Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, YOU are the one that thinks juries find facts. I told you that they DO NOT find facts, they REVIEW evidence entered into the case and make a determination if they actually mean anything or if the defense raised a possibility of doubt to ignore said facts. That's what I said, you continued to argue that the jury is the FINDER of facts to BE TRUE. THEY ARE NOT! Like I mentioned, if that was the case, then why did Casey Anthony get let off? Wasn't it because the JURY thought it was POSSIBLE that they were covering up for a drowning in their pool? What FACTS did the jury have that made them think that? The answer is NONE, it was a POSSIBILITY, that's all. Anyway, please explain how you can add up multiple LEGAL actions and come out with an ILLEGAL action? Please, by all means, make me laugh!
Alrighty then. If you want to ignore all legal definitions as to who the finders of fact are, you're certainly welcome to do that. Guess judges in all criminal cases are wrong when they point out to the jury that they are the finders of fact and that the judge will give them the law to apply to the facts in their deliberations in order to render a verdict. I think your confusion comes from thinking that "finders of fact" means going out investigating, when, in a trial, it means listening to the evidence presented by witnesses on the witness stand, and exhibits entered into evidence, and determining what they believe to be factual and what they believe is not factual. Finders of Fact is a term that is used to describe what a jury DOES DURING A TRIAL. The Judge deals with the law and the jury deals with evidence presented as finders of fact.
The jury in the Casey Anthony case acquitted her because the State failed to prove first degree murder. They had a reasonable doubt that what the state presented was true. That jury listened to the jury instructions and followed the law and determined that at the end of the day there was a reasonable doubt regarding the State's case.
You need to do some research regarding the reasonable doubt standard of proof; it could be very helpful to your understanding.
Also, consider these words: motive and intent
Last edited by FancyFeast5000; 05-01-2012 at 12:23 PM..
Reason: answering part of post I missed before
The Governor in Florida has put together a Task Force to review|revisit the SYG law, in fact they're meeting today...
Thanks for this info. I remember reading that the Gov had appointed a task force for that purpose, but I didn't know when their work was to begin.....I thought that it was somehow tied to after the special prosecutor had done certain things in this case. Thanks again; I think their work and what they determine will be interesting to follow as much as possible.
For no reason? I am glad I don't have your reading ability.
Seriously, have you followed this case at all? You do know about the break-ins around the neighborhood? You do know about the police not responding in a timely fashion to reported break-ins? You do know about Martin attacking Zimmerman according to witnesses and being on top of him? You do realize that Martin was much bigger than Zimmerman? The stand your ground law is on the side of Zimmerman too.
I hate to see what you need for a reason to defend yourself.
I have followed the case and know that Zimmerman has lied plenty of times. He had more than one story about what happened and where it occurred. He lied in court saying that he didn't know Martin was so young when he stated to the dispatcher that the suspicious male was a teenager. He lied to the court and said he didn't have any money when he had nearly $200K.
He is a liar. Like I said in the another thread it is unfathomable that you all are believing him when he says this was done in self defense. I don't know what happened but I do know that he has lied before and that most people would lie to keep themselves out of prison. I also don't think he hunted the young man down whom he killed. I don't think he set out to kill him, but I don't believe him at all when he says it was self defense even if that is actually what happened. Like everyone else we should all wait until all the evidence comes out. The only thing I truly know is that Zimmerman killed Martin and since then has lied about what happened due to the different variations of the story. The investigator even said that he had "multiple versions" of what took place that night.
For no reason? I am glad I don't have your reading ability.
Seriously, have you followed this case at all? You do know about the break-ins around the neighborhood? You do know about the police not responding in a timely fashion to reported break-ins? You do know about Martin attacking Zimmerman according to witnesses and being on top of him? You do realize that Martin was much bigger than Zimmerman? The stand your ground law is on the side of Zimmerman too.
I hate to see what you need for a reason to defend yourself.
So the kid was guilty of what, being black?
There are no credible witnesses that said Martin attacked Zimmerman.
There were no marks on Martin to show any attack. And this information is from police evidence (or lack thereof).
So the kid was guilty of what, being black?
There are no witnesses that said Martin attacked Zimmerman.
There were no marks on Martin to show any attack.
Nothing interesting or groundbreaking in any of that. According to you, the police can just pick up a cell phone and know automatically the first and last name and address of the victim. It doesn't work like that. The phone has to first be logged in as evidence, then LATER they can use it to find next of kin or a friend to ID him. Dead victims are ALWAYS tested for drugs and alcohol, it's called a toxicology report. I've never seen or heard of the other party being tested.
WTF are you talking about!!!! If you would talk to any real police officers the first thing that they do with a "John Doe" is to try every means possible to identify him including the cell phone. In this case since the last number recorded was so recent it would make all the sense in the world to call it in order to identify the body.
The shooter is ALWAYS tested for drugs or alcohol except in this case. Do you realize the gravity of his defense if it was found that zimmerman was on drugs or drunk! Yes I can understand the reasoning for testing the victim but there was no excuse for NOT testing zimmerman.
Thanks for this info. I remember reading that the Gov had appointed a task force for that purpose, but I didn't know when their work was to begin.....I thought that it was somehow tied to after the special prosecutor had done certain things in this case. Thanks again; I think their work and what they determine will be interesting to follow as much as possible.
You're welcome IMO, it's too broad...I'm curious how other states w/ a SYG law spell it out...I'll have to look it up LOL... Here's one article from the Miami Herald (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/04/30/2776176/independent-task-force-wants-major.html - broken link)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I remember reading that the Gov had appointed a task force for that purpose, but I didn't know when their work was to begin.....I thought that it was somehow tied to after the special prosecutor had done certain things in this case. Thanks again; I think their work and what they determine will be interesting to follow as much as possible.
