|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion.
|
On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion.
I did read it.
Just as an example from the link:
They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious.
They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car--despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up.
Etc...
As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me.
|
On June 06 2013 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion. I did read it. Just as an example from the link: They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious. They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car--despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up. Etc... As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me. your post just summed up why this motion is necessary.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On June 06 2013 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion. I did read it. Just as an example from the link: They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious. They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car-- despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up. Etc... As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me. your post just summed up why this motion is necessary. lol I think dAPhREAk means the bolded parts. This is quite interesting though. I didn't realize there are limitations to what can and can't be said but it makes sense. If something didn't happen but is constantly propagated through the courtroom, it can seriously affect the outcome of the trial and such.
|
On June 04 2013 02:45 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2013 15:47 zbedlam wrote: Man follows kid to house. Kid sees man following him, lets assume the kid attacks the man. Man shoots kid. You shouldn't be able to argue self defense if you are following someone with malicious intent (not too familiar with US legal system). If the evidence that ThievingMagpie said is legitimate then there is no question whether or not it was malicious. [..]He asks why trayvon was doing and accused him of trying to rob some house beause he was an unfalimer black youth on pot in the middle of a rainstorm. Thats all the intent and malice that zimmerman ever did. [...] watch out it sounds like your trying to defend the zman but your actually calling him racist and making yourself look racist too.
|
Attorneys file motions to control/limit the language used in the court room at trial all of the time. For example, it is common for plaintiff's attorneys in personal injury actions to move courts to prohibit the use of the term "accident" when referring to the incident that injured the plaintiff.
|
On June 06 2013 04:20 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion. I did read it. Just as an example from the link: They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious. They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car-- despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up. Etc... As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me. your post just summed up why this motion is necessary. lol I think dAPhREAk means the bolded parts. This is quite interesting though. I didn't realize there are limitations to what can and can't be said but it makes sense. If something didn't happen but is constantly propagated through the courtroom, it can seriously affect the outcome of the trial and such. even highly relevant and probative evidence can be excluded at trial under certain circumstances. for example, offers of settlement are relevant to whether the defendant in fact believes he/she/it is at fault for an accident, but courts routinely exclude evidence of settlement offers because they want to encourage pre-trial resolution of claims. post-accident remedial conduct (e.g., a recall of all food alleged to be toxic) is relevant to show that the defendant believes the claims are valid and wants to prevent future injuries, but courts may exclude such evidence of post-accident remedial conduct because they want to encourage such actions. there are also many other examples of probative/relevant evidence that is excluded.
the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread).
regardless, motions to exclude irrelevant/unduly prejudicial/etc. evidence are commonplace. i have seen cases with over 50 such motions in one case. people think that lawyers are allowed to say whatever they want at trial, but that is not the case. it is highly regulated and any slip ups could lead to an immediate mistrial, which nobody wants.
|
On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior.
EDIT:
It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below.
+ Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor.
|
On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though.
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf
|
On June 06 2013 05:26 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though. http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf Wow, that is an absolute dog shit response to a critical motion in limine. There is no recitation to any legal authority for why the evidence comes in.
Frankly, I think it is a pretty clear cut issue under 404. The evidence should come in.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 04:20 BigFan wrote:On June 06 2013 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion. I did read it. Just as an example from the link: They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious. They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car-- despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up. Etc... As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me. your post just summed up why this motion is necessary. lol I think dAPhREAk means the bolded parts. This is quite interesting though. I didn't realize there are limitations to what can and can't be said but it makes sense. If something didn't happen but is constantly propagated through the courtroom, it can seriously affect the outcome of the trial and such. even highly relevant and probative evidence can be excluded at trial under certain circumstances. for example, offers of settlement are relevant to whether the defendant in fact believes he/she/it is at fault for an accident, but courts routinely exclude evidence of settlement offers because they want to encourage pre-trial resolution of claims. post-accident remedial conduct (e.g., a recall of all food alleged to be toxic) is relevant to show that the defendant believes the claims are valid and wants to prevent future injuries, but courts may exclude such evidence of post-accident remedial conduct because they want to encourage such actions. there are also many other examples of probative/relevant evidence that is excluded. the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). regardless, motions to exclude irrelevant/unduly prejudicial/etc. evidence are commonplace. i have seen cases with over 50 such motions in one case. people think that lawyers are allowed to say whatever they want at trial, but that is not the case. it is highly regulated and any slip ups could lead to an immediate mistrial, which nobody wants. interesting, fair enough. I figured that previous behaviour might be relevant to this case but I guess because someone is rude or acts badly before doesn't imply that they are a killer etc...
