Zimmerman - Guilty of Murder or Self Defense

[Recliner Pilot 61]

No, but they have done a great Job of proving it was self defense though. I am starting to think if Zimmerman calls any witnesses of his own it could only hurt

No kidding.

 

Unless they pull a rabbit out of hat, if I were GZ attorney I would stand up at the end of the prosecution's case and say:

 

"Your honor, while there is no burden to prove my client innocent, I think the prosecution has done a bang up job of doing just that. I see no reason to waste your time, the time of the jurors, or any more money with this charade. Motion to dismiss"

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Why?

 

Has the prosecution's case done anything to prove murder?

You must have misunderstood my post.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

You must have misunderstood my post.

How?

[Mungwater 597]

How?

He said that when the defense goes for a dismissal of the murder charge at the midway point, the prosecution will have a tough time backing the charge.

[Gepetto 1,374]

There's a reason the police took such a long time to arrest Zimmerman. They had these witnesses and knew it was self defense. GZ's story made sense and his injuries and any other evidence backed his story. The only reason there is a trial is because the black people were going to start killing his family members and him. When do the riots start?

[BLS 314]

When do the riots start?

 

About 4 hours after GZ is acquitted. My ride along SGT tonight said they are watching the case very closely because they are concerned about that very thing.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Not a good day for the prosecution. They got a few hits in re: Zimmerman's MMA training and the not really significant cuts on the back of his head, but the defense brought out plenty of stuff to support its case on cross-examination.

 

Not sure how many witnesses the prosecution has left. At this point I'd think they'd have a tough time with a halftime motion to dismiss the murder charge.

 

 

He said that when the defense goes for a dismissal of the murder charge at the midway point, the prosecution will have a tough time backing the charge.

 

Well then the bolded sentence of his post is poorly crafted. By using "they'd" it stands to reason he was referencing the defense, since they are the ones who would make that motion. After that it is pretty much up to the judge, so I'm not sure how the prosecution would have "a tough time with a motion to dismiss".

 

The prosecution doesn't have a lot to do with a motion to dismiss. Given that, if that's what he means I agree. The prosecution didn't have much to work with in the first place, and have done a p!ss poor job with the little they had.

[remote controller 143]

He was guilty of not shooting that little piece of $h!t earlier or in Texas! It is clear the kid was a punk and got what he deserved.

 

 

...oh, I voted self defense.

[Mungwater 597]

It doesn't bode well for the prosecutors when it seems that their whole case is based on "the injuries weren't severe enough to fear ones life is in danger..".

 

Going for murder two will be their downfall.

[Voltaire 5,322]

I'm ready to change my vote from page one to manslaughter from Murder two. I haven't done so however, since I think BLS wanted a pulse of where we were before the trial started.

 

Also, if the jury acquits Zimmerman, I would totally understand and I wouldn't be upset about it.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

 

 

Well then the bolded sentence of his post is poorly crafted. By using "they'd" it stands to reason he was referencing the defense, since they are the ones who would make that motion. After that it is pretty much up to the judge, so I'm not sure how the prosecution would have "a tough time with a motion to dismiss".

 

The prosecution doesn't have a lot to do with a motion to dismiss. Given that, if that's what he means I agree. The prosecution didn't have much to work with in the first place, and have done a p!ss poor job with the little they had.

It's not my fault you can't read.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

It's not my fault you can't read.

 

When you point out early in your post how both sides won points, and then say "they" would have a hard time with a motion to dismiss, one would logically think "they" referred to those making the motion.

 

Especially when you have no pronoun/antecedent relationship, Sport.

 

I read just fine. I just don't read dumbass too well.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

When you point out early in your post how both sides won points, and then say "they" would have a hard time with a motion to dismiss, one would logically think "they" referred to those making the motion.

 

Especially when you have no pronoun/antecedent relationship, Sport.

 

I read just fine. I just don't read dumbass too well.

