Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Debating with the enemy


Trayvon Martin Case

Debating with the enemy


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-11-2013, 12:07 PM   #901
Registered User
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 10,069
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by HailGreen28 View Post
LMAO. These two posts are too good not to respond to. For the post above, I was going to respond with, "Do you understand in what way 5th amendment rights apply in this case, saden?" But why try to provide some reasoning to your thinking myself? Saden, how does this case you cite applies to the Zimmerman case?

OMG. I saw this website earlier and figured it was so in favor of Zimmerman it would be dismissed as too biased. Saden, like the prosecution in this case, you keep giving victory to your opponent. In this example, you don't understand that not all affirmative defenses are alike.

From the website you brought up yourself:

Florida Law on Self-Defense : Use of Deadly and Non Deadly Force

What Evidence is Required to Raise a Self-Defense Claim in Florida?

The defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on self-defense in Florida when there is any evidence to support the claim. This is a low standard and even a “scintilla” of evidence will be sufficient, even if the self-defense theory is extremely weak or improbable. Self-defense may even be inferred from the State’s evidence without the Defendant or a defense witness ever taking the stand.


Read further, I think the website you brought up pretty much addresses and then invalidates every argument you've made in this thread, saden.
I really tired to read and comprehend your cluster **** of a post before I realize you're a dummy.
saden1 is offline  

Advertisements
Old 07-11-2013, 12:28 PM   #902
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by saden1 View Post
You're muddling the water and you god damn well know it. The Sipple case is all about whether the defendant raised a self-defense claim not that there isn't a greater burden on him once he raised self-defense than a normal defendant. What the court said in the Snipple case is that the defendant raised the a self-defense argument through his police testimony and that his attorney should have done a better job in representing,


If Zimmerman's defense does not actively provide sufficient evidence to the court to support his self-defense claim the prosecutor can petition the court to force the defense to provide material to support a self-defense claim. If the defense does not then the affirmative defense claim can be thrown out all together. In the Snipple case the court said the defendants statement constitute supporting material.

If Zimmerman doesn't call EMT or any other witnesses and simply used his statements to the police he will most certainly be found guilty. "The word 'affirmative' in 'affirmative defense' refers to the requirement that the defendant prove the defense, as opposed to negating the prosecution’s evidence of an element of the crime.

As a lawyer you should know all of this! A lowly software engineer should have to fcking explain this shit to you.
You simply have no idea what you are talking about. Shephardize Sipple and see what the cases say. I am tired of quoting it for you.

In the matter at hand, a prima facia claim of self-defense has been made and, as such, Zimmerman does not need to prove the existence of a reasonable doubt that he acted in self-defense because it is presumed such as a matter of law. It is now up the State to disprove one or more of the elements of self defense beyond a reasonable doubt to invalidate the defense. If they fail to do so, the jury must acquit. In arguing the State failed to meet its burden, Zimmerman can rely on any admitted evidence regardless of who elicited or submitted it.

It is just that simple.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 12:33 PM   #903
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by saden1 View Post
I really tired to read and comprehend your cluster **** of a post before I realize you're a dummy.
Let me simplify ... everything you have cited in support of your argument demonstrates your ignorance b/c they say the exact opposite of what you are asserting AND this is apparent to everyone here but you (and maybe G84C).
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 12:34 PM   #904
Registered User
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 10,069
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Dont believe me...and certainly dont believe Joe. Here is the case...read it and come to your own conclusion.


SIPPLE v. STATE, No. 5D06-2861., November 30, 2007 - FL District Court of Appeal | FindLaw
saden1 is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 12:46 PM   #905
Registered User
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 10,069
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Let me simplify ... everything you have cited in support of your argument demonstrates your ignorance b/c they say the exact opposite of what you are asserting AND this is apparent to everyone here but you (and maybe G84C).

