Law of Self Defense Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:12 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:12 PM Hey folks, I just wanted to drop a note to let you know I'm covering the George Zimmerman trial down in Florida for one of the internet's largest legal blogs, Legal Insurrection. Some of you may know me as a lawyer with a practice specializing in the law of self defense, others as that guy who shoots the IDPA matches wearing a suit jacket along with his cargo pants. In any case, if you're tired of the incredibly biased mainstream media coverage (or should I call it mis-coverage) of the Zimmerman case, consider taking a look at my coverage of the trial and analysis of the legal issues, all from the perspective of a gun guy who has CCW'd every day of his adult life. It is, of course, all entirely free, and Legal Insurrection doesn't sell anything. Past coverage (up through last night's daily wrap-up post) can be found here: http://bit.ly/15KXK1a Today's live coverage will be added to that list when Court goes into session at 9AM. Thanks for your consideration! Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C0untZer0 Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:45 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:45 PM Some of you may know me as a lawyer with a practice specializing in the law of self defense, others as that guy who shoots the IDPA matches wearing a suit jacket along with his cargo pants. Uh... No. But I will check out the coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjames Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:53 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 12:53 PM Some of you may know me as a lawyer with a practice specializing in the law of self defense, others as that guy who shoots the IDPA matches wearing a suit jacket along with his cargo pants. Uh... No. Ha ha. Kind of like... "Troy McClure: Hi, I'm Troy McClure. You might remember me from such self-help videos as "Smoke Yourself Thin", and "Get Confident, Stupid."." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted June 11, 2013 at 01:15 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 01:15 PM Andrew!!! How wonderful to know one of our IllinoisCarry members is covering this story first hand! We will definitely check out the website! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhawk99 Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:09 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:09 PM Thanks Andrew, I will be following your unbiased updates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooch Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:39 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:39 PM Thanks for the heads up Andrew. I will definitely visit the site to keep up on the trial. Gooch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangari1 Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:48 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:48 PM Thanks for the heads up Andrew. I will definitely visit the site to keep up on the trial. x2Thanks Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:49 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 02:49 PM Has anyone gone to the site yet? The url being weird, and from a brand new member makes me leery. I like my URLs something more like. www.thisisascam.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly B. Posted June 11, 2013 at 03:03 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 03:03 PM Has anyone gone to the site yet? The url being weird, and from a brand new member makes me leery. I like my URLs something more like. www.thisisascam.com Uh, Andrew joined us nearly three years ago - 2010. Yes, been to the website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 11, 2013 at 03:13 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 03:13 PM I see the date, but I also see a really low post count and a non-descript web address. I also assume everything on the internet to be a scam until verified. It keeps me safer! *This is not to disparrage Andrew, but I am not comfortable just clicking on anything until verified. Thanks Molly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarandFan Posted June 11, 2013 at 04:27 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 04:27 PM Thanks Andrew! For those who are ignorant on this (that's you, TyGuy), Andrew Branca is good people. The Real McCoy. And Legal Insurrection is an excellent blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoYouFeelLucky Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:17 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:17 PM Thanks for the coverage! I keep wondering how important evidence is going to be in this trial versus we have to convict him because that's the agenda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Redmond Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:22 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:22 PM Cool, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtr100 Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:27 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:27 PM thanks for the links does the trial really matter in this case? I can't see them letting Zim walk regardless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnfran Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:48 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 06:48 PM Thanks Andrew! Its good to see a side of this without the definte media bias... