[Ed] George Zimmerman to sue Trayvon Martin's family et al

commandlinegamer · 4th December 2019, 02:52 PM

Would have posted this in another thread, but there are so many on GZ.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/loc...238030539.html

Quote:

George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer acquitted of homicide charges in the 2012 fatal shooting of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, is suing Martin’s family, prosecutors and others involved in the case he claims rested on false evidence, according to a copy of the suit sent to the media Wednesday.

Classy.

ETA: Sorry, title should read "Trayvon Martin's family et al". If a kind mod could adjust that, would be so grateful.

Mumbles · 4th December 2019, 03:00 PM

Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?"

My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense.

Doghouse Reilly · 4th December 2019, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?"

Is this meant to mean why hasn't he been murdered yet?

casebro · 4th December 2019, 05:06 PM

I guess there must have been a Go Fund Me for the Martin family? Zimmerman's lawyer has to have a target to file a suit.

Trebuchet · 4th December 2019, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?"

My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense.

You called it, it's Klayman. From my point of view, Zimmerman couldn't have picked a better lawyer. He's lost pretty much every suit he ever filed. Including when he sued his own mother.

smartcooky · 4th December 2019, 07:16 PM

The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson)

commandlinegamer · 5th December 2019, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson)

I wonder that Martin's parents didn't file a civil suit previously. Then found out they did, but that that was against the homeowners' association where the killing took place.

ponderingturtle · 5th December 2019, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?"

My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense.

Yep Klayman is in it.

"Zimmerman and his lawyer, the controversial attorney Larry Klayman, allege that Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the prosecution who testified about being on the phone with Martin just before the shooting, was an impostor. They accuse her of standing in for another teenager, Brittany Diamond Eugene, whom the suit describes as Jeantel's half sister who did not want to testify in the case."

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/04/78484...an-100-million

ponderingturtle · 5th December 2019, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson)

Can they? Florida has some weird laws about not suing people for shootings that are not convicted. So stand your ground makes you immune to civil suits.

rockysmith76 · 5th December 2019, 05:46 AM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?"

This may well help speed that along. Talk about gall.

SuburbanTurkey · 5th December 2019, 06:28 AM

Martin's family sued the HOA that Zimmerman was patrolling for and they settled for a cash payout of undisclosed amount for the wrongful death.

The family had a lawyer and made the choice not to sue Zimmerman. Not sure what the reasoning is. May have to do with the fact that Zimmerman likely does not have many assets or much income potential, which is why you see him working the racist gun nut circuit and cashing in on his celebrity as a right wing hero. His life seemed to have been circling the drain after the trial.

Zimmerman could offer a lawful self defense claim to any civil suit, and if successful, that could result in Martin's family having to pay his legal costs. It wouldn't be automatic and I'm not really sure how likely that outcome would be. He was acquitted for criminal liability, but the standards of proof are different for civil cases.

Matthew Best · 5th December 2019, 06:40 AM

And Zimmerman auctioned off the gun he used to kill Trayvon Martin for $138,000.

Mumbles · 5th December 2019, 06:56 AM

Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly

Is this meant to mean why hasn't he been murdered yet?

Yes.

literally, people want to know why he hasn't been shot dead. He was the figurehead of white nationalism for years, right up until Dolt 45 ran for office.

Hey, that's what's known when your claim to fame is chasing and shooting an unarmed teegager.

Originally Posted by Trebuchet

You called it, it's Klayman. From my point of view, Zimmerman couldn't have picked a better lawyer. He's lost pretty much every suit he ever filed. Including when he sued his own mother.

Makes sense, doesn't it? The lawsuit is clearly not going anywhere.* see no basis for this domestic abusing murderer to sue anything, never mind the parents of the kid he murdered.

Klayman, though, can take all kinds of money. And before anyone says it, no he does now represent Klayman's a scumbag, the end.

JoeMorgue · 5th December 2019, 07:01 AM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Yes.

literally, people want to know why he hasn't been shot dead. He was the figurehead of white nationalism for years, right up until Dolt 45 ran for office.

Hey, that's what's known when your claim to fame is chasing and shooting an unarmed teegager.

Because, sadly, shooting an unarmed black teenager doesn't exactly make him stand out all that much.

