murder.

All the defendant is required to do is to claim it. he does this by answering questions from the police. It then becomes the burden of the police to either accept hisstory, or prove it wrong. The Defendant is under no burden to prove he's innocent.

 

[PredFan]

People having seen Martin on top of Zimmerman is not necessarily evidence that Martin started the confrontation. It does not tell us what happened in the lead up to the part of the incident that the witnesses observed.

The thing with 'grainy' images is that there is technology that can clean up those images. That is not altering in the images - it is enhancing them... ie making grainy images clear. SOP for many agencies.

While this is a good point.

Since the police in question have a lot to lose if it is proved Zimmerman was lying, and they behaved improperly...

"Enhancement" can easily be used to produce "enhancements" that are more amenable to what the person performing the enhancements wants to see.

 

[California Girl]

People having seen Martin on top of Zimmerman is not necessarily evidence that Martin started the confrontation. It does not tell us what happened in the lead up to the part of the incident that the witnesses observed.

The thing with 'grainy' images is that there is technology that can clean up those images. That is not altering in the images - it is enhancing them... ie making grainy images clear. SOP for many agencies.

While this is a good point.

Since the police in question have a lot to lose if it is proved Zimmerman was lying, and they behaved improperly...

"Enhancement" can easily be used to produce "enhancements" that are more amenable to what the person performing the enhancements wants to see.

Actually, while what you said is technically true.... the original tape is always available for comparison.... thus making it very obvious if anything has been tampered with to promote one particular agenda. So, basically, no. It is a technical process... it does not involve adding or removing anything. All it does is enhance the clarity of the image.

 

[PredFan]

People having seen Martin on top of Zimmerman is not necessarily evidence that Martin started the confrontation. It does not tell us what happened in the lead up to the part of the incident that the witnesses observed.

The thing with 'grainy' images is that there is technology that can clean up those images. That is not altering in the images - it is enhancing them... ie making grainy images clear. SOP for many agencies.

While this is a good point.

Since the police in question have a lot to lose if it is proved Zimmerman was lying, and they behaved improperly...

"Enhancement" can easily be used to produce "enhancements" that are more amenable to what the person performing the enhancements wants to see.

Actually, while what you said is technically true.... the original tape is always available for comparison.... thus making it very obvious if anything has been tampered with to promote one particular agenda. So, basically, no. It is a technical process... it does not involve adding or removing anything. All it does is enhance the clarity of the image.

Don't bother explaining, just do this:

 

[California Girl]

There's 2 witnesses that state Martin was beating up Zimmerman....there are NO witnesses that say Zimmerman did anything at all to Martin.

Other than his comment about the boy being a "Fucking Coon", following him, and finally shooting him to death with his 9 mm, nothing at all,

He didn't say "fucking Coon" prove he did.

Now you'll get a link to a pre-judged audio that has been enhanced.... and not by an official accredited source. Therefore, we have no way of being certain that it has not been tampered with.

There is one on the net that also sounds nothing like 'coons'.

Which you believe seems to depend on your bias. I have no bias so I don't believe either. I'll believe it when there is an accredited enhancement available.

 

[Si modo]

As to the video, even with the press (none of whom can be trusted at this point) doing their analysis, my standard of believing anything based on that video seems higher than some.

For me, the video neither confirms nor refutes anything because it's quality limits what information I can glean from it. It does nothing for me either way at this point.

What it does do is clarify the original... and that makes it more difficult for ranting fools to scream that Zimmerman doesn't have any injuries. There is clearly some kind of injury to the back of his head. Does that mean he's innocent? No. It just makes the fools who jumped to a conclusion about the video look like fools.

Still, for me it does nothing - neither refutes Zimmerman's story nor confirms it. It's poor quality. It could show injuries. It could show no injuries. For me, it's inconclusive of much of anything other than Zimmerman being cuffed and in custody.


I have little doubt the cops took pics which will be much more clear than that video.

 

[GHook93]

Frankly, I don't care whether Zimmerman had any marks or bruises on him or not. He was told not to follow Trayvon and kept going anyway.

That depends on if you believe Zimmerman or if you can prove he is lying (and the eye witness was lying also). According the Zimmerman, when the dispatcher said to not follow him, he said OK and backed off and headed towards his car. When he got to his car Martin confronted Zimmerman, asked why he was following him and a scuffle occurred. According to that fact pattern, Stand your ground applies. At that point the bruises on the back of his head are very relevent. No bruises then creditability lost. Bruises there, then its consistent with the official story.

To me, the "stand your ground" law no longer applies and he was the one who made the entire incident possible

If the facts above are correct then it does apply!

At this point, I think he's guilty of some form or murder/manslaughter;

It appears you would say guilty either way!

I also think there are a lot of facts that we don't know yet.

You said this but you then say he is guilty! How backwards is your thinking that you sentence the guy with admiting to not knowing all the facts!

And I also think the local police dept are a bunch of racist bastards, and the case against Zimmerman has already been compromised by their failure to apply police procedures equally when the homicide occured.

What a reckless comment worthy of a neg!

 

[Vast LWC]

Actually, while what you said is technically true.... the original tape is always available for comparison.... thus making it very obvious if anything has been tampered with to promote one particular agenda. So, basically, no. It is a technical process... it does not involve adding or removing anything. All it does is enhance the clarity of the image.

Don't bother explaining, just do this:

By all means, don't get involved in rational debate on a subject, just answer with emoticons...

Fortunately there are people on the board that actually have something to say.

California girl makes a good point that the original tape is publicly available.

Though I would say that I doubt anyone else has tried to actually enhance the tape as of yet, since this enhancement just happened. And of course, if someone else enhanced the tape, and had a different outcome, like the Martin family's attorney, for instance, people would just claim that one was a fake...

