Last August Mark O’Mara, George Zimmerman’s attorney, announced that Zimmerman might not be relying on the “Stand your ground” defense.
Given what we knew about the night of Martin’s death, and Zimmerman’s account of the events, it seemed that Stand Your Ground might not be applicable. The most obvious reason was that to rely on this defense, the Defendant could not be determined to be the “aggressor.” It seemed unlikely that, given Zimmerman’s account of the events leading up to the shooting of Martin, a jury would decide that Zimmerman was NOT the aggressor.
This morning Mark O’Mara has announced a waiver of the need for a Stand Your Ground hearing, so it appears that Zimmerman will be relying on a simple self-defense claim.
74 comments
Comments feed for this article
March 5, 2013 at 2:52 pm
Eulaine Hall
Lottsa’ luck, Zim ole boy!
March 5, 2013 at 3:12 pm
GreenTiger17
Good! He’ll lose the self defense claim. This boy is going to jail for life! You take a life you owe your own to the system to pay back for murdering an innocent young black youth. You’ll just have to pay for standing your own rediculous ground of which you had none to begin with.
March 5, 2013 at 3:13 pm
Jan
then what’s left, manslaughter?
March 5, 2013 at 4:02 pm
malialitman
Jan,
He’s still being charged with 2nd degree homicide, the issue is just what defense he’ll assert?
March 5, 2013 at 4:00 pm
truth
Malia, he was always claiming self-defense. I thought I already made that clear last week.
He did not waive his Stand Your Ground hearing, there is no such thing. The media is distorting reality again. As I mentioned last week, they really want it to be about SYG, so there might be some “controversy” (ooooohhhhh-hooooo!!!, shake your hands in the air). It is called an Immunity Hearing, you can use SYG or Self-Defense to fight for immunity from prosecution (persecution in this case). He has not waived his right to his Immunity Hearing, instead he’s asking for it to be rolled into the trial date, due to the state’s stonewalling with hiding evidence they possess.
The most important thing that happened today, however, and that the media is not making a big deal of, is that Trayvon’s “girlfriend” is a big fat liar. She lied under oath. That is the state’s only witness that actually does not corroborate Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. So the state now has no witnesses & no evidence to counter Zimmerman’s story, but the farce continues. Stay tuned….
March 5, 2013 at 4:06 pm
malialitman
truth,
The reason there is no “witness” for the prosecution is that Martin is dead! There is DNA evidence and voice recording experts that will be important in this trial.
March 5, 2013 at 7:26 pm
truth
malia, you must admit I have been correct on all counts where you have questioned me thus far. I can guarantee you this prosecution is entirely political and not based on evidence at all.
You questioned me when I stated the defense never claimed SYG, but instead always claimed self-defense. Now, your new post finally reflects that.
You asked me for a source for the Martin team’s lies that I listed in the other comment thread. I gave you links to actual court documents as my sources, but you never countered.
Open your eyes, you are being manipulated.
March 5, 2013 at 4:58 pm
freckles
“truth” — there is undeniable evidence of the conversation between Trayvon and his girl friend on the cell phones. You must be a fan of the stormfront (aka KKK site) site.
Face it, “truth,” Zimmerman murdered an unarmed teenager for no reason. The little scratches on the back of Zimmerman’s head didn’t even need bandaids. Look at the picture of Zimmerman the night of the murder and you’ll see his nose is NOT broken.
March 5, 2013 at 7:53 pm
truth
“there is undeniable evidence of the conversation between Trayvon and his girl friend” – False. The prosecution has provided phone records for Martin for all days except the date of the incident, they somehow left that out.
They’ve been hiding evidence throughout. Crump flashed a page of some obscure phone record to get the media frenzy going. If you have some actual proof of the conversation having taken place, please provide it. I am gathering all the real evidence that I can. Thanks.
March 5, 2013 at 6:17 pm
debbie
You sound like a z-man lover. He did wave his right to SYG hearing and his attorney confirmed it. Therefore, when z-man goes to trial what is his defense? Martin has no dna that is z-mans on his body and was found in between two buildings not near the truck that z-man got out of to chase down the boy.
March 5, 2013 at 8:05 pm
truth
Martin was seen beating the crap out of Zimmerman by 2 eyewitnesses. It is not in question. Look it up. If you need help finding it, let me know and I will provide links.
Don’t be their puppet, stand up for yourself, demand the truth from the media!!!
March 5, 2013 at 6:40 pm
MrsGunka
And you know this how, truth?
March 5, 2013 at 7:56 pm
truth
Which part are you questioning? I’ve already provided Malia evidence of everything I claimed above. She doubted me and asked for sources, I provided them, she did not counter and stopped replying.