In the abstract no matter how guilty I personally feel the person in question is I've never been 100% comfortable with any version of the "Okay the court system found him not guilty so we have find some other way to 'get' him."

I didn't like the whole OJ thing (Yeah I am one of those people who think the civil case was, in spirit not letter, a case of double jeopardy and you don't get much more guilty then literally writing a book about how you got away with it) and as much as it sickens me I kind of have to feel the same way about Zimmerman. The system didn't work, that happens. We need (desperately) to fix the system, but we can't go back and subvert the system in this one case without breaking it more.

That being said when that waste of humanity slips in the shower I won't shed any tears.

casebro · 5th December 2019, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

Yep Klayman is in it.

"Zimmerman and his lawyer, the controversial attorney Larry Klayman, allege that Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the prosecution who testified about being on the phone with Martin just before the shooting, was an impostor. They accuse her of standing in for another teenager, Brittany Diamond Eugene, whom the suit describes as Jeantel's half sister who did not want to testify in the case."

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/04/78484...an-100-million

Interesting "fact". Any evidence that it is true? And if so, why did it take all these years to surface?

SuburbanTurkey · 5th December 2019, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by casebro

Interesting "fact". Any evidence that it is true? And if so, why did it take all these years to surface?

Not really worth looking into. Klayman is a serial frivolous litigator. It's pretty safe to assume any legal action he takes is a bad faith abuse of the legal system intended to generate headlines for right wing tabloids.

wasapi · 5th December 2019, 09:02 AM

More reasons to wish this man would vanish. Forever. How dare this Narcasstic piece of waste to do this to the family.

Trebuchet · 5th December 2019, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by wasapi

More reasons to wish this man would vanish. Forever. How dare this Narcasstic piece of waste to do this to the family.

Zimmerman or Klayman? Never mind, the answer is yes.

Captain_Swoop · 5th December 2019, 12:03 PM

BBC pioece on the case

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-50671843

Seems there is a forthcoming documentary titled the "Trayvon Hoax" that claims Rachel Jeantel was an impostor.

Looks like the case is designed to tie in with that and raise somer publicity.

plague311 · 5th December 2019, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Because, sadly, shooting an unarmed black teenager doesn't exactly make him stand out all that much.

In the abstract no matter how guilty I personally feel the person in question is I've never been 100% comfortable with any version of the "Okay the court system found him not guilty so we have find some other way to 'get' him."

I didn't like the whole OJ thing (Yeah I am one of those people who think the civil case was, in spirit not letter, a case of double jeopardy and you don't get much more guilty then literally writing a book about how you got away with it) and as much as it sickens me I kind of have to feel the same way about Zimmerman. The system didn't work, that happens. We need (desperately) to fix the system, but we can't go back and subvert the system in this one case without breaking it more.

That being said when that waste of humanity slips in the shower I won't shed any tears.

This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get.

ponderingturtle · 5th December 2019, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get.

Or simply change the standard of decision in tort cases away from preponderance of the evidence to beyond a reasonable doubt. That will accomplish serious tort reform.

JoeMorgue · 5th December 2019, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by plague311

This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get.

Because he is, technically speaking, innocent on a legal level and that has to mean something or the system isn't worth saving or fixing.

Anything we let be done to Zimmerman is a legal precedent to be done to someone who didn't actual commit the crime just based on the fact that the victim's family still thinks they did it.

We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it."

plague311 · 5th December 2019, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Because he is, technically speaking, innocent on a legal level and that has to mean something or the system isn't worth saving or fixing.

No, he was found innocent on a criminal charge. Civil =! Criminal. They're two separate things with two separate standards that have two separate outcomes.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Anything we let be done to Zimmerman is a legal precedent to be done to someone who didn't actual commit the crime just based on the fact that the victim's family still thinks they did it.

Again, no. It's setting a legal precedent that someone who hasn't been convicted of a crime can still be held fiscally responsible. If it's just the victim's family who still thinks he did it then he has nothing to worry about. The family doesn't convict, or set the penalty. Either a judge or jury will do that.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it."

Yes, we literally can. That's why there are civil and criminal courts.

Ziggurat · 5th December 2019, 03:26 PM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it."

That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set.

But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see.

theprestige · 5th December 2019, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set.

But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see.

If true, the delay will probably be explained by new information having come to light only recently. Also, Zimmerman is kind of a jackass who's made a lot of stupid life choices. It won't be much of a surprise if it turns out he could have brought this suit years ago, but he didn't have his act together.

