|
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 July 14 2013 07:26 AllHailTheDead wrote: so whats going on I didnt watch it at all today
They have been deliberating all day and just now they wanted clarification on the manslaughter charge. That's it.
|
if zimmerman did not act in self defense, of course he should go to jail for a long time. he fucking killed a kid who was 17 years old.
|
On July 14 2013 07:26 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: What's the actual difference, in terms of sentencing, between him being convicted of the stronger charge or the weaker one? Not much, it's minimum 30 to life, I believe for Murder 2, and like minimum of 20 or 25 for manslaughter. No parole in Florida.
That's pretty much what I thought.
I think that the prosecution offering this secondary ("lighter") charge was actually a really smart move, as it gives the jury a theoretical (faulty) compromise and middleground, even though in all actuality, it's doing the same thing as a straight up conviction of murder.
|
But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense...
|
On July 14 2013 07:30 Vin{MBL} wrote: But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense... That is why a guilty verdict would be so retarded and a miscarriage of justice.
|
On July 14 2013 07:30 Vin{MBL} wrote: But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense... That's the scary part, to see it's taken so long and they haven't acquitted him.
|
Clarification, more from tv. The instructions actual instruct the jurors to process the instructions in order, so the question about manslaughter would, sequentially, come before even considering whether he acted in self-defense. So, I think all we can read from this question is 1) the jurors are following the instructions to the letter, 2) won't convict on Murder 2, and 3) haven't gotten to the point of considering self-defense.
|
On July 14 2013 07:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:26 Kaitlin wrote:On July 14 2013 07:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: What's the actual difference, in terms of sentencing, between him being convicted of the stronger charge or the weaker one? Not much, it's minimum 30 to life, I believe for Murder 2, and like minimum of 20 or 25 for manslaughter. No parole in Florida. That's pretty much what I thought. I think that the prosecution offering this secondary ("lighter") charge was actually a really smart move, as it gives the jury a theoretical (faulty) compromise and middleground, even though in all actuality, it's doing the same thing as a straight up conviction of murder.
If they didn't have the manslaughter instruction, they would have come back with a not-guilty already, based on their progress as determined by their question.
|
On July 14 2013 07:30 Vin{MBL} wrote: But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense... i am not going to say i disagree, because i think he should be acquitted with the shitty case that the prosecutor has presented. but this is our system and if a jury, after reviewing the evidence, disagrees and an appellate court affirms then zimmerman is guilty.
|
|
wtsp doesnt have audio right now. just wait until recess over.
|
On July 14 2013 07:35 dAPhREAk wrote: wtsp doesnt have audio right now. just wait until recess over.
Okay thanks I was worried ^^
|
On July 14 2013 07:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:26 Kaitlin wrote:On July 14 2013 07:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: What's the actual difference, in terms of sentencing, between him being convicted of the stronger charge or the weaker one? Not much, it's minimum 30 to life, I believe for Murder 2, and like minimum of 20 or 25 for manslaughter. No parole in Florida. That's pretty much what I thought. I think that the prosecution offering this secondary ("lighter") charge was actually a really smart move, as it gives the jury a theoretical (faulty) compromise and middleground, even though in all actuality, it's doing the same thing as a straight up conviction of murder.
I agree. That was definitely their gameplan, which is why Guy stressed the emotional side so much in his closing, and tried to say "A 17 year old kid is dead so there must be some type of punishment"
|
On July 14 2013 07:32 Kaitlin wrote: Clarification, more from tv. The instructions actual instruct the jurors to process the instructions in order, so the question about manslaughter would, sequentially, come before even considering whether he acted in self-defense. So, I think all we can read from this question is 1) the jurors are following the instructions to the letter, 2) won't convict on Murder 2, and 3) haven't gotten to the point of considering self-defense.
So the jury is just being super mechanical, and actually following procedure?
|
On July 14 2013 07:32 Kaitlin wrote: Clarification, more from tv. The instructions actual instruct the jurors to process the instructions in order, so the question about manslaughter would, sequentially, come before even considering whether he acted in self-defense. So, I think all we can read from this question is 1) the jurors are following the instructions to the letter, 2) won't convict on Murder 2, and 3) haven't gotten to the point of considering self-defense.
I think it's far more likely that they've read the relevant instructions that they were given and found them inadequate.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 14 2013 07:32 Gunther wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:30 Vin{MBL} wrote: But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense... That's the scary part, to see it's taken so long and they haven't acquitted him. One thing to note is that unanimous is a pretty difficult standard to reach.
|
On July 14 2013 07:35 Zenocide wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:32 Kaitlin wrote: Clarification, more from tv. The instructions actual instruct the jurors to process the instructions in order, so the question about manslaughter would, sequentially, come before even considering whether he acted in self-defense. So, I think all we can read from this question is 1) the jurors are following the instructions to the letter, 2) won't convict on Murder 2, and 3) haven't gotten to the point of considering self-defense. So the jury is just being super mechanical, and actually following procedure?
That's what it seems to be. There are 4 women who are over 50 on that jury. That's what I think is going on.
|
On July 14 2013 07:38 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2013 07:32 Gunther wrote:On July 14 2013 07:30 Vin{MBL} wrote: But there is not even one piece of substantial evidence to prove that he did not act in self defense... That's the scary part, to see it's taken so long and they haven't acquitted him. One thing to note is that unanimous is a pretty difficult standard to reach.
But easier with only 6 jurors, rather than 12.
|
Is it likely that the decision will come today?
|
I have a feeling that if the jury was 5 guys they would have reached a verdict in under 10 minutes. Putting a group of 5 girls in the same room leads to substantial over analysis.
User was banned for this post.
|
|
|
|