March 5, 2013 at 6:49 pm
jk
“Big fat liar?” There is no indication that she lied about what she heard on the phone that night. She may have lied about her age. She may have lied about being in the hospital on the day of his funeral.
Zimmerman has also lied under oath. Does that make him a “big fat liar?” What else has he lied about?
March 5, 2013 at 7:58 pm
truth
Zimmerman has not lied under oath. You might want to do some research on that.
Trayvon’s gf’s story was made up from the beginning. I mentioned that to Malia a couple of weeks ago and she doubted me. Now, she still doubts me, but now I’m thinking a little less perhaps.
March 5, 2013 at 9:09 pm
malialitman
truth,
How can you say he didn’t lie under oath, as it was shown that he lied in the hearing on bail. Remember that’s why the judge was removed…he learned that Zimmerman was a liar!
March 5, 2013 at 9:25 pm
truth
What was his lie? It’s a trick question. You see, you cannot answer it because it never happened. You were manipulated by the media into believing he did. I’m waiting….
Stand up for yourself, it’s ok to admit you’ve been duped, but demand more from the media from now on!! Be skeptical, be alert, they’re using you.
March 6, 2013 at 10:57 am
malialitman
truth,
He lied about his lack of funds! I heard the audio in a you tube video! I don’t have time to do research over and over again to respond to your questions, but you can find it if you look!
March 5, 2013 at 10:22 pm
jk
At his first bond hearing, through his attorney, Zimmerman claimed he had only one passport which he relinquished (a lie). Was he technically under oath? No, but his attorney passed this lie on to the court.
Not directly, but through his wife, Zimmerman attempted to hide his finances by sitting mute while she claimed not to know how much money came in from online donors (saying she couldn’t even estimate) and that she had no money to help with legal costs. We could quibble over whether Zimmerman conspired with his wife to commit perjury, but their phone calls indicate they both knew a lot about how much money was floating around.
He knowingly and purposefully hid a passport and a lot of money from the court. He is a liar.
March 6, 2013 at 11:13 am
truth
Neither of you has provided any lie at all. See how you believe without actual knowledge. You’re being manipulated.
Malia, you might want to look for that youtube video because that’s just not true. You think you saw it, but you didn’t, you’ve simply been brainwashed by the media’s repetition of their lie into believing you have. Waiting….
jk, he did not lie and his wife did not lie. I already provided Malia proof of that. Look it up for yourself. If you need help finding a link of actual proof (not media drivel), let me know and I will provide you with one.
March 6, 2013 at 12:19 pm
jk
Please provide your evidence that he did not misrepresent himself (lie) concerning an additional passport.
Please provide your evidence that she did not lie about having no idea how much money was in that account or that she did not have any funds to help with her husband’s legal fees.
I read the transcripts from the original bail hearing, the bail revocation hearing, and the phone calls between Zimmerman and his wife.
March 6, 2013 at 1:30 pm
truth
jk, we’ll take one at a time. It is very obvious that Shellie never lied. Since I already replied in another thread to Malia on that, I will just copy & paste here and see your reaction. The proof is clear as to who the liars are (the state). If you do not accept this as proof, then it shows that you yourself have an agenda and are not seeking truth at all.
The state actually edited the bond hearing transcript to make it seem like she lied, much like NBC edited the Zimmerman call. By editing out the relevant part of her statements, the state broke the law.
==================================
This is from the probable cause affidavit for her arrest:
==================================
Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was —
A: Currently, I do not know.
Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?
A: I do not.
==================================
This is from the actual bond hearing:
==================================
Q: How much money is in that website right now? How much money as a result of that website was —
A: Currently, I do not know.
Q: Who would know that?
A: That would be my brother-in-law.
Q: And is he — I know he’s not in the same room as you, but is he available so we can speak to him, too, or the Court can inquire through the State or the Defense?
A: I’m sure that we could probably get him on the phone.
Q: Okay. So he’s not there now.
A: No, he is not, sir.
Q: Do you have any estimate as to how much money has already been obtained or collected?
A: I do not.
==================================
Notice how they simply erased the part about her telling them how to access the information they seek thru a simple phone call.
Actual Bond Hearing transcript:
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/excerpt%20of%20bond%20hearing.pdf
Probable cause affidavit:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/122649914/Florida%20v.%20Shellie%20Zimmerman%20-%20Criminal%20Information%20and%20Affidavit%20of%20Probable%20Cause
This is very plain to see that the state is playing games, that this case is political.
What do you say, jk? Did she lie? or did the prosecution lie about her having lied?
March 5, 2013 at 7:12 pm
WakeUpAmerica
Forensic evidence that has been released doesn’t support Zimmerman’s story. Sorry to harsh your mellow.
