It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

State Pushes To Keep Trayvon Martins Past Out of Zimmerman Trial

page: 10
19
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2013 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Pre-empting the jury decision is a fun, nothing negative about it. You can discuss anything, but you knew that without me telling you. Speculation is of course allowed. However, speculation it is not an effective method of exploration if you are interested in determining the truth of what happened. This is why speculation is not allowed in a court when a lawyer is questioning a witness. For example, your statement that I "seem to be suggesting" something is speculative, both in the literal wording and in the fact that I never suggested anything of the sort.




posted on May, 20 2013 @ 07:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Slugworth
 

Oh, so when you asked my why I favoured one side, it wasn't because you thought it wrong to do so, but because you genuinely wanted a detailed response re my reasoning behind not believing Zimmerman's story? Not really the right thread for that sort of reply, is it?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Getting back to the subject of the OP, is it possible that the state are playing a reverse psychology game with their attempts to keep TM's past out of the courtroom, and really they want the defense to fight to include it so they can bring up Zimmerman's past?



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 



IF that is the case, Martins history must be admitted as well.
Afterall .. he could be the one that was attempting to kill ..
Martin could be the perp. Zimmerman could be the perp.
With two potential perps .. then both histories should be open.
Afterall .. we want to get to the truth .. and not withhold evidence .. right??


I don’t think we’d determine anything about that night whether their history was revealed or not. All that does is make the jurors formulate a positive or negative opinion about the subjects. How will that help?

It took me a long time to come to terms with this rule but I now agree with it. There was once a case where a guy was charged with murder. He had a rap sheet a mile long and had spent 50% of his life incarcerated. I was pissed that the jury didn’t get to hear that history. The guy was found not guilty of the murder. After the trial, when the jury learned the man’s history, they were furious. They said that information would have altered their decision. How can that be if they are only supposed to consider the evidence presented in the current case???

As much as that douche bag deserved to be in prison, the prosecution didn't have enough evidence to convict. The burdon of proof was not satisfied. Justice was served (even though we may not like it).

Zimmerman's trial wouldn't be fair if everyone knew Treyvon's criminal history. I think Zimmerman would have an unfair advantage with the jurors.



posted on May, 21 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
I don’t think we’d determine anything about that night whether their history was revealed or not. All that does is make the jurors formulate a positive or negative opinion about the subjects. How will that help?

Let's say it was beyond dispute that prior to his death, TM was a clean-cut, church-going teen, quick to help out old-aged pensioners and the needy, and the least violent person anyone who had ever met him had ever encountered? Would you not think it relevant to a jury's attention when, now that he's been shot dead, the person who shot him is saying he acted like a wild animal who he had to put down, or else he'd have died himself?



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 06:24 AM
link   
CNN article
So new information is released. Martin was in trouble ... had been kicked out of the house by his mother ... was skipping school ..... was proud of his drug use .... was posting pictures of guns and drugs (not sure if they were his guns and drugs or just pictures of them) and ,... (drumroll) he was a SELF PROFESSED GANSTA'.

So for those who say Zimmermans alleged history as a super-cop wannabe should matter.
Does that mean that Martins self professed being a GANSTA should matter?

Zimmernan wanting to play supercop is alleged.
Martin self-professing to be a GANSTA is recorded in his own words.

Does any of this matter for a trial?
Is it still just the events of that night that matter?



posted on May, 26 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
www.nydailynews.com...

Slain Florida teen Trayvon Martin's cellphone texts and photos show him chatting with friends about marijuana, fighting and guns, new potential evidence shows. Data from the 17-year-old's cell phone was released Thursday by lawyers for George Zimmerman, whose second-degree murder trial for killing Martin begins next month. The texts and photos paint a troubling portrait of Martin's home and school life in the months before his death. In one exchange, a friend texts that Martin is turning into "a hoodlum." Read more: www.nydailynews.com...
so i would assume this means his past is fair game and i would assume that now that this is out more then a few jurors minds



posted on May, 26 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Do gangstas normally settle their grudges over 3 rounds, and without the involvement of any weapons? So, TM took part in a little backyard mma activity? That actually indicates a kind of honourable fighter, rather than someone who'd sneak up behind a stranger, alert them to his presence, and then sucker-punch them. (Although, how you catch someone off guard who has just been following you only moments before, is a question Zimmerman has yet to answer satisfactorily.)

ps. If you've read TM's texts, he's actually honest enough to admit that he got owned in the first round of his fight...because he couldn't handle his opponent on the ground. I wonder if his opponent was 40lb heavier than him?


