What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Did anyone else note the difference in the way the WSJ article referred to the two people? Martin and Mr. Zimmerman. I wonder what it means.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

duper said:
Did anyone else note the difference in the way the WSJ article referred to the two people? Martin and Mr. Zimmerman. I wonder what it means.
Click to expand...
Classic grammatical usage. The designation "mister" refers to an adult male, which would not be used to refer to a minor.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Farce Poobah said:
Classic grammatical usage. The designation "mister" refers to an adult male, which would not be used to refer to a minor.
Click to expand...
I had forgotten Trayvon Martin was a minor. It's too bad "master" has gone out of use. :)

Edit: the more I think, the more I reject the "classical English usage" argument. (Mind you, I quite believe that IS why it is that way in the article, so I'm not saying I think Farce Poobah is wrong about his answer, I just reject the idea of doing it that way.) It just seems to me that calling someone by surname only is impolite, unless you call everyone by surname only, or if it is someone who is known to prefer to be called that way. It seems to me that if you are going to abandon the usage of the polite title for juveniles, then you should extend the polite title for adults to those juveniles. Just my $.02
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

FreshFish said:
The author stressed the word "imminent" as one of the necessary conditions; not sure whether your example qualifies or not....

My guess is that the trial may very well be effectively "over" by the end of jury selection: will the defense be able to slip in one person who will vote for jury nullification no matter what the law actually says?
Click to expand...

Possibly. Good thing there's no chance the prosecution might try the same thing. Right? Cuz white folks is racist and will vote based on ethnic prejudices, unlike any other group.
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Tough case for the prosecution, at least from what's publicly available, especially since they went for second degree murder rather than manslaughter. But, in these circus cases, who knows what may happen.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Kibitzer Alan Dershowitz weighs in from the sidelines:

http://www.redstate.com/center77/20...t-affidavit-is-‘irresponsible-and-unethical’/

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/...-predicts-george-zimmerman-will-be-acquitted/

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harvard-...arrest-affidavit-irresponsible-and-unethical/

Full disclosure: I didn't read any of these articles, I just did a search for "alan dershowitz" and "george zimmerman" and posted a few of the links that showed up. I tried to avoid the most extreme right-wing sites so as not to upset the delicate sensibilities of those here most easily offended by my heretical deviation from orthodoxy.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

New pictures of what ABC claims to be Zimmerman's injuries.

And of course

“Even if George Zimmerman was injured in his fight,” said Abrams, “it doesn’t change the fact that the prosecutors clearly believe that Zimmerman was the aggressor. And if Zimmerman was the aggressor and they got into a fight, that doesn’t allow him to use deadly force. It simply — you can’t be losing a fight and then decide to use your gun to protect yourself.”
Click to expand...
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

IIRC, jury nullification is the jury ruling on the validity of the law itself as opposed to guilt/non-guilt of the person who broke it. The jury basically says "we don't care if he did it, we think it's an unjust law to begin with so we find not guilty." Most commonly used in the Fugitive Slave Law days where a lot of people disagreed with the law.

Could they nullify the law on second degree murder? It's generally agreed the murder laws are fair and are in place for good reason.
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Twitch Boy said:
IIRC, jury nullification is the jury ruling on the validity of the law itself as opposed to guilt/non-guilt of the person who broke it. The jury basically says "we don't care if he did it, we think it's an unjust law to begin with so we find not guilty." Most commonly used in the Fugitive Slave Law days where a lot of people disagreed with the law.

Could they nullify the law on second degree murder? It's generally agreed the murder laws are in place for good reason.
Click to expand...

I guess we just have different recollections of how the term has been used.

Some people have said that OJ's acquittal was a form of jury nullification, especially given some of the comments made by jurors during post-trial interviews (that case was so divisive I don't want to try to quote from memory).
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

FreshFish said:
I guess we just have different recollections of how the term has been used.

Some people have said that OJ's acquittal was a form of jury nullification, especially given some of the comments made by jurors during post-trial interviews (that case was so divisive I don't want to try to quote from memory).
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I'm not clear on. "This law is unjust and needs to go" vs. "This law is okay, but being improperly applied in this case." Which can be nullified?
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

There has been alot of cases that have gone bad for the NRA in the last couple of years. Doesn't seem to hurt their clout though. I'm guessing that has more to do with the Republican majority.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

FreshFish said:
The "same thing" being jury nullification? um, isn't it imposssible for a prosecutor to go for jury nullification, by definition?
Click to expand...

You really ought to watch more "Law and Order" reruns. A single juror cannot "nullify," but a single juror can "hang" a jury. By refusing to vote based on the law and evidence and voting instead for some other reason, like prejudice. Nullification refers to a VERDICT, with all jurors in agreement. It's just as likely the prosecution will want jurors sympathetic to their perspective as for the defense. But then, you knew that, didn't you?
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

5mn_Major said:
There has been alot of cases that have gone bad for the NRA in the last couple of years. Doesn't seem to hurt their clout though. I'm guessing that has more to do with the Republican majority.
Click to expand...

C-. You failed to throw in the obligatory Bush reference.
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

duper said:
I had forgotten Trayvon Martin was a minor. It's too bad "master" has gone out of use. :)

Edit: the more I think, the more I reject the "classical English usage" argument. (Mind you, I quite believe that IS why it is that way in the article, so I'm not saying I think Farce Poobah is wrong about his answer, I just reject the idea of doing it that way.) It just seems to me that calling someone by surname only is impolite, unless you call everyone by surname only, or if it is someone who is known to prefer to be called that way. It seems to me that if you are going to abandon the usage of the polite title for juveniles, then you should extend the polite title for adults to those juveniles. Just my $.02
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Well said.
I don't like the usage either.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Zimmerman out on $150K bail.

If you're in Z's shoes right now, what do you do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top