The only part of the law that the SYG legislation created that is directly related to the concept of “standing one’s ground” is the line “no duty to retreat”. O’Mara argues that Zimmerman wasn’t able to retreat anyway, so the “stand your ground” part of the Stand Your Ground law will not necessarily be of any importance to them. Of course he is still eligible for all of the other benefits that SYG legislation provided, i.e., the immunity hearing.
Zimmerman isn’t talking on the phone. If you look closely, theres someone dressed in blue in front of Zimmerman, who also got photographed.
Actually Smallwood was about photos on the cell phone, not texts.
Actually you need to find a Florida precedent, since SMS are handled differently from state to state, but I would suggest you wait until Zimmerman texts are released and see if there is any incriminating texts to argue about. O’Mara might be a liar, but I doubt that he is a stupid liar.
BTW, I already looked at case where Dennis Abrahamsen was murdered by Logue and Andrews. They got the texts off Andrews blackberry.
Are you talking about this picture?
It really looks as if Zimmerman’s holding something up to his right ear.
Read GZ’s attorneys’ “Petition for Writ of Prohibition” to disqualify Judge Lester. I think it should be granted, and that there is a pretty good chance it will be. Interested in people’s predictions. I say 60% chance it is granted, 40% it is denied.
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/writ/petition_for_writ_of_prohibition.pdf
True, but the decision includes an excellent summary of other case law that does involve text messages:
My bad for not being clear on the purpose for bringing up Smallwood, but again, these cases all involve searches of the phone, as opposed to cell provider data, so your primary objection remains.
The only benefit of SYG–separate and apart from “regular self defense”–is relieving the defense of the task of proving their client’s couldnt have retreated. That’s it. That’s all.
If O’Mara wants to throw away that gimme, more power to him. His fan base obviously can’t see the stupid implications of this, as this thread makes clear.
The prosecution isn’t likely to argue that, unless they are complete idiots. Which I suppose is possible, but not likely.
The defense doesn’t lead off - the prosecutors go first. And again, the defense is not going to open its case by arguing that Zimmerman had no duty to retreat. That argument is one that you are suggesting, because you want Zimmerman to be convicted. So you are hoping the defense botches it by presenting arguments as weak and mendacious as yours.
Let’s hope that [list=A][li]the jury is not composed of idiots like some, and [*]the jury actually cares about the law, unlike some.[/list][/li]
Which is, legally, morally, and logically, complete horseshit.
Regards,
Shodan
He has a red shirt on, the arm holding the phone is BLUE.
Are you talking about the pretrial hearing?
At trial the burden of proof will be on the prosecution.
Let’s just hope the prosecution has something up their sleeve that we haven’t seen that makes the whole issue moot.
It’s not a shirt, it’s a jacket.
It’s not blue, it’s black.
PLease examine this photo and see if the photo shows that it’s possible that the black sleeve of GZ’s jacket could be the sleeve which is around the arm which is holding the phone.
The most decision I can find is Glasco.
http://www.5dca.org/Opinions/Opin2012/061112/5D11-851.op.pdf
From the comments I read this appears to be the last word until the Florida Supreme Court rules.
I’m rather puzzled, since I’m not clear under what circumstances the police can demand your cell phone password.
I read Zimmerman’s arrest report from April 11th and he did have a cell phone when he was arrested, but it wasn’t clear if they searched it or even kept it. His rental car and his other property was given to Zimmerman’s brother.
(page 89-90 2nd discovery).
At trial, the defense has to assert that Zimmerman was justified in using lethal force. That will necessitate them presenting Zimmerman’s theory for what happened. They need not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, but it would be in their best interest to be as convincing as possible.
And the idea that it was impossible for Zimmerman to retreat merely because a 158-lbs teenager was on top of him is not convincing. In fact, it’s so unconvincing, they’d be better off leaving that completely out of his narrative.
Your reaction is interesting. I would’ve assume you’d be in favor of the SYG law. Apparently you’re not, though.
Wanna know what else is weird? Look at his right ear. If you can find it.
What about it?
One ear sticks out farther than the other. What’s weird about that?
Many people are not precisely symmetrical. Doesn’t strike me as weird.
Assuming the phone was locked, police can’t demand it at all. (Well… they can act like they’re demanding it, but you have the right to remain silent and thereby refuse.)
However, a judge or grand jury can order you to give up your phone’s password without infringing on your Constitutional rights. That is, you don’t have the right to refuse such an order. If the police find information that way, the fact that you knew the password may not be used against you… but the evidence discovered can be.
Cites on request.
But as to the overarching issue, it’s perfectly possible to imagine that police have a text message from ZImmerman that could refute his claim of fear, and such a message would prove fatal – no pun intended – to his self-defense claim.
It has nothing to do with symmetry. What is “off” is that there is a phone where his ear should be. It just doesn’t look right. And neither does all that light coming off the top of his head, despite the camera being aimed towards the back of his head. Did the witness have a spot light shining down on him? The picture just looks wrong to me.
How about the civil immunity?
He has a two-tone jacket with color blocking on. Check out the picture linked upthread.