Meet the Judge Who Drew George Zimmerman’s Case
The Florida judge assigned to George Zimmerman’s case is among the newest on the circuit court’s bench, but former colleagues and adversaries say Jessica Recksiedler’s previous life as a tough-as-nails trial lawyer and prosecutor makes her a good fit for what could be one of the highest-profile trials in recent memory.

After graduating Stetson University College of Law, she spent about two years as a state prosecutor in Florida’s Ninth Judicial Circuit, leaving for private practice in 1998. Judge Recksiedler, 39, was elected to the bench in 2010.

“Her main claim to fame is she knows her way around the courtroom,” said Paul Thompson, her former law partner at Thompson & Evangelo in Altamonte Springs, Fla.

Thompson’s firm handles insurance defense and personal injury cases, and Judge Recksiedler handled both during her time there.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/04/12/...mermans-case/#

Attorney for George Zimmerman seeks judge's recusal

Sanford neighborhood watch volunteers charged with second-degree murder
SANFORD, Fla. -
The attorney for George Zimmerman, who's charged with murder in the death of Trayvon Martin, said he will likely filing a motion for the judge to recuse herself from the case because of a possible conflict of interest.
During a 10-minute status hearing that was held Friday in Seminole County, attorney Mark O'Mara said the filing of the motion to have Circuit Court Judge Jessica Recksiedler removed may be "imminent."

O'Mara became Zimmerman's attorney after being recommended by attorney Mark NeJame, who was contacted by Zimmerman's family. Recksiedler's husband works at NeJame's law firm.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/Attorne...i/-/index.html

George Zimmerman judge: My husband works for a lawyer who'll do case commentary for CNN
SANFORD – The judge hearing the George Zimmerman case today announced that her husband works for the law firm of Mark NeJame, who's been hired to act as a CNN analyst for this case.

Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler said she had an ethical obligation to disclose that and allow Zimmerman's attorney or the special prosecutor to ask her to step down.

No one's made that request yet, but Zimmerman's attorney, Mark O'Mara, said that's an issue that worries him and next week he may ask her to give the case to another judge.

The judge scheduled the 10-minute hearing on her own, specifically to tell attorneys about the issue.

Zimmerman did not appear. Neither did the attorneys, who were tied into the courtroom by phone.

When Zimmerman and his family were looking for a lawyer, O'Mara told the judge, they talked to NeJame and even signed paperwork. NeJame, however, decided he'd rather be a case analyst for CNN, O'Mara said.
http://www.cltv.com/news/os-george-z...,3434387.story

Yes, you're absolutely right. No one made any assumptions about Casey Anthony prior to her trial. Seriously, no one talked about the case at all. It totally happened in a vacuum.

Of course, it's pretty near impossible to put a sweet looking dead toddler on trial in the court of public opinion, so perhaps the character attacks on a teenager who is not here to defend himself are included the "half-assed reporting" you're referring to in the Martin case.

I think one of the concerns that TonyB06 is raising is "why now?" Of course, the answer to that is "we can't change everything but we can change this."

However, it goes back to what I was saying in previous posts. Consistency in "no rush to judgment" and "(public /media/legal treatment of) innocent until proven guilty" gives those more credibility rather than it being perceived as subjective. I do remember, for example, those Casey Anthony threads.

The Zimmerman Circus: The Latest from LIONEL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVyASDWnKsY

And yes, Lionel is a radio personality. He also has a rather interesting back-story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_...personality%29
http://lionelmedia.com/
He is also a Brother of Sigma Alpha Epsilon.

Truth, and I actually mostly agree with Tony raising that question. This case is something of a window into race in modern America, and the difference between a white infant (possibly just "infant") and black teenager as victim can't be ignored.

None of those things, though, change the fact that elements of public discourse on this specific case are somewhat out of control, or that the case itself (and the public) could benefit from a dose of rational thought.

Yes, as long as people don't conveniently forget that discourse control and dose of rational thought when it suits them for another incident or case.

Of course, they will so I will be sitting in the Ivory Tower with a glass of wine, looking down on the masses and scoffing at the predictable inconsistencies of life. :p

Pretty much. Obviouly the facts at issue are different, but in the larger sense this case is no different than many others that have been speculated on and discussed on GC. Most posters have sense enough to weigh information, seek out more if they wish, post/not post if they wish, and arrive at fairly logical conclusions.

