Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

[joecct]

Well why not? We'll have another "Trial of the Century" in Florida.

I think they overcharged to scare Z into pleading to involuntary manslaughter. But, I am not a lawyer, just a cynic.

[bronconick]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

That's my guess, too. IIRC, the investigating detective wanted to bring manslaughter charges but got overruled by his chief.

[walrus]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Shouldn't Z be dead already? We don't need no stinkin' trial

“Let me tell you, the things that’s about to happen, to these honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, these —- people. It has been long overdue,” Williams said in an interview. “My prize right now this evening … is gonna be the bounty, the arrest, dead or alive, for George Zimmerman. You feel me?”

[Slap Shot]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Shouldn't Z be dead already? We don't need no stinkin' trial

As an outsider I get your point and even agree, but not sure I'd be thinking clearly if I thought someone murdered my son.

[Twitch Boy]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Affidavit of probable cause (PDF warning, couple NSFW words)

tl;dr: Not much we haven't already heard. Looks like they're riding on Zimmerman exiting the truck and following after being instructed not to by the dispatcher, and the screaming on the 911 tape being Trayvon.

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Affidavit of probable cause (PDF warning, couple NSFW words)

tl;dr: Not much we haven't already heard. Looks like they're riding on Zimmerman exiting the truck and following after being instructed not to by the dispatcher, and the screaming on the 911 tape being Trayvon.

I wonder how they got "instructed" Zimmerman not to follow Martin from: "We don't need you to do that."

[huskyfan]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

IMHO charging him with 2nd degree is letting him off. isn't that awfully hard to prove?

[joecct]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

IMHO charging him with 2nd degree is letting him off. isn't that awfully hard to prove?

The cynic in me is out again.

You charge him with Murder2 to get the community off your back. Then you muck up the prosecution just enough that he walks. You did your job, the jury just did not believe the facts. Whatever you do, never give the jury the option to convict on a lesser charge.

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

The cynic in me is out again.

You charge him with Murder2 to get the community off your back. Then you muck up the prosecution just enough that he walks. You did your job, the jury just did not believe the facts. Whatever you do, never give the jury the option to convict on a lesser charge.

Again assuming there's no evidentiary bombshell we're not aware of, how cynical is it to charge a guy with an offense you know you can't prove? As things now stand it won't be necessary to "muck" up the prosecution, since there's no evidence to show Zimmerman did anything legally wrong. The unsubstantiated guesses of what transpired by so-called witnesses who didn't actually SEE what went down strikes me as pretty thin gruel.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I wonder how they got "instructed" Zimmerman not to follow Martin from: "We don't need you to do that."

Once he started following TM, he was no longer acting in any capacity as a community watcher. He was just a redneck cracker with a gun. So he confronts TM anyway. Then TM jumps Zim and starts pounding him into oblivion - ramming his head repeatedly into the pavement (which, more and more, seems like a reasonable reaction . . . if it had happened).

From seeing the police video, though, it's kind of hard to believe that happened. The police say they took him directly to the station. Nowhere in their report does it mention about taking Zim home to put on some clean clothes, then taking him to a clinic to have his head trauma examined, or his facial lacerations cared for. There was no time for him to get stitches, never mind get stitches removed. Yet the guy shows up at the station without a scratch on him and without a thread on any of his clothes out place?

All of it points to a couple possibilities. Either Zim has a screw loose, and has no business walking the street packing heat.

Or he's the Terminator. Circa Terminator 2.

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Once he started following TM, he was no longer acting in any capacity as a community watcher. He was just a redneck cracker with a gun. So he confronts TM anyway. Then TM jumps Zim and starts pounding him into oblivion - ramming his head repeatedly into the pavement (which, more and more, seems like a reasonable reaction . . . if it had happened).

From seeing the police video, though, it's kind of hard to believe that happened. The police say they took him directly to the station. Nowhere in their report does it mention about taking Zim home to put on some clean clothes, then taking him to a clinic to have his head trauma examined, or his facial lacerations cared for. There was no time for him to get stitches, never mind get stitches removed. Yet the guy shows up at the station without a scratch on him and without a thread on any of his clothes out place?

All of it points to a couple possibilities. Either Zim has a screw loose, and has no business walking the street packing heat.

Or he's the Terminator. Circa Terminator 2.

Well, there's a balanced piece of reasoning. But in all of that blather you didn't answer the question I asked: how does "we don't need you to do that," become an "instruction" not to follow Martin? Why don't you wait until the nature and extent of Zimmerman's possible injuries are described by the people who actually saw them. Or will you persist in relying on your intuition and extensive medical training?

In your world violently assaulting someone else because he's a "redneck cracker" may be appropriate, but not in civilized society. After all, this young man had only a bag of "skillets" in his possession. He was as pure as the driven snow. And such a violent reaction to someone who may have been following him, but nevertheless presented no obvious threat, would seem to be a bit of an overreaction.

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Well, there's a balanced piece of reasoning. But in all of that blather you didn't answer the question I asked: how does "we don't need you to do that," become an instruction not to follow Martin? Why don't you wait until the nature and extent of Zimmerman's possible injuries are described by the people who actually saw them. Or will you persist in relying on your intuition?

I'm not relying on anything. It's not up to me to decide his guilt or innocence. And I never said the 911 operator's comment was a definitive injunction against following him. But it takes a certain level of willful obtuseness to deny that it changes the legal context.

Mainly I'm just having fun with folks whose convictions are so unshakable that they find it easier to construct some sort of conspiracy - with no discernible evidence - than to accept that things may, in fact, appear to be what they seem.

$.02

[Handyman]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

The cynic in me is out again.

You charge him with Murder2 to get the community off your back. Then you muck up the prosecution just enough that he walks. You did your job, the jury just did not believe the facts. Whatever you do, never give the jury the option to convict on a lesser charge.

And then the DA does not get re-elected because he takes the fall. No way they let this one get screwed up when everyone is watching over them. If they dont dot every I and cross every T the world will know about it and they will be canned faster than you can say mistrial.

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I'm not relying on anything. It's not up to me to decide his guilt or innocence. And I never said the 911 operator's comment was a definitive injunction against following him. But it takes a certain level of willful obtuseness to deny that it changes the legal context.

Mainly I'm just having fun with folks whose convictions are so unshakable that they find it easier to construct some sort of conspiracy - with no discernible evidence - than to accept that things may, in fact, appear to be what they seem.

$.02

The only conspiracies advanced here are in the minds of the race pimps and their media allies who find it appropriate to fraudulently edit audio in order to make Zimmerman look worse. I have qualified every statement I've made on this subject based on "what we know now," or "in the absence of bombshell evidence." From where I sit, you're doing pretty good on your own when it comes to obtuseness. Based on nothing but prejudice and bigotry you've decided Zimmerman is a "redneck cracker." I can also understand walking back from your diagnosis of his possible injuries, it puts you in the same category as "Dr." Chris Mathews (and other media lefties) who similarly concluded Martin hadn't assaulted Zimmerman, because "he doesn't look injured to me." But, as you've indicated, it really doesn't matter. Your "reasoning" is that Martin didn't violently assault Zimmerman and even if he had, it doesn't make any difference.

[Old Pio]

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

And then the DA does not get re-elected because he takes the fall. No way they let this one get screwed up when everyone is watching over them. If they dont dot every I and cross every T the world will know about it and they will be canned faster than you can say mistrial.

Two words: Casey Anthony. Against whom there was far more d*mning evidence than Zimmerman.