<p>poetgrl–Unless Z testifies, it is a surmise whether Z in fact told a surrogate anything. </p>
<p>Witness examination outside the presence of the jurors. “Didn’t Z tell you _______?” “Well, no I actually did not get this straight from Z. I thought I heard someone say that probably ---------.” Hearsay objection sustained.</p>
<p>Okay, so if his family runs around saying all sorts of things, it does not become “evidence” that he himself was lying? This is what I am assuming.</p>
<p>Once the trial begins, then the jurors are only able to consider the evidence actually admitted into the trial. Right?</p>
<p>That’s what happened with the Casey Anthony trial, imho. When I watched it, and only listened to what was being allowed as evidence, I did “see” how they could acquit. So, we should not assume that everything we have heard will even be a part of the evidence.</p>
<p>I predict they will get manslaughter unless there are forensics which decimate Z’s defense, which there could well be. I think only forensics will get them Murder2.</p>
<p>Maybe I’m being too trusting, but I got the impression that both the prosecutor and the defense lawyer are trying to do the right thing. Clearly, they are on different sides, and it is the job of the defense lawyer to present evidence and interpretation that is most favorable to Z, but I don’t think he is going to do anything dishonorable, like try to trash Trayvon’s reputation and imply that he “deserved” to be shot. Similarly, I don’t think the prosecutor is going to try to get Z convicted of something she doesn’t believe that he did.</p>
<p>This is off Pam Bondi’s website. Bondi is the Florida Attorney General.</p>
<p>An Overview of the Legal System
The process begins when a victim, or one having knowledge of a crime, files a sworn statement with the proper authority known as a complaint. Once a complaint has been investigated, and the complaint is found to have probable cause, a crime can be charged either by information or indictment. An information is a sworn document signed by the prosecuting authority (in this case the Office of Statewide Prosecution) which charges a person with the a violation of the law. An information may charge any crime except a crime punishable by death.</p>
<p>An indictment is a charging document filed by a grand jury and may indict on any crime. A grand jury consists of 18 citizens who hear allegations and evidence brought before them by the prosecuting authority and decide who, if anyone, should be charged with what crime(s). If a defendant is held on a complaint and an information or indictment is not filed within 21 days, he/she may demand an adversary preliminary hearing. At an adversary preliminary hearing, evidence is presented and witnesses are questioned. The judge then makes a determination whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed and that the defendant committed it, in order to further detain the defendant.</p>
<p>Within 24 hours of his/her arrest the accused criminal, known as the “defendant” is brought before the judge for first appearance. At this hearing the judge informs the defendant of the charges against him/her, advises the defendant of his/her right to counsel, and explains the amount of bond.</p>
<p>If the defendant is not able to post the bail initially set by the judge, he/she may request a bond hearing at any time. At a bond hearing the judge considers the nature and circumstances of the case, the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the risk of danger to the community, and the defendant’s prior record and ties to the community. The judge then determines whether a lower bond amount will ensure the defendant’s appearance at further court proceedings and protect the community from unreasonable danger.</p>
<p>After filing an information or indictment the defendant is next entitled to an arraignment, whereby the defendant is told of the substance of the charge against him/her and called upon to plead guilty or not guilty. Defendants rarely plead guilty at arraignment; however, in more than 90 percent of the cases the defendant pleads guilty or no contest prior to trial.</p>
<p>If Z is claiming self-defense, he’ll have to testify. It’s undisputed that he shot Martin.</p>
<p>A witness can testify to what he himself heard Z say. That’s not hearsay-- as to what Z said. Suppose I’m accused of robbing a 7-11. Afterwards I tell 07Dad I was at church, I tell NYMomof2 I was at the gym, I tell poetgrl I was home asleep. So then I testify in court that I didn’t do it. The prosecution could bring 07Dad, NYMomof2 and poetgrl in to show that I lie a lot and therefore can’t be believed, couldn’t they?</p>
<p>I went to the Florida Supreme Court website. For 2nd Degree, the information (pleading) has to state the lesser included offense for there to be an option for the jury to convict on thoses offenses. </p>
<p>Has anyone found the information (pleading) filed against Z? If manslaughter is not listed in the information, it may be murder 2 or nothing.</p>
<p>It is correct that if person A says Z told them something relevant it will not be barred by hearsay. Note that my example was the witness crawfishing on where he had heard something.</p>
<p>It gets a little dicey if you are trying to show a propensity to lie by reference to some totally unrelated issues. Where it involves the direct facts/issues in the case, there usually is not a problem getting the conflicting statements in. The assertion is “you have said, X,Y and Z as the same fact–which is it?”</p>
<p>I wonder if Z will get bail.</p>
<p>I heard an experienced prosecutor on the radio and he was a bit puzzled as to Corey’s approach - similar to what has been said here. I have an article in another tab saying that the prosecution faces a lot of challenges.</p>
<p>From what I found quickly.</p>
<p>Florida Bond Holds</p>
<p>Previous Felony Hold
