Evidence from prosecution witnesses today seemed to say that TM was on top in a "MMA" ground and pound position and witness closest to fight said that he felt it was GZ calling for help.

 

Seems as if prosecutor is conceding these points to the defense, not sure what their theory is in light of this testimony.

Evidence from prosecution witnesses today seemed to say that TM was on top in a "MMA" ground and pound position and witness closest to fight said that he felt it was GZ calling for help.

 

Seems as if prosecutor is conceding these points to the defense, not sure what their theory is in light of this testimony.

 

I think UKMF's earlier posts are the key issue to this case. I heard some attorneys say that even if GZ initiated the fight the SYG can still be used IF IF IF at ANY point GZ tried to back off or get help. Neighbors hearing the "guy on the bottom" yell for help seems to indicate he tried to back off. We can say it's an Oscar Mayer Bologna law BUT it IS the law.

 

Also let's remember that the burden is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that GZ was NOT at some point trying to get help. The attorneys I watched tonight said that once there is enough testimony indicates he tried to get help then the judge will "instruct the jury" that it has to be proven that he was not seeking help.

 

Remember, we can all speculate as to who did what and what the real law should be. The burden though is on the prosecution.

 

Right now I'd say GZ is in solid shape legally.

Edited June 29, 201313 yr by PurplePride92
Rule 8

Evidence from prosecution witnesses today seemed to say that TM was on top in a "MMA" ground and pound position and witness closest to fight said that he felt it was GZ calling for help.

 

.

 

The prosecuting attorney got the witness to say that he did NOT see any blows striking the person on the bottom. I'm not sure if that will sway the jury. This testimony is probably enough to get the judge to give the jury the instruction I mentioned previously.

Edited June 29, 201313 yr by Clyde

BTW I think GZ is a problem. He's out there looking for trouble wanting to play cop. He could have a problem with race. Maybe. Maybe not. He may fully deserve to have his butt kicked like he got.

 

Doesn't matter legally.

Edited June 29, 201313 yr by PurplePride92
Rule 8

BTW the wording of that SYG law leads to situations like this.

 

It's like the law said that if I broke into RTS' house and threatened him and he got on top of me and I shot him that I should be able to claim self-defense.

Watching TM's step-mom talk about TM and seeing the pain in her face is hard to watch.

 

This is not going to end satisfactorily for most.

The prosecuting attorney got the witness to say that he did NOT see any blows striking the person on the bottom. I'm not sure if that will sway the jury. This testimony is probably enough to get the judge to give the jury the instruction I mentioned previously.

Prosecutor did ask the question in a very precise way to get the response that he did get. Got him to admit he didn't see him hit him in the head. He had said he couldn't see where he was hitting him earlier.

Prosecutor did ask the question in a very precise way to get the response that he did get. Got him to admit he didn't see him hit him in the head. He had said he couldn't see where he was hitting him earlier.

 

The problem is two-fold: Logic says his punches would cause GZ to seek help - key in the SYG law. Secondly, the cuts on the back of the head will cause some jurors to think the blows were landed.

BTW the wording of that SYG law leads to situations like this.

 

It's like the law said that if I broke into RTS' house and threatened him and he got on top of me and I shot him that I should be able to claim self-defense.

The lawyers I saw on TV said that SYG wasn't really the defense in this case it was more of a self defense case...I dunno.

The problem is two-fold: Logic says his punches would cause GZ to seek help - key in the SYG law. Secondly, the cuts on the back of the head will cause some jurors to think the blows were landed.

Plus the broken nose.

The lawyers I saw on TV said that SYG wasn't really the defense in this case it was more of a self defense case...I dunno.

 

You could be right. The key point is that it allows for the instigator to essentially say "I didn't really mean it."

With all of the emotion around this case what will happen if GZ is aquitted?

 

The problem is two-fold: Logic says his punches would cause GZ to seek help - key in the SYG law. Secondly, the cuts on the back of the head will cause some jurors to think the blows were landed.

 

The defense isn't using SYG as a defense.

The defense isn't using SYG as a defense.

 

Thanks. I guess I am using FL's self-defense law and SYG interchangeably.

With all of the emotion around this case what will happen if GZ is aquitted?

 

At the very least an ugly scene outside of the courtroom when he leaves IMO.

 

I believe the picture of a 12 year old Trayvon has infected public opinion about the case. I have talked to countless people who see a 12 year old Trayvon and refuse to believe he was winning the fight.