|
On June 06 2013 05:32 BigFan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 04:20 BigFan wrote:On June 06 2013 03:27 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:18 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 03:11 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 03:00 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2013 02:43 dAPhREAk wrote:this seems relevant to your guy's discussion. zimmerman has filed a motion to exclude certain terms from being used at trial. the list of terms are: "profiled" "vigilante" "self appointed neighborhood watch captain" "wannabe cop" "he got out of the car after the police (or dispatcher) told him not to" "he confronted trayvon martin" the motion in limine discusses the reasons for each (basically that they are factually inaccurate and disparaging). http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0613/limine_use_of_terms.pdfthis should be interesting because these terms have been used extensively (and inappropriately in my opinion) in this thread to discuss the issues in this case. lets see how the court rules on them. Hmm... interesting stand to take for the defense. I didn't know you were allowed to tell others how to evaluate evidence. you're not allowed to say whatever you want. arguments have to be supported by admitted facts. the defense is arguing that such terms are not supported by facts, misrepresent facts and/or are otherwise prejudicial and misleading. the defense's argument for each term is delineated in the linked motion. I did read it. Just as an example from the link: They don't like the use of the word profiled because its deemed as racially charged even though that is exactly what Zimmerman did in his conversation with the dispatcher when he described Travyon as a drugged up criminal that looks suspicious. They also say that there is no evidence that Zimmerman got our of the car-- despite the fact that Zimmerman was sitting on the grass about two or more blocks away. They don't want them mentioning that Zimmerman got out of his car--despite the fact that they found him outside of the car when the police showed up. Etc... As I said, I didn't realize that you could inform the other side how to interpret evidence. That's new to me. If that's how law works then cool, just news to me. your post just summed up why this motion is necessary. lol I think dAPhREAk means the bolded parts. This is quite interesting though. I didn't realize there are limitations to what can and can't be said but it makes sense. If something didn't happen but is constantly propagated through the courtroom, it can seriously affect the outcome of the trial and such. even highly relevant and probative evidence can be excluded at trial under certain circumstances. for example, offers of settlement are relevant to whether the defendant in fact believes he/she/it is at fault for an accident, but courts routinely exclude evidence of settlement offers because they want to encourage pre-trial resolution of claims. post-accident remedial conduct (e.g., a recall of all food alleged to be toxic) is relevant to show that the defendant believes the claims are valid and wants to prevent future injuries, but courts may exclude such evidence of post-accident remedial conduct because they want to encourage such actions. there are also many other examples of probative/relevant evidence that is excluded. the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). regardless, motions to exclude irrelevant/unduly prejudicial/etc. evidence are commonplace. i have seen cases with over 50 such motions in one case. people think that lawyers are allowed to say whatever they want at trial, but that is not the case. it is highly regulated and any slip ups could lead to an immediate mistrial, which nobody wants. interesting, fair enough. I figured that previous behaviour might be relevant to this case but I guess because someone is rude or acts badly before doesn't imply that they are a killer etc... Courts always balance the probative value of evidence (ie how relevant it is) versus the risk of harm in admitting the evidence (confusion, delay, unfair prejudice, etc). Context is always critical. In criminal cases, the defendant typically is going to get the benefit of the doubt on these issues and have a much longer leash to present this kind of evidence. Parties in civil actions have a much harder time getting this evidence admitted.
|
On June 06 2013 05:29 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:26 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though. http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf Wow, that is an absolute dog shit response to a critical motion in limine. There is no recitation to any legal authority for why the evidence comes in. Frankly, I think it is a pretty clear cut issue under 404. The evidence should come in. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial.
edit: i believe its in here, but its such a bad copy.
http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052813_court_minutes.pdf
|
Trayvon Martin Shooting Fast Facts
Here's a look at what you need to know about the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in February 2012. Former neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman has been charged with second-degree murder and is scheduled to go on trial June 10, 2013.
