Wow! Interesting when you hear the whole story.......
Zimmerman=Guilty
He shot the kid and walked out of jail that day. CMON!!!
Ten days after his father was hospitalized, Zimmerman noticed another young man in the neighborhood, acting in a way he found familiar, so he made another call to police.
"We've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy," Zimmerman said, as Trayvon Martin returned home from the store.
That's the "evidence", and that makes the killing okay?
What a terrible crocked up story.
this one is easy - I sure wish I knew how you know that Zimmerman's guilt, at least from a legal perspective, is assured.
I don't think the story linked matters in the least.
What matters is the incompetent performance by the prosecution, both in the charging document and at the bail hearing.
The affidavit attached to the charging document is woefully insufficient to support a second degree murder charge. In fact, I think it arguably makes a case for Zimmerman's defense of self-defense! I laughed when I read the affidavit's statement that "there was as scuffle" without any, I mean any notion of why it was started or who caused it. From Zimmerman's perspective, of course there was a scuffle - and he was getting pounded on. Again, charging documents are supposed to support each and every element of the applicable charge and not make the defense's affirmative defense.
And the bail hearing was a joke. The detective - brought in by an experienced special prosecutor to go over the Sanford Police Department's work, was ill prepared, brought no notes, and had not even read the evidence. The defense attorney even offered to give the state a copy of the medical records in the case substantiating Zimmerman's injuries (although the severity of those injuries has yet to be put into evidence). The detective could not explicate a theory of the case, could not substantiate why the term profiling was used in the affidavit, and really, sent the prosecution's case into a corner, because the non-answers at a bail hearing will provide significant impeachment possibilities at trial.
I don't get it. The prosecutor is experienced and knows how to press charges competently. And ditto for the two detectives.
It is really hard not to conclude that the prosecution has brought second degree murder charges for political reasons to gain peace from the mob. They are simply mailing it in - shocking, really. That may be an expedient thing to buy peace for a while, but really, with a special prosecutor brought in to do a professional job in the name of justice, so far the conduct has been unreal. You can bet the judge thought so too. 150,000 grand in bail for a murder case? Zimmerman out free? The judge was not at all impressed by the state's evidence or its case.
I am disappointed. If I was an informed thinking black person, I would be really disappointed at the prosecution. Is it really the case that Prosecutor Corey thinks that blacks can be manipulated merely by bringing second degree murder charge with no theory of a crime or essential elements of the offense to support the charge? And note by and large the media has not called her on it.
Look, I don't have a duck in this hunt. Let a competent justice system do its work. But so far, this has been a miserable mess for the prosecution, and I cannot figure out why. The case may simply not be prosecutable, no matter what people hope and wish for.
If Zimmerman really acted like a ruthless vigilante, then why did he get into a fight and get his head bashed in? Seems to me that he could have shot Martin immediately- that didn't happen. Martin chose to fight and he could have run away. He kicks Zimmerman's ass. Zimmerman's fears for his life- at this point he pulls out the gun, bang bang. Martin dies.
Mistakes on both sides here. A life lost. Many details we don't know and I'm not jumping to any conclusions. Too many folks here want to hang the guy. He will have his day in court. Patience people.
It appears highly unlikely that Zimmermann gets convicted of second degree murder. That charge is an overreach, cooked up for political purposes to quell the public furor, created by an irresponsible media that literally sold this as an unprovoked, race-based hate crime. Every shred of evidence coming out has been supporting Zimmermann's contention that he shot in self-defense - the partial eye witness account, Zimmermann's injuries, etc.
Now it seems that the special prosecutor on the case failed to reveal the photograph of Zimmermann's bloodied head in her affidavit supporting the charges. This was a shirking of her responsibility as prosecutor and an illegal act. Her apparently politically tainted approach to this case is troubling.
Unless the prosecution has some bombshell up their sleeve, they do not have the makings of a murder conviction. To whip the public into a frenzy and expectation is setting the stage for problems down the road.
That does not diminish the tragedy of a kid losing his life. It is an awful, tragic event that never should have happened. Legally speaking, however, the evidence coming out suggests that Zimmermann should not, and will not, be convicted of murder. We'll see what comes out at the trial, but I predict an acquittal.
Swellzner wrote:
It appears highly unlikely that Zimmermann gets convicted of second degree murder. That charge is an overreach, cooked up for political purposes to quell the public furor, created by an irresponsible media that literally sold this as an unprovoked, race-based hate crime. Every shred of evidence coming out has been supporting Zimmermann's contention that he shot in self-defense - the partial eye witness account, Zimmermann's injuries, etc.
