Zimmerman Faces 2nd Degree Murder

[Mean Green 93-98]

I don't know how accurate this assessment is, but

Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated upon release of the arrest affidavit that it was “so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge … everything in the affidavit is completely consistent with a defense of self-defense.”

After the release of the photo, however, Dershowitz went much further, telling Breitbart News that if the prosecutors did have the photo and didn’t mention it in the affidavit, that would constitute a “grave ethical violation,” since affidavits are supposed to contain “all relevant information.”

Dershowitz continued, “An affidavit that willfully misstates undisputed evidence known to the prosecution is not only unethical but borders on perjury because an affiant swears to tell not only the truth, but the whole truth, and suppressing an important part of the whole truth is a lie."

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/20/Dershowitz-prosecution-immoral

[UNT90]

I don't know how accurate this assessment is, but

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/20/Dershowitz-prosecution-immoral

Well, he is a little off in the "whole truth" affidavit assumption. You don't have to have every fact that points to guilt in the affidavit. You simply have to have enough to establish probable cause exists for the offense named in the warrant. Where the affiant could get into trouble is if he/she intentionally left out facts that would detract from said probable cause, with the key word being intentionally.

I thought it was strange that Martin's mother said that no matter what happens from this point forward, she was satisfied with an arrest. Seemed to imply that someone had told her that prosecution would not go well.

But, we are all just guessing because WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF THE FACTS!!!

[Monkeypox]

Yeah, I just don't see there being enough evidence for conviction. It's going to be hard to PROVE Zimmerman was the aggressor. Once the fight starts, the escalation and deadly force response are almost irrelevant. This will come down to "Can we PROVE Zimmerman started the fight." Doesn't have anything to do with what people think. And that's the way it works. And that's the way it's supposed to work.

[UNT90]

Yeah, I just don't see there being enough evidence for conviction. It's going to be hard to PROVE Zimmerman was the aggressor. Once the fight starts, the escalation and deadly force response are almost irrelevant. This will come down to "Can we PROVE Zimmerman started the fight." Doesn't have anything to do with what people think. And that's the way it works. And that's the way it's supposed to work.

They will look at Zimmerman's story. Did Zimmerman say he was on his way back to his car when confronted by Martin? If so, does where the incident occurred as related to the landmarks he gives in his 911 call back up his story? WHat did the actual witnesses see (because the actual witnesses are not all over GMA giving interviews)? Does the account of the struggle match up with ballistics on the scene? Did the struggle described by Zimmerman match the scene found by police?

I will tell you that if ZImmerman is lying, it won't take rocket science to prove it.

So much we don't know. Especially to try and judge it by a supposed racial slur Zimmerman may or may not have said in the 911 call.

Edited April 20, 2012 by UNT90

[UNT90]

Good article on the background of that neighborhood.

Reuters has done some of the best, most non-biased reporting on this case.

Edited April 26, 2012 by UNT90

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Look, Hispanic is not minority enough. We've already been through this. A black kid died, and a non-black person killed him. The media was in no way going to let facts stand in the way of cultivating another race riot. It's good for TV, and TV is what the media does.

It trickles out that the 911 tapes were spliced, the shooter grew up in Hispanic household, had injuries consistent to what he told police the night of the shooting, etc.

All that mattered last month was that the media had a full on Racism Package to sell and flame and sell and sell and sell. Only now are they actually digging into the story to flesh out the backgrounds and circumstances.

Edited April 27, 2012 by The Fake Lonnie Finch

[UNT90]

Look, Hispanic is not minority enough. We've already been through this. A black kid died, and a non-black person killed him. The media was in no way going to let facts stand in the way of cultivating another race riot. It's good for TV, and TV is what the media does.

It trickles out that the 911 tapes were spliced, the shooter grew up in Hispanic household, had injuries consistent to what he todl police the night of the shooting, etc.

All that matter last month was that the media had a full on Racism Package to sell and flame and sell and sell and sell. Only now are they actually digging into the story to flesh out the backgrounds and circumstances.

Black and white sells.

Shades of gray? Not so much.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Black and white sells.

Shades of gray? Not so much.

They'll still try to wedge in the racism angle. They have to...it's what they built this thing up as - a crazed, gun-wielding white man gunning down a candy-eating black kid.

Stupid.

By the way, we've got nothing on the black nurse killing the white lady and stealing her baby down near Houston. Black on white crime isn't racism to the media, right?

[UNT90]

http://news.yahoo.com/abc-news-exclusive-zimmerman-medical-report-shows-broken-204911351--abc-news-topstories.html

"A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a 'closed fracture' of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation."