Facts: Trayvon Benjamin Martin, born February 5, 1995, was a 17-year-old African-American high school student who lived in Miami Gardens, Florida with his mother Sybrina Fulton. In February 2012, Martin was visting his father Tracy Martin in Sanford, Florida after receiving a ten-day suspension from Krop Senior High School. The suspension stemmed from the discovery of drug residue in Martin's book bag.
George Michael Zimmerman, born October 5, 1983, was a part-time student at Seminole State College and a neighborhood watch captain at the Retreat at Twin Lakes gated community in Sanford at the time of the shooting. He is married to Shellie (Dean) Zimmerman and is the son of Robert and Gladys Zimmerman.
Timeline: February 26, 2012 - George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, calls 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood. He is instructed not to get out of his SUV or approach the person. Zimmerman disregards the instructions. Moments later, neighbors report hearing gunfire. Zimmerman acknowledges that he shot Martin, claiming it was in self-defense. In a police report, Officer Timothy Smith writes that Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of the head.
February 27, 2012 - Martin's father, Tracy Martin, files a missing persons report. Officers with the Sanford Police Department visit Tracy Martin. He is able to identify Trayvon Martin's body using a photo.
March 8, 2102 - Investigators receive a fax from the Altamonte Family Practice containing the medical records identifying the injuries sustained by Zimmerman on the night of the shooting: Open wound of scalp, without mention of complication; nasal bones, closed fracture; assault by other specified means.
March 12, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee says that Zimmerman has not been charged because there are no grounds to disprove his story of the events.
March 13, 2012 - Sanford Police Department's homicide detective Christopher Serino recommends Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. Zimmerman "failed to identify himself" as a concerned citizen or neighborhood watch member on two occasions that night. Serino reports that he thought Zimmerman's head injuries were "marginally consistent with a life-threatening episode, as described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force were deployed by Trayvon Martin."
March 14, 2012 - The case is turned over to the Florida State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
March 15, 2012 - In a letter to the Orlando Sentinel, Robert Zimmerman, George Zimmerman's father, writes that George has been unfairly portrayed as a racist, and that George is Hispanic and grew up in a multiracial family.
March 16, 2012 - Authorities release seven 911 calls from the night of the shooting. In one of the 911 recordings, Zimmerman, against the advice of the 911 dispatcher, follows Martin. In one of the recordings, a voice screams "Help, help!" in the background, followed by the sound of a gunshot.
March 19, 2012 - The Justice Department and the FBI announce that they have launched an investigation into Martin's death.
March 20, 2012 - A lawyer for the Martin family, Benjamin Crump, holds a news conference, telling reporters that Trayvon was on the phone with his 16-year-old girlfriend at the time of the shooting. The girl, who wishes to remain anonymous, says she heard someone ask Martin what he was doing and heard Martin ask why the person was following him, according to Crump. The girl then got the impression that there was an altercation in which the earpiece fell out of Martin's ear and the connection went dead.
March 21, 2012 - CNN analyzes one of the tapes of Zimmerman's call to dispatch, in which he is purported to have used a racial slur against blacks. The results are inconclusive.
March 22, 2012 - A petition on Change.org calling for the arrest of Zimmerman, created by the parents of Trayvon Martin, surpasses 1.3 million people.
March 22, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee announces he is stepping down "temporarily" as head of the department, which has been criticized for its handling of the fatal shooting.
March 22, 2012 - Florida Gov. Rick Scott announces he is appointing Angela B. Corey of the 4th Judicial Circuit as state attorney in the investigation, replacing Norman Wolfinger, state attorney for Florida's 18th District, which includes Sanford.
March 23, 2012 - President Barack Obama speaks out publicly for the first time on the growing controversy over the shooting of Trayvon Martin, saying that the incident requires national "soul-searching."
March 24, 2012 - A handful of members from the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) offer a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman.
March 26, 2012 - Exactly one month after Trayvon Martin's death, rallies take place in cities across the country, including Sanford, where the City Commission holds a town hall meeting on the incident and its aftermath. Martin's parents speak at the meeting.
March 28, 2012 - Zimmerman's father, Robert, appears on television and says that Martin threatened to kill Zimmerman and then beat him so badly Zimmerman was forced to shoot.
