Zimmerman to sue the fuck out of NBC

[Shiranu]

If you say so... I think with Ann Coulter, Ted Nugent and Newt Gingrich are cheering for a position, you really should re-evaluate that position.

Actually, lets just say all of Fox News...

the frenzy of this case was spoonfed by the local media.

And thats for the best; it's good to know that if someone kills all the witnesses, they are therefor innocent.

[Nonsensei]

This is a case of defamation. I assume nobody here is enough of a fucking dickbag to support defamation just because it is being done to someone they don't like.

[Shiranu]

I agree, actually. I just don't see it going anywhere.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

This is a case of defamation. I assume nobody here is enough of a fucking dickbag to support defamation just because it is being done to someone they don't like.

I would like to agree with you, but there are people out there (not necessarily on AF) who think it is perfectly ok to defame a dickbag.

[aitm]

And thats for the best; it's good to know that if someone kills all the witnesses, they are therefor innocent.

your issue should be with the six jurors who heard all the evidence, all the testimony and ruled as such. Did you actually follow this case with the same intensity that they did?

[Shiranu]

...your issue should be with the six jurors who heard all the evidence, all the testimony and ruled as such.

But... that IS who I am upset with?

I really don't think Zimmerman was a bad man, I don't really care what happened to him one way or another because I don't know him. What I don't like is the precedent that it sets, and that is what I have said from the beginning... that this sets a really bad example; get in a fight, and if you murder the only other witness you can just claim self defense!

[aitm]

but they did exactly what they had to do shir, the prosecution didn't have enough to convict the guy and they knew that one year ago.

[Shiranu]

but they did exactly what they had to do shir, the prosecution didn't have enough to convict the guy and they knew that one year ago.

Here is my problem with that:

http://www.alternet.org/stand-your-grou ... e-standard

A woman in Florida shoots the wall to scare off an abusive husband, harming nobody. Guess which one was acquitted? Guess which one was convicted?

On Aug. 1, 2010, Marissa Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three, with a Master's degree and no criminal record, was working for a payroll software company in Jacksonville. She was estranged from her abusive husband, Rico Gray, and had a restraining order against him. Thinking he was not at home, she went to their former house to get some belongings. The two got into an argument. Alexander says that Gray threatened her and she feared for her life. Gray corroborates Alexander's story: "I was in a rage. I called her a whore and bitch and .?.?. I told her... if I can't have you, nobody going to have you,"  he said, in a deposition. When Alexander retreated into the bathroom, Gray tried to break the door. She ran into the garage, but couldn't leave because it was locked.  She came back, he said, with a registered gun, which she legally owned, and yelled at him to leave.  Gray recalls, "I told her... I ain't going nowhere, and so I started walking toward her...I was cursing and all that... and she shot in the air." Even Gray understands why Alexander fired the warning shot: "If my kids wouldn't have been there, I probably would have put my hand on her. Probably hit her. I got five baby mommas and I put my hands on every last one of them, except for one .... I honestly think she just didn't want me to put my hands on her anymore so she did what she feel like she have to do to make sure she wouldn't get hurt, you know. You know, she did what she had to do." And Gray admits Alexander was acting in self-defense, intending to scare and stop but not harm him: "The gun was never actually pointed at me... The fact is, you know .?.?. she never been violent toward me. I was always the one starting it." Ultimately nobody was hurt. Nobody died. On May 12, 2012, it took a jury 12 minutes to find Alexander guilty of aggravated assault. She was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

THIS is self-defense. She gets 20 years in jail after 12 minutes of discussion from the jury.

THIS is why this case pisses me the fuck off; if you are someone the jury likes, you can get away with murder. If you are someone the jury doesn't... even if you DIDN'T EVEN KILL ANYONE... congrats, you just earned yourself 20 years in jail. For LEGITIMATE self-defense.

Florida has terrible case after terrible case after terrible case from juries that, bluntly, vote based on race.

[aileron]

but they did exactly what they had to do shir, the prosecution didn't have enough to convict the guy and they knew that one year ago.

