Zimmermann verdict in. Case for civil suits?

What about civil suits going the other way - like GZ suing whatever tv stations that redacted key elements of the 911 call to make him out to be a big racist? some of those actions directly flavored the public opinion on this thing for some time. I don't know all the potential here, but he has to move to another state, probably hire bodyguards for all his family members, lost weight, etc. I suspect an imaginative soul could go on for some time with ideas. He is going to have some big bills to pay.......
Click to expand...
Very, very unlikely. Zimmerman is a public figure, and for a public figure to prevail in a libel/slander suit, he/she must prove not only that the utterer of the libel/slander knew that the information was false, but that it was uttered with malice. That's a tough nut to crack.
 
I just watched the defense team's post-verdict presser. One of the journalists specifically asked O'Mara about civil immunity, and he quite confidently claimed that in the event of civil litigation, that they would seek and obtain immunity. He obviously didn't see it as an area of great contention.
 
Lawsuits; book-movie deals...

The civil actions & Hollywood deals will now be brought out. :rolleyes:
To my limited knowledge, GZ & his lawyers filed suit against NBC News for the 911 call statements & the call center information.
As noted too, the Martin family already settled a wrongful death civil case with the Sanford HOA for a reported $1,000,000.00.
As Mark O'Mara stated in the media briefing, GZ will seek immunity in future civil actions since the jury found him not guilty.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if GZ & his legal team don't go after more media outlets for their 2012 statements & news stories. Zimmerman was labeled a killer a vigalante a stalker etc w/o any trial or hearing.
In central Florida then in the national media, he was dragged down & slandered.

The Orlando FL news media started to shift back as more facts & testimony came out but if I were GZ, Id still feel more legal action should be considered.
George Zimmerman & O'Mara(who started as a media pundit on the case for WKMG-TV just like OJ Simpson's lawyer Johnnie Cochran in the LA area did) will get film/TV & book deals.

I'm thinking maybe William H Macy or maybe Matthew Modine could play O'Mara. :D
 
I was curious how much Zimmerman might get from NBC were he to sue them for doctoring that 911 tape. Or, if he can even sure them for such a thing. I know I certainly would be looking into it.

The FBI report said they found no evidence of this being a race based crime so I am not sure how DOJ can do much of anything, though with Holder in charge nothing would surprise me.
 
It's my understanding that Zimmerman has already sued NBC for the doctored 911 tapes ... don't know where the case stands ... I appreciate all the reasoned explanations of FL law regarding civil suits .. I think he's protected, but that doesn't mean he won't be sued, or that the feds won't come in and try him on a civil rights charge, given Obama interjecting himself into the case before it even went to trial ... this is what you get when a criminal case is turned into a media circus ...
 
Very, very unlikely. Zimmerman is a public figure, and for a public figure to prevail in a libel/slander suit, he/she must prove not only that the utterer of the libel/slander knew that the information was false, but that it was uttered with malice. That's a tough nut to crack.
Click to expand...

This seems circular to me. Zimmerman was only a public figure due to the uproar generated by the media, in large part due to their manipulation of the facts.

E.G.

We can't be held liable for libel because the outrageous lies we told were so convincing that Mr. Zimmerman became nationally known and therefore a public figure.
Click to expand...
 
I was watching Fox just a little while ago and two judges (Judge Jeanine Pirro and Judge Alex E.Ferrer, former Florida Judge, Lawyer, and retired police officer) both said they can bring charges but he is immune because it was self defense and is protected by SYG law under its self defense partition. Who knows if this is 100% accurate or not. What I would expect is a civil rights case from Holder and his goons, saying he profiled Martin.
 
I was curious how much Zimmerman might get from NBC were he to sue them for doctoring that 911 tape.
Click to expand...
We probably won't know. Those cases are usually disposed through settlement agreements, and one of the terms of the settlement is usually that the plaintiff keep quiet about it.
 
I don't think he is immune from civil suit ... yet. I just read an article quoting O'Mara as csmsss wrote in post #43:

Mark O'Mara said:
O'Mara said if anyone tries to sue Zimmerman, "we will seek and we will get civil immunity in a civil hearing. And we will see just how many civil lawsuits have spawned from this fiasco."
Click to expand...
So Zimmerman's own attorney doesn't think he currently has immunity from civil lawsuit.
 
Do you think this trial will adversely affect stand-your-ground laws? I see this verdict putting pressure on proposed laws and possibly on jurisdictions with SYG already on the books.
 