KDLarsen · 5th December 2019, 04:21 PM

It's yet another lawsuit by GIL (Grossly Inappropriate Larry, since he was found to have.. “act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children.” Klayman v. Luck, Case Nos. 97974, 97075, 2012-Ohio-3354, ¶ 25 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Jul. 26, 2012), intended to draw attention to something else.

Edit: the full citation from Klayman v. Luck

Quote:

on more than one occasion [Klayman] act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children. His conduct may not have been sexual in the sense that he intended to or did derive any sexual pleasure from it or that he intended his children would. That, however, does not mean that he did not engage in those acts or that his behavior was proper.

Quite a charmer that GIL.

theprestige · 5th December 2019, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by KDLarsen

It's yet another lawsuit by GIL (Grossly Inappropriate Larry, since he was found to have.. “act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children.” Klayman v. Luck, Case Nos. 97974, 97075, 2012-Ohio-3354, ¶ 25 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Jul. 26, 2012), intended to draw attention to something else.

Edit: the full citation from Klayman v. Luck

Quite a charmer that GIL.

Quite the ad hominem. Let's try to stay on topic.

rockinkt · 5th December 2019, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set.

But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see.

So far - I'm betting that the merits of the accusation rest on pretty flimsy ground.
The person who wrote the book that purportedly provides the evidence that Rachel Jeantel was an imposter is Joel Gilbert. As per NBC website:

Gilbert is a frequent InfoWars guest who has produced movies that have falsely claimed that former President Barack Obama's real father was a Chicago communist, that Paul McCartney is dead and Elvis Presley is alive.

BStrong · 5th December 2019, 05:03 PM

Idiot right-wing attorney represents trigger happy idiot client.

If they'd hold hands and jump into the nearest body of water it would be a tread day for the Republic.

kookbreaker · 5th December 2019, 05:03 PM

Klayman is a rabid Birther. Really second only to Taitz in frivolous Birther lawsuits. Pretty sure any theory he comes up with is laughable.

casebro · 5th December 2019, 05:28 PM

I would have thought the cops would have checked Trayvon's phone log to see who he was talking to. Is the claim going to be "he dialed HER number, but I picked up" ?

theprestige · 5th December 2019, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by casebro

I would have thought the cops would have checked Trayvon's phone log to see who he was talking to. Is the claim going to be "he dialed HER number, but I picked up" ?

Maybe this is addressed in the text of the lawsuit. I don't know.

What I do know is that this is going to be a **** show no matter what. I have no dog in this at all. Just some popcorn and some patience while it all plays out.

Giordano · 5th December 2019, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Maybe this is addressed in the text of the lawsuit. I don't know.

What I do know is that this is going to be a **** show no matter what. I have no dog in this at all. Just some popcorn and some patience while it all plays out.

I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma...

Checkmite · 6th December 2019, 12:28 AM

Originally Posted by Giordano

I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma...

There will probably always be people who see the suffering of others they don't care about as little more than entertainment.

I believe it was one of George Carlin's bitter and misanthropic screeds disguised as "comedy routines" that most famously gave them free permission to do so proudly. But even at that time it wasn't an original idea.

smartcooky · 6th December 2019, 01:38 AM

Originally Posted by BStrong

Idiot right-wing attorney represents trigger happy idiot client....

... based on the fantasist writings of a conspiracy theorist nutjob.

What could possibly go wrong?

casebro · 6th December 2019, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by BStrong

Idiot right-wing attorney represents trigger happy idiot client.

Gee, for just a second there I thought you were talking about a cop.

theprestige · 6th December 2019, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by Giordano

I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma...

I take it for granted that everyone commenting on Zimmerman on this forum is doing so out of prurient interest.

luchog · 7th December 2019, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by Giordano

I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma...

Something conservatives in general are experts at doing.

With any luck, Zimmerman and his idiot lawyer will not only get their frivolous suit thrown out; but get slapped with a great big contempt charge as well.

This is The End · 9th December 2019, 01:50 AM

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue

Because he is, technically speaking, innocent on a legal level and that has to mean something or the system isn't worth saving or fixing.

You are incorrect. In the US people in criminal trials are found "not guilty". Very explicitly separate from "innocent".

