<p>If Zimmerman is telling the truth, it makes the instructor look pretty bad that he gave an A to someone who completely missed a fundamental concept…</p>
<p>I don’t think the jury would have any trouble believing that Citizen Judge, Jury & Executioner would be familiar with SYG.</p>
<p>Grading on a curve can do that.</p>
<p>I think the damaging thing about the DNA on the gun is the idea the defense wants to impart that the rain washed all the DNA away. So z has trayvons DNA on himself. But Trayvon has none from z. Interesting</p>
<p>Now you are saying it is an honesty issue. Sorry I, as a lay person, can’t follow all these repeating of yourself stuff. I thought it was more of a possible backlash and a hole that the defense can counter at closing which by then it will be too late to come back with more affirming evidence. Now the prosecutors are trying to mislead? It is possible I guess.</p>
<p>Also z had blood DNA from trayvon</p>
<p>
Or from my car, or chemicals, or anything else I own. Suicides make up about 60% of firearm deaths, homicide another 35%, so accidental firearm deaths make up ~1000 deaths, and that includes hunting accidents and idiots trying to clean a loaded gun, and is spread out over something like 50-100 million households. I am more interested in teaching my kids responsible gun ownership and use than I am concerned that they will disregard everything I teach them and then find a way to pick the lock.</p>
<p>07DAD, I was always under the impression that lack of knowledge of the law (of any law) is not a defense. </p>
<p>Or am I incorrect about that?</p>
<p>Couldn’t we all just claim that yes, we took a Driver’s Ed course, and yes, we passed the course, and yes, we completed the required 60 hours of practice driving, and yes, we also completed an additional 6 hours of practice driving with a driving instructor,and yes, we passed the state written and practical test, BUT we had no knowledge of the law that requires us to come to a complete stop before turning right on red… And use that as a defense when we were charged with killing a pedestrian in a cross walk? </p>
<p>If that was used as a defense would the state have to bring in physical evidence that we had actually encountered that as a test question, or that we had actually been present and listening when that topic was covered?</p>
<p>07DAD, in my experience jurors aren’t stupid. They will get a standard instruction on circumstantial evidence and inferences. Usually the oral argument goes something like: “If you’re in a building and someone walks in with wet shoes and a wet umbrella, it’s reasonable to infer that it’s raining outside. That’s what’s called circumstantial evidence.” The jury will be instructed to use “common sense” in assessing evidence, and that circumstantial evidence is as valid as direct evidence to prove a fact.</p>
<p>“Ask myself why they didn’t go over the dates these things were discussed in that class, and check attendance records? Like this trial didn’t go on long enough with lawyers arguing over stuff that was trivial and obvious enough already? Why is this guy making this stupid argument? Is he trying to distract me from the important stuff in the case? Doesn’t he have anything better to say?”</p>
<p>I would be surprised if the jury had any question as to whether or not GZ was telling the truth in the Hannity interview when he claimed not to know anything about SYG, and if his lawyer makes that argument.</p>
<p>Prosecutors try to lead jurors to a result with what evidence they have. A dishonest prosecutor hides exculpatory evidence that it has, pressures witness to testify a certain way etc. I’ve not seen anything to suggest any dishonesty, that is why they have a hard time because they cannot create evidence to make the proof they do have any more or less tight than it is.</p>
<p>“I am more interested in teaching my kids responsible gun ownership and use than I am concerned that they will find a way to pick the lock.”</p>
<p>But you said over 60% of the deaths are suicides. Kids might want to pick the lock to get an easy mean to commit suicide? Maybe the statistics of kids committing suicide with guns are not very high?</p>
<p>I believe what you are looking for is “Ignorance of the law is no excuse” What the prosecution wants the jury to believe is that GZ is a liar and had actual knowledge of these laws and how they worked.</p>
<p>But cosmic fish, it is not only your own children in your house. Unless you are different than we are. My kids have a lot of friends in and out. </p>
<p>It is what it is. But I can promise you that the adults who’ve screwed this up didn’t PLAN to.</p>
<p>
Suicide OR homicide, it is the psychological state that concerns me, not the means. My best friend committed suicide by gun, but it was not his first attempt nor would it have been his last. </p>
<p>I have smart kids. (I know, don’t we all?) If they are suicidal or homicidal and I cannot tell the difference… I and they are already screwed. The presence of a locked gun in the house is at that point a comparatively small matter.</p>
<p>kluge, do you know if the Hannity interview can be presented as evidence?</p>
<p>“A crime lab analyst testified today that Zimmerman’s DNA was found on the gun, but that no DNA from Martin was on the gun.”</p>
<p>It doesn’t surprise me that GZ DNA is on the gun. It is his gun after all. I would have been surprised if his DNA hadn’t been on the gun or if TM’s DNA had been on the gun.</p>
<p>didn’t the jury see the Hannity interview in court? Isn’t that evidence? What jury does with it is up to them.</p>
<p>
Well aware. But I always know where they are wrt my guns, which are not in any obvious location. If they want to get to my guns, they essentially have to go through me to get to them.</p>
<p>And I know that there is always risk, but the point is that there is always risk and I do not want my children to live in fear of inanimate objects. I want them to understand and respect them.</p>
<p>"It doesn’t surprise me that GZ DNA is on the gun. It is his gun after all. I would have been surprised if his DNA hadn’t been on the gun or if TM’s DNA had been on the gun. "</p>
<p>GZ best friend yesterday testified that GZ told him that TM grabbed the gun. So it would not have been a surprise to me if there is a little bit of TM DNA on the gun. Actually, it would help GZ case if they found some TM DNA on the gun.</p>
<p>"kluge, do you know if the Hannity interview can be presented as evidence? "</p>
<p>The interview was presented to the jury yesterday.</p>
<p>While I didn’t closely follow the Arias and Zimmerman case, I’m wondering if Jodi would be scott free right now if she delivered just one fatal stab to Travis’ heart?</p>