17 year old kid shot dead by Neighborhood Watch "Captain"

[Kutnupe14]

I believe Kutnupe is saying he hopes that since Zimmerman has been arrested is that he has been arrested for real reasons and NOT for posturing, placating the media, satisfying race baiters, etc.

Ding!

 

[Pocketman]

I believe Kutnupe is saying he hopes that since Zimmerman has been arrested is that he has been arrested for real reasons and NOT for posturing, placating the media, satisfying race baiters, etc.

That was my interpretation of Kutnupe's post. My, we have some sensitive folks here this morning.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Apparently you don't understand the english(1) language. When one says "They hope(2)" that means they are wishing something to be true. In this case(3) you are wishing hte(4) prosecutor has information that locks him away. Therefor(5), that means you want him to be guilty. If you had meant that to read for the prosecutor's benefit, they had batter(6) have more information than we have, you would have worded it differently.

You've not hidden your feelings on Z very well. From the "destroy his life"(7) comments to other comments. You've made it quite clear to anyone capable of reading at a 5th grade level that you want him to fry.

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

1. English (capitalized)
2. Insert comma
3. Insert another comma
4. the (misspelled)
5. Therefore (misspelled)
6. better (misspelled).... I won't even talk about the bare infinitive
7. Quotes not needed unless one can attribute the exact phase to a specific individual (good luck trying to find it, lol).

Well, that was fun. I'm assuming you stopped at the 5th grade, eh?

 

[CarmelHP]

So you mean to tell me that a retained defense attorney's, who has an absolute legal and ethical obligation to advocate for his clients position with very few limitations, statements to the press somehow now constitute evidence?

Yawn...

Joe

Do you know any of it to be incorrect?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So you mean to tell me that a retained defense attorney's, who has an absolute legal and ethical obligation to advocate for his clients position with very few limitations, statements to the press somehow now constitute evidence?

I was doing cartwheels when we got IRE 617, but I will be overjoyed when this rule of evidence goes into effect.

 

[Fargo]

Do you know any of it to be incorrect?

Know? No. Consider it questionable? Absolutely.

For example, he claims @ 3:40 that there are parts missing from the 911 tape where the dispatcher asked Z to go get the address the guy went to. Color me a bit skeptical.

He also claims that T was skulking behind houses, but there is no reference to that when Z is describing what this "suspicious" person is doing to the 911 dispatcher.

No, I wasn't there so I don't KNOW much of anything about the case. However, I do know and understand the duties of counsel to a client so you will have to forgive me if I view this attorney's statements through the lens of what the law requires him to do.

That said, I really can't blame him for trying to try the case in the media. T's family got way ahead in that game and he is playing a losing game of catchup.

Best,

Joe

 

[CarmelHP]

Know? No. Consider it questionable? Absolutely.

For example, he claims @ 3:40 that there are parts missing from the 911 tape where the dispatcher asked Z to go get the address the guy went to. Color me a bit skeptical.

He also claims that T was skulking behind houses, but there is no reference to that when Z is describing what this "suspicious" person is doing to the 911 dispatcher.

No, I wasn't there so I don't KNOW much of anything about the case. However, I do know and understand the duties of counsel to a client so you will have to forgive me if I view this attorney's statements through the lens of what the law requires him to do.

That said, I really can't blame him for trying to try the case in the media. T's family got way ahead in that game and he is playing a losing game of catchup.

Best,

Joe

Certainly, the law does not require him to make any knowingly false statements, does it? In fact, he would be more than foolish to make statements that could later be disproved, right? It isn't evidence, but we don't have to completely dismiss it out of hand.

 

[bobzilla]

Apparently, I'm not the only one...

1. English (capitalized)
2. Insert comma
3. Insert another comma
4. the (misspelled)
5. Therefore (misspelled)
6. better (misspelled).... I won't even talk about the bare infinitive
7. Quotes not needed unless one can attribute the exact phase to a specific individual (good luck trying to find it, lol).

Well, that was fun. I'm assuming you stopped at the 5th grade, eh?

Can't discuss things, so we turn to this? Got much of an ego? Oh, wait, you're a Carmel cop. We already know that answer.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Can't discuss things, so we turn to this? Got much of an ego? Oh, wait, you're a Carmel cop. We already know that answer.

...reeks of irony, professor.

 

[MagicKev]

Can't discuss things, so we turn to this? Got much of an ego? Oh, wait, you're a Carmel cop. We already know that answer.

That's your comeback for being shown that you couldn't comprehend his sentence correctly?

 

[strahd71]

That's your comeback for being shown that you couldn't comprehend his sentence correctly?

yea that smacks of truth...........

jake

 

[Fargo]

Certainly, the law does not require him to make any knowingly false statements, does it? In fact, he would be more than foolish to make statements that could later be disproved, right? It isn't evidence, but we don't have to completely dismiss it out of hand.

No, I'm not saying that he is making "knowingly false" statements. I'm saying he is doing his job of construing everything in the light most favorable to his client, including advocating positions and theories he knows MAY be false or even personally believes to not be the case. As long as he does not KNOW them to be false, he may put them forward and in many cases is bound to.

As to the fact that these things could potentially be later disproved, I think that was probably the least of his concerns. That video is from back when a media was was being waged on both sides to try and influence a charging decision. If he can avoid a charging, he doesn't need to worry about judicial scrutiny of claims made. Plus, as he is making these claims and it in no way a witness himself, I don't see how it could hurt him in court anyway.

I'm not dismissing it out of hand, but it has to be recognized for what it is. It is pure advocacy based upon an obligation which is not truth-seeking based. Rather, the obligation is to do everything possible to legally protect his client short of knowing lying and suborning perjury. If he doesn't, he dishonors his oath and obligations and could be disciplined.

Best,

Joe

 

[Bunnykid68]

I got this video from Frontsite, it answered a question of why was Zimmerman out of his car. I never heard this info before. Sounds possible.

Front Sight's Monday Blog: Zimmerman versus Martin

That video was great

 

[dross]

So you WANT him to be guilty. Got it.

I'm seriously wondering about your reading comprehension. No, seriously.

I took it to mean that he hopes they have something more significant than what they've released, meaning that he hopes they have served the system better than it looks like they have.

It would be the same as saying, "I HOPE Zimmerman had a good reason to shoot him."

That wouldn't mean I'm on Zimmerman's side, it just means I hope that since someone died that there was a reason it happened.

 

[bobzilla]

I took it to mean that he hopes they have something more significant than what they've released, meaning that he hopes they have served the system better than it looks like they have.

It would be the same as saying, "I HOPE Zimmerman had a good reason to shoot him."

That wouldn't mean I'm on Zimmerman's side, it just means I hope that since someone died that there was a reason it happened.

I probably would have too if he hadn't already been on record for saying that he hope's Z is financially ruined and his life is destroyed.

 

[griffin]

Well, I hope Corey doesn't have any new evidence. I hate to see Zimmerman get sent up for self defense because he was railroaded on a false racial profiling "he was out targeting young blacks" charge. If there is no more to the story than what we already know, he should walk.

The guy didn't even lawyer up at the police station. He sat there for five hours being interrogated alone. Maybe he should have.

 

[hornadylnl]

Any body seen the transcript from the 5 hour interrogation?

 

[Bunnykid68]

Any body seen the transcript from the 5 hour interrogation?

Yea, but I cannot talk about it

 

[griffin]

The police did. Norman Wolfinger did.

 

[hornadylnl]

Yea, but I cannot talk about it

It seems everyone knows what was gleaned from the interrogation. Just wondering where they got their intel. Would the prosecutor have access to the full interrogation videos?