I Thought OJ, Robert Blake, Casey Anthony, And George Zimmerman Were "Guilty"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Last edited Sat Apr 21, 2012, 04:15 PM - Edit history (2)

What does that make me?

[bowens43]

1. wrong at least twice........

[Darth_Kitten]

49. ????

n/t

[KharmaTrain]

2. A Victim Of Trial By Media...

Here's a common link with all those names you mention above...their trials took place in the cable teevee era...where channels obsessed 24/7 over every scrap of gossip of these cases and used them to attract eyeballs to their coverage. They presented hours of speculation and "anal-isis" based more on personal feelings and emotions and little on the germaine facts of the case. The juries in those cases stayed strictly on the facts and were not allowed to be distracted by "experts" sitting in teevee studios thousands of miles away from the case and the actual facts. Fortunately we have a jury/justice system in this country that still sticks to the facts and the law, not to emotions and agendas.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. Three Of Those Cases I Followed The Live Testimony Gavel To Gavel

.

[KharmaTrain]

4. Ever Served On A Jury?

Lots of things go on behind the closed doors that aren't carried...a dynamic that develops over the case of a trial. I had the opportunity to serve on a federal jury and saw this process in action. Many people avoid this service and too bad...it's a wonderful opportunity to learn about how our justice system really works. It's not based on ratings or personalities...it's based strictly on the interpretation of the laws. Fortunately its also based on innocence until proven guilty...definitely not a mission of the cables that are catering to a specific audience.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Non Jurors Can Get To See More Of A Trial On Television Than Jurors

Because jurors don't get to see challenges, non jurors watching on television do. Non jurors also get to see excluded evidence. "Guilty" and "Not Guilty" are really specific terms that have more to do with procedural guilt and innocence. I am going to put guilty in quotation marks to indicate that's what I mean.

[KharmaTrain]

9. There's A Reason That "Evidence" is Excluded...

The role of a juror is to interpret the law and then to judge (along with 11 others) if that law had been violated. The prosecutors and defense can work within the system to try to seat a jury that is sympathetic to their case or to try to sway jurors through testimony, but in the end it's all decided inside that jury room where the law is examined and then then innocence and guilt are determined. Not by someone playing "expert" in a teevee studio. It's the job of the judge to make sure there is that wall that separates speculation and hearsay (almost always what are excluded) and if its truly germaine evidence that is excluded, then there's the appeals process that should take that into consideration.

The bottom line here is what 12 men and women will decide when this case goes to trial and with Florida's laws, the entire process will be right there for you to watch. The one place those cameras won't be allowed is in that jury room...or when the judge meets with the jurors to issue instructions. In many cases the laws are so confusing or obtuse that it's hard to convict even when it appears to the "viewer" that it's an open and shut case.

Enjoy watching...and surely this case will be a rating's blockbuster...True TV must be dreaming of lots of advertising dollars. My hopes are to see justice done...within the courtroom, not in a teevee studio.

Cheers...

[unblock]

16. right -- bottom line is that you shouldn't let excluded evidence sway you

if, on tv, you see some evidence the prosecution would like to show the juror but it was excluded, then at a minimum you're ALSO not seeing the defence's response had that evidence been shown to the jury.

you don't get to see the defence cross-examine that testimony or challenge the validity or correctness or accuracy or applicability of the test, or whatever. you don't get to hear some other witness testify that THEY had something to do with that excluded evidence.

sometimes there isn't much the defence can do to refute the evidence, but sometimes there is, and you usually don't know for certain. as a result of the evidence being excluded, you'll likely never see the other side of the story.

[KharmaTrain]

17. If Important Evidence Was Excluded...

...then there's something to be said of how the defense is being conducted. A competent lawyer will be relenteless in getting that evidence entered in some way. If it's not, he/she can and should bring it up on appeal...and why there is an appelate process.

