A question not asked: Forensics in Zimmerman case..

[Placementvs.Calibur]

Following someone and asking why they're in your neighborhood isn't a crime nor does it justify a fight. If Trayvon was in fear of someone following him, then he should've called the Police. In most states when a fight occurs, and physical wounds are observed on either party by the Police, both parties are wisked off to jail. God Forbid this similiar situation happens to you while carrying, and you choose to use deadly force because you're in fear for your life. Mr.Z, if tried and convicted, will set a presidence, and will give the anti-gun lobby the fuel to take on the laws as it applies to carrying and self defense. If you are unable to interpret the laws as I've posted, or unable to decifer fact from fiction, then you shouldn't be carrying in public. You're letting emotions interfere with common sense. I've served as a neighborhood watch coordinator, the President of a large HOA, and have come in contact with situations in which I've almost had to draw my firearm because the Police weren't there when I needed them (especially with regard to tresspassing). I don't claim to know exactly what happened in this case, or your life experiences, I can only speak to mine. The Police acted correctly, and I have faith in them and the justice system. Therefore, Cory may try to charge and convict, but due to the media's misrepresentation of the facts, and the race chasers spewing their racial rhetoric, Mr.Z can't get a fair trial. I beleive, if he's tried, that charges will be dismissed. Unless he fails to turn himself in. Just my prediction.

 

[Placementvs.Calibur]

4/11/12 5.55pm Fox News reports that Mr.Z is in custody and will be charged with 2nd degree murder.

 

[randian]

4/11/12 5.55pm Fox News reports that Mr.Z is in custody and will be charged with 2nd degree murder.

Seems quite harsh given what evidence we've seen so far.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

4/11/12 5.55pm Fox News reports that Mr.Z is in custody and will be charged with 2nd degree murder.

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/04/1...rged-in-trayvon-shooting-wednesday-afternoon/

News conference now http://miami.cbslocal.com/live-video/

 

[Placementvs.Calibur]

Seems quite harsh given what evidence we've seen so far.

I agree. How the hell can Mr. Z get a fair trial?

 

[randian]

I agree. How the hell can Mr. Z get a fair trial?

It would be very hard indeed. The charge seems so out of bounds with regard to the evidence it's almost like the prosecutor is playing for a dismissal or acquittal, but would be equally happy if Z accidentally got convicted. I despise it when prosecutors play that kind of cynical game with people's lives, so I hope that isn't what's happening here.

 

[Herr Heckler Koch]

Seems quite harsh given what evidence we've seen so far.

I agree. How the hell can Mr. Z get a fair trial?

I don't think that we have seen any evidence yet, just lamestream media spin fisking. That said, I would argue that he cannot get a fair trial for the hyperbolic coverage. Lets change venue to Hayden Lake or Laclede, Idaho.

 

[LkWd_Don]

I agree. How the hell can Mr. Z get a fair trial?

I don't see it being possible. Here is a clip from a news report after Z was arrested.

"There's been an overwhelming amount of publicity," Corey said, expressing concern about damage to a potential jury pool. "It's regrettable that so many facts got released and misconstrued."

"Forty-five days ago, Trayvon Martin was murdered," Rev. Al Sharpton said at a separate press conference in Washington, flanked by Martin's parents. "No arrest was made. The chief of police announced after his review of the evidence there would be no arrest. His parents refused to leave it there."

"Tonight," Sharpton continued. "Maybe America can come together and say only the facts should matter, when dealing with a loss of life.

I now have to ask.. Why wasn't Sharpton worried about facts before?

For as long as this link works.. here is the report.. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...murder-trayvon-martin-shooting-220301336.html

 

[randian]

I now have to ask.. Why wasn't Sharpton worried about facts before?

Because Sharpton is a lying racist. The notion that the absence of arrest means no facts were involved is an insult to the Sanford PD.

 

[Dreamer]

The tactic being used by this prosecutor is VERY elegant and sophisticated, and most people in the Mushroom Media are just too stupid to "get it"...

My opinion is that the PA believes Zimmerman's side of the story, and probably has the evidence to back up that position. She COULD just let him walk, and justice would be served, but she knows if she did that, then Miami, Sanford, Orlando and several other cities in FL (and in other parts of the nation) would probably burn like Baltimore in 1968.

So, she's levying Murder-2 charges to keep radicals like the Black Panthers and race-pimps like Al Sharpton from whipping the inner-city hooligans into a full-out race war, and to give them a chance to find a new cause celeb.

A Murder-1 case would be nearly impossible to prove (requires premeditation)and anyway, under FL law, a M-1 charge can only be levied by a Grand Jury.