My entire post was about the prosecution and where they stand with the case right now. Why the fock would I, in the last sentence of my post, suddenly shift my point of reference to the defense?

 

You are too dumb to live.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

My entire post was about the prosecution and where they stand with the case right now. Why the fock would I, in the last sentence of my post, suddenly shift my point of reference to the defense?

 

You are too dumb to live.

You referenced both the prosecution and the defense, Sport.

 

You may need to read it again.

 

Also, you mention how "they" would have a hard time with a motion to dismiss. Since the only "they" who would make a motion is the defense, and the prosecution has no involvement in the motion it stands to reason the "they" involved would be the defense.

 

Let me give you yet another legal lesson:

 

 

Motions may be made in the form of an oral request in open court, which is then summarily granted or denied orally.

 

 

 

Defense makes the motion, judge decides. Prosecution is not involved.

[Mike Honcho 5,302]

You referenced both the prosecution and the defense, Sport.

 

You may need to read it again.

 

Also, you mention how "they" would have a hard time with a motion to dismiss. Since the only "they" who would make a motion is the defense, and the prosecution has no involvement in the motion it stands to reason the "they" involved would be the defense.

 

Let me give you yet another legal lesson:

 

 

Defense makes the motion, judge decides. Prosecution is not involved.

 

Everyone else in the world = "Oh I misunderstood, my bad".

RP = Let me spend post after post proving you were incorrect, because I'm never wrong, that's unpossible.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Wow, you are really dumber than dogsh!t if you believe the prosecution would have no opportunity to respond to a defendant's motion to dismiss. That would in fact violate due process, ie the opportunity to be heard.

 

Thank goodness you only try to pretend you have some understanding of what goes on in court and aren't actually charged with making any decisions. See how this fake lawyering stuff is hard? Not everyone can do it

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

Everyone else in the world = "Oh I misunderstood, my bad".

RP = Let me spend post after post proving you were incorrect, because I'm never wrong, that's unpossible.

Then he goes and betrays himself as being even dumber by claiming that the State would essentially be prohibited from arguing against the dismissal of its charges. Anyone with a high school education would know better.

 

Anywho I'm done wasting my time arguing with him about what "they" meant in one of my posts

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

Everyone else in the world = "Oh I misunderstood, my bad".

RP = Let me spend post after post proving you were incorrect, because I'm never wrong, that's unpossible.

 

 

 

 

The prosecution doesn't have a lot to do with a motion to dismiss. Given that, if that's what he means I agree. The prosecution didn't have much to work with in the first place, and have done a p!ss poor job with the little they had.

Once again Honcho chimes in to show his ass.

 

I agreed with Worms once Mung pointed out what he was trying to say. He came back with some shot about me not being able to read, and being too dumb to live.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Wow, you are really dumber than dogsh!t if you believe the prosecution would have no opportunity to respond to a defendant's motion to dismiss. That would in fact violate due process, ie the opportunity to be heard.

 

I said in an ealrier post (see my response the the dumbass Honcho) that they don't have much to do with a motion to dismiss. The defense enters a motion to dismiss, the judge rules on it, the prosecution can file a response.

 

The prosecution's role comes after the ruling by the judge. Once a judge rules to dismiss, how many times does he/she reverse that ruling?

[Mike Honcho 5,302]

Not a good day for the prosecution. They got a few hits in re: Zimmerman's MMA training and the not really significant cuts on the back of his head, but the defense brought out plenty of stuff to support its case on cross-examination.

 

Not sure how many witnesses the prosecution has left. At this point I'd think they'd have a tough time with a halftime motion to dismiss the murder charge.

 

 

 

When you point out early in your post how both sides won points, and then say "they" would have a hard time with a motion to dismiss, one would logically think "they" referred to those making the motion.

 

Especially when you have no pronoun/antecedent relationship, Sport.

 

I read just fine. I just don't read dumbass too well.

 

 

 

 

Once again Honcho chimes in to show his ass.

