Anything to get Zimmerman into prison where he can be murdered. Holder knows people.
Zimmerman has defended himself against the charge of second degree murder. Now the judge says - we’ll charge you with manslaughter or aggravated assault. Doesn’t this involve more/different defense on the part of Zimmerman?
Perhaps this is standard operating procedure, but it seems unfair to Zimmerman. The prosecution did not make a case for second degree murder. There was no other charge. He should be acquitted. The time to make any and all charges is before the trial starts.
And if the jury won’t convict him for *anything*, the judge will order Zimmerman to jail for six months for “contempt of court”, because she doesn’t think he should “get over”, and not go to jail or prison for *something*.
I would think Obama would want zimmerman to go free. They want race riots and black people stirred up
Giving the judge the benefit of a doubt (which she doesn’t deserve, but just as an academic exercise) I wonder if she is intentionally throwing mistakes into the trial that will guarantee a reversal on appeal of Zimmerman is convicted.
The badgering about whether he would or would not take the stand is sufficient, in itself, to taint any guilty verdict that is handed down.
The evil news media created this story and is inciting riots.
Zimmerman isn’t even a white male but a Hispanic.
Now the media has all of us talking about this trial when we should be focusing on stopping the awful Amnesty bill.
If nothing else, the state of Florida will consider charging Zimmerman with gaining excess weight and failure to use racial language...
That really pissed them off.
They’re probably also looking into bogus civil rights charges like they did to the cops who apprehended Rodney King.
This (kind of stupid comment like the Boston Professor Break-In resulting in a "beer summit" with the President and VP Dumbass), was even worse than Nixon opening his big trap about Charles Manson right during the trial.
The State of Florida must be desperate to put Zimmerman away. How about illegal parking?
Seems to me the prosecutor went for all or nothing. Now he’s beginning to see what the rest of us saw all along. He’s about to wind up with zip. Desperate, he now seeks to add in the charges others were saying he should have from the onset.
What bothers me most about this late in the game tactic, is that the defense didn’t have the ability to address these lesser charges throughout the trial.
They provided a defense against the charges brought. Now the prosecutor is trying to change the charges after the fact, and after the defense has nearly rested their complete defense.
How is that fair? Witnesses could have been asked questions, evidence could have been submitted, and the tactics of the defense could have been different realizing they had to impress the jury that lesser charges were not applicable too.
People have made a big stink out of the fact the judge asked Zimmerman himself if he was going to testify. That seemed to them to be prejudicial. Judges do this. They want to hear from the individual themselves that they are making this decision of their own free will. It helps shut down a defense move later on that the defendant wanted to testify, but was not allowed to by his attorney.
Point is, I don’t understand everything that goes on in court. Perhaps it’s reasoned to add in these extra charges. To me, a lay person, it doesn’t seem fair at all. That said, it may be something that happens all the time.
Doesn’t seem reasoned to me.
Mistrial materal.
This never would’ve gotten to trial had Zimmerman claimed he was an illegal. La Raza would’ve thrown up the shields and shouted “HANDS OFF!”
Virtually guarantees Zimmerman will be sentenced to 30 years in prison.
“Lesser” charges is a meaningless term in liberal FL, what is called “a distinction without a difference”. I bet this jury knows nothing about this. And I think the jury will vote 6-0 to convict for manslaughter because he “should pay” for taking an “innocent life”. I believe this jury will never understand the reality; probably much of the testimony was excluded to the jury.
And when Jebbie runs in 2016, a conservative opponent if he had the gall could cite “Judge Nelson” as the kind of judicial appointments one could expect from a third Bush administration. I wonder if Republican primary voters could understand that.
Injustice will prevail, and I wish very much I am wrong.