Looks like George Zimmerman was a child molester too
- Thread starter Habit
- Start date
these cacs still gonna rally behind him, he represents 2much 2 their movement 4 them give any fux. these npr/cac/racists are going 2 need videotapes, ectoplasmic samples and the word of god 2 be convinced of this filthy fukk's actions. {in don king's voice}
ONLY IN AMERICA !
ONLY IN AMERICA !
Mikael Blowpiff
#LosIngobernabrehs
some of the best men i knew growing up were molesters
Um, I'm not going to ask you how. I really don't want to know.
npr? enlighten me please.....
or do you mean NRA
or do you mean NRA
SquirtleSwag
Rookie
first thought that came to my mind, duke probably tried to rape him and Trayvon was snuffin' that nikka so he had to pull the gat
Propaganda
Superstar
pedophile? child molester? dude was two years older. sensationalize much? 
still, fukk that guy.
still, fukk that guy.
pedophile? child molester? dude was two years older. sensationalize much?
still, fukk that guy.
It depends if you take her account of events as child's play or something more sinister. At 8 years old, I wasn't that sexually mature.
You can't use evidence of another crime to show that one acted according to that same behavior in this case. That would prejudice the jury against him. Granted that I haven't taken evidence yet, but absent some sort of exception, I doubt this information is applicable.
Mic-Nificent
I didn't eat nobody
I'd agree if not for the fact that she didn't come out publicly.
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
It's done all the time so no, you're wrong legal eagle.
Actually, you don't know a single thing about law. It's only allowed if it meets specific standards. Do want meet to go bring up the Florida rules of evidence so we can reference this specifically?
What I just said is a basic legal principle. Just because you didn't see the motions and the arguments for it being admitted, that doesn't mean that there are not legal hurdles. Seeing as how I'm working on a similar case right now at my summer job, I'd say I know more than you do on the subject. Unless you're about to tell me you're an attorney or know a bunch of attorneys.
Matter fact, here are the pertinent Florida Rules of Evidence:
(1) Character evidence generally.--Evidence of a person's character or a trait of character is inadmissible to prove action in conformity with it on a particular occasion, except:
(a) Character of accused.--Evidence of a pertinent trait of character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the trait.
(2) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts.--(a) Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a material fact in issue, including, but not limited to, proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad character or propensity
Fla. Stat. Ann. § 90.404 (West)
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
So let me get this right? You know more than the seasoned prosecutors I work for with all their accolades?
Typical coli foolishness. How about you read the rules and understand why that stuff ever gets admitted. It's tossed out 95% of the time. LOL@you thinking there is any chance of this being introduced at trial and a job not going
and being prejudiced against the prosecution for it.I just gave you the actual law that will apply in the case and you said..."but quote whatever you want."