March 5, 2013 at 8:03 pm
truth
False. The prosecutions’s lead investigator has already testified, in court, that they have absolutely no evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s “story”. None, nada, zippo. Look it up. If you need help, let me know, I will provide a link.
Wake up America, indeed, you are being manipulated.
March 6, 2013 at 8:22 am
aj weishar
Semantics. Zimmerman waived his right to an immunity hearing on Stand Your Ground. The media shortens the term to keep it close to a second grade reading level and for the short attention span of viewers. We should thank “truth” for keeping the insults at a second grade level by calling Martin’s girlfriend a big fat liar. Spanky. Alfalfa, and Darla agree.
(disclaimer: I am known as Weezer, but I am not the Weezer from Little Rascals.)
March 6, 2013 at 1:31 pm
truth
you’re welcome
March 6, 2013 at 2:06 pm
kev
where is your proof that she liar.but we all know that zimmerman is a big fat liar
March 6, 2013 at 2:50 pm
truth
you’re kidding, right? It was declared in court yesterday that she lied.
March 7, 2013 at 8:26 am
Lonnie Starr
I sincerely doubt the lie DD told, will be sufficient cause for the jury to disbelieve her. It’s as if, after a witness gave damning testimony against the defense, the defense then seeks to discredit the witness, by proving that he told his fat wife, yesterday morning, that she was slim. Have they proved he lied? Sure, but does it seem to matter much? NOPE! We all go through life lying all the time, being civil and/or social requires it.
Did she, obviously, feel so distressed about not having attended Trayvon’s service, that she sought to embellish the cause? Perhaps.
But, believe me, that’s nothing like lying to conceal the fact that one has been an active aggressor in the moments before they shot an unarmed kid to death.
March 7, 2013 at 10:52 am
truth
DeeDee entire story is a lie. Don’t be deceived. ABC has just recently secretly released a more extensive recording of the initial Crump interview of her and it now proves that Crump is a liar in his affidavit to not be deposed. The lies are now falling apart, there are more coming, stay tuned…
Don’t be deceived, the media is lying to you.
March 5, 2013 at 5:46 pm
Summer
Note to new readers of Malia’s blog.
Malia changes her post periodically and if you would like to read her very enlightening past posts they can be reached and read at the top of this page.
March 5, 2013 at 5:54 pm
Ivy Freeborn
Why the hell do they keep referring to him as Neighborhood Watch? That was denied by NW from the very beginning. NW are taught how to identify potentially dangerous situations, they are taught to obey police directions and they do not carry weapons- and we still hear that Zimmerman was NW. This article even refers to him as a Neighborhood Watch captain. No: he was a jerk who was driving around looking for trouble while carrying a gun, and he thought a slight, teenage boy carrying a soft drink was a threat. Damn, if you’re so afraid of a kid, stay in your fucking truck! My only concern is that they won’t execute Zimmerman, but evidently, that’s not on the cards for second-degree. (Personally, given that he’d gone out with a gun, called the cops, ignored their directions, and approached the guy WITH A GUN, I think there’s plenty of ground to consider that he premeditated the murder- what did he think he was carrying the gun for? Decoration?)
News media keep reporting that NW bullTOS, and it makes me crazy. It’s fucking Florida: where it’s okay to kill a kid if he’s black, and it takes national pressure to actually investigate a shooting death.
March 5, 2013 at 8:12 pm
truth
He was NW but he was not on duty at the time. He was merely observing Martin as he talked to dispatch. The dispatch call confirms that. After that, there is no actual evidence but all the available evidence matches up with Zimmerman’s story as confirmed by the prosecution’s lead investigator in court testimony.
Don’t be so full of hate, it’s unfortunate but Martin viciously attacked Zimmerman. Teenagers do these kinds of things not realizing they can seriously injured someone as we see happening throughout our country repeatedly.
This is a clear case of self-defense. If you do not think so, then ask yourself why the Martin team is full of lies and why the state is hiding evidence. Political persecution is real, don’t be blind to it and let them manipulate you into being so hateful.
March 5, 2013 at 9:06 pm
malialitman
truth,
Surely you can’t believe this is a “clear case” of anything! The internet has had hundreds of stories about this incident, so I can’t imagine how you think this is a “clear case” for either side!