Cable outlets of varying political influence have legal "experts" speculating, often contradictorily, on the latest information/developments. But somehow the Republic will apparently crumble and fall if folks weigh in on Greekchat. Who knew?

Agree with both of you.


side rant:

Am I the only person who, when a poster basically does nothing but post excerpts of and links to articles, pretty much ignores those posts? I mean, we all link to articles we find interesting or informative from time to time, but c'mon. Don't just be a Google News Alert. -- at least if you think the article is worth reading, tell us why. Offer your own opinion. Engage in discussion.

/side rant

I have an RSS feed, I don't need another one (and one that I don't control, at that).

However, others may appreciate the information - I don't think it's particularly granular or well-selected in most cases, though. More of a fire hose.

Jesus.. hyperbolic much?

The Republic will be fine. Whether we continue to have a positive opinion of TonyB06 and others is what's at issue here.

As to MC's & RC's points, agreed. The cut/pastes done by many here are from questionable sources at best. The mainstream media started with a narrative here, i.e., race was definitely a factor, Martin was an innocent kid with some skittles, Zimmerman is a rat bastard, etc. None of that has actually been established. The state's burden is high but not insurmountable. We'll see.

That said, I don't really think there's much more to talk about in this case. The media circus and the portrayal of the narrative have become much bigger than the actual case.

The question I have, and maybe an attorney may know more than I know on this, but shouldn't Zimmerman have gotten charged for 1st degree murder instead of 2nd degree? I thought there was some shady shit with that.

Revelations From the Zimmerman Affidavit
The case will likely hinge on the testimony of one key witness: the young woman who was on the phone with Trayvon Martin as it all happened.
Andrew Cohen - Andrew Cohen is a contributing editor at The Atlantic and legal analyst for 60 Minutes. He is also chief analyst and legal editor for CBS Radio News and has won a Murrow Award as one of the nation's leading legal analysts and commentators

And on the 45th day we finally learned something.
From the short "Affidavit of Probable Cause -- Second Degree Murder," made public late Thursday by state prosecutors, we now know that Florida believes that George Zimmerman was chasing after Trayvon Martin just before he shot the unarmed teenager to death. This means we know that Florida officials believe that Martin was, indeed, talking on his cellphone with a friend at the time of the altercation. It means we know that officials do not believe Zimmerman's reported story that Martin attacked him from behind.
It means, in turn, that prosecutors and police believe that Martin's friend, the young woman on the other end of that fateful phone call, is credible and will be believed by both judge and jury. It means the prosecutor believes that this testimony can help overcome the state's stout self-defense law. And it also means that a case about race will ultimately become a "he said, she said" story when Zimmerman and his attorneys move to dismiss the charge against him based upon Florida's "Stand Your Ground" justifiable homicide law.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...it/255830/#bio

The prosecutor didn't take it to the Grand Jury. Under Florida law, the maximum a prosecutor can charge without a Grand Jury is Murder in the 2nd Degree. The only difference is that with Murder in the First Degree, it has to be shown that the killing was done with malice aforethought--essentially, that means that the murder was premeditated.

Your question has been covered by several reports. I would suggest reading some of stories of the past few days. IIRC Lionel did a segment or two on matter this week.

Oh gag me with a spoon. Please re-read my posts.

What character attacks are you talking about? Martin getting expelled or suspended from school? Given the context I think it's perfectly acceptable to bring that up. I mean, if a speeding ticket from 2006 is supposed to convince the public of Zimmerman's tendencies towards violence, then it's only natural that Martin's past comes into play as well.

And do you not think the media half assed this? I take it you're clueless about the edited 911 tapes? Hell, even Jon Stewart was ragging on the media's role in this case the other night on The Daily Show.

Pssst Jon Stewart is not admissable in a court of public opinion :D

Oh but Nancy Grace is??? :eek: The last segment with the animal clips is PRICELESS!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zxAAmJZuJ8

I will allow it....hehehe

Is anyone here familiar with the case of John McNeil in Georgia? I'm curious if all this attention to the Stand Your Ground laws will bring his case back to light.

Never followed it in the first place, but I'm not expecting a totally fair treatment from an editorial on salon.com. A jury voted to convict and the highest Georgia court of appeals only had one dissent from the majority which upheld the conviction.

What did that jury and court of appeals see which wasn't presented in these articles? It wouldn't be the first case of the media attempting to mislead in order to get page clicks and viewers in a racially charged story (even if the media has to fan the flames a bit to turn it into a controversy).