(I am only really posting that because you used the word "technically".

)

ponderingturtle · 9th December 2019, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by This is The End

You are incorrect. In the US people in criminal trials are found "not guilty". Very explicitly separate from "innocent".

(I am only really posting that because you used the word "technically".

)

A great example of the differences in standards is that if you could prove that there is a 75% chance someone murdered someone that would be a great example of plenty of evidence in civil court where the standard is a preponderance of the evidence, but not a good standard for criminal court as I would say 1 in 4 is a reasonable doubt.

So with out changing either criminal courts to preponderance of the evidence or civil to beyond a reasonable doubt the fact that you get civil judgement when criminal ones fail is a feature not a bug of the system.

4th December 2019, 02:52 PM	#1
commandlinegamer Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mazes of Menace Posts: 9,091	George Zimmerman to sue Trayvon Martin's family et al Would have posted this in another thread, but there are so many on GZ. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/loc...238030539.html Quote: George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer acquitted of homicide charges in the 2012 fatal shooting of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, is suing Martin’s family, prosecutors and others involved in the case he claims rested on false evidence, according to a copy of the suit sent to the media Wednesday. Classy. ETA: Sorry, title should read "Trayvon Martin's family et al". If a kind mod could adjust that, would be so grateful.
	__________________ He bade me take any rug in the house. Last edited by commandlinegamer; 4th December 2019 at 02:54 PM. Reason: Title

4th December 2019, 03:00 PM	#2
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,395	Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?" My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense.
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,395

4th December 2019, 05:06 PM	#4
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 18,634	I guess there must have been a Go Fund Me for the Martin family? Zimmerman's lawyer has to have a target to file a suit.
	__________________ Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.

4th December 2019, 06:09 PM	#5
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 30,983	Originally Posted by Mumbles Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?" My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense. You called it, it's Klayman. From my point of view, Zimmerman couldn't have picked a better lawyer. He's lost pretty much every suit he ever filed. Including when he sued his own mother.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

4th December 2019, 07:16 PM	#6
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 16,741	The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson)
	__________________ I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms. - Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project) If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! ! Last edited by smartcooky; 4th December 2019 at 07:21 PM.

4th December 2019, 04:20 PM	#3
Doghouse Reilly Adrift on an uncharted sea Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 3,405	Originally Posted by Mumbles Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?" Is this meant to mean why hasn't he been murdered yet?

5th December 2019, 01:22 AM	#7
commandlinegamer Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mazes of Menace Posts: 9,091	Originally Posted by smartcooky The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson) I wonder that Martin's parents didn't file a civil suit previously. Then found out they did, but that that was against the homeowners' association where the killing took place.
	__________________ He bade me take any rug in the house.

5th December 2019, 04:21 AM	#8
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,412	Originally Posted by Mumbles Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?" My assumption is that Larry Klayman, or some other such sleazy lawyer, is involved and bilking him for fees. In normal cases, I'd have some slight sympathy, but in this one it's only for the people whose son he murdered, and likely the other people he's harrassed, abused, etc' before and since, for having to waste time and possibly money on his continued nonsense. Yep Klayman is in it. "Zimmerman and his lawyer, the controversial attorney Larry Klayman, allege that Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the prosecution who testified about being on the phone with Martin just before the shooting, was an impostor. They accuse her of standing in for another teenager, Brittany Diamond Eugene, whom the suit describes as Jeantel's half sister who did not want to testify in the case." https://www.npr.org/2019/12/04/78484...an-100-million
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

5th December 2019, 04:23 AM	#9
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,412	Originally Posted by smartcooky The NAACP ought to chip in with a pro-bono lawyer, and help the Martins counter-sue Zimmerman for the wrongful death of their son (al la the Browns and the Goldmans v OJ Simpson) Can they? Florida has some weird laws about not suing people for shootings that are not convicted. So stand your ground makes you immune to civil suits.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

5th December 2019, 05:46 AM	#10
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990	Originally Posted by Mumbles Saw it, the standard reaction is "why isn't Zimmerman dead yet?" This may well help speed that along. Talk about gall.
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990

5th December 2019, 06:28 AM	#11
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 7,896	Martin's family sued the HOA that Zimmerman was patrolling for and they settled for a cash payout of undisclosed amount for the wrongful death. The family had a lawyer and made the choice not to sue Zimmerman. Not sure what the reasoning is. May have to do with the fact that Zimmerman likely does not have many assets or much income potential, which is why you see him working the racist gun nut circuit and cashing in on his celebrity as a right wing hero. His life seemed to have been circling the drain after the trial. Zimmerman could offer a lawful self defense claim to any civil suit, and if successful, that could result in Martin's family having to pay his legal costs. It wouldn't be automatic and I'm not really sure how likely that outcome would be. He was acquitted for criminal liability, but the standards of proof are different for civil cases.
	__________________ Gobble gobble Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 5th December 2019 at 06:30 AM.