 

I agreed with Worms once Mung pointed out what he was trying to say. He came back with some shot about me not being able to read, and being too dumb to live.

 

Speaking of showing one's ass, you don't read "just fine".

 

 

Often, but not always, the pronoun and antecedent appear in the same sentence. Sometimes are in different sentences. Either way, the idea is the same: If the antecedent of the pronoun is too far away, the reader or listener may become confused.

 

Positioning Pronoun-Antecedent Pairs

 

 

 

[Strike 5,607]

Wow, you are really dumber than dogsh!t if you believe the prosecution would have no opportunity to respond to a defendant's motion to dismiss. That would in fact violate due process, ie the opportunity to be heard.

 

Thank goodness you only try to pretend you have some understanding of what goes on in court and aren't actually charged with making any decisions. See how this fake lawyering stuff is hard? Not everyone can do it

I'm pretty sure due process protects the rights of the individual being accused by the government, and not the government when the defendant makes a motion. I agree that the prosecution would be able to respond to the motion to dismiss but I think you're wrong that it would be a due process violation.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

I said in an ealrier post (see my response the the dumbass Honcho) that they don't have much to do with a motion to dismiss. The defense enters a motion to dismiss, the judge rules on it, the prosecution can file a response.

 

The prosecution's role comes after the ruling by the judge. Once a judge rules to dismiss, how many times does he/she reverse that ruling?

I know you'll refuse to accept that you're wrong here, but for your own edification I will explain that the defense makes the motion, the prosecution responds (this is where "they" will have a tough time, BTW), the defense then replies to what the prosecution says, and then the judge rules.

 

Here's an example:

 

Defense: your honor we move to dismiss. The prosecution has presented no evidence supporting its charge that RP is a focking moron.

 

Prosecution: your honor, we have introduced the FBI Surveillance Van thread we were able to recover from an archive, which the defendant clearly deleted out of shame; we have shown numerous instances where the defendant caused himself to get slaughtered in a thread due to his own sheer stupidity; and we have introduced testimony from every single Geek except Rusty stating their opinion that the defendant is possibly the dumbest person to every grace the bored. From all of that the jury could easily find that RP is, in fact, a blithering idiot.

 

Defense: link?

 

Judge (rolling eyes): motion denied, and may God have mercy on your soul.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

I'm pretty sure due process protects the rights of the individual being accused by the government, and not the government when the defendant makes a motion. I agree that the prosecution would be able to respond to the motion to dismiss but I think you're wrong that it would be a due process violation.

Due process applies to all litigants in any action, civil or criminal. It is the fundamental tenet on which our entire legal system is based. HTH

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking of showing one's ass, you don't read "just fine".

 

 

 

Never said they can't be in different sentences, Dumbass. Since he discussed both earlier "they" could refer to either, Dumbass.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

Prosecution: your honor, we have introduced the FBI Surveillance Van thread we were able to recover from an archive, which the defendant clearly deleted out of shame;

Dayum!

 

The gift that keeps on giving. Butthurt to this day, huh?

[drobeski 3,061]

Worms and honcho collectively got their ass handed to them in this thread.

Basically the outcome is the equivalent of the cowboys playing the pats.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Worms and honcho collectively got their ass handed to them in this thread.

Basically the outcome is the equivalent of the cowboys playing the pats.

Cowboys lead the series 7-4, so I'm not sure that analogy fairly represents the ass kicking they took here.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Worms and honcho collectively got their ass handed to them in this thread.

Basically the outcome is the equivalent of the cowboys playing the pats.

You have no focking clue what you're talking about, as usual.

[Strike 5,607]

Due process applies to all litigants in any action, civil or criminal. It is the fundamental tenet on which our entire legal system is based. HTH

Link? Here's one:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process

 

Your turn Howard.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Link? Here's one:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process

 

Your turn Howard.