Do you think this trial will adversely affect stand-your-ground laws?
Click to expand...
If political pressure from within a given state causes the state to give in, then I see it as a possibility, but not on a national level due to the fact that state rights to self govern and their current law supersedes the federal law and some states will not waiver to political spin.

Keep in mind the political spin on this case has reached a level that it never should have. The repeated statements like "loosing a fight" rather than "being assaulted" are designed specifically to warp the truth and spin the truth.

Unfortunately people tend to believe something repeated and the majority of the media have political motivation. Until there is proper and fair reporting of facts the US will change politically through methods of "Politics by Media" in ways they never would have.
 
It will most likely result in considerable debate about stand-your-ground, but it shouldn't. This was never a stand-your-ground case.

If Zimmerman's story is the version you accept, both people had a right to be in the complex but Zimmerman was jumped, pinned to the ground, and was having his head beat against a concrete sidewalk. Retreat (irrespective of whether or not it could have been accomplished "in complete safety" was not an option. In his mind (according to this theory) it was shoot in self defense ... or die. In fact, he says Martin said "You're going to die tonight."

Conversely, if you choose to accept the version that Martin didn't initiate the physical conflict, you have to believe that Zimmerman shot him just because he was there and he was black -- the prosecution's argument. In this version, it wasn't Martin who used the deadly force, so again it would not have been a stand-your-ground case.

Just before the verdict, I saw some taking heads advancing the argument that Martin had a right to "stand his ground." But there is no evidence that he did so. Either he was shot in cold blood, or he initiated an assault against Zimmerman, which the Florida stand-your-ground law does NOT convey a right to do. You can defend yourself against a physical assault, but the law doesn't create or convey any right to initiate an assault because you think the other person is a "creepy-a$$ cracker of a white guy."

I think stand-your-ground is solid law and simply codifies what should be (and what some people say has always been) in common law anyway. Laws that dictate that a victim MUST attempt to flee before being allowed to defend themselves are an affront to decency and to common sense. And the related notion that a victim who succeeds in defending him/herself could then be vulnerable to a civil lawsuit by the assailant of the assailants heirs is likewise an affront to decency and to common sense.
 
Do you think this trial will adversely affect stand-your-ground laws? I see this verdict putting pressure on proposed laws and possibly on jurisdictions with SYG already on the books.
Click to expand...

A few states may tweak their "stand your ground" laws due to media pressure: Most states will not. The state of OK will not. One media outlet in OK City predicted the end of the OK "stand your ground" law after a local prosecutor gave three passes for righteous shoots in a short period. Few, if any, in the OK legislature noticed.
 
I thought one of the news channels reported tha Florida Law is- If you are proven Innocent, no wrongfull law suit can be brought against you.
 
The DOJ will have a harder row to hoe for a hate crime conviction considering the result of the FBI investigation was that race was NOT a factor.

Something I have not seen discussed but is relevant is that the defense was forced to file motions to get the color photos of Zimmerman's injuries instead of a grainy black and white photo the prosecution gave them. Several requests were ignored.
When you see the photos side by side the differences are remarkable in showing the injuries.
Also in the same motion was a request for the polygraph that was passed successfully the night of the incident. Same reasons, requests ignored.

Mark O’Mara has filed Motions for Sanctions Against The State for Discovery Violations.

Amazing.....
 
4runnerman said:
I thought one of the news channels reported tha Florida Law is- If you are proven Innocent, no wrongfull law suit can be brought against you.
Click to expand...
See post #26. I cited the law, and explained why I think it does not automatically protect Zimmerman. Zimmerman's own attorney, O'Mara, seems to agree. He acknowledged that a civil suit could be initiated.
 
See post #26. I cited the law, and explained why I think it does not automatically protect Zimmerman. Zimmerman's own attorney, O'Mara, seems to agree. He acknowledged that a civil suit could be initiated.
Click to expand...
In yesterday's post-verdict presser, spoke to this and indicated that if civil litigation were initiated, he would seek and obtain a judgement of civil immunity. Though I cannot cite his specific wording from memory, he made it quite clear that he did not think he would have any trouble obtaining such an order of immunity. And I don't think he will either.
 
I have 2 questions about law and civil rights as it pertains to the Zimmerman trial.

1. Wouldn't a civil trial violate the 5th amendment double jeopardy clause? The double jeopardy clause prohibits anyone from being prosecuted twice for the same crime.

2. Why is the federal department of justice involved in a local crime? The NAACP has requested the President and DOJ to pursue civil action.
 
It has happened before. The civil rights violation is a separate crime and the Feds have the ability to do such. It happened for Rodney King but not for Diallo, IIRC.

Thread lightly folks - a hint.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top