March 29, 2012 - Zimmerman's brother, Robert Zimmerman Jr., appears on CNN and says medical records will prove that his brother was attacked and his nose was broken by Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the teen.
April 2, 2012 - FBI agents interview Martin's girlfriend, the 16-year-old girl who, phone records show, was on the cell phone with him shortly before the fatal confrontation.
April 3, 2012 - Zimmerman's legal adviser, Craig Sonner, says that criminal defense lawyer Hal Uhrig will represent Zimmerman and that Sonner will serve as co-counsel if the case proceeds.
April 7-8, 2012 - George Zimmerman launches a website warning supporters about groups falsely claiming to be raising funds for his defense. The site includes a link through which donations can be made to pay for Zimmerman's lawyers and living expenses.
April 9, 2012 - Prosecutor Angela Corey announces that she will not present the case to a grand jury.
April 10, 2012 - Attorneys Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner announce that they have lost contact with Zimmerman and no longer represent him.
April 11, 2012 - Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder. His new lawyer, Mark O'Mara, tells CNN that Zimmerman has turned himself in.
April 18, 2012 - Seminole Circuit Court Judge Jessica Recksiedler, who was assigned to Zimmerman's case, approves a motion to disqualify herself from the criminal case because her husband works as a CNN legal analyst.
April 18, 2012 - It is announced that Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. will take over George Zimmerman's case.
April 20, 2012 - Zimmerman's bond hearing is held. Judge Lester sets Zimmerman's bond at $150,000. During the hearing, Zimmerman apologizes to the family of Trayvon Martin for the loss of their son.
April 23, 2012 - Zimmerman is released on bail at 12:05 AM. Later in the day, Zimmerman enters a written not guilty plea and waves his right to appear at his arraignment.
May 8, 2012 - Judge Kenneth Lester accepts Zimmerman's written plea of not guilty.
May 15, 2012 - A medical report by George Zimmerman's family doctor, taken a day after the February 26 shooting, shows Zimmerman was diagnosed with a fractured nose, two black eyes and two lacerations on the back of his head.
June 1, 2012 - Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. revokes Zimmerman's bond and orders him to surrender within 48 hours after the prosecution argues that Zimmerman and his wife, Shellie, misrepresented their finances when Zimmerman's bond was originally set in April.
June 3, 2012 - At 1:45 PM, Zimmerman surrenders to authorities and is taken into custody at the John E. Polk Correctional Facility in Seminole County.
June 12, 2012 - George Zimmerman's wife Shellie is arrested and charged with perjury.
June 18, 2012 - Audio of six phone calls between Zimmerman and his wife Shellie are released, along with bank statements.
June 20, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee is officially fired.
June 25, 2012 - Zimmerman's attorney files a motion requesting a "reasonable bond" be set for Zimmerman's release from jail.
July 5, 2012 - The judge sets Zimmerman's bond at $1 million.
July 6, 2012 - Zimmerman is released from jail after posting the required 10% of the $1 million bond ($100,000).
July 13, 2012 - Zimmerman's legal team files a motion requesting Judge Lester step down from the case. The motion claims Zimmerman cannot get a fair trial because Lester used "gratuitous, disparaging" language in the previous week's bail order.
July 18, 2012 - Zimmerman, appearing on Fox News "Hannity" show, does his first television interview since the shooting. He says he would not do anything differently.
August 9, 2012 - A photo of Trayvon Martin's body and George Zimmerman's school records are mistakenly released by prosecutors. Special Prosecutor Angela Corey's office issues a statement asking reporters to "please disregard and do not use the information contained in the initial e-mail. It was inadvertently attached."
August 13, 2012 - George Zimmerman appeals Judge Lester's refusal to recuse himself with the Fifth District Court of Appeals.
August 29, 2012 - A Florida appeals court grants Zimmerman's request for a new judge, saying Judge Kenneth Lester's remarks in a bail order put Zimmerman in reasonable fear of a fair trial.
August 30, 2012 - Judge Debra Nelson is assigned to replace Judge Kenneth Lester in the case of George Zimmerman.
December 7, 2012 - Zimmerman sues NBC Universal for allegedly editing the 911 call he placed on the night of the tragic event. He states in the lawsuit that NBC unfairly made it appear that "Zimmerman was a racist, and that he was racially profiling Trayvon Martin".
