<p>poetgrl-- I agree that the State should try that approach. It will be interesting to see if the defense has a witness to go into the counter agrument/studies
</p>
<p>Unfortunately we’ll never know if GZ was on any drugs that night. Or if his nose was broken. Or whether he was screaming or being smothered. Or whether his gun was accessible on his hip or inaccessible on his back. Or whether TM reached for the gun, or even saw the weapon. Or whether GZ was in legitimate danger, or just got scared/PO’d and shot the kid. There sure is plenty of “reasonable doubt” in this case … most of it surrounding GZ’s story of the altercation.</p>
<p>“This could be a game changing/determining ruling.”</p>
<p>I agree, and I think it’s prejudicial as well. we all know how people feel about these thugs and their drugs. Suspicious, suspect. Up to no good. If the prosecution doesn’t handle this well, I figure that’s game, set and match.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I hope calmom explains to us why TM’s toxicology report was allowed to be presented when there was no drug test done on GZ, the defendant.</p>
<p>^^I can’t believe it makes that much difference. Marijuana use just isn’t that big a deal any more.</p>
<p>Will GZ’s meds also be considered and the reason for them?</p>
<p>^I don’t think so, myturn. Since the prosecution has rested I don’t think they can introduce anything else. Hopefully calmom will come on and correct me if I’m wrong.</p>
<p>GZ might very well be guilty as sin, free as a bird as some people’s hero Bill Ayers once said.</p>
<p>“GZ might very well be guilty as sin, free as a bird as some people’s hero Bill Ayers once said.”</p>
<p>Yes free as a bird to prepare for the Civil trial … where all the questions and doubts will again be in public view.</p>
<p>geeps, this is the new, improved “super civil” thread. No need to flame things up with political references.</p>
<p>Please see the 4th Amendment and the recent court ruling regarding blood testing.</p>
<p>Probable cause. How about he just killed a teenager?</p>
<p>Since riprorin edited his/her post #271, I am amending my response to:</p>
<p>Since the dependent had just used a gun and killed a teenage boy, it would seem to me that an officer of the law investigating that shooting would deem the circumstances to be probable cause for requesting a warrant for blood work from the shooter.</p>
<p>Not to flame things up here but are there any female posters on here leaning toward innocence?
I agree with razor that that may be the most critical thing and favors prosecution. Maybe moms just have different experiences than dads.</p>
<p>Another bad day for the prosecutors, but a couple of points. First the THC level is very small and can be consistent with smoking hours or even days before he died, the effect THC could have been almost zero or zero at that point. Second, I am not sure why there is not much made of this point but if you are reaching for a gun and pull it out and then press it right at the chest of someone, would you be crying “Help Me, Help…” continuously right to the moment when you pull the trigger?</p>
<p>I assume that the police didn’t get a warrant to test GZ’s blood because they had no suspicion that he was on drugs or alcohol.</p>
<p>"… if you are reaching for a gun and pull it out and then press it right at the chest of someone, would you be crying “Help Me, Help…” continuously right to the moment when you pull the trigger?"</p>
<p>Just George being George. IMO you can’t use typical standards when assessing what GZ says and does.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Can we all agree Georgie ain’t very bright? He told the dispatcher he did not know the address where he was and he did so quickly such that I don’t think he just made that up. It would be an odd thing to do. He must not have figured out all he had to do was turn around to see the number on the house behind him.</p>
<p>The marijuana will support GZ’s claim that TM was behaving oddly and thus justify GZ following TM.</p>
<p>Sometimes drug and or alcohol use precede violent behavior such as shooting another person.</p>
<p>"The marijuana will support GZ’s claim that TM was behaving oddly and thus justify GZ following TM. "</p>
<p>But I thought he was looking for an address? You can’t justify something that you supposedly did not do.</p>
<p>Bovertine - Everyone on the jury comes in with their own life experiences. I don’t think we can lump all women together and say they are going to all think the same way and automatically convict. As a mom, I know that I will never know what really happened that night and I am glad that I’m not on that jury.</p>