5th December 2019, 06:40 AM	#12
Matthew Best Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Leicester Square, London Posts: 8,178	And Zimmerman auctioned off the gun he used to kill Trayvon Martin for $138,000.

5th December 2019, 06:56 AM	#13
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,395	Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly Is this meant to mean why hasn't he been murdered yet? Yes. literally, people want to know why he hasn't been shot dead. He was the figurehead of white nationalism for years, right up until Dolt 45 ran for office. Hey, that's what's known when your claim to fame is chasing and shooting an unarmed teegager. Originally Posted by Trebuchet You called it, it's Klayman. From my point of view, Zimmerman couldn't have picked a better lawyer. He's lost pretty much every suit he ever filed. Including when he sued his own mother. Makes sense, doesn't it? The lawsuit is clearly not going anywhere.* see no basis for this domestic abusing murderer to sue anything, never mind the parents of the kid he murdered. Klayman, though, can take all kinds of money. And before anyone says it, no he does now represent Klayman's a scumbag, the end.
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,395

5th December 2019, 07:01 AM	#14
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,568	Originally Posted by Mumbles Yes. literally, people want to know why he hasn't been shot dead. He was the figurehead of white nationalism for years, right up until Dolt 45 ran for office. Hey, that's what's known when your claim to fame is chasing and shooting an unarmed teegager. Because, sadly, shooting an unarmed black teenager doesn't exactly make him stand out all that much. In the abstract no matter how guilty I personally feel the person in question is I've never been 100% comfortable with any version of the "Okay the court system found him not guilty so we have find some other way to 'get' him." I didn't like the whole OJ thing (Yeah I am one of those people who think the civil case was, in spirit not letter, a case of double jeopardy and you don't get much more guilty then literally writing a book about how you got away with it) and as much as it sickens me I kind of have to feel the same way about Zimmerman. The system didn't work, that happens. We need (desperately) to fix the system, but we can't go back and subvert the system in this one case without breaking it more. That being said when that waste of humanity slips in the shower I won't shed any tears.
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

5th December 2019, 07:54 AM	#15
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 18,634	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle Yep Klayman is in it. "Zimmerman and his lawyer, the controversial attorney Larry Klayman, allege that Rachel Jeantel, a key witness for the prosecution who testified about being on the phone with Martin just before the shooting, was an impostor. They accuse her of standing in for another teenager, Brittany Diamond Eugene, whom the suit describes as Jeantel's half sister who did not want to testify in the case." https://www.npr.org/2019/12/04/78484...an-100-million Interesting "fact". Any evidence that it is true? And if so, why did it take all these years to surface?
	__________________ Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.

5th December 2019, 08:35 AM	#16
SuburbanTurkey Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Massachusetts, USA Posts: 7,896	Originally Posted by casebro Interesting "fact". Any evidence that it is true? And if so, why did it take all these years to surface? Not really worth looking into. Klayman is a serial frivolous litigator. It's pretty safe to assume any legal action he takes is a bad faith abuse of the legal system intended to generate headlines for right wing tabloids.
	__________________ Gobble gobble

5th December 2019, 09:02 AM	#17
wasapi Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 13,172	More reasons to wish this man would vanish. Forever. How dare this Narcasstic piece of waste to do this to the family.
	__________________ Julia

5th December 2019, 11:27 AM	#18
Trebuchet Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Port Townsend, Washington Posts: 30,983	Originally Posted by wasapi More reasons to wish this man would vanish. Forever. How dare this Narcasstic piece of waste to do this to the family. Zimmerman or Klayman? Never mind, the answer is yes.
	__________________ Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.