March 5, 2013 at 9:21 pm
truth
1-Martins hire Ben Crump to get money
2-Crump demands Zimmerman dispatch call tape to create narrative from
3-Crump hires Ryan Julison’s PR firm to create narrative to get money
4-DeeDee story invented to base their narrative off of (poor girl got used)
5-PR firm sells the narrative to media to get money
6-Media buys the narrative to get money
7-State enforces the narrative for political gain and money
It’s happening. Wake up. The state’s lead investigator has already testified IN COURT that they have absolutely no evidence to counter Zimmerman’s version of events. NONE. Yet the persecution continues???? And you want to give them your money ????? (Yes, they will be suing the city & state to get your money, that’s why the want it to be about SYG, so they can sue YOU).
March 5, 2013 at 9:23 pm
Ivy Freeborn
No, in fact, you’re wrong. He was not Neighborhood Watch. He looked into it but they actually required training. And no, teenagers are not attacking large hostile men repeatedly around our country. Seriously, you have got to learn how to assess what you read on the internet…. you sound like you’re dating a French model.
March 5, 2013 at 9:59 pm
jk
It’s unfortunate that a cop-wannabe like George Zimmerman made a series of terrible decisions that put himself and that young man in a terrible position.
Don’t pretend that Zimmerman is some kind of innocent or some kind of hero in this scenario or that you know for certain that Martin viciously attacked Zimmerman or that, if there was an attack, it was unprovoked.
Zimmerman did everything wrong. You would hope a watch-captain or whatever bullshit para-military/para-police designation he gave himself would have better sense. You would especially hope a guy carrying a loaded weapon would know how to keep himself out of trouble. He was a vigilante with gun-induced bravado; a disaster waiting to happen.
And stop your patronizing. We are well-equipped to read the transcripts and the witness reports and draw our own conclusions. When new information comes out, we are well-equipped to evaluate it.
March 6, 2013 at 11:25 am
truth
Ivy, Neighborhood Watch flyer, Page 2:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/357596/zimmerman-case-neighborhood-watch-1.pdf
in the contact information:
“George Zimmerman,Neighborhood Watch Coordinator 407-435-2400″
Get educated, learn about the knockout game. It’s happening. Look it up on youtube and I’ll send you a picture of my french model.
March 6, 2013 at 11:32 am
truth
jk, it is apparent that you are very angry. Don’t be so obtuse. While you castigate me for my conclusions that are based on actual evidence, you go off on a wild story based on zero evidence (as proven by the prosection’s lead investigator already testifying in court as such as well as the police’s lead investigator also already saying the same).
You need to calm down and look at the evidence more clearly. You say you’ve read the transcripts, but when I ask you to provide proof of you claims, you do not.
Answer me these simple questions: Why do you think Crump refuses to answer questions under oath? Why did DeeDee lie?
March 6, 2013 at 1:18 pm
malialitman
truth,
Here is the link in which he is shown to be intentionally hiding information from the court re financial means to make bail:
March 6, 2013 at 12:22 pm
jk
I not angry, although you seem to be. I am, however, put off by your attitude and your patronizing tone. I am also sickened by how certain elements in this country have held up Zimmerman as a hero. He was a screw up and he screwed up.
March 6, 2013 at 1:44 pm
truth
Malia, that does not show that he lied at all. That only shows more media drivel. You’re going to have to be specific. Please show his statement in quotes that is a lie. He could have said “the sky is blue” and the media would do their garbage analysis and declare it a lie. The lie never happened.
The old judge said that he should have spoken up when his wife was saying they were broke at the bond hearing. 2 huge problems with that: 1. You do not interrupt court proceedings to speak up when you’re not on the stand, 2. She never lied as I already proved to you so there was nothing to interrupt anyway.
Why do you think you’re having so much trouble proving it? Is a lie so difficult to show. I showed you how the state lied about his wife’s perjury charges, they simply erased her testimony, like NBC did. Was it difficult to prove NBC lied, NO. Was it difficult to prove Trayvon’s gf lied, NO. Why is it so difficult to prove the Zimmerman’s lied?
So NBC, the State and DeeDee’s lies easily shown. But why can’t you prove Zimmerman’s lie? Why is it a mystery? It just did not happen.
March 7, 2013 at 5:31 am
debbie
Z-man lover-
The only thing confirmed is Z-man got out of his truck and chased down a kid who was walking the neighborhood and copwannabe z-man had an itch that he had to scratch.
He should have followed the 911 operators request to not follow Martin and one family would have been saved years of mourning.
March 7, 2013 at 10:49 am
truth
“The only thing confirmed is Z-man got out of his truck and chased down a kid who was walking the neighborhood”
debbie, if this is indeed confirmed, please provide the proof. The prosecution has already testified in court that they have absolutely no proof of that, so how can it be confirmed.
I am willing to believe you, but I cannot do so blindly, especially given the state’s court testimony that they have no evidence to indicate what you just claimed.
