The judge at the George Zimmerman murder trial ruled the defense cannot bring up Martin's text messages, his familiarity with guns, marijuana use or previous fights.

LOL reptile dorks.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23283896)

The basis for their motion is that there's only 8 seconds of tape and the industry guidelines recommend a minimum of 10 seconds to analyze an audio sample such as this. i expect that their motion will be denied, but you never know.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23283917)

*def doesn't change her mind about anything*

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23283939)

he may have been completely full of shit about it, but he does not present a sympathetic image

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23283958)

over half the male poasters here likely got in several fights in their teens. doesn't mean anything.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23283961)

Second, yes showing you played football, for example, does have bearing on your propensity to engage in physical violence. The HS football player is alot more likely to jump someone for looking at them the wrong way or following them vs. the nerd in the library.

Third, based on what I have seen, we are not talking about some weak indicators such as participation in football where you can certainly argue it is more likely to prejudice without actually being a good link to propensity. Bragging about guns and violence, being a part of filmed fist-fights, etc, are pretty fucking indicative.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284021)

You are dumb

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284302)

I'm no expert on Zimmerman's past, but from what I have read, the charge came about because he was assaulted by an undercover officer (not knowing they were an officer) and defended himself. The only relevance therefore to this case would be to suggest that Zimmerman is willing to defend himself when someone else attacks him. Certainly not something that can be used against him. However, if the events surrounding the charge were different, say Zimmerman initiated violence against the undercover cop for whatever reason, then yes it should be allowed.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284369)

Being a thug nigger who gets into fights at school and sells dope and poses for thug pics with guns DOES indicate a propensity for violence.

I don't understand how someone would even need this explained to them. What sort of delusional fantasyland do you shitlibs live in?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284351)

Propensity evidence is only relevant if the defendant knows about the propensity.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23285517)

(idiot)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23286619)

That makes them relevant, although that doesn't necessarily make them admissible.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23289211)

Author: ,,.,,.,,.,.,.,.,..,..,..,..,

it makes no sense that the defendant would also have to know of the victim's propensity for violence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23286721)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23286744)

But probably cr.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284333)

1) It was a felony conviction

2) He takes the stand to testify.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284320)

his posts are very clunky (like an argument robot wrote them) but they make sense

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284960)

It is also clear from the texts and videos that Martin was participating voluntarily in fights. I'm not sure how you can possibly form an alternative explanation that is it all plausible, but please feel free to do so.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284538)

The Lisa Rowe bf thread is another good example

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23284545)

ALl the related stories have been on CNN's main page as the top story multiple times

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23286784)

Specific instances are only allowed to prove character on direct I believe when it's an essential element to claim or defense (e.g. a defamation claim).

Now, in this case, it seems very fucking likely that they'll get it in somehow. The state's star witness has already been caught in numerous lies, and I think the D can press her to say Martin would never start a fight or something along those lines, at which point the D can try to impeach her with specific instances.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2267401&forum_id=2#23289243)