The defense has already said they aren't using stand your ground (Trayvon was on top of George preventing him from retreating) but they haven't given up self-defense immunity. My guess is that the defense is going to fight being committed to when they choose to assert self-defense immunity. MOM has suggested maybe during trial and maybe after if it becomes necessary for civil immunity. I think the judge can only limit how much time a defendant has to request and hear a pre-trial motion. But IANAL. I'm not sure if the judge can refuse to hear an immunity motion during trial unless it was already denied pretrial. I'm still very confused about it all. I don't feel bad though. Most lawyers seem very confused as well.

IMO the defense doesn't have to have an immunity hearing before trial in order to use some of the elements at trial as a defense. MOM has already passed on the hearing. The state wants everything about immunity kept out of the trial.

Bernie doesn't want that in the hands of the jury.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/29/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE93S0B920130429?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews

Prosecutors asked Judge Debra Nelson in a motion to remind Zimmerman "that should defendant in fact wish to waive any pre-trial immunity challenge under this statute, he may not attempt to do so later, particularly once trial has commenced."

Zimmerman will attend Tuesday's hearing, according to his lawyer, Mark O'Mara. However, O'Mara told Reuters he hadn't decided what he will do if the judge tries to question his client.

"I know the state would like to have that information, it seems. I don't feel compelled to advise anybody of my strategy in this case," O'Mara said


O'Mara couldn't request an immunity hearing once the trial has started, but he could bring up elements as a defense. The state wants to stop that. Should be a very interesting hearing tomorrow. IMO

anyone here besides me ever look at the police report for Emmanuel Burgess he was arrested the day after Trayvons birthday and was caught in between RTL and Colonial Village when he ran he cut through Colonial Village which is also the place I believe Trayvon came in from on the way back from 7-11. Lots of things went missing due to Burgess lots of jewelry.

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/files/ ... eports.pdf

_________________
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."

"If a man talks in a forest, and there is no woman there to hear him.

Is he still wrong?"

Too bad I don't know what was taken off Trayvon when he was at school cause that police report details a lot of jewelry.

_________________
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."

"If a man talks in a forest, and there is no woman there to hear him.

Is he still wrong?"

Juries don't decide immunity. A jury will not even hear a discussion of immunity, but rather only the affirmative self-defense.

Per Peterson v State (2006) (PDF), the legislative intent of the immunity statute is to avoid prosecution altogether. Immunity is explicitly not a form of affirmative defense. Per Peterson, Immunity is to be determined by the trial court, via pre-trial evidentiary hearing.

From my reading of the relevant case law, O'Mara is taking a calculated risk. By missing the trial court judge's established deadline to file a Motion for Declaration of immunity, the court can deny any later filing of such a motion, and the appellate court would not provide relief, as it would affirm the trial court judge's denial on appeal. Nelson could agree to accept a later-filed motion, or could agree to roll the immunity hearing into the trial (somehow). The State could object (though I don't see any grounds on which for the State to do so), and it would be up to Nelson to decide. Based on the case law, the appellate court will very likely support whatever decision Nelson makes in that regard.

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

The State can't stop the defense from using affirmative self-defense. Only a bare minimum of evidence is required in order for the defense to receive self-defense jury instructions - and those instructions say, basically: unless the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant could NOT have been acting in self-defense, you must find the defendant not guilty.

But I think that the immunity hearing ship will sail tomorrow, one way or the other. I think Nelson will make the defense state its intentions (and based on relevant case law, that is appropriate).

_________________
"That the attacker sustained a mortal wound is a matter that should have been considered by the deceased before he committed himself to the task he undertook." - 5th DCA, Stinson v. State (Fl)

I remember the Anderson death and trial very well. I don't think Crump is or was ever a Defense Attorney. Was he in on the Civil Suit? The Defense Attorney was a Walter Smith and I think a Public Defender. The Prison quards and nurse were overcharged with aggrivated Manslauder. They did not mean to kill the 14 year old but infact they did. Martin Anderson did not deserve to die. As an RN and6 year Correctional Nurse, I found the nurse at the incident totally inappropriate in her assessment of Anderson condition and her behavior appalling. Having been in thousands of medical situation with Correctional Officers, never once did they not defer to the medical judgment of the Medical Staff. She could have and should have stopped the Officer's treatment of Anderson. I think the COs got caught up in the drama of the situation. I found the nurse primarly at fault for not stopping the COs when the 14 year old had symptoms including SOB. I was shocked when the group was found Not Quilty, equally shocked when poor Cynthia Summers was found Quilty. Thankfully, Cynthia was eventually proven Not Quilty of the charges.

Zimmerman will attend hearing Tuesday

George Zimmerman will attend a hearing Tuesday morning to clarify his position on asking for immunity under Florida's "stand your ground" law.

His defense team tells WESH 2 they have no intention of giving up the right to seek immunity

http://m.wesh.com/news/zimmerman-will-a ... index.html

BBM - And we wonder why there's confusion

Which proves an earlier point..... supposedly reputable media continue to reference SYG... it's still WRONG even when you read it in a news report!

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

That's just one of many things they still get wrong. It's amazing when you read the comments following many articles, how much misinformation is out there. Read the comments following this article:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/george ... index.html

First comment quotes Talk Left on immunity hearing. Second comment is from reporter Tony Pipitone.

"Interesting. Thanks for some facts."

Just shows you how much time they put in investigating the facts.

I am going to try to setup an audio stream of the hearing tomorrow. What is the best channel on the TV to get the the best audio? I know we don't like Court TV but I am thinking that might be the most reliable. I won't be around to change the channel if I don't pick a good source.

This is from Jeralyn Merritt:



SideNote:
The easiest way to look at this is that with SYG, there is no duty to retreat. With 776.032, that addresses the issue that Zimmerman couldn't retreat since he was on his back. Thus Self-Defense. I figure the combo of 776.032/776.012

ALL the video streaming sites seem similar - same feed.

Two that I have watched last few hearings

WFTV http://www.wftv.com/s/news/trayvonmartin/

Click Orlando http://www.clickorlando.com/news/trayvo ... index.html

You will have to shag about close to hearing time to get the actual link

For actual TV broadcast... You are on your own..... HLN is a good place to start

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

I would donate for this:
http://www.instantventrilo.com/ventrilo ... prices.php

I have used them before over at Hinky and the big + is that we can talk to each other live during hearings and trial. They give you one month free no questions asked about money.

This one is my favorite.
http://www.wesh.com/

Do you think HLN will show the whole thing? That would be my only concern.

Don't HLN also cut in with inane commentary and ads?

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Deb




Sounds reasonable to me. I have always found Jeralyn Merritt very smart and she is an attorney.

You don't understand what I'm saying. I give up.

ETA The state just wants to find out what O'Mara's strategy is going to be. They are worried. IMO.

What is that? Basically a Teamspeak server? I believe anyone can host a Teamspeak server for free. If they have the bandwidth.

http://support.teamspeakusa.com/index.p ... eamspeak-3