5th December 2019, 12:03 PM	#19
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 31,830	BBC pioece on the case https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-50671843 Seems there is a forthcoming documentary titled the "Trayvon Hoax" that claims Rachel Jeantel was an impostor. Looks like the case is designed to tie in with that and raise somer publicity.

5th December 2019, 01:22 PM	#20
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,461	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Because, sadly, shooting an unarmed black teenager doesn't exactly make him stand out all that much. In the abstract no matter how guilty I personally feel the person in question is I've never been 100% comfortable with any version of the "Okay the court system found him not guilty so we have find some other way to 'get' him." I didn't like the whole OJ thing (Yeah I am one of those people who think the civil case was, in spirit not letter, a case of double jeopardy and you don't get much more guilty then literally writing a book about how you got away with it) and as much as it sickens me I kind of have to feel the same way about Zimmerman. The system didn't work, that happens. We need (desperately) to fix the system, but we can't go back and subvert the system in this one case without breaking it more. That being said when that waste of humanity slips in the shower I won't shed any tears. This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2019, 01:43 PM	#21
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 50,412	Originally Posted by plague311 This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get. Or simply change the standard of decision in tort cases away from preponderance of the evidence to beyond a reasonable doubt. That will accomplish serious tort reform.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

5th December 2019, 01:44 PM	#22
JoeMorgue Self Employed Remittance Man Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 30,568	Originally Posted by plague311 This is kind of a weird take to me. You're ok with the system failing people, (yes, I understand you said it needs to be fixed) but you're not ok with the people who have been wronged to have a way to fight back? I don't get it. Then again, there's a lot of things I don't get. Because he is, technically speaking, innocent on a legal level and that has to mean something or the system isn't worth saving or fixing. Anything we let be done to Zimmerman is a legal precedent to be done to someone who didn't actual commit the crime just based on the fact that the victim's family still thinks they did it. We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it."
	__________________ Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question." Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..." Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

5th December 2019, 02:10 PM	#23
plague311 Great minds think... Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: North Dakota Posts: 8,461	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Because he is, technically speaking, innocent on a legal level and that has to mean something or the system isn't worth saving or fixing. No, he was found innocent on a criminal charge. Civil =! Criminal. They're two separate things with two separate standards that have two separate outcomes. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue Anything we let be done to Zimmerman is a legal precedent to be done to someone who didn't actual commit the crime just based on the fact that the victim's family still thinks they did it. Again, no. It's setting a legal precedent that someone who hasn't been *convicted* of a crime can still be held fiscally responsible. If it's just the victim's family who still thinks he did it then he has nothing to worry about. The family doesn't convict, or set the penalty. Either a judge or jury will do that. Originally Posted by JoeMorgue We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it." Yes, we literally can. That's why there are civil and criminal courts.
	__________________ "Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher “There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

5th December 2019, 03:26 PM	#24
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 48,259	Originally Posted by JoeMorgue We can't have different standards for "People who are found not guilty" and "People who are found not guilty but come on they obviously did it." That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set. But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

5th December 2019, 04:08 PM	#25
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,513	Originally Posted by Ziggurat That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set. But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see. If true, the delay will probably be explained by new information having come to light only recently. Also, Zimmerman is kind of a jackass who's made a lot of stupid life choices. It won't be much of a surprise if it turns out he could have brought this suit years ago, but he didn't have his act together.
	Last edited by theprestige; 5th December 2019 at 04:12 PM.

5th December 2019, 04:21 PM	#26
KDLarsen Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 4,372	It's yet another lawsuit by GIL (Grossly Inappropriate Larry, since he was found to have.. “act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children.” Klayman v. Luck, Case Nos. 97974, 97075, 2012-Ohio-3354, ¶ 25 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Jul. 26, 2012), intended to draw attention to something else. Edit: the full citation from Klayman v. Luck Quote: on more than one occasion [Klayman] act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children. His conduct may not have been sexual in the sense that he intended to or did derive any sexual pleasure from it or that he intended his children would. That, however, does not mean that he did not engage in those acts or that his behavior was proper. Quite a charmer that GIL.
KDLarsen Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 4,372	Last edited by KDLarsen; 5th December 2019 at 04:22 PM.