"Also today, a trove of documents are being examined by lawyers for both the defense and prosecution as part of discovery in Zimmerman's trial -- including 67 CDs worth of documents, video of Martin on the night of the shooting, his autopsy report and videos of Zimmerman's questioning by police. Zimmerman's three-page medical report is included in those documents that the defense could use as evidence."

I wonder how many on here who have already tried and convicted Zimmerman reviewed all these documents? That would be none.

But keep on with your politically correct self righteousness. I here it's the in thing now-a-days.

[Censored by Laurie]

http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html

"A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a 'closed fracture' of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation."

"Also today, a trove of documents are being examined by lawyers for both the defense and prosecution as part of discovery in Zimmerman's trial -- including 67 CDs worth of documents, video of Martin on the night of the shooting, his autopsy report and videos of Zimmerman's questioning by police. Zimmerman's three-page medical report is included in those documents that the defense could use as evidence."

I wonder how many on here who have already tried and convicted Zimmerman reviewed all these documents? That would be none.

But keep on with your politically correct self righteousness. I here it's the in thing now-a-days.

Did he still squeeze the trigger and take the life of another human being?

[KRAM1]

Did he still squeeze the trigger and take the life of another human being?

Your point? I think we all know he did...the point here is why and if he felt he was in a life threatening situation under Florida law. Isn't that what the courts are looking to decide? I wasn't there that night and I doubt anyone who has posted here on the matter was either. So, it's all speculation and opinion. As UNT90 has tried to point out...along with others...Zimmerman seems to have already been tried and convicted in the press and the court of public opinion. Neither of which should...SHOULD...have any bearing on the outcome of this case.

[Censored by Laurie]

Your point? I think we all know he did...the point here is why and if he felt he was in a life threatening situation under Florida law. Isn't that what the courts are looking to decide? I wasn't there that night and I doubt anyone who has posted here on the matter was either. So, it's all speculation and opinion. As UNT90 has tried to point out...along with others...Zimmerman seems to have already been tried and convicted in the press and the court of public opinion. Neither of which should...SHOULD...have any bearing on the outcome of this case.

So...yes? Just wanting to make sure that hadn't changed.

[UNT90]

Did he still squeeze the trigger and take the life of another human being?

So you advocate arrest and prosecution of military members who kill enemy combatants in a time of war, police officers who kill in self defense, the particular police officer who shot and wounded the mass murderer at the military base in Kileen, among many others?

Kinda ridiculous, don't you think?

Edited May 17, 2012 by UNT90

[UNT90]

As UNT90 has tried to point out...along with others...Zimmerman seems to have already been tried and convicted in the press and the court of public opinion. Neither of which should...SHOULD...have any bearing on the outcome of this case.

And don't forget many on this board who were quick to believe everything the idiotic media presented. You know, like Zimmerman calling Martin a, GASP, black male.

Of course, these same people don't reverse course when it comes out that NBC altered the 911 call to make it seem like Zimmerman called Martin a, GASP, black male when all he was doing was responding to a question from the call taker who asked, GASP, the race of the suspect. .

Some people want to believe what they want to believe and will use anything to justify that belief. It has nothing to do with truth seeking, just justifying their own prejudiced ideas on how things SHOULD be.

Edited May 17, 2012 by UNT90

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

So you advocate arrest and prosecution of military members who kill enemy combatants in a time of war, police officers who kill in self defense. The particular police officer who shot and wounded the mass murderer at the military base in kileen, among many others?

Kinds ridiculous, don't you think?

So are we to assume a neighborhood crime watcher has had training equivalent to military and police?

[UNTLifer]

So are we to assume a neighborhood crime watcher has had training equivalent to military and police?

What is your stance on acting in self-defense? What about your's, CBL?

[meangreendork]

I really wish there had been recordings of the whole thing. It'd clear up the following:

1. Was it really necessary to follow/confront Martin? Was he acting suspiciously?

2. How did Zimmerman confront Martin? Would it warrant a violent response? Did he attempt to ID himself as neighborhood watch?

3. Who was the first to get violent?

If there was no need to follow Martin, then this hurts Zimmerman a great deal. If Zimmerman was impolite or didn't ID himself, it does more damage because Martin, being unfamiliar with the area wouldn't know if Zimmerman was just another criminal or a watchman. If Martin was looking into car windows and if he was being mouthy with Zimmerman for no reason, the case swings heavily against him, so it does come down to those 3 items, too bad that there were only 2 witnesses, of which one is dead.

[UNT90]

So are we to assume a neighborhood crime watcher has had training equivalent to military and police?

That was a specific response to CBL saying that if you shoot soemone, you should be arrested. You know that.

And if he had less training, that would be a factor in his favor, don't you think?

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

I really wish there had been recordings of the whole thing. It'd clear up the following:

1. Was it really necessary to follow/confront Martin? Was he acting suspiciously?

2. How did Zimmerman confront Martin? Would it warrant a violent response? Did he attempt to ID himself as neighborhood watch?