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:14 PM Author Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:14 PM Some of you may know me as a lawyer with a practice specializing in the law of self defense, others as that guy who shoots the IDPA matches wearing a suit jacket along with his cargo pants. Uh... No. But I will check out the coverage. Ha, ha, well I DID say "some" of you. In any case, now you do, too. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:16 PM Author Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:16 PM Thanks Andrew! Its good to see a side of this without the definte media bias... With that massive misinformation/propaganda machine rolled out by the Martin family's lawyers, I figured someone ought to stick to actual facts in reporting on the case. Half the prospective jurors screened so far have a recollection that Trayvon Martin was a "child" or "kid" when he was killed, and many others that Zimmerman "chased him down like a rabid dog." They've been amazingly effective at poisoning the jury pool. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Getzapped Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:20 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:20 PM Has anyone gone to the site yet? The url being weird, and from a brand new member makes me leery. I like my URLs something more like. www.thisisascam.comits just a shortened url. Bitly.com or tinyurl.com. You take a long url and put it in the website and it shortens it to something more manageable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtr100 Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:22 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:22 PM Thanks Andrew! Its good to see a side of this without the definte media bias... With that massive misinformation/propaganda machine rolled out by the Martin family's lawyers, I figured someone ought to stick to actual facts in reporting on the case. Half the prospective jurors screened so far have a recollection that Trayvon Martin was a "child" or "kid" when he was killed, and many others that Zimmerman "chased him down like a rabid dog." They've been amazingly effective at poisoning the jury pool. Andrew is is it looking like Zimm is going down regardless of the facts and the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:22 PM Author Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:22 PM I see the date, but I also see a really low post count and a non-descript web address. I also assume everything on the internet to be a scam until verified. It keeps me safer! *This is not to disparrage Andrew, but I am not comfortable just clicking on anything until verified. Thanks Molly! No offense taken, TyGuy, I totally understand. I use the shortened link because I also do a lot of communication using my smartphone and things like Twitter where it really helps to keep things brief. The full url for the Legal Insurrection web site is: www.legalinsurrection.com. It's one of the largest, if not the largest, law-centered blogs out there, with a pleasantly non-left tilt despite being run by a Professor of Law from Cornell University, Bill Jacobson. If you go there and scroll around a bit you're sure to see one of my posts, I do at least one or two a day. To go directly to today's live coverage post you can click here: http://legalinsurrec...l-day-coverage/ Or to go to a list of a half-dozen or so of my most recent posts on the Zimmerman case you can click here: http://legalinsurrec...f-self-defense/ So, there you go--full-length URLs. (There's probably a guide rod joke in there somewhere, but it's not coming to me.) Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:23 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:23 PM I am well aware of tinyurl.com, but again I just have a skeptical eye against things posted on the internet. I wanted to try and keep others safe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:24 PM Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:24 PM Thanks for the updates. Again, it wasn't a slam against the OP, just wanted to verify before clicking on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:28 PM Author Share Posted June 11, 2013 at 07:28 PM is is it looking like Zimm is going down regardless of the facts and the law? Too early to tell. SImple truth is there's not a shred of evidence I've yet seen (and I've seen everything that's been released through discovery to date) to suggest anything other than that Zimmerman acted in lawful self defense. Based on the evidence this would be an easy lay-up for Florida's immunity state, and a grand-stand home run for a not guilty verdict--to get guilty, on the evidence, the prosecution would have to disprove some element of the self defense statute beyond a reasonable doubt, and unanimously convince all 6 jurors of that. On the evidence, no way. And that's not even considering that they've charged Zimmerman with murder 2, which is also completely unsupportable on the facts. Manslaughter would be all but impossible to prove, no way to get to murder 2, requiring a "depraved mind". On the evidence. The trouble is this is really all political theater now, and most of the actors are playing roles and seeking goals that have little or nothing to do with Zimmerman's guilt or innocence. Frankly, most of them will accomplish their personal objectives even if Zimmerman is acquitted--it's the noise and fury they're looking for, or the civil suite money, or a taller political profile for seeking future office, not an actual conviction. Oops, Court's back in session, have to run. Andrew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:33 PM Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:33 PM Why has it been so delayed in going to trial? Is that the doing of the defense