edit on 26-5-2013 by IvanAstikov because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 26 2013 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


washington just passed a law that states to the effect if two legal aduts agree to engage in combat willingly it is not a crime so who knows if laws like this pass we migth have less people getting arrested for violence and perhaps even people setteling "scores in the ring" might lead to a decrese in fatal or weapons violence i know its slightly off topic but i feel if these kinds of things are legalized we might have less people in jail and probation for violence as they can get it out of their system legaly if both parties are willing

www.escapistmagazine.com...
seems florida might have the same law



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


I have no idea about the life of 'ganstas' or what they do or do not do.
(other than generally acting like idiots and ignoring the law ... )
I'm just passing along the new information that has come out in the press.
Martin was a drug user who skipped school and was kicked out of the house.
He was a self professed 'gangsta' who posted pictures of guns and drugs on
his social network sites.

He's not a just little kid with a bag of skittles.
So ... does his attitude and actions matter?
And if Zimmermans alleged attitude matters, shouldn't it matter for Martin?
Those are my questions.
edit on 5/27/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Trayvon smoked a little weed and had had a few disciplinary problems, like lots of teenagers. He had fair fights with people he had beef with and never mentioned anything about jumping out on complete strangers then giving them a nasty beatdown, in any of his communications with his fellow gangstas.

George, on the other hand, has actual previous form for approaching complete strangers and getting feisty with them, and is known to have been on medication that can cause violent mood swings.

If the defence needs to dredge up Trayvon's past to make its case, it can't object to the state doing the same.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
CNN Live Blog link to what is going on with the hearing in court today

Nothing to quote .. it's a blow by blow by everyone in court as it happens ...



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 08:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov
If the defence needs to dredge up Trayvon's past to make its case, it can't object to the state doing the same.

That's what I said ... if one side wants things about the person brought up .. then the other side can do it as well. If Martins drug use and skipping school and fights and being kicked out of the house matter ... then Zimmermans alleged behavior also matters. If Martins doesnt' matter ... then Zimmermans doesn't matter.

Same/same.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
SO far ....the judge is coming down on Martins side ... Zimmermans defense is screwed

- Shellie Zimmerman must finish her deposition - Prosecution win.

- Martins text messages are to be blocked from trial - Prosecution win.

- Judge has granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence of Martin's school suspension.

- Judge has granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence of Martin's past drug use.

- Judge granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence that Martin had been in fights during opening statements

- prosecution's motion requesting the court to bar information about what witnesses the prosecution did or did not call to the stand during the trial - granted. Prosecution win.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Okay .. this is a big one ... the judge just sided with the prosecution and said has barred evidence of Martin's THC blood levels from opening statements.

Zimmermans big defense is that Martin was high that night and had a history of being violent.
Now he can't say that to a jury. The judge just squashed the Zimmerman defense.
The prosecution is probably very happy. Zimmerman can't defend himself.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Zimmerman can't defend himself.


Yes he can. He's just not allowed to use unsubstantiated claims and baseless speculation.

I think Zimmerman's history of violence will be the biggest hurdle for his defence team.

Whatever the outcome of the trial, I fear we might never know why Zimmerman attacked and murdered this defenceless young man.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sankari
He's just not allowed to use unsubstantiated claims and baseless speculation.

There is nothing unsubstantiated or baseless about positive drug tests ... truancy school reports .... pictures that Martin himself posted online about guns he wanted to sell and drugs he was doing ...


I think Zimmerman's history of violence will be the biggest hurdle for his defence team.

No. The biggest hurdle will be for Zimmerman to prove that Martin was high on drugs and that he has a violent background ... because the judge just said that Zimmerman isn't allowed to bring those facts up.


Whatever the outcome of the trial, I fear we might never know why Zimmerman attacked and murdered this defenceless young man.

With Zimmerman being blocked from showing that Martin was a violent druggie ... you are right ... he can't prove that he killed in self defense.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Regardless of the trials outcome...

Justice will be served!......eventually



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I would believe that some of the jurors would be thinking to themselves "wtf? why is the judge barring this info?". If so, some of the jurors may be inclined to sway towards GZ's side regardless.

Personally, it sounds to me like the judge is just CHA and protecting everyone else in the same breath.



posted on May, 28 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


i wonder if trayvon attacked zimmerman after zimmerman pulled a gun on him? how was zimmerman able to get his gun while being mounted and "beaten half to death"? did the witness see the point at which zimmerman pulled the gun out? we really don't know what happened or exactly how it went down, unfortunately one guy is dead an we will never get to hear his side of the story.




top topics



 
19
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join