March 5, 2013 at 6:57 pm
eclecticsandra
I’m hoping this means that the SYG will not be part of the defense. It seems ridiculous considering what happened, and it was the reason so many gun people sent money to Zimmerman. I still think Zimmerman acted in self defense and find it interesting that Martin’s records can’t be released because of some criminal aspects.
March 5, 2013 at 7:41 pm
malialitman
eclecticsandra,
I think this means it is not going to be part of the defense.
March 5, 2013 at 8:01 pm
truth
It was never about SYG. The Martin’s and the persecution team tried to make the people believe it was about SYG to add some “controversy”. Never did Zimmerman nor his attorneys claim SYG. I explained that last week and Malia doubted me, even provided a link where she thought it proved O’Mara did claim it. But I showed her how only the media was saying SYG and O’Mara was never quoted in the article as saying such.
I told her to think about who it is that is manipulating the facts to make you think it’s about SYG. Once you realize who it is, then you should start doubting their every statement.
March 5, 2013 at 10:39 pm
jk
Although O’Mara may not have, I believe one of Zimmerman’s original attorneys publicly claimed Stand your Ground would play a role in their defense.
And, “persecution team?” Really?
March 6, 2013 at 11:50 am
truth
Yes, this is a persecution, don’t fool yourself. When the prosecution’s lead investigator testifies in court as having absolutely no evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s story, and the police’s lead investigator also has no evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s story, when the police department is turned inside out, including firing the chief, because they won’t comply with the fraud, then YES, you have political persecution. Even the media has deliberately lied and deceived repeatedly about it.
Please provide a link to his prior attorney’s claiming SYG as I cannot find it anywhere. We know for certain he nor O’Mara have ever claimed it, but I can’t say for sure about his early attorneys. One thing’s for sure, though, the media, Crump and the Martins really want it to be SYG so so badly. What is your opinion as to why the want that?
March 7, 2013 at 11:40 pm
jk
SONNER: No. The Stand Your Ground law will be relevant in this case, and I think it will be applicable in this case. I think at one point, on a first review, I had made a misstatement. But upon further review as this goes on, I see that clearly, that it’s my opinion that the Stand Your Ground law will come into play in this case.
http://www.npr.org/2012/04/03/149919309/zimmermans-lawyer-dont-rush-to-judgement
March 8, 2013 at 8:42 am
truth
jk, you conveniently left out his next answer:
SONNER: It shows that – I think the evidence will show that George Zimmerman was acting in self-defense, and the statute will be applicable.
What is it that you are looking to achieve with your deception? It is clear, even Sonner said the evidence will show Self-Defense. While it is obvious that SYG is applicable (as he said), because it goes ABOVE AND BEYOND Self-Defense (so it must be applicable in order to claim self-defense), it does not need to be used and you still have not shown anyone from Zimmerman’s side claiming SYG will be used. Again, applicable does not mean applied (since it is not needed).
It’s like using Calculus to solve an addition problem, it is applicable, but does not need to be applied since it goes ABOVE & BEYOND the requirement.
You are attempting to deceive, why?
I’ll ask again: The Martin’s, Crump, the media, the politicians and even you very badly want this to be about SYG. Why do you think you all want it to be about SYG so badly?
March 8, 2013 at 2:31 pm
jk
Self-defense is an essential element of SYG, not the other way around. Or as you put it, SYG is over and above self-defense. You need to prove self-defense to prove SYG. You do not need to prove SYG to prove self-defense.
I did not “conveniently” leave out anything. The follow up statement simply restates the statement I cut and pasted. “I think the evidence will show that George Zimmerman was acting in self-defense, and the statute will be applicable.” In other words, he is saying Zimmerman acted in self-defense and SYG (“the statute”) will be relevant and appropriate.
As you say, applicable doesn’t mean actually appliec. But it also doesn’t literally mean “can be applied.” Otherwise, we might as well say that Legal Duty, Duress, Insanity, and Diplomatic Immunity are all applicable in this case.
The logical defintion of “applicable” is relevant and appropriate. In other words, Sonner was saying that SYG is relevant and appropriate.
In fact, later on in the same interview, Sonner said:
“SONNER: My review of the statute, upon first blush, I was thinking more along the lines of the Castle Doctrine. And there was some question as to whether or not that the Castle Doctrine, when he was not in his home – I was thinking along that line. But I was always convinced it was self-defense. And on reviewing – I believe it’s paragraph three of the statute, that will directly be relevant in this case.”
Please note that Sonner said that paragraph three of the statute “will be directly relevant in this case.”
Paragraph 3:
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html
March 8, 2013 at 3:18 pm
truth
On to the question, why do the Martins, Crump, the media, and the politicians so badly want this to be about SYG? O’Mara has emphatically stated they are not using SYG, they never were. What is your opinion as to why those I listed insist on discussing SYG?