February 9, 2013 - The Justice for Trayvon Martin Foundation hosts a "Day of Remembrance Community Peace Walk and Forum" in Miami. It takes place four days after what would have been Martin's 18th birthday.
March 5, 2013 - Trayvon Martin's girlfriend, known as Civilian Witness 8, who was on the phone with Martin the night of his death, admits that she lied under oath when she told court prosecutors that she was in the hospital on the day of Martin's funeral.
March 5, 2013 - Lawyer Mark O'Mara decides against seeking a pretrial Stand your Ground immunity hearing for George Zimmerman citing lack of preparation time.
April 5, 2013 - Martin's parents settle a wrongful-death claim against the homeowners association of the Florida subdivision where their son was killed.
April 30, 2013 - George Zimmerman waives his right to a "stand your ground" pretrial immunity hearing. Zimmerman's attorneys decide they will instead try this as a self-defense case. If Zimmerman had had a pretrial immunity hearing, a judge would have ruled whether his actions were protected under the "stand your ground" law. If the judge had ruled in favor of Zimmerman, it would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed.
May 28, 2013 - Judge Debra Nelson rules on several motions brought by the defense. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial. She also denies a request to take the jury to the crime scene. Nelson, however, rules that jurors will remain anonymous and will be referred to by numbers only. http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts/
|
On June 06 2013 05:54 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:29 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:26 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though. http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf Wow, that is an absolute dog shit response to a critical motion in limine. There is no recitation to any legal authority for why the evidence comes in. Frankly, I think it is a pretty clear cut issue under 404. The evidence should come in. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial. What was the basis? That they aren't evidence of a pertinent trait of a victim?
|
On June 06 2013 05:56 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:54 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:29 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:26 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though. http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf Wow, that is an absolute dog shit response to a critical motion in limine. There is no recitation to any legal authority for why the evidence comes in. Frankly, I think it is a pretty clear cut issue under 404. The evidence should come in. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial. What was the basis? That they aren't evidence of a pertinent trait of a victim? http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052813_court_minutes.pdf
typical minute order.
|
it is kind of funny how many times the appellate court has reversed the trial court in this case.
Appeals court: Zimmerman defense can depose Trayvon Martin family attorney
The Fifth District Court of Appeal today ruled that Benjamin Crump, an attorney for Trayvon Martin’s family, must sit down and answer questions under oath by George Zimmerman’s attorneys.
In the just-released ruling, the court wrote that Zimmerman’s lawyers have a right to question Crump about his dealings with a woman who’s expected to be the state’s most important witness.
She’s a young Miami woman who was on the phone with Trayvon moments before he was shot.
Zimmerman’s attorneys had twice asked trial judge Debra S. Nelson to order Crump to sit down for a deposition, and twice she said no.
So defense attorneys went over her head, filing a writ with the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Daytona Beach.
It returned a unanimous five-page ruling this afternoon in Zimmerman’s favor.
Nelson was wrong, the court wrote, when she said Crump is protected by a work product privilege. He conducted a March 19, 2012, interview of the woman and made an audio recording while in the same room with two employees of ABC News.
The network broadcast portions of it shortly thereafter.
The appeals court said because that news crew was present during the recording, Crump had waived his work product privilege.
It also ruled that Crump deserves no protection, despite his claim of being opposing counsel, because he’s not. In this case he’d have to be a prosecutor to qualify.
Defense attorneys obtained a copy of the recording Crump made, but the appeals court described it as “incomplete and of very poor quality.”
It ruled that Zimmerman’s attorneys may question Crump but only on a very narrow set of things. They may ask him about the contents of the interview and about the circumstances surrounding it.
They may not, however, ask why he tracked her down or what methods he used to do that.