You should consult your supervising associate/partner on this matter...perhaps they will be able to enlighten you.
saden1 is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 12:57 PM   #906
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Zimmerman is also being charged with Manslaughter as it is a lesser included charge of murder 2 (Meaning: All the elements necessary to prove manslaughter are included in the original charge or murder 2 and, conversely, all the defenses applicable to Manslaughter are equally applicable to murder 2. As such, the prosecutors is not bringing any "new" charges that must be defended by Zimmerman).

Attorneys are arguing the instructions now (well, this morning). The self-defense instruction will be given. It will not include an instruction that following Martin was a lawful act but the defense is free to tell the jury that in its closing.

I would love to see the final version of the jury instructions. It sounds as if the judge is following the pattern instructions with some modifications. In my experience, most judges don't like to vary from the pattern instructions as they are generally developed by the appellate courts with existing caselaw in mind and, as such, their language is generally considered "appeal proof".
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 12:58 PM   #907
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: close to the edge
Posts: 3,918
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

joe - have you ever had a plaintiff attorney start/do their opening in this way ..

1. "this case is about one rule.

all (doctors, cities, drivers, etc) have a duty to not needless harm others."

blah blah blah

"when a person causes another harm, they are responsible for the harm that they caused ..."

2. "Now let me tell you a story . . . (tells facts of case in a story narrative focusing on the defendant's conduct)

3. "who we are and why we are here ... my name is blah blah blah and I represent blah blah blah .."

4. explain burden of proof, what the witnesses will say, what the defense expert will say and why he is a paid-for opinion favorable to the person paying him ....

5. "the american justice system in the finest and fairest in the world . . . you took an oath to not allow any bias or undue influence on your verdict .. the word verdict means 'to speak the truth' and at the end of this case this is what you are going to be asked to do, to speak the truth and to be the conscientious of the community .. i promise to not waste your time and i will do my best to only put on the witnesses and evidence i think you need to hear and consider for you to make an informed decision and in return I ask that you listen to what the people have to say when they take the stand ... "

this trial approach is called "reptile" developed by don keenan and david ball. ive been flown around the country to their various seminars and million dollar club plaintiff attorneys are eating it up ... the DRI has seminars on how to combat reptile

i assume you know about pat malone and rick friedman "rules of the road" . .

link to a pat malone closing, not his greatest that ive read but he is the best imo. Reporter's Official Transcript Of Proceedings (Mr. Malone's Closing Argument) | Jones v. Prince George’s County, Maryland | Patrick Malone & Associates P.C. | DC Injury Lawyers - JDSupra

Last edited by over the mountain; 07-11-2013 at 01:11 PM.
over the mountain is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 01:22 PM   #908
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

In answer to your question, no. Not that I can recall specifically.

To me, it seems like typical plaintiff attorney cosying up to the jury and pushing the boundaries of fact/argument in opening. Never heard of "Reptile". Googling now ...

Yes. I am familiar with "Rules of the Road". I am doing a in-house seminar on damages/negotions in September and am trying to get my office to get a copy of it and David Balls' "Damages3" as references.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 01:30 PM   #909
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Quote:
Originally Posted by saden1 View Post
Dont believe me...and certainly dont believe Joe. Here is the case...read it and come to your own conclusion.


SIPPLE v. STATE, No. 5D06-2861., November 30, 2007 - FL District Court of Appeal | FindLaw
Yes. Please do read the case. Particularly relevant are the last five paragraphs where the court reviews Florida's laws concerning burden of proof in self-defense.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 01:40 PM   #910
Playmaker
 
over the mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: close to the edge
Posts: 3,918
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

I have attended 3 seminars now and am eligible to participate in the "masters" seminar in somewhere in carribean islands ...

here is a quick snippet from david ball on damages, i spoke with him a bunch of times, even had don keenan "review" a case issue for me . .

6-8
Damages-only case.(16)
With minor adjustments, the same structure for opening – minus whatever won’t be admissible –works well for a damages-only case. Here’s how:

Damages-only case.
Part I. Primary rules. No advocacy.
Focus the rule on money:
When a truck driver’s negligence harms a pedestrian, the pedestrian is entitled to an amount of money equal to the level of the harm. Now let me tell you about the harm in this case.