[unblock]

41. i was thinking mostly in terms of prosecutorial evidence excluded

similarly, excluded defence evidence should also be viewed with a grain of salt, though yes, the situation is different.
so the grain of salt is different as well.

[Solomon]

5. I dont see how you actually watched OJ' trial gavel

to gavel and disagreed with the jury. I watched the whole thing as well. The jury did the right thing based upon the evidence presented, much of it planted.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. I Respectfully Disagree But So Many Years Have Passed

And that's the nature of things.


There are DUERS who are actually convinced George Zimmerman didn't unlawfully take the life of Trayvon Martin or that Casey Anthony wasn't responsible for the death of her daughter.

[Life Long Dem]

11. Right now I don't see it as clear as Casey Anthony's case with Zimmerman.

Not until I see all the evidence presented. The clueless lead investigator is scary, but I'll wait until the trial before I find Zimmerman guilty before trial.

[Solomon]

26. Edt found in the blood evidence. That cant hapoen unless

it was in a test tube first. You must have missed that.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Respectfully I Really Don't Want To Relitigate It

I watched the trial, practically all of it, including the most hotly contested issues.

[Solomon]

31. Respectfully, you dont have to re-litigate to

acknowledge planted evidence. Some believe they framed a guilty man. At least you retreated to having watched almost all of the trial.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. It's Like The JFK Assassination. People's Minds Will Never Be Changed

It doesn't mean they are wrong.

[geckosfeet]

8. A jumper to conclusions?

Which is ok by the way.

We all have opinions. So do the courts - but the court opinions are the ones that count. Hopefully justice will be served and zimmerman will at least be convicted of manslaughter.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Sure

I just pointed out that I found all four defendants to be guilty to defeat the rather silly assertion that some on the left harbor some special anumus toward Zimmerman because he was white and his victim was black.

[doc03]

12. A few days ago I caught a couple minutes of an interveiw on the radio with an auther that

believes OJ's son actually commited the murders. He claims he has evidence, I just caight the tail end of it I didn't even know OJ had a son..

[Solomon]

32. I read the book. Pretty persuasive. i believe Jason

did it too.

[treestar]

13. Someone who would have caused a hung jury on those cases

Had you been on the jury. Which shows us how juries cannot be infallible. Which to me is the one reason there should be no death penalty.

[doc03]

14. Zimmerman may be guilty in everyone's mind but with that goofy SYG

law he could still be not guilty.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

15. Beyond all reasonable doubt is a pretty high bar.

Especially when the STATE has to disprove zimmerman's account of events (innocent until proven guilty & burden of proof rests with the prosecution). When/if zimmerman gets on the stand and says "trayvon swung/attacked me 1st" ask yourself how the state can disprove that... because that's what they're going to have to do.

[doc03]

18. Watch yourself on DU you get flamed for even suggesting that Trayvon

could have possibly took the first swing. We don't need a trial Zimmerman is guilty.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. When Skilled Lawyers Get Involved Facts Become , Well, Less Factual

Very few things in life ,imho, can be reduced to a metaphysical certainty.


Here's what I believe happened. Zimmerman saw Trayvon and deemed him suspicious because of his race and attire. He then called 911 to report that there was a suspicious man in his complex and asked the police to send someone to check it out and he would follow the suspicious person until they arrived. The dispatcher asked him not to. He ignored her. He eventually caught up with Trayvon .


We don't know what happened next but I assume he tried to detain Trayvon. We will learn how much force was used and how the fight ensued but we have certain elements


-Zimmerman profiled Martin
-Trayvon was within his rights to be where he was. He was a guest of a resident of Twin Lakes.
-Zimmerman followed Martin despite being asked not to by the police dispatcher
-At some point a physical confrontation ensued
-The unarmed person was shot by the armed one.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

33. But that's where the case falls apart... what happens when they meet up.

I beieve it is likely zimmerman directly/physically confronted a fleeing trayvon. However it's not unresonable to believe that trayvon, feeling threatened by someone folowing him, dedcided to confront the guy stalking him. Or maybe it was a hybrid scenario where zimmerman verbally confronted trayvon and cornered him wihout attempting to physically detain or contact trayvon... fight or flight is envoked and trayvon reacts.