In a statement, Crump said “I am available to be deposed, and the trial should not be delayed in any possible way ....” http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-06-03/news/os-george-zimmerman-trial-crump-deposition_1_trayvon-martin-family-attorney-george-zimmerman-zimmerman-defense
|
On June 06 2013 05:58 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2013 05:56 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:54 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:29 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:26 dAPhREAk wrote:On June 06 2013 05:19 xDaunt wrote:On June 06 2013 05:08 dAPhREAk wrote: the most relevant one here though is likely the exclusion of trayvon's drug use/suspensions/guns/whatever other negative stuff he did before the incident. such character evidence (albeit relevant in most people's minds as to what actually happened) is normally excluded except under special circumstances in self defense cases unless the defendant was previously aware of such character (not the case here). same goes for zimmerman. the fact that he allegedly molested his family member, domestic violence, aggressive asshole at work, etc. should be excluded. none of it is relevant or probative of what happened on the actual date of the killing, and such evidence of bad character only serves to get people riled up and making decisions based on emotion rather than the cold hard facts (as considerably demonstrated in this thread). Does Florida have a special Rule 404? That limitation typically doesn't apply in most jurisdictions as far as I know. Defendants typically have free reign to offer evidence suggesting that their victims were aggressors based upon past behavior. EDIT: It doesn't look like Florida's Rule 404 is any different than the majority rule. See (1)(b)(1) below. + Show Spoiler +90.404 Character evidence; when admissible.-- (1) CHARACTER EVIDENCE GENERALLY.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except: (a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait. (b) Character of victim.-- 1. Except as provided in s. 794.022, evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait; or 2. Evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the aggressor. there is a MIL on it. defense is trying to get around character evidence rule. gzlegalcase doesnt have the state's motion though. http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052413_response_to_limine_tm.pdf Wow, that is an absolute dog shit response to a critical motion in limine. There is no recitation to any legal authority for why the evidence comes in. Frankly, I think it is a pretty clear cut issue under 404. The evidence should come in. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial. What was the basis? That they aren't evidence of a pertinent trait of a victim? http://www.gzdocs.com/documents/0513/052813_court_minutes.pdftypical minute order. Yeah. Hopefully the judge took the time to at least explain herself during the hearing.
|
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/05/zimmerman-hearing-prosecutor-violation-live-blog?hpt=hp_t2
If someone wants to read the proceedings of todays court hearing. It should be the last one before the trial. It'll pick up again tomarrow morning.
11:20 a.m. ET:
Kruidbos says there were 2958 photos in original report. In Kruidbos rreport, there were 4275 photos. Photos included Martin blowing smoke, pot, underaged naked fmales, clump of jewelry on bed.
He also says there were deleted text messages re a transaction for a firearm. The investigator said "it looks like they were selling a gun" and said they have to talk to Rionda.
11:51 a.m. ET: Kruidbos said Rionda told him they would only turn over the source file of Martin's phone to the defense.
|
On June 06 2013 05:55 dAPhREAk wrote:Trayvon Martin Shooting Fast Facts Show nested quote +Here's a look at what you need to know about the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in February 2012. Former neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman has been charged with second-degree murder and is scheduled to go on trial June 10, 2013.
Facts: Trayvon Benjamin Martin, born February 5, 1995, was a 17-year-old African-American high school student who lived in Miami Gardens, Florida with his mother Sybrina Fulton. In February 2012, Martin was visting his father Tracy Martin in Sanford, Florida after receiving a ten-day suspension from Krop Senior High School. The suspension stemmed from the discovery of drug residue in Martin's book bag.
George Michael Zimmerman, born October 5, 1983, was a part-time student at Seminole State College and a neighborhood watch captain at the Retreat at Twin Lakes gated community in Sanford at the time of the shooting. He is married to Shellie (Dean) Zimmerman and is the son of Robert and Gladys Zimmerman.
Timeline: February 26, 2012 - George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, calls 911 to report "a suspicious person" in the neighborhood. He is instructed not to get out of his SUV or approach the person. Zimmerman disregards the instructions. Moments later, neighbors report hearing gunfire. Zimmerman acknowledges that he shot Martin, claiming it was in self-defense. In a police report, Officer Timothy Smith writes that Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of the head.
February 27, 2012 - Martin's father, Tracy Martin, files a missing persons report. Officers with the Sanford Police Department visit Tracy Martin. He is able to identify Trayvon Martin's body using a photo.
March 8, 2102 - Investigators receive a fax from the Altamonte Family Practice containing the medical records identifying the injuries sustained by Zimmerman on the night of the shooting: Open wound of scalp, without mention of complication; nasal bones, closed fracture; assault by other specified means.
March 12, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee says that Zimmerman has not been charged because there are no grounds to disprove his story of the events.