Damages-only case.
Part II. Story of what the defendant did. No advocacy.
Tell as much of the negligence story as allowed. Argue to get in as much as possible. Explain to the judge that part of the emotional harm is your client’s vivid, painful memory of what happened. The traumatic memory of the defendant’s truck careening at her across the median is causing her emotional harm now, so that memory goes to damages.

Damages-only case.
Part III. Who we are suing and why: the safety rules the defendant(s) violated. Start of advocacy.
Again, include all you can get in. Try to cover each thing the defendant did wrong, why it was wrong, how it caused harm, what the defendant should have done, how easy that would have been, and how that would have prevented the harm. These elements should get in because each of your client’s harms is exacerbated by her knowing about the very simple safety rules the defendant so needlessly violated. Your client will tell you this, as will any psychologist or similar kind of therapist. Knowledge of how easily the defendant could have followed the rules makes the pain harder to bear.
When possible, part of your story of what the defendant did should include the defendant’s denial of negligence until the eve of trial – when they stipulated despite having no information they did not have in the first place.
Last-minute stipulation is relevant to damages because it causes additional harm.
For three years, Jane had to live with the knowledge that she was stopped at a light and hit from behind – yet they denied doing anything wrong and refused to meet any responsibility. That makes things a lot worse for anyone. It increased her worry that she’d never get the money she needs to take care of herself. And they did it just to scare her into walking away from her case. Only when they knew you were coming did they decide to try to look as if they were exercising some responsibility – far too late to do anyone any good but themselves.
Remember: the defense can diminish damages by showing your client’s failure to mitigate them. So you should be allowed to show how the defendant’s last-minute stipulation exacerbated them.

Damages-only case.
Part IV. Undermine. (What is wrong with the negligence defenses?)
This is usually not necessary for a damages-only case. You’ll undermine the causation and damages defense points in the next section.

Damages-only case.
Part V. Causation and damages.
Same as with regular case.

Damages-only case.
Part VI. ‘Before’.
Same as with regular case.

Damages-only case.
Part VII. “What can the jury do about it?”
Same as with regular case.
——————————————–
(16) For additional help with damages-only cases, please see Chapter 20 of Reptile.
over the mountain is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 02:05 PM   #911
Gamebreaker
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 38
Posts: 13,466
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

So lets get a roll call of the what you think the jury verdict will be from everyone,

Im saying: guilty manslaughter
__________________
“Nobody’s going to be handed a job; not my standpoint, and I know Jay feels that way and I know Bruce feels the same way. You have to earn it. That’s what the NFL is about. Prove to me that you deserve to be on the field,’ and that’s the way it has to be in the NFL.”- McC
Chico23231 is online now  
Old 07-11-2013, 02:28 PM   #912
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Tough, I am sticky with a not guilty for the moment. I may change to mistrial. Want to see the closings. Hopefully, I will be able to see the instructions.

Solid start to prosecution's closing, playing into all the juries emotional responses and highlighting all the points we've been discussing. Chico, you would be seating in your seat nodding in affirmation to everything he is saying b/c it is, essentially, exactly what you have said in the last view pages of the thread.

Judge: Zimmerman to face manslaughter, too | HLNtv.com
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.

Last edited by JoeRedskin; 07-11-2013 at 02:35 PM.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 02:35 PM   #913
Registered User
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 35
Posts: 10,069
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

The prosecutor is laying the smack-down.
saden1 is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 02:44 PM   #914
Registered User
 
Gary84Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,035
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

manslaughter
Gary84Clark is offline  
Old 07-11-2013, 03:04 PM   #915
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,266
Re: Trayvon Martin Case

Well, the prosecutor had me right to the point he started askiing a bunch of rhetorical questions...

FWIW: Here's a poll from HLN. Has the defense created enough reasonable doubt to get Zimmerman off? | HLNtv.com

[NOTE: Although I think the title is phrased in a legally incorrect manner, I agree that, from a practical aspect, it's how the jurors will likely judge the evidence].
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.34924 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25