• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

George Zimmerman's attorneys withdraw from Trayvon Martin case

Excon said:
You are introducing hyperbole and spin where none is needed. Shaken Baby was brought up as a way to explain the severity of the situation George was in, not as a defense.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was just going with what his ex-lawyer said:


Hal Uhrig, an ex-Florida police officer and the new criminal-defense attorney for Trayvon Martin shooter George Zimmerman, is starting off with a media campaign to defend his client. Today on CBS, Uhrig explained how Martin was attacking Zimmerman, requiring him to shoot the 17-year-old in self defense. "We're familiar with the Shaken Baby Syndrome," said Uhrig. "You shake a baby, the brain shakes around inside the skull. You can die when someone's pounding your head into the ground."

linkypoo...​


That's not describing the situation Zimmerman is in.
 
Last edited:
SheWolf said:
I am wondering why the police wouldn't have take photos or something too.... some witnesses coming forward about his wounds would help and that's all he's left with now
Click to expand...

Which is more than sufficient. He doesnt have to prove anything. He is not prosecuting anything. He is the defense.
 
MaggieD said:
That's what I remember reading. Let me see if I can find a link.
Click to expand...

It doesn't sound right to me either. How can a lawyer determine that without medical advise or records. Also, that women died from the condition. It doesn't sound right.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: U.S. News - George Zimmerman's attorneys withdraw from Trayvon Martin case

Hmm kinda of a interesting little twist in the case. I wonder whats going on?

Thoughts?
Comments?
Response?
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...
My thoughts are that he is severely damaging his credibility to the public, but I don't know that that has implications for a trial. I wouldn't be surprised if he had a breakdown or something given all the media attention, but I don't know. He's making himself look super bad though.
 
muciti said:
I have never understood this. Why is cooperating a bad thing unless you are trying to beat a charge for a crime you did in fact commit? Everyone should always cooperate fully.
Click to expand...
Because what is happening now is an adversarial process.
It is the same reason that you do not talk to LE.
They are not trying to clear your name, but come up with a reason to charge you.
 
poweRob said:
That's not describing the situation Zimmerman is in.
Click to expand...
Yeah... it was being used as a way to describe the severity of the situation he was in!
 
muciti said:
Which is more than sufficient. He doesnt have to prove anything. He is not prosecuting anything. He is the defense.
Click to expand...

I don't think Zimmerman is acting as confident as you seem to think this is going to go for him.
 
muciti said:
Which is more than sufficient. He doesnt have to prove anything. He is not prosecuting anything. He is the defense.
Click to expand...

I seriously don't think testimony by himself will stand.

The court: Ted Bundy do you promise to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Ted Bundy: Yes
The court: Did you commit these murders?
Ted Bundy: No
The court: Well there you have it.​


George's testimony, which probably will never happen because the defendant rarely gets on the stand, won't be used in the court much less believed.
 
SheWolf said:
I don't think Zimmerman is acting as confident as you seem to think this is going to go for him.
Click to expand...

I think it is going well for him. He is not in jail. Doesnt change what the roles would be in court. Prosecution is the only ones who have to prove anything. Not the defense.
 
MaggieD said:
Edit: I can also understand Zimmerman contacting the special prosecutor with a plea to **** or get off the pot.
Click to expand...

I hope, he is not that stupid...

You never provide a statement without consulting your counsel prior, and having them present during the interview. Is has nothing to do with guilt. Is has everything to do with protecting your rights
 

If the only evidence they had was Ted Bundy's word then he would have walked. Fortunately they had a truck load of other evidence.
 

I don't think it helps his image. Blowing off your lawyers is really irresponsible. So much is riding on his defense and case, and he should have made talking to his lawyers and working on this case a priority.

I'd say he's on the verge of a breakdown too... it seems reasonable to think so. Trayvon's family is probably not ok either right now, so it really isn't supposed to be easy on him either. This is tragic. All we can hope for is that he is honest and justice is done for both families now.
 
Excon said:
Yeah... it was being used as a way to describe the severity of the situation he was in!
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I think you and I are just caught in the use of "situation" rather than what was said so basically, on the same page.
 
muciti said:
After speaking with the investigator he may not feel the need to retain an attorney any further.
Click to expand...

He didn't fire his attorneys. They fired him. There is a big difference. If their attorneys knew the case wasn't going to court, then they would say so instead of making their client look a fool for not justifiable reason.
 
muciti said:
If the only evidence they had was Ted Bundy's word then he would have walked. Fortunately they had a truck load of other evidence.
Click to expand...

George's word isn't going to fly.
 
muciti said:
I think it is going well for him. He is not in jail. Doesnt change what the roles would be in court. Prosecution is the only ones who have to prove anything. Not the defense.
Click to expand...

It's not going well for him. If there is no case and he walks free, his life will never be the same. The fact is, he has to live with this the rest of his life. He took somebody else's life and I think it will haunt him, even if he had to do it to save his life. He is going to feel compelled to bury his emotions than seek professional help and professional therapy.

This is definitely not going well for him.
 
poweRob said:
George's word isn't going to fly.
Click to expand...
It flew just fine the first time. And stood up to, what was it, five hours of questioning.

This time though if he is in contact with the special prosecutor, she will be trying to trip him up.
 
SheWolf said:
He didn't fire his attorneys. They fired him. There is a big difference. If their attorneys knew the case wasn't going to court, then they would say so instead of making their client look a fool for not justifiable reason.
Click to expand...

Wait wait wait. When did you learn all of this? Can you please show me where it says they fired him?
 
The guy has been tried and convicted and never stepped into a court room and has a bounty on his head. I'd run too. Out of the USA. What is left to return to?
 
muciti said:
I think it is going well for him. He is not in jail. Doesnt change what the roles would be in court. Prosecution is the only ones who have to prove anything. Not the defense.
Click to expand...
Well, if the prosecution has a good argument, then the defense better prove something.
 
muciti said:
Wait wait wait. When did you learn all of this? Can you please show me where it says they fired him?
Click to expand...

The news and the OP. Read the article in the OP. I am not going to repost it.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
then the defense better prove something.
Click to expand...
As has already been pointed out, the defense does not have to prove anything, just introduce enough reasonable doubt.
 
muciti said:
The prosecution has to prove he is lying and did not act in self defense. Saying his word is not going to fly doesnt mean much. What are you basing this on?
Click to expand...

Well I'm basing it on a couple things.


1) he hasn't been charged with anything for him to declare a defense yet so I have no idea what it is he will declare innocence to.
2) if in a trial, he most likely won't take the stand to speak.​


I'm interested in getting people under oath and then seeing what kind of answers they spew to questions rather than this media thing. I get the feeling that the answers will flesh out some of this tabloid crap that we are being fed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…