July 13, 201313 yr I can't wait to get jury duty but a case like this would have an effect on me for the rest of my life. Two families are forever changed for what very well could be a self-defense vs. self defense situation. I would want no part of this jury. There is no happy ending either way they rule.
July 13, 201313 yr Jury asking for explanation of Manslaughter...talking heads say this means they are past Murder 2 and self defense...others not so sure
July 13, 201313 yr Jury asking for explanation of Manslaughter...talking heads say this means they are past Murder 2 and self defense...others not so sure From wiki. Criminally negligent manslaughter Criminally negligent manslaughter is variously referred to as criminally negligent homicide in the United States, gross negligence manslaughter in England and Wales. In Scotland and some Commonwealth of Nations jurisdictions the offence of culpable homicide might apply. It occurs where death results from serious negligence, or, in some jurisdictions, serious recklessness. A high degree of negligence is required to warrant criminal liability. A related concept is that of willful blindness, which is where a defendant intentionally puts himself in a position where he will be unaware of facts which would render him liable. Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs where there is an omission to act when there is a duty to do so, or a failure to perform a duty owed, which leads to a death. The existence of the duty is essential because the law does not impose criminal liability for a failure to act unless a specific duty is owed to the victim. It is most common in the case of professionals who are grossly negligent in the course of their employment. An example is where a doctor fails to notice a patient's oxygen supply has disconnected and the patient dies (R v Adomako). I could see them going this route possibly. Although I still can't see it happening. A serious lack of evidence in this case. A lot of bad choices made by both TM and GZ.
July 14, 201313 yr Manslaughter as explained in the jury instructions, fits 100% to the facts of this case IF they determine it was not self defense.
July 14, 201313 yr is there proof GZ followed TM because he was black ? Or are you just guessing his mindset ? Theives come in all colors , they raid my change in my car ever time I forget to lock up and I'm 99.9 positive my theives are white as snow .
July 14, 201313 yr I wonder how having your nose broke and head slammed off a side walk could not be considered self defense ? cant get my mind around that .
July 14, 201313 yr I wonder how having your nose broke and head slammed off a side walk could not be considered self defense ? cant get my mind around that . I agree with you on this, but you never know what a jury will think. I gotta think that if they were going with self defense they would be done by now.
July 14, 201313 yr Not guilty on all counts...actually a little shocked by this How so? There was no evidence to go on. With everything considered, this is the verdict that should have been handed down.
July 14, 201313 yr Because you never know with juries, the closing argument was really good focusing on the emotion and not the facts of the case. With that juries can go any direction. Been on a few jury trials as a jury member and some crazy stuff comes up during deliberations.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.