March 13, 2012 - Sanford Police Department's homicide detective Christopher Serino recommends Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. Zimmerman "failed to identify himself" as a concerned citizen or neighborhood watch member on two occasions that night. Serino reports that he thought Zimmerman's head injuries were "marginally consistent with a life-threatening episode, as described by him, during which neither a deadly weapon nor deadly force were deployed by Trayvon Martin."
March 14, 2012 - The case is turned over to the Florida State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
March 15, 2012 - In a letter to the Orlando Sentinel, Robert Zimmerman, George Zimmerman's father, writes that George has been unfairly portrayed as a racist, and that George is Hispanic and grew up in a multiracial family.
March 16, 2012 - Authorities release seven 911 calls from the night of the shooting. In one of the 911 recordings, Zimmerman, against the advice of the 911 dispatcher, follows Martin. In one of the recordings, a voice screams "Help, help!" in the background, followed by the sound of a gunshot.
March 19, 2012 - The Justice Department and the FBI announce that they have launched an investigation into Martin's death.
March 20, 2012 - A lawyer for the Martin family, Benjamin Crump, holds a news conference, telling reporters that Trayvon was on the phone with his 16-year-old girlfriend at the time of the shooting. The girl, who wishes to remain anonymous, says she heard someone ask Martin what he was doing and heard Martin ask why the person was following him, according to Crump. The girl then got the impression that there was an altercation in which the earpiece fell out of Martin's ear and the connection went dead.
March 21, 2012 - CNN analyzes one of the tapes of Zimmerman's call to dispatch, in which he is purported to have used a racial slur against blacks. The results are inconclusive.
March 22, 2012 - A petition on Change.org calling for the arrest of Zimmerman, created by the parents of Trayvon Martin, surpasses 1.3 million people.
March 22, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee announces he is stepping down "temporarily" as head of the department, which has been criticized for its handling of the fatal shooting.
March 22, 2012 - Florida Gov. Rick Scott announces he is appointing Angela B. Corey of the 4th Judicial Circuit as state attorney in the investigation, replacing Norman Wolfinger, state attorney for Florida's 18th District, which includes Sanford.
March 23, 2012 - President Barack Obama speaks out publicly for the first time on the growing controversy over the shooting of Trayvon Martin, saying that the incident requires national "soul-searching."
March 24, 2012 - A handful of members from the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) offer a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman.
March 26, 2012 - Exactly one month after Trayvon Martin's death, rallies take place in cities across the country, including Sanford, where the City Commission holds a town hall meeting on the incident and its aftermath. Martin's parents speak at the meeting.
March 28, 2012 - Zimmerman's father, Robert, appears on television and says that Martin threatened to kill Zimmerman and then beat him so badly Zimmerman was forced to shoot.
March 29, 2012 - Zimmerman's brother, Robert Zimmerman Jr., appears on CNN and says medical records will prove that his brother was attacked and his nose was broken by Trayvon Martin before he fatally shot the teen.
April 2, 2012 - FBI agents interview Martin's girlfriend, the 16-year-old girl who, phone records show, was on the cell phone with him shortly before the fatal confrontation.
April 3, 2012 - Zimmerman's legal adviser, Craig Sonner, says that criminal defense lawyer Hal Uhrig will represent Zimmerman and that Sonner will serve as co-counsel if the case proceeds.
April 7-8, 2012 - George Zimmerman launches a website warning supporters about groups falsely claiming to be raising funds for his defense. The site includes a link through which donations can be made to pay for Zimmerman's lawyers and living expenses.
April 9, 2012 - Prosecutor Angela Corey announces that she will not present the case to a grand jury.
April 10, 2012 - Attorneys Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner announce that they have lost contact with Zimmerman and no longer represent him.
April 11, 2012 - Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder. His new lawyer, Mark O'Mara, tells CNN that Zimmerman has turned himself in.
April 18, 2012 - Seminole Circuit Court Judge Jessica Recksiedler, who was assigned to Zimmerman's case, approves a motion to disqualify herself from the criminal case because her husband works as a CNN legal analyst.
April 18, 2012 - It is announced that Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. will take over George Zimmerman's case.
April 20, 2012 - Zimmerman's bond hearing is held. Judge Lester sets Zimmerman's bond at $150,000. During the hearing, Zimmerman apologizes to the family of Trayvon Martin for the loss of their son.
