Skip to comments.Trayvon Martin to go under the public microscope, like George Zimmerman did
Posted on 09/14/2012 7:20:13 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
On Friday, Sept. 14, the Orlando Sentinel stated that in response to the defense seeking Trayvon Martin's social media records and school records, which could show behavioral issues and more about the deceased, that the prosecution will release additional records on the accused next week.
The family of the deceased has called the defense's request for personal records as "character assassination" and a "witch hunt," but any criminal defense attorney worth their salt calls it putting on a complete defense for their accused client.
And since George Zimmerman's own life hangs in the balance in a court of law, it seems prudent for the facts to come out about each male's public and private life and records--especially if something in those records could shed better light on the shooting death.
Naturally, an attorney for the Martin family is saying the request for records which may show the Sanford, Florida shooting victim in a negative light is "an attack" on the deceased, as HLN reports.
Yet if nothing derogatory is found on the dead youth, then what harm is there in requesting records that show him as an exemplary young man without any known gang ties or issues about conduct unbecoming?
Wednesday, Sept. 19 appears to be the date the public will get that answer, with the state slated to release their last batch of evidence regarding the shooting that took the life of the youth on school suspension, and the defense finally obtaining all the data from schools sought 10 days earlier.
And while it is generally the case that school records are not released to the public at large, this is also a nationally headline-generating case with racial repercussions that appear to dictate deviating from the norm in order to keep the public better informed about the facts....
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
In my opinion, Travon was casing the Twin Lakes gated community when George Zimmerman stumbled upon him. For some reason Zimmerman’s presence alerted Martin to run out of his sight. Perhaps it was to hide something he did not want anyone to know he had in his possession; especially the cops if they showed up because of Zimmerman. That situation probably enraged Martin enough to get back at Zimmerman. That is when the attack happened. It also was the result of Martin’s mind addled by DXM.
Not at all. If it can be shown that Trayvon had a history of drug abuse, including "sippin sippin" lean (as he bragged about on his Facebook page), then maybe it was Trayvon's drug abuse that caused the diminished mental capacity that resulted in his brutal attack on the Hispanic neighborhood watch fellow, George Zimmerman.
Since the Dearly Departed Martin described his taste for “purple drank, AKA “lean’, his motives for another high will be allowed.
Pattern of previous behavior, etc.
Nasty stuff ...
[[Since the Dearly Departed Martin described his taste for purple drank, AKA lean, his motives for another high will be allowed.]]
It is speculation- You say ‘pattern of previous behavior’- however , talkign about sipping lean doesn’t translate into actually doiong hte act- it hasn’t been established that he had previously done so- Had he been pulled into jail and tested and foudn lean in system, then that is established ‘previous behavior’
*(I have no doubt he was mostl ikely after a high- however- as mentioned, speculation isn’t evidence- I can’t see how it can be allowed-
“Your Honor- The defendent is a known drunk, and there was a bottle of beer foudn at the murder scene, therefore he must have committed them urder’
“Your Honor, the deceased did drugs, and he had skittles on him and iced tea, therefore he was goiogn to get high- and in an agitated prehigh state, was prone to attackign innocent civilians’?”
Like I said- Trayvon was a punk- he picked on wrong person and paid dearly for it- however, I can’t see how a judge can allow speculation to go toward show motive- Because the evidence for that is so shallow, his lawyer will jump all over it- stronger evidence needs to be presented-,
Now, perhaps he had already done some lean aND WAS HIGH ALREADY AND WENT TO STORE FOR MORE, BUT TOXICOLOGY REPORTS SHOULD BEAR THAT OUT- but the case has to be tried on established evidences- simply because a man drinks, and a bottle of booze was found at a murder scene does not go toward establishign that the drunk in question must have done the act
[[Not at all. If it can be shown that Trayvon had a history of drug abuse, including “sippin sippin” lean (as he bragged about on his Facebook page), then maybe it was Trayvon’s drug abuse that caused the diminished mental capacity that resulted in his brutal attack on the Hispanic neighborhood watch fellow, George Zimmerman.]]
That’s different than tryign to prove he went to the 7/11 for skittles and drink to make lean- what you describe is simply establishign character and mental condition based on established evidence- there’s no evidence however that his purchase of items was for brewing anything— It could I suppsoe be suggested that he puirchased them for such a purpose, however anyoen can say anythign they like about anyone as ‘evidence’? Speculation isn’
t wevidence- conjecture isn’t eitrher- what you describe however are facts based on records-
The Black Racists seem to be in panic mode now. Trayvon Martin was a Ghetto Thug who had a history of problems at school
He is not the “14 yr old honor student” as claimed by the Black Ku Klux Klan....the New Black Panthers
And, in a criminal trial, it is a lot easier to get in evidence of past bad behavior from the victim...than it is to get in past bad behavior of the accused. That is why most states and Federal courts have Rape Shield Laws....and not “Rapist Shield Laws”
The prosecutors still have not released the full toxicity report on Martin. Obviously it is not good for the prosecution
[[Whatll the jury hears that the thug Trayvon went to that 7-11 in the rain to get the Skittles and Arizona Watermelon Tea because those were the ingredients he needed to add to the Robitussin to brew up some lean. This should be a fun trial.]]
