Judge in Zimmerman murder case also taking on Zimmerman v. NBC

[DebFrmHell]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-nbc-judge-20121214,0,5740654.story] Debra S. Nelson will oversee both[/url]

SANFORD — In three weeks, Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson, who's overseeing the George Zimmerman murder case, will inherit a new one: George Zimmerman's defamation suit against NBC Universal Media LLC.

Rarely is a judge asked to preside over a man's murder case and, at the same time, his suit demanding a big payout from a major media company that he accuses of defamation.

Mark O'Mara represents Zimmerman in both cases. In an email exchange Thursday, he wrote that he sees no conflict with Nelson handling both cases and has no current plans to ask her to give the defamation suit to another judge....

It must be me.  I can't see how there is anything but a conflict of interest unless she removes herself after the NBC case.  For a woman that doesn't watch TV, she is in for a big surprise, IMO.  Perhaps it will enlighten her as to the Motions that have been filed on behalf of George Zimmerman by the Defense Team.

[nomatter_nevermind]

How is it a conflict of interest?

[annoyedbeyond]

How is it a conflict of interest?

I'm not seeing it either.

[DebFrmHell]

Like I said,  It must be me.  There are things that are going to be brought up with the racial implications that are going to be most likely discounted at the immunity hearing or trial if it comes to that.  There is the scope of questions that could be asked that might used in the future.

Since it hasn't happened and I am not able to see into the future...it just must be me!

On the Good News front...you both agreed with each other.

**Looks around for pigs with wings**

[RickyJim]

On the Good News front...you both agreed with each other.

**Looks around for pigs with wings**

I agree with them too.   Is that good or bad news? 

[unitron]

If they were using the same jury for both cases that would be a conflict, but the judge is there to be a referee between the two sides so that the jury only hears what it should in a particular case.  As long as the judge is fair to both sides in each case, I don't see that as a conflict.

Now if the judge, rather than a jury, were deciding the case, that would be different.

[nomatter_nevermind]

Now if the judge, rather than a jury, were deciding the case, that would be different.

Why?

[unitron]

Why?

Because if the judge is both referee and jury (decider of outcome), then it strengthens the arguement that what the judge learns at one trial that's not eligible to be introduced at the other might still influence their decision on the verdict, as opposed to just their decisions on objections and evidence admissibility and all of that other regular judge stuff.