or the prosecution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:45 PM Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:45 PM Why has it been so delayed in going to trial? Is that the doing of the defense or the prosecution? The prosecution has persistently slow-rolled discovery, and/or effectively hidden discovery such that the defense comes upon it much later than should be the case. In fact, this conduct has been so egregious that the defense has sought sanctions against the State--after a partial hearing Judge Nelson decided to leave that matter until after the trial is concluded--a very odd decision when the accusation of misconduct centers on delayed or hidden evidence that would naturally be needed during the trial. Just last week the prosecution dumped another batch of discovery on the defense, including thousands of pictures, and even as of today one of the State's expert witnesses, Dr. Reich, has yet to submit his final findings to the defense. Because of this the defense has repeatedly submitted motions for a continuance, including this past Monday when they told the judge "we're just not ready for trial," and she has denied every motion. Interestingly, the denial of a motion for a continuance that is reasonably requested is frequently ruled on appeal to be abuse of discretion by the trial judge, and cause by itself for reversal of a conviction. The defendant is entitled to a fair trial and real due process, not a rushed kangaroo court. FYI, my summary of yesterday's Zimmerman trial jury selection can be found here:http://legalinsurrec...-two-wrap-up-2/ Some interesting characters among those prospective jurors, including a woman with a one-winged pet crow, an African-American who refers to O'Reilly and Hannity as "Bill" and "Shaun", and a young woman who gets all here news information--ALL of it--from Facebook and who wants to make sure sitting on the jury won't interfere with her planned summer trip to Dubai. My live, all-day coverage of today's (Day 3) Zimmerman jury selection can be found here:http://legalinsurrec...l-day-coverage/ Andrew@LawSelfDefense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:54 PM Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 02:54 PM News from FB? Oh brother. I guess those moves really bother me. The prosecution could destroy your life (money, sanity, and just your life in general) by causing the trial to take so long. Is there any recompense for such abuses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:03 PM Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:03 PM News from FB? Oh brother. I guess those moves really bother me. The prosecution could destroy your life (money, sanity, and just your life in general) by causing the trial to take so long. Is there any recompense for such abuses? Not unless there's misconduct, which seems likely in this case, frankly, given the State's slow-roll and/or hiding of discovery. Usually the sanctions are punishment against the misbehaving prosecutor, such as disbarment, rather than a financial compensation for the defendant, but misconduct on such an egregious scale as seen here is so rare that I'm frankly not familiar with how the judicial system might handle it. Andrew@LawSelfDefense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyb82 Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:08 PM Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:08 PM Yes, if he is acquitted or convicted and his conviction is subsequently dumped and the DA chooses to not refile. He'll be going after NBC first. That's what I'd do. He MIGHT be able to go after the DA for malicious prosecution, usually DAs have absolute immunity but this would be a great test case. The Martin family would not be immune from the wrath of the tort lawyer either. Defamation suit alleging slander, libel, libel per se. Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Law of Self Defense Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:14 PM Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:14 PM Yes, if he is acquitted or convicted and his conviction is subsequently dumped and the DA chooses to not refile. He'll be going after NBC first. That's what I'd do. He MIGHT be able to go after the DA for malicious prosecution, usually DAs have absolute immunity but this would be a great test case. The Martin family would not be immune from the wrath of the tort lawyer either. Defamation suit alleging slander, libel, libel per se. Careful there. An acquittal isn't the same thing as being found "innocent," and therefore prove that the accusations against Zimmerman were false, such that he'd automatically have a open-and-shut case against the Martin family for libel, etc. Criminal trials don't find anybody "innocent". They find you "Guilty", or "Not Guilty," which really just mean "Not Proven Guilty." It merely means that the prosecution failed to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence could have been 60% against the defendant, or 70%, or 80%--all more than sufficient to lose him a civil suit--and he'd still be found "Not Guilt" in criminal court. Regardless, it seems likely that the Martins don't have enough money to make the effort worthwhile, and in any case living in Florida they will have many ways their assets from a civil judgment (that's why OJ moved down there). Andrew@LawSelfDefense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyGuy Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:14 PM Share Posted June 12, 2013 at 03:14 PM So, even if you are acquitted you could have your life ruined without any ability to recovery? That stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.