Closing Arguments Loom in Alleged 'Road Rage' Stabbing

Mar 9, 2013 Full story: Patch.com 12

Closing arguments will begin next week in the trial of Livermore resident Cort Holbrook who fatally stabbed Ricky Ziesmer of Fremont during a fight in a parking lot in downtown Livermore around 1:30 pm on March 9, 2011.

Full Story

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#2 Mar 11, 2013
Hopefully the members of the jury aren't like the raving morons here on Topix, who persist with their erroneous assumptions about the law and deliberate misrepresentations of the facts of the case to smear Holbrook, who was acting in self defense.

While some on the juror might not like the idea that he was in a verbal altercation, or even the possibility that he instigated a verbal confrontation, their personal opinions must be set aside to ensure that they weigh the facts of the case with impartiality and follow the instructions of the judge. All that the jury is allowed to consider for a verdict of murder, is the reasonableness of Holbrook's testimony that he feared for his life prior to getting out that knife, which provides an exemption to murder. The facts of the case are not in dispute - both the State and the defense agree that Holbrook stabbed Ziesmer. However, the State alleges it was unlawful, and the defense alleges it was lawful under self-defense. Thus, the only consideration the jury can be allowed to make is whether the defendant's testimony as to the conditions for the self-defense exemption was reasonable or not. Not even whether he believed that he feared for his life, as they have to accept his testimony on that, as there is not any other witness that can testify to his state of mind.

Hence, in order to find him guilty they would have to reach the determination that a reasonable person could not possibly have also concluded that he was at risk of GBI or death.

I think it is impossible to come to that conclusion.

Since: Aug 11

Concord, CA

#3 Mar 11, 2013
Did u go to Granada anon?

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#4 Mar 12, 2013
Riverbank resident wrote:
Did u go to Granada anon?
No.
MourningWood

San Francisco, CA

#6 Mar 31, 2013
Well we aren't on the jury are we Anon. Get your head out of your ass.
L town Native

San Francisco, CA

#7 Mar 31, 2013
The Real Anon wrote:
Hopefully the members of the jury aren't like the raving morons here on Topix, who persist with their erroneous assumptions about the law and deliberate misrepresentations of the facts of the case to smear Holbrook, who was acting in self defense.
While some on the juror might not like the idea that he was in a verbal altercation, or even the possibility that he instigated a verbal confrontation, their personal opinions must be set aside to ensure that they weigh the facts of the case with impartiality and follow the instructions of the judge. All that the jury is allowed to consider for a verdict of murder, is the reasonableness of Holbrook's testimony that he feared for his life prior to getting out that knife, which provides an exemption to murder. The facts of the case are not in dispute - both the State and the defense agree that Holbrook stabbed Ziesmer. However, the State alleges it was unlawful, and the defense alleges it was lawful under self-defense. Thus, the only consideration the jury can be allowed to make is whether the defendant's testimony as to the conditions for the self-defense exemption was reasonable or not. Not even whether he believed that he feared for his life, as they have to accept his testimony on that, as there is not any other witness that can testify to his state of mind.
Hence, in order to find him guilty they would have to reach the determination that a reasonable person could not possibly have also concluded that he was at risk of GBI or death.
I think it is impossible to come to that conclusion.
Guilty..plain and simple. Stop trying to over analyze the whole case. The jury got it right. Case closed. Now you can get back to posting your usual rants against the LPD.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#9 Apr 1, 2013
L town Native wrote:
<quoted text> Guilty..plain and simple. Stop trying to over analyze the whole case. The jury got it right. Case closed. Now you can get back to posting your usual rants against the LPD.
That's someone else you're thinking of. All I have posted is that they have in the past prioritized raising revenue over public safety issues and that I object.

I think you're think of this lunatic with handle initials of MW: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/livermore-ca/...