Still, it is a good point.

 

[Vel]

I just found this article and the statistics in it just floored me. Where the hell are Al and Jesse in dealing with this? Where are the parents marching for justice?
***********************************************
Why Manipulate the Tragedy of Trayvon Martin?
National Review Online ^ | March 25, 2012 | Heather Mac Donald

Blow went on to claim that it is the “the burden of black boys in America” to be at high risk of being shot by non-blacks: “This is the fear that seizes me whenever my boys are out in the world: that a man with a gun and an itchy finger will find them ‘suspicious.’”

Blow is right about one thing: Black boys do face a much higher chance than non-blacks that they will be shot when they are “out in the world.” Black males between the ages of 14 and 24 were seven times more likely to die of homicide in 2007 than white and Hispanic males of the same age group combined. But the danger they face comes overwhelmingly from other black males, whose homicide offending rate in the 14 to 24 age category was nearly ten times higher than that of young white and Hispanic males combined. (The federal government’s crime data puts Hispanics and whites in a single category of “white,” thus overstating the non-Hispanic white offending and victimization rates). Most homicides are intraracial, but the chance of a black being killed by a white or Hispanic is much lower than the chance that a white or Hispanic will be killed by a black. Seventeen percent of what the FBI calls “white” homicide victims in 2009 were killed by blacks, compared to 8 percent of black homicide victims who were killed by “whites.” There were two and a half times as many white and Hispanic victims of black killers in 2009 as there were black victims of white and Hispanic killers, even though the black population is one-sixth that of whites and Hispanics combined. If Hispanics were removed from the category of “white” killers of blacks, the percentage of blacks killed by Anglo whites would plummet, since a significant percentage of what the FBI calls “white”-on-black killings represent gang warfare between Hispanic and black gangs. (Needless to say, there is no reason to think that racism plays a more frequent role in white-on-black killings than in black-on-white killings.)

Blow’s fear that his children will be blown away by a white is particularly ludicrous in New York City. Blacks commit 80 percent of all shootings in the city — as reported by the victims of and witnesses to those shootings — though they are but 23 percent of the population; whites commit 1.4 percent of all shootings, though they are 35 percent of the population. Add Hispanic shootings to the black tally, and you account for 98 percent of all of the city’s gun violence. In New York, as in big cities across the country, the face of violence is overwhelmingly black and Hispanic.

Why Manipulate the Tragedy of Trayvon Martin?

 

[GHook93]

Frankly, I don't care whether Zimmerman had any marks or bruises on him or not. He was told not to follow Trayvon and kept going anyway. To me, the "stand your ground" law no longer applies and he was the one who made the entire incident possible. At this point, I think he's guilty of some form or murder/manslaughter; I also think there are a lot of facts that we don't know yet. And I also think the local police dept are a bunch of racist bastards, and the case against Zimmerman has already been compromised by their failure to apply police procedures equally when the homicide occured.

I agree that continuing to follow AFTER being told by authorities to stop removes his protections under the stand your ground law.

However he may be protected under some self defense laws.

Either way it should be in court, in a trial, with real solid evidence and not heresey and media speculation.

State law trumps fed law here. The Model Penal Code is a Federal guideline for states to MODEL after. Model Penal Code states you have a right to defend yourself if attacked. You can ONLY defend yourself using deadly if you're threatened with deadly force or serious injury. The MPC disallows the affirmative defense of self-defense if your the aggitator or aggressor!

 

[edthecynic]

Again.... Zimmerman claims he stopped following Martin when told to by the 911 dispatcher. Why are you accepting one version - that has Zimmerman following Martin... over the other? The truth is we do not know which version is accurate.

where the dead body of the boy was found will tell that tell.

Why would a child attack a man who had been following him but walked away?

Not a 'child', a 17 year old.... 17 year olds are not children... and, sadly, they often lack the common sense that adulthood should bring. 17 year old boys are often full of piss and vinegar... was Martin that type of kid? I don't know, nor to you.

Your constant use of emotion over logic blinds you to facts... I thought you liked facts.

Or full of FEAR that a pale faced, skin headed, gun toting person was chasing after him. Face it Zimmerman looks like a skinhead and Martin had every right to fear for his life and stand his ground.

 

[edthecynic]

when his head was treated there willl be paperwork on it.

that will will tell the tell.

That claimed injury doesnt comport with having the back of ones head banged on the ground.

They are too high on his head for that

Also there are several other places in the video where the back of his head is clearly visible that even the "enhanced" video shows no injuries. It appears that one and only frame in the entire video is the only one that shows the possible wounds. More likely they are just a video artifact on that one frame only.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

reverend al says he's guilty, even congress said he was hunted down with the hoodie on.

what else do we need ??

how about a real trial instead of a "witchhunt"

 

[edthecynic]

The thing that the lynch mob here cannot comprehend is that it matters little. Witnesses state that martin was on top of Zimmerman beating on him. Zimmerman says it, witnesses corroborate it, and there is nothing to disprove it. A grainy tape cannot prove or disprove anything.

Which begs the question, if Martin was on top beating Zimmerman's head into the sidewalk, meaning Zimmerman had to be flat on his back, when he shot Martin, how did Martin end up face down with his hands underneath his body, as the police found him???? Also if Zimmerman was under Martin when he shot him, why is there no blood on Martin's shirt??? Gravity would dictate that the blood would fall in a downward direction onto Zimmerman from the time the bullet entered Martin's body to the time Zimmerman freed himself from the dead body weight on top of him.

 

[California Girl]

reverend al says he's guilty, even congress said he was hunted down with the hoodie on.

what else do we need ??

how about a real trial instead of a "witchhunt"

How about we just stick to the fucking process, regardless of the outcome?