In Florida, if the defendant has previously been convicted of a felony and the person’s civil rights have not yet been restored, or if other felony charges are pending against the defendant a bail bond may be denied. In these cases, a criminal defense attorney may appeal the court’s order to deny him or her a bail bond.</p>
<p>Serious Felony Hold</p>
<p>Some serious offenses, like first-degree murder, are deemed “non-bondable” and thus, a defendant is unable to bond out immediately. A Florida criminal defense lawyer must request what is referred to as an “Arthur Hearing.” An Arthur Hearing is like a mini-trial whereby the state has the burden of proving that the person committed the crime and that the presumption of guilt is great.</p>
<p>I don’t know if 2nd degree is nonbondable without a hearing. Getting bail set at an amount that can be bonded may in part be reflected in how Z and the new atty are behaving.</p>
<p>The prosecutors must prove Zimmerman’s shooting of Martin was rooted in hatred or ill will and counter his claims that he shot Martin to protect himself while patrolling his gated community in the Orlando suburb of Sanford. Zimmerman’s lawyers would only have to prove by a preponderance of evidence — a relatively low legal standard — that he acted in self-defense at a pretrial hearing to prevent the case from going to trial.</p>
<p>There’s a “high likelihood it could be dismissed by the judge even before the jury gets to hear the case,” Florida defense attorney Richard Hornsby said.</p>
<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Prosecutors face hurdles in Trayvon Martin case](<a href=“http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5heLdqFJicYjEpktxhARt1JNobCrw?docId=3478dc00dece49b284c142cdaa7be9d2]The”>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5heLdqFJicYjEpktxhARt1JNobCrw?docId=3478dc00dece49b284c142cdaa7be9d2)</p>
<p>
This is a common misconception. It takes 12 jurors voting not guilty for the defendant to “walk.” One juror can only cause a hung jury and a mistrial, which only entitles the defendant to a retrial, not an acquittal. Cases can be dropped or pled out after a mistrial, and not uncommonly are, especially if the tally is one-sided one way or the other (11-1 or 1-11, for example) but many are retried.</p>
<p>My guess is that the state will prosecute Murder 2 with lesser included charges (manslaughter, etc.) available for the jury to default to if they don’t agree on the top charge. That is pretty standard here in California.</p>
<p>kluge–no matter how many times a defendant is tried, it only takes one to let him walk.</p>
<p>thanks Kluge. I was under the impression that they frequently allow juries to move charges to lesser ones. It is the case in Illinois, from what I have seen.</p>
<p>BC wrote:
</p>
<p>This is one of the reasons why I appreciate what the special prosecutor is doing. She is taking responsibility for the decision, rather than fobbing it off on a grand jury, and then she is allowing a judge to make a “call.” It involves the least number of people in the process, and involves the least number of “citizens,” as well. It diffuses the storm, to some extent, and at her own expense. I think she made the harder choice. I applaud that kind of thing.</p>
<p>poetgrl–have you seen any indication that the special prosecutor’s information (the pleading) contains any lesser included offenses? The reason I ask is that in the Casey Anthony case, there were several lesser offenses that were not charged and at least one juror mentioned that there might have been a different result if there had been other choices.</p>
<p>The Florida Supreme Court website is pretty clear that for 2nd degree the lesser offenses have to be pled.</p>
<p>Also, if the judge does not dismiss at the pre-trial level, the SYG issue goes to the jury.</p>
<p>
Maybe we’re using a different definition of the term “walk.” The only place a murder defendant “walks” to after a mistrial is back to jail to await his next hearing. I’ve seen defendants convicted on their second and even third trials. I’ve never seen (or heard of) a murder case where the jury hung 11-1 for conviction and the defendant wasn’t retried until he was convicted or pled out to a serious charge - such as manslaughter in this case. </p>
<p>(And if the jury hangs 11-1 on a murder charge the chances of the defendant getting out on bail after the verdict are slim and none, I’d add.)</p>
<p>I don’t even understand how SYG is relevant. The undisputed facts are that Z followed Martin (legal, if a bad idea) and they got into an altercation that turned into a physical battle. Then, according to Z, Martin was sitting on him, choking him/punching him/banging his head into the concrete, Z feared for his life, and he shot Martin. When would Z have been said to choose to stand his ground? If Martin was on top of him, he couldn’t have gotten away if he wanted to. He couldn’t have chosen to flee.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>In the Duke case, it was a lot easier to go with the Grand Jury as the prosecution didn’t have enough evidence to charge the students.</p>
<p>
That is not true. They do not need to prove an intentional killing – they need to prove that Zimmerman was engaged in conduct inherently likely to lead to serious injury or death of another. Zimmerman’s state of mind can be inferred from his actions. “Patrolling” a neighborhood while carrying a loaded firearm and looking for suspected burglars or pr.owlers could be enough.</p>
<p>The Florida statute defining 2nd degree murder uses the phrase, “act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life.” </p>
<p>The Florida jury instruction is as follows:</p>
<p>
</p></li>
</ol>
<p>“Stand Your Ground” is the sales slogan used to get the law passed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Special Prosecutor had nothing to do with the judge getting to make “the call.” The provisions of SYG mandated this if the defendant raised it in a pre-trial motion.</p>