5th December 2019, 04:37 PM	#27
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,513	Originally Posted by KDLarsen It's yet another lawsuit by GIL (Grossly Inappropriate Larry, since he was found to have.. “act[ed] in a grossly inappropriate manner with the children.” Klayman v. Luck, Case Nos. 97974, 97075, 2012-Ohio-3354, ¶ 25 (Ohio App. 8th Dist. Jul. 26, 2012), intended to draw attention to something else. Edit: the full citation from Klayman v. Luck Quite a charmer that GIL. Quite the ad hominem. Let's try to stay on topic.

5th December 2019, 04:48 PM	#28
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,092	Originally Posted by Ziggurat That already happened with OJ Simpson. Suing Zimmerman wouldn't set a precedent, it's already been set. But this really boils down to the accusations about Rachel Jeantel being an imposter. If she is, and if any of the defendants knew, then it seems like Zimmerman deserves to win. If she isn't, Zimmerman has no case and deserves to lose. At this point, I have no real knowledge of the merits of the accusation. If true, it seems strange that it would take this long to uncover the conspiracy. If false, it seems strange that Zimmerman's lawyer would pursue a lawsuit on that basis. So it's strange no matter what. And since I have no personal stake in the outcome, I'll simply wait and see. So far - I'm betting that the merits of the accusation rest on pretty flimsy ground. The person who wrote the book that purportedly provides the evidence that Rachel Jeantel was an imposter is Joel Gilbert. As per NBC website: Gilbert is a frequent InfoWars guest who has produced movies that have falsely claimed that former President Barack Obama's real father was a Chicago communist, that Paul McCartney is dead and Elvis Presley is alive.
rockinkt Master Poster Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 2,092	__________________ "Townes Van Zandt is the best songwriter in the whole world and I'll stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table in my cowboy boots and say that." *Steve Earle* "I've met Bob Dylan's bodyguards and if Steve Earle thinks he can stand on Bob Dylan's coffee table, he's sadly mistaken." *Townes Van Zandt*

5th December 2019, 05:03 PM	#29
BStrong Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 13,079	Idiot right-wing attorney represents trigger happy idiot client. If they'd hold hands and jump into the nearest body of water it would be a tread day for the Republic.
	__________________ Music is what feelings sound like "Dulce bellum inexpertīs." - Erasmus

5th December 2019, 05:03 PM	#30
kookbreaker Evil Fokker Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 13,165	Klayman is a rabid Birther. Really second only to Taitz in frivolous Birther lawsuits. Pretty sure any theory he comes up with is laughable.
	__________________ www.spectrum-scientifics.com <- My store of science toys, instruments and general fun! Thanks for helping me win Best Toys in Philly Voter in 2011,2012, and 2014! We won' be discussing the disappointment that was 2013.

5th December 2019, 05:28 PM	#31
casebro Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 18,634	I would have thought the cops would have checked Trayvon's phone log to see who he was talking to. Is the claim going to be "he dialed HER number, but I picked up" ?
	__________________ Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.

5th December 2019, 05:34 PM	#32
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,513	Originally Posted by casebro I would have thought the cops would have checked Trayvon's phone log to see who he was talking to. Is the claim going to be "he dialed HER number, but I picked up" ? Maybe this is addressed in the text of the lawsuit. I don't know. What I do know is that this is going to be a **** show no matter what. I have no dog in this at all. Just some popcorn and some patience while it all plays out.

5th December 2019, 07:55 PM	#33
Giordano Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 17,646	Originally Posted by theprestige Maybe this is addressed in the text of the lawsuit. I don't know. What I do know is that this is going to be a **** show no matter what. I have no dog in this at all. Just some popcorn and some patience while it all plays out. I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma...

6th December 2019, 12:28 AM	#34
Checkmite Skepticifimisticalationist Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Gulf Coast Posts: 26,389	Originally Posted by Giordano I guess it might seem like a show if you ignore there are real people invoked for whom it will be a costly and very emotional trauma... There will probably always be people who see the suffering of others they don't care about as little more than entertainment. I believe it was one of George Carlin's bitter and misanthropic screeds disguised as "comedy routines" that most famously gave them free permission to do so proudly. But even at that time it wasn't an original idea.
	__________________ "¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD? ¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?" --- Carlos S., 2002

6th December 2019, 01:38 AM	#35
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 16,741	Originally Posted by BStrong Idiot right-wing attorney represents trigger happy idiot client.... ... based on the fantasist writings of a conspiracy theorist nutjob. What could possibly go wrong?
	__________________ I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms. - Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project) If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !