OK, let me put it another way. When the appeal is denied, what will be your reaction?
That might be amusing when the jury starts getting text messages from the prosecution and the judge confessing to Martin’s murder.
Your question has already been answered. But I’ll try it once more.
“look, regardless of if the defendant could flee or not, he was entitled to standing his ground due to the attack violent against his person”
– Because in order for him to make that statement, he would have to prove that Zimmerman did not provoke the encounter. (he is not entitled to stand your ground if he provoked the encounter). So, it will be easier to prove that Zimmerman tried to escape but was unable to than to prove that Zimmerman did not provoke the encounter.
Glad to see you share my interpretation that O’Mara is conceding the point that Zimmerman was the aggressor. He knows he’ll have an uphill battle to prove he wasn’t so he’s not making “he started it!” the centerpiece of his case.
The folly, though, is thinking this strategy is easier than arguing that Zimmerman was standing his ground. The whole point of SYG was to make it easier for people claiming self-defense to get an acquittal, because it takes the issue of retreat off the table. The state doesn’t have evidence as to who started the fight…and guess who that gives the advantage to? The defense, that’s right. The state does have evidence that retreat was possible when the kid was shot. The ballistics alone are damning enough, but witnesses also claim there was no fight taking place when the bullet went off. The tape with the yelling also is pretty revealing as well.
So if O’Mara is not going to try to convince the jury that Martin was the aggressor, he’s setting his client up for manslaughter at the least.
There is not one eyewitness to the moment when the shot happened.
GZ isn’t charged with manslaughter.
Way back in early April, when O’Mara was first hired by GZ, he talked about possible defenses. O’Mara said, “We’re not taking any possibilities off the table”. The choice of a SYG defense or a self-defense defense would depend on the prosecution’s evidence.
Claiming self-defense from being beaten has long been used in cases like this. SYG is relatively new. Which defense better applies to this particular case? O’Mara can use both. One for a SYG hearing and another for the 2nd degree murder trial.
When the shot was fired, GZ was on the ground, on his back, and being beaten by TM. TM was preventing GZ from getting away by straddling him which pinned him to the ground and TM was repeatedly hitting GZ. Cries for help from the neighbors resulted in calls to the police but no one attempted to physically stop the beating. GZ was on his own to save his life. GZ was on his own to use lethal force to save his life. Self-defense seems the most likely defense.
External and terminal ballistics are not “damning” to either side. Ballistics show that a firearm was used, where the barrel was pointed at the moment it was fired, and the medical reason why TM died minutes later. Forensics show the distance the muzzle was from TM. These are only “evidence” that a pistol was fired and that firing resulted in a death. It doesn’t prove who started the fight or why the fight was started.
Is he charged with manslaughter?
I honestly haven’t been paying much attention as I have zero illusions that justice will be served here. He was charged with 2nd degree murder correct? Failing to prove that, it doesn’t just roll down to the next lesser offense does it? OK, I suppose there is some kind of plea deal being offered and manslaughter would make sense there. I guess I am just failing to see how he is “setting up” his client.
It doesn’t matter. He can still go down on that charge even if he isn’t found guilty of murder. If you are just realizing this, then haven’t you been paying close attention to the discussion.
And my point is that this strategy makes things unnecessarily difficult for Zimmerman. Legally, it works to O’Mara’s advantage to play the SYG card straight to the end. Not only is O’Mara crazy for revealing his planned defense strategy months before the trial anyway, but he’s crazy to be drawing distinctions between SYG and regular self-defense. Such distinctions only imply that Zimmerman was the aggressor, and I’m sorry if you don’t see why this doesn’t work in Zimmerman’s favor.
If he is found not guilty of 2nd degree murder, he can still be found guilty of the lesser charger of manslaughter. He would not need to be charged and re-tried separately for this.
This is one of the most frustrating threads I have ever been involved in. So far as I can discern, the people with the most confident opinions about the intricacies of the law are not lawyers, have not made any study of the law apart from legal-themed TV shows and news reports of legal proceedings, but are still sure they know of whence they speak.
Tell me, Joel – let’s imagine the accused wrote a letter, printed it, and signed it, and then mailed it to his wife. In the letter he said, “One thing’s for sure – that Martin never stood a chance against me, and his lame punching attempts never worried me for a second.”
Would that letter be admissible in evidence against him? After all, anyone can “spoof” a letter – signatures can be forged, letterhead can be stolen, anyone can run paper through a printer.
Would it be “amusing” if the letter were admitted and then they jury started getting fake letters from the judge and prosecutor confessing to the crime?
Can you explain why your analysis of the admissibility of text messages varies (if it does) from your analysis of the admissibility of a letter?
In fact, he could not be re-charged and re-tried separately for this.
He could be found guilty of manslaughter, but only if the information is amended to include manslaughter. This can absolutely be done before trial, and it’s possible that it could be done during trial, depending on the theories of the case presented at trial.
Thanks for clarifying. So if it is never included in the charges against him then it isn’t an option for the Jury to find? Do I have that correct?
No, it means that O’Mara isn’t certain he can prove Zimmerman wasn’t the aggressor. That doesn’t mean he’s conceding that he was, it simply means that he’s accepting that the truth may be undiscoverable.
Which means Zimmerman is not guilty of any crime.
That said, as he could neither escape nor save himself by any other means, as is shown by the fact that he took a beating whilst screaming for help for minutes, he was entitled to shoot Martin no matter what. SYG is irrelevant to Zimmerman’s innocence or guilt, it is only relevant because if the SYG hearing is successful he can face no further legal action - murder charges, manslaughter charges, civil suits, or whatever - based on the shooting.
Yes. But there are a number of different ways in which it might be included in the charges against him.
The prosecution can amend their information, meaning they include the lesser charge.
Or the defense could ask that the jury be given the instruction for manslaughter, assuming the evidence adduced at trial supports it as a possible finding.
For both sides, it’s a strategy decision. A jury that has a choice between second degree murder and acquittal may find that the prosecution hasn’t proved every element. For example, they may find that they don’t believe Zimmerman was animated by malice, spite, or ill-will. They have no choice but to acquit on second degree murder – good news for the defense. But if they had a manslaughter option open, they could take it.
I haven’t done a lot of parsing of O’Mara’s words, but I thought he meant something else. He was saying that the term SYG is generally used to refer to the additional self-defense element added under that law, which is that you had no duty to retreat. So saying you’re going for a SYG defense means “I was able to retreat, but am relying on the SYG law which says I had no duty to do so”. O’Mara is saying - as I understood him - that in this case GZ had no ability to retreat, and so was not going to rely on the “no duty to retreat” element of the SYG law, but would instead claim he was covered by ordinary self-defense laws.
I could be wrong, but that’s how I took it. In which case certain people are making a mountain out of a molehill (nothing new for this thread, of course).
If the truth about who started the fight was truly “undiscoverable”, then that is even more reason why it is stupid to try this as anything other than straight SYG. He should be capitalizing on what’s ambiguous instead of avoiding it.
At the trial, yes. At the pre trial hearing, where Zimmerman has to prove his innocence, no. Are you really still confused between the two?
To put it very simply, if we don’t know* whether Zimmerman was entitled to use self defence, he cannot claim immunity at the pre trial hearing, and he cannot be found guilty of murder at trial.
*To the necessary, and different, standard of proof required at the hearings.
I understand that FLA can’t find someone guilty of something they haven’t charged them with.
The lawyers originally claiming to represent GZ discussed several possibilites for GZ’s defense. O’Mara has discussed several possibilities for GZ’s defense. O’Mara could only be considered crazy if he took advice from someone like yourself who had already decided a very long time ago that GZ must be guilty regardless of any possible evidence to the contrary or the laws of FLA.
I’m sorry Bricker, but you are talking about a technological issue and not a legal issue, so you are in my baliwick. Have you every worked on a case involving SMS messages?
Forging a hand written letter requires specialized skills and you also have to deal with the issues of the ink and paper and incidental DNA on the letter. You also have to deal with the fact that it would require someone that actually was in Central Florida to have the correct post marks. Even a type or printed letter would be good, because forensic experts can match letters to typewritters and printers.
The trouble with digital technology is that all bits look the same. A SMS could be spoofed by anybody in the world. With a case of international notoriety like this there could hundreds of people with the inclination and the skills to spoof an SMS from Zimmerman.
If you want to prove an SMS is from Zimmerman’s phone, then you need to get to the phone companies logs before they deleted or actually pull the SMS from his phone directly. BTW, if you report for arrest, leave your phone at home if you don’t want the police spelunking around it.
Now if Zimmerman left a confession voice mail, then that would be fairly easy to authenticate.
But how would they know the phone number of someone Zimmerman would be likely to send it to?