It's easy not to have enough evidence when you can't be bothered to collect it.

[Shiranu]

but they did exactly what they had to do shir, the prosecution didn't have enough to convict the guy and they knew that one year ago.

It's easy not to have enough evidence when you can't be bothered to collect it.

Much easier when the only other witness was the guy you killed.

But all that said, I blame the prosecution far more than I do lack of evidence or anything like that. And again it seems there are just two different sets of mind...

[Colanth]

but they did exactly what they had to do shir, the prosecution didn't have enough to convict the guy and they knew that one year ago.

They didn't need any.  The claim was self defense, an affirmative defense, so the burden of proof was on the defense.  All the prosecution had to do was show up in court.  That was NOT explained to the jury.  (Check the transcript.)  (When you assert an affirmative defense, you're guilty until proven innocent.)

[aileron]

(When you assert an affirmative defense, you're guilty until proven innocent.)

It's true that an affirmative defense places a burden of evidence on the defense, but in a self-defense claim it's not a burden of proof.  It's a lesser burden.  For a self-defense claim to succeed, the defense needs to show only that there's reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant was justified in using deadly force.

[Titania]

Marissa Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three, with a Master's degree and no criminal record, was working for a payroll software company in Jacksonville .... (Gray the husband:) "I ain't going nowhere .... If my kids wouldn't have been there, I probably would have put my hand on her .... I got five baby mommas .... she did what she feel like she have to do .... she never been violent toward me."

Okay, sorry to sidetrack, but what?? Ms. Alexander is a professional with a Master's, and she married... this guy?    There's no accounting for taste, I guess.  :-&  Can I indulge in a little victim-blaming here, please, and you won't hold it against me? The chick got involved with a moron, one who beats women and has knocked up five people, and she thought it could end well?

Also, this case is kinda opposite to your assertion that juries vote based on how likable the defendant is. In this case the defendant was a woman, a respectable productive citizen, and a mother. The "victim" was a man, a confessed beater, a dumbass, and a deadbeat dad. All the biases should have been in the lady's favor but she got convicted anyway.

But all is not lost:

Alexander's story resurfaced because it was a Stand Your Ground case, as was brought up in the Zimmerman case. Many protests by the public and by activists took place in Florida during Alexander's trial, and after, but were to no avail. Now, thanks to the Zimmerman case, there is renewed attention and hope for Alexander. A group of attorneys have come together to appeal for a another trial, along with a new petition, which is gaining momentum.

//http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/15/1223903/-A-Letter-From-Marissa-Alexander-The-Battered-Woman-Serving-20-Years-For-Firing-A-Warning-Shot

Good. Poor lady. Jesus. I'd bust her out of prison myself if I could.

[Shiranu]

The chick got involved with a moron, one who beats women and has knocked up five people, and she thought it could end well?

Women do it all the time, just like men marry gold diggers all the time. Humans are pathetic when it comes to who we fall for.

Also, this case is kinda opposite to your assertion that juries vote based on how likable the defendant is. In this case the defendant was a woman, a respectable productive citizen, and a mother. The "victim" was a man, a confessed beater, a dumbass, and a deadbeat dad. All the biases should have been in the lady's favor but she got convicted anyway.

Likable the suspect is, not necessarily the defendant. She was a productive citizen, but... she was black.

(And yes, race is still a HUGE issue with the American justice system and American culture as a whole).

Alexander's story resurfaced because it was a Stand Your Ground case, as was brought up in the Zimmerman case.

See HBA and aitm (I believe was the other)... the media making huge trials ARE useful.

[hillbillyatheist]

If the media reports on an unfair guilty verdict I'm okay with that.

I'm not okay with the media reporting the names and faces of people accused of crimes, Or those who are declared innocent.

If you're accused of a crime that you didn't do and win in court and they let you go but the sensationalist media gets a hold of the story, then your life is ruined.

I'd rather a few guilty people be protected in their privacy than even one innocent persons name drug through the mud.

Now if a person stands trial and is declared guilty,  and the media thinks its unfair, I'm okay with that because it might free said innocent person.