Now it seems that the special prosecutor on the case failed to reveal the photograph of Zimmermann's bloodied head in her affidavit supporting the charges. This was a shirking of her responsibility as prosecutor and an illegal act. Her apparently politically tainted approach to this case is troubling.
Unless the prosecution has some bombshell up their sleeve, they do not have the makings of a murder conviction. To whip the public into a frenzy and expectation is setting the stage for problems down the road.
That does not diminish the tragedy of a kid losing his life. It is an awful, tragic event that never should have happened. Legally speaking, however, the evidence coming out suggests that Zimmermann should not, and will not, be convicted of murder. We'll see what comes out at the trial, but I predict an acquittal.
Pretty much what I was going to say.
I wept as I read this heart warming feel good story of self sacrifice. Surely George's self less acts make him eligible for some kind of humanitarian award. Our society should be ashamed of using state resources to persecute one of America's greatest living citizens.
Race riots to ensue if not guilty verdict comes in.
Victory riots(race riot in disguise) to ensue if guilty verdict comes in.
Riots to ensue.
And for the last time, Zimmerman is not white!
We, the white delegation, do not claim him.
George Zimmerman is solely responsible for the death. He was the one that initiated the confrontation. Had he not done that, nobody would be dead.
I am not going to pretend I am smart enough to know what level of crime he is guilty of but his actions were the cause of a death.
chill, kids wrote:
If Zimmerman really acted like a ruthless vigilante, then why did he get into a fight and get his head bashed in?
Head bashed in = loosing a fight he started.
Swellzner wrote:
That charge is an overreach, cooked up for political purposes to quell the public furor, created by an irresponsible media that literally sold this as an unprovoked, race-based hate crime.
Thank God you are smart enough to see through the media bullshit. But all us po black folk think Zimmerman is guilty because he is white and that this is exclusively a hate crime. Oh, and we all voted for Obama simply because he is black.
Interesting take on this in the paper today:
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/148756895.html
Comments by Alan Dershowitz (who you would think would be on board with the anti-Zimmerman crowd).
Dershowitz is one sick puppy. He's the main proponent of torture of the members of his own identical ancient Semitic race who oppose apartheid, genocide, and the State of Israel. Without Dershowitz there would be no waterboarding nor a Guantanemo Bay death camp. He thinks Jews are superior Nazi beings and will forever be able to blast the hell out of a billion Arabs in the Middle East. Fortunately we know from history that time levels the playing field and eventually the Arabs will recover Palestine.
Interesting that the "whole" story makes no mention of his father's Jewishness or that this Jewish judsge of a father made George's earlier run-ins with the law go away in a legal sense
fixed wrote:
chill, kids wrote:If Zimmerman really acted like a ruthless vigilante, then why did he get into a fight and get his head bashed in?
Head bashed in = loosing a fight he started.
Under the Florida statute it is perfectly legal to start a fight, then when it starts to go against you (and you are in reasonable fear of your life) you can then kill the other person. So as horrifying as it is, even if the state could prove that Zimmerman physically attacked Martin, as long as Z could convince a jury that he was reasonably in fear of his life then he is in the clear (legally, morally it is a whole different story).
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force. {/i}
this one is easy - if he initiated the confrontation, why didn't the state make that case? My guess is not only do they not have any evidence of the same, eyewitness testimony tends to support exactly the opposite. But no matter, the state has not come close.
Forget about what you think. Look at what the state is doing. It makes no sense. Why would they begin the case with woefully inadequate assertions and no theory of the case. Again, it is not about your belief, but what the state can prove. And the state is right now 9 miles behind.
I am so surprised that none of the typical suspects - Sharpton, et. al., have not criticized the prosecution for bringing (to date) a weak and incompetent case. It makes one believe the usual suspects care more about the cause and not about justice.
The state never investigated the case thoroughly initially treating it as if it was a traffic infraction. They did not test Zimmerman for drugs - an unarmed teenager was shot dead walking home in his own neighborhood. They did not check Trayvon's cell phone to see who he was talking to at the time. How hard was it to look at his cell phone log and call the person who he was speaking to at the time to see if useful information could be provided? A proper investigation was not done. If the screams on the 911 call turn out to be Trayvon's, Zimmerman is going to have a tough time claiming cell defense.