I have no idea how to reply to this other than to quote myself again. His defense IS NOT "believe me." His defense is "I killed in self defense." Period. End of discussion. NOW the prosecution has to prove (the burden is on them, not Zimmerman), that he didn't. Beyond a reasonable doubt. That's how the system works.
Trust me, in 99% of cases you will agree with this. Without this all of the racial injustice and poor people injustice and whatever else injustice you holler about all the time would be a lot worse. However, when it is a white man on trial for killing a black person you become all indignant that EVERYTHING anyone says related to a case has to come in ALL the time.
Sheesh I even think Zimmerman was in the wrong here and probably murdered the kid, but lets not eviscerate the efficacy of a competent judicial system to hang a man.
Bojangle killed it with this post.
Putting the "white man" stuff aside that you find insulting, RJ...Bojangle is 100% right here. For someone who normally posts about the wrongly convicted, and the injustice of the system....you are advocating for a completely biased system against the accused. The number of wrongly convicted people would grow exponentially if they changed the rules of evidence to what you're advocating for. Let me give you a simple example...
In almost every jurisdiction that I know about, an individual has to fill out a financial affidavit that is supplied to the court when applying for the public defender. there has to be a showing of indigency before a pd is appointed by the judge. Conservatively, I would say 1 out of 3 people who fill out this affidavit lie about their finances. Conservatively. Especially the drug dealers. No one ever really cares. No one looks into it. It is perjury, however. If the laws were changed to how you want it, I can guarantee you there would be some prosecutor offices who would look much deeper into these affidavits. Imagine if they can show they lied under oath to the court about their finances! What else could they be lying about? Wink wink.
This is just a small example to show how dangerous your ideas are.
Then, on top of that, you keep saying "how can you believe anything Zimmerman says?" Again, an unbelievably dangerous notion. To require Zimmerman to prove any of his actions to a jury goes against the very foundation of our system. As I said in an earlier post, I am very thankful we live in a country where the government has to prove guilt. I would think you would agree.
You are entitled to your opinions, of course. I, obviously, vehemently disagree. This is not a personal attack, but I agree with bojangle. I truly hope you never serve on a criminal jury based upon your opinions of the system.