EPTShooting of Trayvon Martin - Page 357
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:38 Blacktion wrote: Shouldnt the prosecutors closing arguement be like "He is guilty because of X,Y,Z facts, shown by A,B,C evidence/testimonies"? Should be, yes. | ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
guess not lol. On July 12 2013 03:38 Kaitlin wrote: Add it to the list of bullshit coming from this argument. Not the first, likely not the last. yep, not the first. On July 12 2013 03:38 Blacktion wrote: Clueless about the american legal system but arnt these supposed to the closing arguements? Shouldnt the prosecutors closing arguement be like "He is guilty because of X,Y,Z facts, shown by A,B,C evidence/testimonies"? This guys got nothing but doubt, conjecture and shitting on zimmermans character. Doesnt he understand who the burden of proof is on? yep, closing arguments. They don't have a strong theory so they are making random points and hoping the jury will just piece together some picture that works for them. | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:38 Blacktion wrote: Clueless about the american legal system but arnt these supposed to the closing arguements? Shouldnt the prosecutors closing arguement be like "He is guilty because of X,Y,Z facts, shown by A,B,C evidence/testimonies"? This guys got nothing but doubt, conjecture and shitting on zimmermans character. Doesnt he understand who the burden of proof is on? Evidence is not on his side. He's arguing for a conviction, regardless. | ||
|
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:39 crms wrote: his friend who made a book wrote that zimmerman said treyvon grabbed the gun. in all testimony zimmerman has only said 'grabbed FOR the gun'. the friend said he must have heard wrong during his testimony. oh ok makes sense. | ||
|
sc2superfan101
3583 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:38 Blacktion wrote: This guys got nothing but doubt, conjecture and shitting on zimmermans character. Doesnt he understand who the burden of proof is on? He does understand that quite well, he is an experienced prosecutor. the problem is that he is corrupt as sin and sees a chance to get famous by being the guy who put GZ in prison. | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
|
airtown
United States410 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:37 BigFan wrote: wait, he never said that. I thought he said that he tried to go for the gun but never said he got it? It's actually quite possible for Martin to have touched the gun and for the forensic people to have not found his DNA. The rain might have washed it off, and if I remember correctly, there were one or two other items that there was NO touch DNA found on (which obviously people had touched.) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:42 sc2superfan101 wrote: He does understand that quite well, he is an experienced prosecutor. the problem is that he is corrupt as sin and sees a chance to get famous by being the guy who put GZ in prison. Oh come on, that is a bit much. The guy is just doing his job and the manslaughter charge might stick(ok, it won't, but hindsight is 20/20.) | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:44 airtown wrote: It's actually quite possible for Martin to have touched the gun and for the forensic people to have not found his DNA. The rain might have washed it off, and if I remember correctly, there were one or two other items that there was NO touch DNA found on (which obviously people had touched.) I'm pretty sure not even GZ's DNA was found on the fucking trigger. | ||
|
Romantic
United States1844 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:26 Defacer wrote: Based on all the available evidence, and the state's poorly constructed argument, Zimmerman should walk. But at the end of the day Zimmerman still technically killed a 17 year old whose only intent that night was to visit his dad. When you step back from the situation (really, really far back) that's just seems 'wrong,' and for whatever reason, people in general have this unreasonable expectation that life is supposed to be 'fair' or 'make sense'. I wouldn't be surprised if he was found guilty, just disappointed in -- well, the media and society for letting their emotions and desire for 'fairness' and over-rule the the importance of the law. You don't know that his only intent was to visit his dad I mean obviously at some point he also intended to kick Zimmerman's ass at the least | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
|
dotHead
United States233 Posts
| ||
|
Blacktion
United Kingdom1148 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:40 Kaitlin wrote: Evidence is not on his side. He's arguing for a conviction, regardless. So the evidence is shit but hes trying to fire enough bullshit at the jury to confuse them? | ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
| ||
|
PassiveAce
United States18076 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:46 Blacktion wrote: So the evidence is shit but hes trying to fire enough bullshit at the jury to confuse them? Prosecutors are paid to go after the people they are paid to prosecute. most of the time, regardless of the evidence. Its quite rare for a prosecutor to outright dismiss a case. | ||
|
Klondikebar
United States2227 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:44 airtown wrote: It's actually quite possible for Martin to have touched the gun and for the forensic people to have not found his DNA. The rain might have washed it off, and if I remember correctly, there were one or two other items that there was NO touch DNA found on (which obviously people had touched.) That's kinda weird. DNA is a crazy sticky molecule. If it gets on something, it's really hard to get it off. For example, rain cannot wash off DNA. Unless Florida's rain is particularly acidic. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
Kaitlin
United States2958 Posts
On July 12 2013 03:46 Blacktion wrote: So the evidence is shit but hes trying to fire enough bullshit at the jury to confuse them? Basically, yeah. Can anyone in this thread actually articulate exactly what the prosecution is suggesting happened through this course of events ? All BDLR seems to be doing, as the defense has been doing for quite some time, is poking holes in one theory put forth by the defense, not having their own version. This is because they, nor anyone else, can imagine a fact scenario supported by evidence, which proves Zimmerman guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. | ||
MethodSC
United States928 Posts
| ||
| ||