You cant imply intent- you have to show he itnended to brew it up- aqnd thats impossible to do- Not stickign up for trayvon, just commenting on the comment as I dont think it wil lweven be allowed in court even if those are the ingredients for lean-
The defense does not have to prove a thing. Contrary to what TV lawyers say
Martin’s past drug use...as discovered in his autopsy and internet postings....are enough to get the “lean” probability into trial
Florida Statute on Character Evidence:
And then after showing the 7-Eleven photo of that tall dark figure of TM at the counter, you hear the voice of Sabrina saying that Trayvon was just a little boy who couldn't hurt anybody. Talk about a woman living in a fantasy and you have a psychologist there publicly encouraging that fantasy.
Then after postulating that Trayvon was a skinny little kid with no muscles his father recalls when Trayvon at 9 years old dragged him out of a burning house. He must have developed muscular dystrophy after that. Trayvon is 17 years old and his father has to reach back to when he is 9 years old for an event to remember his son??? Nothing in the last 8 years??? And Dr Phil is clueless.
Will discovery shock these Pinnichioes back to the real world or into further denial???
Years ago, Oprah chose Dr Phil well.
According to Wikipedia, Dr. Phil McGraw retired his psychology license in 2006 and is merely an entertainer now.
So then he is no longer really "Dr." Phil and should be careful practicing his whichcraft on aire without a license.
” simply because a man drinks, and a bottle of booze was found at a murder scene does not go toward establishign that the drunk in question must have done the act”
The issue is not what Martin did, but possible motives. Motives are up for discovery.
Use the spell check button or slow down!
Some of your replies are terrible...
[[Some of your replies are terrible...]]
Then don’t read thme-
[[Martins past drug use...as discovered in his autopsy and internet postings]]
It was his past drug use that was discovered in autopsy? How? Has it been established that the liver was damaged from drug use? and natural causes ruled out? Was there drug i nhis system at the point of death? I haven’t seen anythign to indicate that? Perhaps I’ve missed it- Internet postings aren’t exactly evidence of drug use- many peopel brag abotu doign things they never actually did (although I’m sure martin did infact- but his lawer will simply argue the kid was just braggign
[[are enough to get the lean probability into trial]]
Hmmm I dunno- Now if there was lean in his system at tiem of death- then it could be easily brought to bear o nthe case- and that woudl be muich stronger evidence-
I’m just worried that zimmerman is facing a biased crowd/judge/prosecution etc and his lawyer is goign to need good hard evidences- and not look like he’s desperate and o na fishign escapade tryign to fidn somethign to hang onto regardless of how flimsy- he’ll need solid evidence due to all the bias agaisnt zimmerman- I just really doubt he can get a fair trial- It used to be that most judges took their oaths before God and country seriously, and judged in an unbiased manner- fairly for everyone- however, many activist judges today LIED before God and coutnry when takign their oaths-
They say zimmerman’s lawyer is brilliant- and if so he should see that bringing weak charges will backfire agaisnt the hostile crowd and court and make it look like he’s simplytryign to get his client exhonorated by impuning the character of Martin- with weak evidence- implyign that because martin may or may not have done lean i nthe past, that this must be the reason martin attacked george i nthe first place- I really hope this isn’t the best goerge’s lawyer has- in front of this hostile court, he’ll need to be extra brilliant- I just don’t see how they coukld make the jump from ‘martin used lean i nthe past to ‘martin’s past lean use led to the attack on george? martins lawyer wil lsiomply argue that lots of drug users and alcoholics never attack anyone- (and they’ll no doubt stick to their ‘martin was simply defendign himself agaisnt a manhunter’ argument)
Oh well- you may be right- we;ll see-
[[The issue is not what Martin did, but possible motives. Motives are up for discovery.]]
motives for what? For what he did?
I’m no lawyer, just tryign to see both angles and I’m just feelign that this line of possible motives discovery is very thin and I’m hoping geroge’s lawyer has soemthign much stronger than that to argue- Many drunks and alcoholics never attack anyone- so tryign to make the jump from ‘martin may have doen drugs to martin therefore attacked zimm- is quite the leap- and actually it’s speculation- I’m not certain, but I don’t think lawyers can argue speculation without objections by opposition beign upheld by the judge?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.