March 8, 2013 at 3:20 pm
malialitman
truth,
Virtually every article written about this event has referred to the SYG law. I know O’Mara has said he won’t be relying on it, and I’ve explained why…you can’t rely on that defense if you are the aggressor!
March 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm
truth
Malia, the question is WHY has almost every article written about this case referred to the SYG law? Why do they want to discuss a law that has NOTHING to do with this case? It seems you and jk don’t even understand the question.
March 8, 2013 at 4:43 pm
jk
I know exactly why. Everyone plays lawyer games. If O’Meara was convinced SYG would get his client off, he would not have waived the hearing. As it doesn’t apply, O’Meara won’t take the chance of tipping his hand to the prosecution. O’Meara plays lawyer games and so does the prosecution. And those of us who believe the SYG law to be, let’s say, not so good, would love to see it torn apart in a national case such as this. Do you have an alternative theory?
March 8, 2013 at 4:45 pm
jk
You haven’t yet responded to my previous follow up about Zimmerman’s previous attorney.
March 9, 2013 at 5:52 pm
truth
So, let me get this right, and I don’t mean to put words into your mouth, but it seems you believe the reason the Martins, Crump, the media, the politicians and You insist this is about SYG, is because you all are convinced O’Mara will use SYG even though he’s said for the beginning, for almost a year now, that he’s claiming self-defense. Is that correct? And everyone, the Martins, Crump, the media, the politicans and You are all in on this little secret as to why you continue on & on about SYG but no one will actually say it? I’m I getting this right?
I haven’t responded to your follow up about Zimmerman’s previous attorney because you just continued to reach with it, so I decided to drop it since it’s not important since everyone knows Zimmerman & O’Mara have ALWAYS claimed self-defense and the Martins, Crump, the media, and the politicians have always pretended him to be claiming SYG.
But just to satisfy you, I will reply. Notice how your follow-up quotes Sonner as saying, “My review of the statute, upon first blush, I was thinking more along the lines of the Castle Doctrine”. So basically he doesn’t even know the law, just gave it a quick skim thru and you are here declaring that he was going to be using it? When that is your deductive reasoning’s conclusion, I’m truly left with nothing much to say and just keep quiet.
It’s obvious that you really, really want Zimmerman convicted, regardless of what truly happened that night. If what he says happened that night is true, you’d still want him convicted. Would you agree on that?
March 10, 2013 at 12:14 pm
jk
It’s quite convenient of you to drop the issue because I’m pushing it. I made a claim (a previous attorney said SYG would play a role) and backed it up with the man’s own words (“…believe it’s paragraph three of the statute, that will directly be relevant in this case.”). End of story.
I sure HOPE you’re not purposefully putting words in my mouth, but I never said in any way that O’Meara was planning to use SYG or had ever planned to use it. But, I guess it goes with your agenda to insist that I did.
I’m saying that if he knew 100% it would work as a strategy, he’d go for it (even if it wasn’t “applicable). But as it isn’t a slam dunk (not even close), a trial at this early stage would tip his hand to the prosecution. The defense doesn’t want to show their strategy, especially as it pertains to self-defense, which as you’ve noted, is a part of SYG. That’s lawyer games and they all, the prosecution and the defense, play them.
You continue to put words in my mouth. I don’t believe things went exactly the way Zimmerman says, but even if I did, his behavior was a major contributing factor to the ultimate outcome. I don’t want him to be convicted for something he didn’t do, but I also don’t want him to be a hero for being a cop wannabe and doing something incredibly stupid that resulted in the death of another human being (even if that other human being might have also made better choices). I am disgusted daily by the racist comments directed at Trayvon Martin.
Now…
Some people are talking about SYG, because they are confused about the attorneys’ strategies (maybe because the first guy said it would be relevant, maybe because they misunderstand or are confused).
Some people are talking about SYG because they think it’s a terrible statute that might be relevant to this case and even if it isn’t, it’s a good time for a debate.
Some people are talking about SYG because they wish O’Meara would go for it and get the smack down and look like a fool.
Some people are talking about SYG because they want Zimmerman to go free and think that’s the right strategy (although it doesn’t apply and it won’t be applied).
Some people are talking about SYG because it’s sexy, controversial, gets clicks, sells papers, and racks up the viewers
Are these really secrets?
March 11, 2013 at 8:48 am
truth
“I don’t want him to be convicted for something he didn’t do, but I also don’t want him to be a hero for being a cop wannabe and doing something incredibly stupid that resulted in the death of another human being (even if that other human being might have also made better choices). I am disgusted daily by the racist comments directed at Trayvon Martin.”