This sounds terrible. I have to wonder how closely the Georgia statute tracks to the horrible Fla. law. There has to be something more than what's been reported here. Letters, some of them anonymous, led a DA to take this action?

Ultimately, despite its claim to the contrary, the legal process is as subject to infection by politics, race, money and other factors, as any other.

I had not followed this story either. So I took a few seconds Kevin to do a rather fast search on it outside of Salon (which YVHO seems to be less than perfect source of informantion)
Based on following, maybe worth some time looking into as a parrell case to Zimmerman and Martin.
Stand Your Ground: Before Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, there was John McNeil

http://www.republicmagazine.com/news...hn-mcneil.html

Is John McNeil the Black George Zimmerman?
http://loop21.com/life/john-mcneil-g...orge-zimmerman

You do know that Republic Magazine is not in fact New Republic Magazine, right?

KSig RC: not at all too sure what to make of your posting. Not that it really matters to me.
All I was indicating was that several posters or postings perked up my interest in John McNeil's case enough to do a fast, quick, down and dirty search on it. And that was enough to place it on my list of things to follow-up on when I have some time to do so.

Two rather interesting, well written and long articles on the back-stories and back-histories of the NRA and Gun Control:
Trayvon Martin and America's Gun Laws:
Battleground America One nation, under the gun
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...urrentPage=all

The Secret History of Guns
The Ku Klux Klan, Ronald Reagan, and, for most of its history, the NRA all worked to control guns. The Founding Fathers? They required gun ownership-and regulated it. And no group has more fiercely advocated the right to bear loaded weapons in public than the Black Panthers-the true pioneers of the modern pro-gun movement. In the battle over gun rights in America, both sides have distorted history and the law, and there's no resolution in sight.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-of-guns/8608/

The Real Injustice at the Heart of the Trayvon Martin Case-Did George Zimmerman Break the Law?
http://www.thenation.com/article/167...on-martin-case

What you posted was an abominably sourced and insanely biased "rundown" - something that was borderline intellectually dishonest. The New Republic is a fairly well-regarded magazine, while the site you posted is a bizarre tea party-oriented opinion site. I figured you thought you'd posted something from a real news source - my bad.

I was surprised to see you bump this thread today with something that literally calls the question ("Did he break the law?") instead of the most important leak in the case to date (the photo of the bloody back of Zimmerman's head).

I see why it would be 2nd degree murder now. At first, I was confused on the two.

Simple: No one, no story, no article, no pundit has been able to move me from Zimmerman becoming the only pure aggressor once he made his own mind up to leave his truck. To me, everything else that happened, that occurred is the result of that one conscious decision of Zimmerman's. Or what that wonderful phase from may an old cop show "Fruit of the poisonous vine" Which in turn would make Martin the only one standing his ground IF he was, it fact and truth, doing any sort of attacking. Or simply defending himself against someone attacking him with a visible gun. We could ague this but lets all see what the circus brings to town next ;>%

I actually agree with your sentiment, for the most part, but I'm just not sure how it aligns with Florida law, specifically with how jurors (on average) interpret those types of law.

I agree, also, that there's likely more to come ... hopefully it can be handled in a civil and positive manner. Also, I appreciate this bit of insight from you - the links are fine in and of themselves, but it's generally more interesting and useful to get an opinion based on them. Thanks, it's an interesting one.

My understanding of Stand you Ground is that once someone becomes the "aggressor", they stay the "aggressor". Even when/if they start to lose the very "fight" they started. In other words, one can not flip-flop and claim to be to aggrieved if they lose the fight they started. Or in this case, perhaps, self-defense/protecting ones own life after making a threat on another.

I saw the photos of Zimmerman's "bloody head." I still call bullshit. If he truly followed Martin then it is perhaps the case that Martin thought he was running from, and eventually beating the shit out of, an aggressor (Zimmerman). I think Martin probably thought that he was defending himself. So, Zimmerman being made out to be the self-defender WITH A DAMN GUN is complete bullshit. Martin may have had every right to break his nose (if that happened) and beat his head into the ground. Perhaps Zimmerman was losing the fight and shot the gun. I would not even doubt that Zimmerman brought out the gun earlier on than he is claiming and Martin beat the shit out of him to escape the wrath of the gun.

We shall see what happens in this case. Innocent until proven guilty and all of that. I pray that there isn't a Trayvon Martin Riot if the public disagrees with the outcome of this trial.