Since: Mar 11

Livermore 94551

#10 Apr 1, 2013
L town Native wrote:
<quoted text>Guilty..plain and simple. Stop trying to over analyze the whole case. The jury got it right. Case closed. Now you can get back to posting your usual rants against the LPD.
His rants are about the fire department. In Anon's last post^^^, he's trying to act like he has no idea what you're talking about and places the blame on someone else- as in you got him confused with MourningWood. But Anon usually rants about the overpaid fire department. MourningWood made one comment about police not using resources/man power as effectively as it could be...not nearly a rant.

Since: Sep 12

Livermore, CA

#11 Apr 1, 2013
The Real Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
That's someone else you're thinking of. All I have posted is that they have in the past prioritized raising revenue over public safety issues and that I object.
I think you're think of this lunatic with handle initials of MW: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/livermore-ca/...
Anon you can view me as a lunatic if you'd like to, I don't think that you are a bad person... I just think you misrepresent yourself. You get so caught up in your crusade that you can't see the other side of the arguement and in turn put down others. You come off as an arrogant, opinionated, self righteous, know it all, snide, irresponsible, verbal assassin. I'm not the only one that feels this way. I can honestly say that I hope that you someday find that happiness that you are desperately searching for.
MourningWood

San Francisco, CA

#13 Apr 6, 2013
The Real Anon wrote:
<quoted text>
That's someone else you're thinking of. All I have posted is that they have in the past prioritized raising revenue over public safety issues and that I object.
I think you're think of this lunatic with handle initials of MW: http://www.topix.com/forum/city/livermore-ca/...
Also if you had even bothered to read my post you would see that you agree with my views on LPD. I resepect the hell out of them but they need to stop making revenue collecting the highest priority. Preparing to be insulted again...

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#14 Apr 7, 2013
Ssophiiee wrote:
<quoted text>
His rants are about the fire department. In Anon's last post^^^, he's trying to act like he has no idea what you're talking about and places the blame on someone else- as in you got him confused with MourningWood. But Anon usually rants about the overpaid fire department. MourningWood made one comment about police not using resources/man power as effectively as it could be...not nearly a rant.
I don't bother posting much about how abusive the compensation and pension scheme for public safety personnel is, because its a well-established fact that doesn't require any corroboration. When public safety workers can earn millions of dollars in retirement, there's a huge problem. And I would hardly call pointing that out, a rant.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#15 Apr 7, 2013
MourningWood wrote:
<quoted text> Also if you had even bothered to read my post you would see that you agree with my views on LPD. I resepect the hell out of them but they need to stop making revenue collecting the highest priority. Preparing to be insulted again...
Well then we do agree on that. But as far as I can tell, that's all we agree on. Not that it matters. I'm probably not going to change your opinion, and you're probably not going to change mine.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#16 Apr 7, 2013
MourningWood wrote:
<quoted text> Anon you can view me as a lunatic if you'd like to, I don't think that you are a bad person... I just think you misrepresent yourself. You get so caught up in your crusade that you can't see the other side of the arguement and in turn put down others. You come off as an arrogant, opinionated, self righteous, know it all, snide, irresponsible, verbal assassin. I'm not the only one that feels this way. I can honestly say that I hope that you someday find that happiness that you are desperately searching for.
Well thank you for the psycho-analysis, Dr Freud. I don't believe I have ever misrepresented myself, and if you think you have some evidence that I have, then by all means post it here and I will be happy to respond to it. As for your labels - I'm not interested in them - and as for happiness, I'm quite content. I know who I am, and one thing I know is I don't need approval from strangers on the internet.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Los Altos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
US stocks start lower 45 min Go Blue Forever 56
pro lifers are bigoted 3 hr Rotten Apples 3
Topix is Against the First Amendment 3 hr Rotten Apples 18
Apple CEO Cook Goes From Record Sales to IPhone... 3 hr Rotten Apples 4
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 8 hr Misty Me 7,968
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) 23 hr do it here 16,011
How would you like to/be proposed? Tue Jimmy 2

Los Altos News Video

Los Altos Dating
Find my Match

Los Altos Jobs

Los Altos People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Los Altos News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Los Altos

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]