April 23, 2012 - Zimmerman is released on bail at 12:05 AM. Later in the day, Zimmerman enters a written not guilty plea and waves his right to appear at his arraignment.
May 8, 2012 - Judge Kenneth Lester accepts Zimmerman's written plea of not guilty.
May 15, 2012 - A medical report by George Zimmerman's family doctor, taken a day after the February 26 shooting, shows Zimmerman was diagnosed with a fractured nose, two black eyes and two lacerations on the back of his head.
June 1, 2012 - Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. revokes Zimmerman's bond and orders him to surrender within 48 hours after the prosecution argues that Zimmerman and his wife, Shellie, misrepresented their finances when Zimmerman's bond was originally set in April.
June 3, 2012 - At 1:45 PM, Zimmerman surrenders to authorities and is taken into custody at the John E. Polk Correctional Facility in Seminole County.
June 12, 2012 - George Zimmerman's wife Shellie is arrested and charged with perjury.
June 18, 2012 - Audio of six phone calls between Zimmerman and his wife Shellie are released, along with bank statements.
June 20, 2012 - Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee is officially fired.
June 25, 2012 - Zimmerman's attorney files a motion requesting a "reasonable bond" be set for Zimmerman's release from jail.
July 5, 2012 - The judge sets Zimmerman's bond at $1 million.
July 6, 2012 - Zimmerman is released from jail after posting the required 10% of the $1 million bond ($100,000).
July 13, 2012 - Zimmerman's legal team files a motion requesting Judge Lester step down from the case. The motion claims Zimmerman cannot get a fair trial because Lester used "gratuitous, disparaging" language in the previous week's bail order.
July 18, 2012 - Zimmerman, appearing on Fox News "Hannity" show, does his first television interview since the shooting. He says he would not do anything differently.
August 9, 2012 - A photo of Trayvon Martin's body and George Zimmerman's school records are mistakenly released by prosecutors. Special Prosecutor Angela Corey's office issues a statement asking reporters to "please disregard and do not use the information contained in the initial e-mail. It was inadvertently attached."
August 13, 2012 - George Zimmerman appeals Judge Lester's refusal to recuse himself with the Fifth District Court of Appeals.
August 29, 2012 - A Florida appeals court grants Zimmerman's request for a new judge, saying Judge Kenneth Lester's remarks in a bail order put Zimmerman in reasonable fear of a fair trial.
August 30, 2012 - Judge Debra Nelson is assigned to replace Judge Kenneth Lester in the case of George Zimmerman.
December 7, 2012 - Zimmerman sues NBC Universal for allegedly editing the 911 call he placed on the night of the tragic event. He states in the lawsuit that NBC unfairly made it appear that "Zimmerman was a racist, and that he was racially profiling Trayvon Martin".
February 9, 2013 - The Justice for Trayvon Martin Foundation hosts a "Day of Remembrance Community Peace Walk and Forum" in Miami. It takes place four days after what would have been Martin's 18th birthday.
March 5, 2013 - Trayvon Martin's girlfriend, known as Civilian Witness 8, who was on the phone with Martin the night of his death, admits that she lied under oath when she told court prosecutors that she was in the hospital on the day of Martin's funeral.
March 5, 2013 - Lawyer Mark O'Mara decides against seeking a pretrial Stand your Ground immunity hearing for George Zimmerman citing lack of preparation time.
April 5, 2013 - Martin's parents settle a wrongful-death claim against the homeowners association of the Florida subdivision where their son was killed.
April 30, 2013 - George Zimmerman waives his right to a "stand your ground" pretrial immunity hearing. Zimmerman's attorneys decide they will instead try this as a self-defense case. If Zimmerman had had a pretrial immunity hearing, a judge would have ruled whether his actions were protected under the "stand your ground" law. If the judge had ruled in favor of Zimmerman, it would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed.
May 28, 2013 - Judge Debra Nelson rules on several motions brought by the defense. Nelson rules that Trayvon Martin's familiarity with guns, his marijuana use, and fights he may have been in cannot be brought up in Zimmerman's trial. She also denies a request to take the jury to the crime scene. Nelson, however, rules that jurors will remain anonymous and will be referred to by numbers only. http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts/ I wish they'd have included the actual wording from the dispatcher. And the fact that a dispatcher's advice is not legally binding.
|
|
|
|