Yet another reason why Stand Your Ground is complete nonsense. These laws and policies should not be based on individuals' understandings. They should not be used as an extreme version of self-defense. They should not be used for "I started this fight but this person is a better fighter than I am...oh yaay...I have a gun." It should not be used for "the police are slow as hell, let me shoot my neighbor's burglars."

Here is another case involving, perhaps, the other side of the coin:
Tonight on AC360: Stand your ground law under scrutiny in domestic violence case
Editor's note: Don't miss Gary Tuchman's interview with Marissa Alexander at 8 and 10 p.m. ET tonight on AC360°.
Marissa Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three, pleaded for her freedom as an inmate in the Duval County Jail in Jacksonville, Florida.
"This is my life I'm fighting for," she said while wiping away tears. She added, "If you do everything to get on the right side of the law, and it is a law that does not apply to you, where do you go from there?"
Alexander is referring to Florida's so-called 'stand your ground' law, a law that has come under scrutiny since the killing of Trayvon Martin. Unlike the Martin case, which involved one stranger killing another, Alexander's case involved her gun and her abusive husband.
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/2...n=1&hpt=ac_bn1

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/24/justic...law/index.html

LIONEL PODCAST: Have You Heard the One About Marissa Alexander?
Explain the difference(s). Marissa Alexander faces a minimum mandatory 20 years in the hoosegow over firing a round into the ceiling of her home. Oh, I forgot to mention, her husband and two stepsons were present and claim she trained the weapon on them first. They also claim she was the aggressor. And did I mention she had a carry permit for her gun?
Is it about race? The local NAACP chapter President is in her corner and vehemently suggests that Stand Your Ground (SYG) should be implemented to acquit her. Big Ange Corey, that’s right, that Big Ange, opposes any such leniency, dismissal of charges or new trial, The jury has spoken.
So what gives? Welcome to the world of big time law, kids. A million cases, a million decisions. One law.
So what do I do now? Thank Zeus you’re not Marissa Alexander and enjoy the podcast.
http://www.podjockey.com/lionelmedia...ssa-alexander/

Marissa Alexander: A Reverse Trayvon Martin?
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor...ter_socialflow

I find it interesting that the major news outlets are not covering the story about Matthew Owens being nearly beaten to death.

http://www2.wkrg.com/news/2012/apr/2...on-ar-3659891/

This is big news in Alabama.

Perhaps it is due to who/what I follow, but I have seen story on both my twitter and Facebook feeds.
And somethings it does take some time-Martin/Zimmerman took a the very least a week, if not even more, to go National.

Zimmerman mugshot in Skittles
 

I saw this and thought it was interesting.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_20...-into-skittles

Seems as if there are more cases that have gotten "over-looked" until now:
Black Man’s Killing in Georgia Eludes Spotlight
LYONS, Ga. — Norman Neesmith was sleeping in his home on a rural farm road here in onion country when a noise woke him up.
He grabbed the .22-caliber pistol he kept next to his bed and went to investigate. He found two young brothers who had been secretly invited to party with an 18-year-old relative he had raised like a daughter and her younger friend. The young people were paired up in separate bedrooms. There was marijuana and sex.
Over the course of the next confusing minutes on a January morning in 2011, there would be a struggle. The young men would make a terrified run for the door. Mr. Neesmith, who is 62 and white, fired four shots. One of them hit Justin Patterson, who was 22 and black.
The bullet pierced his side, and he died in Mr. Neesmith’s yard. His younger brother, Sha’von, then 18, ran through the onion fields in the dark, frantically trying to call his mother.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/us...eorgia.html?hp

"Over-looked" how? We can't have a media circus around every shooting in this country, there just isn't enough hours in the day to allow it.

And this maybe the end of it:
His Own Neighbor! Arrest Made In Trayvon Martin Beating Case (VIDEO)


Mobile, Alabama police have made an arrest in the beating case of Matthew Owens, as 44-year-old Terry Rawls surrendered to authorities on assault charges.

According to Corporal Chris Levy of the Mobile Police Department:

"This here is an ongoing dispute with neighbors, that's what this is."

The story between Owens and Rawls goes deeper, as police say the tension between the two neighbors have been escalating for three years. In fact, police say Rawls has attacked Owens before, but charges were never filed because they say Owens instigated it.


Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/arrest-m...#ixzz1tAKVQ6B2Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/arrest-m...#ixzz1tAKN246V

http://blog.al.com/live/2012/04/arre...eating_of.html

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/0...d-with-victim/