3. Who was the first to get violent?

If there was no need to follow Martin, then this hurts Zimmerman a great deal. If Zimmerman was impolite or didn't ID himself, it does more damage because Martin, being unfamiliar with the area wouldn't know if Zimmerman was just another criminal or a watchman. If Martin was looking into car windows and if he was being mouthy with Zimmerman for no reason, the case swings heavily against him, so it does come down to those 3 items, too bad that there were only 2 witnesses, of which one is dead.

This

[GreenMachine]

By the way, we've got nothing on the black nurse killing the white lady and stealing her baby down near Houston. Black on white crime isn't racism to the media, right?

I knew none of the local blow hards on this board would even remotely comment on this. I guess it doesn't fit their agenda.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

What is your stance on acting in self-defense? What about your's, CBL?

I'm fine with self defense, particularly when it comes to protecting family and property. But when it appears that the conflict could and should have been avoided that's when I start to really struggle with calling it self defense.

Its when someone is killed by a person who pursues them (not on their property) where I feel it is necessary to detain the pursuing party until a full investigation is complete and it is determined whether their is sufficient evidence to bring the pursuing party to trial for manslaughter or murder.

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

That was a specific response to CBL saying that if you shoot soemone, you should be arrested. You know that.

And if he had less training, that would be a factor in his favor, don't you think?

So you were assuming CBL was including police and military in his comment?

And no, him having less training shouldn't work in his favor...it means he should have not pursued Martin like the 911 dispatcher instructed him.

[Rudy]

Its when someone is killed by a person who pursues them (not on their property) where I feel it is necessary to detain the pursuing party until a full investigation is complete and it is determined whether their is sufficient evidence to bring the pursuing party to trial for manslaughter or murder.

You're not the first person that I have heard ask why they didn't "detain" Zimmerman until the investigation was complete. The problem is that it violates the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments. There is no such thing as "detaining" someone while you conduct an entire investigation. It is called arresting. You can not arrest without cause. You can detain someone while you conduct an INITIAL investigation, which was done. If you simply arrest someone while you conduct an investigation for days, not only are you violating state and federal laws, you are violating the suspect's civil rights, and the defense attorney will seek a Writ of Habeas Corpus. Not only will it be granted, your entire case will probably be shot to hell because you know that the fact that you unlawfully detained the individual will be presented as evidence. Say bye bye to your case. Oh, and you know that you will not only possibly lose your job and never work as a police officer again, but you will be big trouble with the judge, and you may even end up in jail yourself.

At the time of the initial investigation, they determined there was not enough evidence, or that there was enough reasonable doubt, not to arrest. I know, I know, this one dectective thought he should have been arrested that night. They probably determined that the case was too "flimsy" and to conduct a more thorough investigation and see if there was enough to obtain an arrest warrant.

[UNT90]

I'm fine with self defense, particularly when it comes to protecting family and property. But when it appears that the conflict could and should have been avoided that's when I start to really struggle with calling it self defense.

Its when someone is killed by a person who pursues them (not on their property) where I feel it is necessary to detain the pursuing party until a full investigation is complete and it is determined whether their is sufficient evidence to bring the pursuing party to trial for manslaughter or murder.

Making a big leap here. No one knows if Zimmerman pursued Martin or not. Again, we don't know. I will tell you that common, everyday citizens call and report suspicious activity to the police everyday, often following the suspicious person until the police arrive.

And there is absolutely nothing illegal or even morally wrong with that behavior.

Conflict can always be avoided by ignoring illegal or suspicious behavior. Do you really want to live in a society like that?

Edited May 17, 2012 by UNT90

[UNT90]

I really wish there had been recordings of the whole thing. It'd clear up the following:

1. Was it really necessary to follow/confront Martin? Was he acting suspiciously?

2. How did Zimmerman confront Martin? Would it warrant a violent response? Did he attempt to ID himself as neighborhood watch?

3. Who was the first to get violent?

If there was no need to follow Martin, then this hurts Zimmerman a great deal. If Zimmerman was impolite or didn't ID himself, it does more damage because Martin, being unfamiliar with the area wouldn't know if Zimmerman was just another criminal or a watchman. If Martin was looking into car windows and if he was being mouthy with Zimmerman for no reason, the case swings heavily against him, so it does come down to those 3 items, too bad that there were only 2 witnesses, of which one is dead.

Good post.

Only disagreement is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with anyone following someone and calling police when the other person is acting suspiciously. This has zero bearing in his trial.

#3 is the key, and it will be determined by physical evidence at the scene, careful examination of Zimmerman's account of events, and how the evidence matches or doesn't match that account of events. All of which WE DON'T KNOW.