Please expand on this thought. I’m very curious as to the thinking behind it. What exactly do you think that Zimmerman did that was “incredibly stupid”?
March 11, 2013 at 9:43 am
truth
“I don’t believe things went exactly the way Zimmerman says, but even if I did, his behavior was a major contributing factor to the ultimate outcome. ”
If things went down exactly the way Zimmerman claims, then his behavior was NOT a contributing factor to the ultimate outcome. That is flat out biased thinking on your part. You would essentially be saying that anybody watching anybody else, majorly contributed to their being assaulted by the “watched” person, if they so happened to be assaulted by the “watched” person. Your opinion is incredibly biased here and just bizarre. To have such a strange opinion of a simple rational & common behavior shows incredible bias that can only be driven by a preconceived agenda on your part. How can you possibly think that?
March 11, 2013 at 9:51 am
truth
I asked you a question and you deliberately avoided. I asked if what Zimmerman says truly happened, do you still think he should be convicted? You spun around like mad and never answered. Being the deceptive person you are, it was not surprising. Thought up a good answer yet?
March 11, 2013 at 10:02 am
truth
“Are these really secrets?”
Some of those are certainly secrets to me as they are just downright bizarre.
What’s hilarious is that your list doesn’t include the real reason SYG is even being discussed. The Martins, Crump, the media & the state have thrown SYG into people’s faces over & over right from the beginning. It’s clear that this group of people brought it up to attach it’s controversial nature to Zimmerman and thereby “make” his behavior controversial. Don’t you think this should’ve made your list?
March 11, 2013 at 3:41 pm
truth
“It’s quite convenient of you to drop the issue because I’m pushing it. I made a claim (a previous attorney said SYG would play a role) and backed it up with the man’s own words (“…believe it’s paragraph three of the statute, that will directly be relevant in this case.”). End of story.”
Your claim was in my response to my claim that SYG has nothing to do with this case and that neither Zimmerman nor his attorneys have claimed it. Therefore, it is NOT END OF STORY, because your response DID NOT disprove my response.
You providing a quote of Sonner, a DUI specialist, having briefly skimmed the statute that he WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH, and stating that the law will be relevant, IN RESPONSE TO THE MEDIA BRINGING IT UP TO HIIM, after that same media had ALREADY pounded it into the heads of the brainwashed masses, in no way disputes my claim.
Therefore, it is not out of convenience that I chose to drop the issue, it is because the 2 paragraphs I just wrote, are beyond your grasp and I came to understand that limitation when I chose to drop it.
March 11, 2013 at 6:45 pm
malialitman
truth,
If you are addressing your comments to me, don’t waste your time! I have written the articles I have and cited my sources. I am willing to post your comments and any disagreement you may have with me, but if I responded to every person commenting on this blog with an article and citations, I WOULD NEVER SLEEP! If you have something to say, just say it, but don’t expect me to write a long post responding! People who read this blog know and understand that I have authority for what I write. If that’s not good enough for you, just post it in a comment.
March 11, 2013 at 8:04 pm
truth
Malia, I’m discussing the case with jk. My latest comments are not directed at you, just breaking down the many points included jk’s long post into smaller posts.
March 12, 2013 at 8:50 am
malialitman
truth,
Thanks for the clarification. I think jk responded.
March 11, 2013 at 9:23 pm
jk
No, Malia, truth is addressing questions to me. The problem is that truth cannot admit being wrong. Instead he/she continues to insist it is the rest of us who cannot grasp the true meaning of what’s going on here.
Sonner’s words stand on their own. He said the statute would be relevant to the case.
Zimmerman took a loaded gun with him to go to the supermarket. He reported a “suspicious” person and then played cop or commando or whatever he imagined he was doing. Even if it went down exactly as he says, Zimmerman made some bad decisions.
And, oh, I’m sorry, I thought it would fall under one or more of my other reasons, but some people are focusing on SYG because it makes Zimmerman look like even more of a fool.
Still not a secret.
I don’t for a second think Zimmerman set out to kill someone that night. In fact, I think he’s a coward who thinks a gun makes him tough. Martin seemed suspicious to him (for walking through the neighborhood in a hoodie). Imagine how suspicious Zimmerman must have looked to Martin, an adult staring at him from his truck. What words were exchanged between them before the fight? We only have Zimmerman as a witness for those moments not seen or heard by others. Martin is dead.
Malia, is a kind and wonderful host and this is my last response. I’ll let my words (like the words of Zimmerman’s previous attorney) stand on their own.