You're like is actually pretty good. Too bad you apparently don't understand what it says

[Strike 5,607]

Your Link You're like is actually pretty good. Too bad you apparently don't understand what it says

 

Fixed your post. Please feel free to educate me Howard. We've all been waiting for you to show us your legal prowess for a few years now. Go for it. Here's your chance!!!!

 

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

Fixed your post. Please feel free to educate me Howard. We've all been waiting for you to show us your legal prowess for a few years now. Go for it. Here's your chance!!!!

 

Just got a new phone and I'm getting used to auto correct. Thanks for pointing that out though.

 

As for teaching you the law, well I spent 3 years and over a hundred grand on my legal education. It would have been pretty foolish to spend all that time and money if the law were the sort of thing idiots could easily pick up on an Internet message board, don't you agree?

[Strike 5,607]

Just got a new phone and I'm getting used to auto correct. Thanks for pointing that out though.

 

As for teaching you the law, well I spent 3 years and over a hundred grand on my legal education. It would have been pretty foolish to spend all that time and money if the law were the sort of thing idiots could easily pick up on an Internet message board, don't you agree?

 

Apparently 3 years and over a hundred grand didn't work. But if people at Cornell are willing to try so could you. It's telling that other lawyers on this board have been willing to talk about the law but you continually refuse. I'd do so as well if I were you.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Worms and honcho collectively got their ass handed to them in this thread.

Basically the outcome is the equivalent of the cowboys playing the pats.

 

Whats funny is how you take up for the idiot even when he is shown, without a shadow of a doubt, to be the one who got beat down bad.

 

But not shocking you chime in this way

drobeski and RP again lose this thread.

[drobeski 3,061]

 

Whats funny is how you take up for the idiot even when he is shown, without a shadow of a doubt, to be the one who got beat down bad.

 

But not shocking you chime in this way

drobeski and RP again lose this thread.

Whats sad is your life at this board solely revolves around nipping pointlessly at rp's heals like an annoying tiny brained chewaha.

Just yapping and whining, you're pathetic kid.

Fun as hell to kick across the room though.

[mobb_deep 920]

Guy with GUN kills unarmed guy, and people believe guy with GUN was acting in self defense. The pussifocation of America continues. MK Ultra.

 

They should make a new law. If you're a pussy who needs a gun everywhere you go, you can't claim self defense when you're acting like a wannabe badass and kill someone.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Whats sad is your life at this board solely revolves around nipping pointlessly at rp's heals like an annoying tiny brained chewaha.

Just yapping and whining, you're pathetic kid.

Fun as hell to kick across the room though.

 

If you say so.

But you have never kicked anything across the room...and neither is he.

And your life on this board revolves around what?

Some moron claiming you won a thread for constant whining (yes, because its been shown over and and over that the only people whining are those like you and RP) and parroting whatever the republicans come up with?

 

The irony of calling someone tiny brained...coming from you...then not even being able to figure out what dog you are trying to spell...

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

If you say so.

But you have never kicked anything across the room...and neither is he.

And your life on this board revolves around what?

Some moron claiming you won a thread for constant whining (yes, because its been shown over and and over that the only people whining are those like you and RP) and parroting whatever the republicans come up with?

 

The irony of calling someone tiny brained...coming from you...then not even being able to figure out what dog you are trying to spell...

I love it!

 

Slo Nuff whining about spelling when he can't craft a simple sentence.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Link? Here's one:

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/due_process

 

Your turn Howard.

How many times can Worms get schooled on the law in one thread?

[Sho Nuff 720]

I love it!

 

Slo Nuff whining about spelling when he can't craft a simple sentence.

 

I love it...RP whining about a typo and totally missing the point about what I said to him about his spelling.

Just a tip for you...and drobeski...if you want to call someone tiny brained or question their intelligence, learn to spell chihuahua.

Much different than a typo from quickly putting something out there on a phone.

 

But everyone knows you won't see that difference.

Just more signs of what jokes you two are.