The Murder of Trayvon Martin

[Phrozen Sands]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Probably not but depending on the actions involved there isn't a legal obligation to abide by the 911 Dispatcher. Yes, what the 911 Dispatcher said can be used in a court of law. Yes, people can say that Zimmerman disobeyed the Dispatcher (which isn't automatically disobeying the law) and therefore got what he deserved.

But, that isn't groundbreaking evidence to lead to a conviction in these types of trials. I keep using Joe Horn as an example but he is someone who was acquitted by a grand jury. He was an idiot who disobeyed the 911 Dispatcher, excitedly went outside with a gun, and shot his neighbor's burglars while saying "bang, bang, you're dead". This was all recorded because he remained on the phone with the 911 Dispatcher. He claimed Stand Your Ground --the 911 Dispatcher's instructions to Horn were not instructions under the law--and Horn remains a free man.

I agree, it isn't groundbreaking evidence, but the prosecutor wasn't on their A-game like they should have been.

Originally Posted by Kevin

3) They have a wrestling match in which all of the evidence showed Martin was on top of Zimmerman getting the better of Zimmerman,

Martin wasn't "Standing his ground"? Zimmerman was the aggressor, not Martin.

Originally Posted by Kevin

So the amount of time they took to deliberate, the request for further instruction on manslaughter, etc., was just an act?

Would it be illegal if it was an act? If all the evidence is pointing to the defense, aren't, most murder cases based on an act to convince the jury to give their clients a lesser sentence or to get them off the hook? Based on my observation, it happened in the Casey Anthony case, it happened with OJ, it happened with Jodi Arias, and it happened in this case too.