March 12, 2013 at 8:48 am
malialitman
jk,
Thank you for the clarification! I am just amazed the “truth” seems to think that we have nothing to talk about except Zimmerman, …over and over.
March 12, 2013 at 9:33 am
truth
jk, your responses to me are all about obfuscation, you like to cloud the issue because you know the truth. I know your type. Your aim is to deceive by confusing the issue. Take, for instance, your grand final post:
“Sonner’s words stand on their own. He said the statute would be relevant to the case.” – This is your feeble attempt to pin SYG being discussed in this case to Zimmerman. It is lame. You wish it did, but it doesn’t, he ALWAYS CLAIMED SELF-DEFENSE, ALWAYS. You cannot change that. You so badly want this to be about SYG but it just never will. You’re probably writing Zimmerman letters to O’Mara to please use SYG so you could be right. You’ve been duped. You are wrong and it drives you nuts.
“Zimmerman took a loaded gun with him to go to the supermarket.” LEGAL
“He reported a “suspicious” person and then played cop or commando or whatever he imagined he was doing.” – FALSE, why must you lie?
“Even if it went down exactly as he says, Zimmerman made some bad decisions.” – FALSE, why must you lie?
“I thought it would fall under one or more of my other reasons” – NOPE, the correct reason didn’t even come close to falling under any of your other incorrect reasons. Nice try.
“I think he’s a coward who thinks a gun makes him tough.” FALSE, why must you lie?
“Martin seemed suspicious to him (for walking through the neighborhood in a hoodie).” FALSE, why must you lie?
“Imagine how suspicious Zimmerman must have looked to Martin” Probably not very suspicious since Martin had plenty of time to get home and chose not to, and instead ended up beating the crap out of Zimmerman, therefore lending great probability to the notion that he doubled back to jump Zimmerman.
“We only have Zimmerman as a witness for those moments not seen or heard by others.” – Don’t forget the huge amount of evidence showing that Martin beat the crap out of Zimmerman, that Zimmerman was NW, that eyewitnesses saw Martin beating the crap out of Zimmerman, that that Martin had a very troubled past, and that the whole Martin team has been lying for a whole year now producing at least 30 provable lies.
I will not bow out of the conversation as you’re choosing to do, since I will continue to stand up for the innocent, to fight back from the lies and the deception the likes of you continue to try to brainwash people with. I’ll let your lies speak for themselves.
Malia, an innocent man is being persecuted by the state. I will continue to fight back those who continue to spread the state’s lies in all forums I find where I am allowed a voice. I thank you for allowing it, you’d be surprised how many sites either erase pro-Zimmerman comments or just modify them. As long as jk keeps replying to me with deception, I will continue to expose jk’s lies. He says he won’t and I hope his lies & deception have been exposed sufficiently enough for any others who stumble upon your blog as I did.
March 12, 2013 at 11:29 am
malialitman
truth,
I would caution you to realize that we each have an opinion about the case based on what we have heard or read, but the jury is the group who will make the final determination, and I assume there is evidence that we are unaware of…so you and I don’t really know all the facts.
March 12, 2013 at 12:00 pm
truth
Malia, yes, the jury will have the final say. There is, however, a big problem in that our very own government & media is conspiring with the scheme that the Martin camp has concocted and neither you nor I should allow this to go on quietly. It is beyond proven at this point, but the media brainwashing allows it to go unnoticed by the masses. The exposure of the girlfriend story is finally starting to turn the tables and major media outlets are finally reporting some of the dishonesty on the part of the schemers. NBC reply to the Zimmerman lawsuit was that “all the other media were doing it too”. That is unacceptable, but the way the railroading has been allowed, that argument may well hold up in court. We need to wake up to what is going on, the manipulation is deep.
Unfortunately even after the jury (if there ever is a trial as there is no evidence upon which to have one) gives it’s final say, the criminals behind this whole manipulation will not be brought to justice, and another poor soul will be dragged into another scheme for money.
March 5, 2013 at 8:12 pm
B.W.
The sooner this farce is over, the better. I think that prosecutors who expected a slam-dunk were surprised to find that their hero (SYG, NW, etc.) is a punk and are now squirming. Ziimerman is bound for jail…or there is no justice in the U.S. for average people.
March 6, 2013 at 1:54 pm
Anne
Zimmerman has told so many lies that contradict each other as well as the evidence that it’s a wonder anyone anywhere believes anything he says.
For Trayvon to have done all that this nut claimed he did, he would have needed at least 3 pairs of arms. Not only that, but there would also have been some of Zimmerman’s DNA on his hands. In addition, the Sanford PD which tested the dead kid for drugs but not the perpetrator, has a history of trivializing black crime victims there, and they thought this would be one more such incident.