The facts we know do can be used to support a picture that zimmerman is guity, but the problem is that they don't DISPROVE scenarios that would exhonorate zimmerman. Basically, everyone will have an opinion of what hapened but to say any of those scenarios is reasonably impossible would be dishonest. What the prosocution has to do is prove that trayvon did not act first... tough to do because so many scenarios could have unfolded and none (with current publicly known facts) are really unreasonable when approached with an open mind.

I predict that zimmerman will eventually plead out to a lesser charge of manslaughter. I think if the prosocution tries to overreach (like in the Casey Anthoney case) it may not be able to win.

[doc03]

38. I agree with all the above. It appears there is evidence Zimmerman actually had at least

some injuries. My guess is the with evidence they have Zimmerman possibly may have acted in self defence. Unless
It can be proven Zimmerman actually started the fight I think he may get off. I don't think there is any law againt following
someone so if Martin confronted him like Zimmerman claims the SYG law would clear him, wouldn't it? The STG law is like the old
westerns, if the cowboys came it town and gunned down sheepherder all the cowboys would tell Marshall Dillon the sheepherder
drew first. Marshall Dillon may not like it but he had to let them go. It's a fucked up law.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

44. The Writers Of The SVG Law Say It Isn't Applicable In This Instance

"He has no protection under my law," former Sen. Durell Peaden told the newspaper

[xoom]

21. Yup.

I already heard enough bad things about Zimmerman to know he is guilty.

Even without a trial.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. FIXED

I already heard enough bad things about Zimmerman to know he is probably guilty

A trial will confirm or deny my original disposition of the case.

[rock]

19. A listener to US media

That is all.

[obamanut2012]

22. All three were guilty of something

Two of Murder One and one of child endangerment and manslaughter. The last wasn't convicted because of an overreaching Prosecutor who wanted it to be a DP case, when it wasn't, and the first two because celebrities in LA who can afford good attorneys very rarely go to state prison.

[slackmaster]

23. Prejudiced.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. Prejudiced Means To Prejudge

I came to those conclusions after watching the trials.


Trials I watched pretty much from gavel to gavel

OJ
Casey Anthony
Zimmerman (just starting)
William Kennedy Smith
David Westerfield

[JVS]

27. Wow. That's a lot of TV.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. I Work At Home

So as I work at my home office I turn on the television with the mute button and closed captioning on I am able to keep up with current events.

I will admit to some prejudice in the William Kennedy Smith case as I wanted to believe he was innocent because of my affection for the Kennedys.

[Paladin]

37. Thanks For Your Input, Mr. "Gang-Related." (n/t)

[slackmaster]

39. That's "Mr. almost always right about gang violence"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. Who Was In A Gang?

I detest gangs. It's sad that youths feel such a sense of desolation they have to join them for a sense of belonging.

[slackmaster]

47. I detest gangs too. We ought to get a bunch of guys together and teach those gangs a lesson.

But seriously, my friend Paladin was referring to my propensity to be one of the first people on DU to respond to a report of a violent crime by hypothesizing that the crime was perpetrated by gang members fighting with other gang members. And I've quite often been correct.

[varelse]

30. Human

We all tend to have opinions. Lots of them. It comes with the territory.

[Evergreen Emerald]

34. They were

[RebelOne]

35. I have to agree. n/t

[Rex]

36. Correct.

That makes you correct.

[CBGLuthier]

40. Intuitive?

Zimmerman is different though. We know he killed. No one denies he killed.

[Iggo]

45. One difference.

Zimmerman actually admits killing his victim.

[JI7]

46. i think the 3 who were acquitted are still guilty

[ananda]

48. It makes you a person who..

.. pays attention.