A M-2 case can be brought by the PA, and has a much lower threshold of proof (only must prove that the lethal act was intentional, not premeditated). If the story Zimmerman's telling has any basis in fact, an M-2 trial will bear this out, and the evidence from the coroner and multiple witnesses will vindicate him and make a LOT of people look like fools and race-baiters. There will be a few "incidents of retaliation" if Zimmerman is exonerated on M-2 charges, but the intervening time elapsed will have let the nation cool down, and will give race-pimps like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson time to find a new cause-du-jour to fous their energy and hatred on. Plus an M-2 charge being brought by the PA gives Martin's family and supporters something to focus on, rather than spewing racist hate speech and trying to foment race war in the meantime...

The media is saying that the PA COULD NOT bring M-2 charges unless she had a pretty strong case for conviction. Actually this is simply not true. A PA can bring charges of "moping with intent to creep" against my cat if she wanted to, and may very well do that if my cat were the target of assassination threats from deep-cover Federal agent provocateurs posing as Radical racist separatists, or my cat had form some reason become the target of hate speech and potentially the reason for an entire segment of the community to threaten large-scale riots.

It doesn't mean she could get (or would even try to get) a conviction if my cat was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But if bringing the charge would do less overall damage to society than just letting my cat walk, a PA would be VERY wise, crafty, and socially astute in bringing such charges. And perhaps this is exactly what is going on in Florida...

 

[Grapeshot]

Well said Dreamer - that possibility has crossed my mind also.

Sometimes the medicine has a somewhat bitter taste, does it not.

 

[j4l]

The tactic being used by this prosecutor is VERY elegant and sophisticated, and most people in the Mushroom Media are just too stupid to "get it"...

My opinion is that the PA believes Zimmerman's side of the story, and probably has the evidence to back up that position. She COULD just let him walk, and justice would be served, but she knows if she did that, then Miami, Sanford, Orlando and several other cities in FL (and in other parts of the nation) would probably burn like Baltimore in 1968.

So, she's levying Murder-2 charges to keep radicals like the Black Panthers and race-pimps like Al Sharpton from whipping the inner-city hooligans into a full-out race war, and to give them a chance to find a new cause celeb.

A Murder-1 case would be nearly impossible to prove (requires premeditation)and anyway, under FL law, a M-1 charge can only be levied by a Grand Jury.

A M-2 case can be brought by the PA, and has a much lower threshold of proof (only must prove that the lethal act was intentional, not premeditated). If the story Zimmerman's telling has any basis in fact, an M-2 trial will bear this out, and the evidence from the coroner and multiple witnesses will vindicate him and make a LOT of people look like fools and race-baiters. There will be a few "incidents of retaliation" if Zimmerman is exonerated on M-2 charges, but the intervening time elapsed will have let the nation cool down, and will give race-pimps like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson time to find a new cause-du-jour to fous their energy and hatred on. Plus an M-2 charge being brought by the PA gives Martin's family and supporters something to focus on, rather than spewing racist hate speech and trying to foment race war in the meantime...

The media is saying that the PA COULD NOT bring M-2 charges unless she had a pretty strong case for conviction. Actually this is simply not true. A PA can bring charges of "moping with intent to creep" against my cat if she wanted to, and may very well do that if my cat were the target of assassination threats from deep-cover Federal agent provocateurs posing as Radical racist separatists, or my cat had form some reason become the target of hate speech and potentially the reason for an entire segment of the community to threaten large-scale riots.

It doesn't mean she could get (or would even try to get) a conviction if my cat was not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But if bringing the charge would do less overall damage to society than just letting my cat walk, a PA would be VERY wise, crafty, and socially astute in bringing such charges. And perhaps this is exactly what is going on in Florida...

Interesting concept but- she was saying just a day or two ago-locally- that she had no intentions of filing ANY charges, because there was nothing to charge him WITH, based on the evidence in-hand. Then, today's 180.
Bottom line- that concept is giving her entirely too much credit. She bent to the political, social, and media pressure. And as such puts Florida's 2a rights backwards by about 30 yrs, if /when this goes to trial.

 

[Jack House]

Interesting concept but- she was saying just a day or two ago-locally- that she had no intentions of filing ANY charges, because there was nothing to charge him WITH, based on the evidence in-hand. Then, today's 180.
Bottom line- that concept is giving her entirely too much credit. She bent to the political, social, and media pressure. And as such puts Florida's 2a rights backwards by about 30 yrs, if /when this goes to trial.

Dunno about a 180, but yesterday a police car got shot up in Zimmerman's neighborhood. Seems tensions are only getting heated. So if she did pull a 180, then it just lends credence to Dreamer's theory. I thought the M2 charge was weired as well. Seems that whatever her reasons, her actions were driven by the public pressure.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2

 

[randian]

The tactic being used by this prosecutor is VERY elegant and sophisticated, and most people in the Mushroom Media are just too stupid to "get it".

Elegant it may be, but it's also immoral. It's playing craps with Zimmerman's life. He is not a pawn to be sacrificed to satiate black people's lust for blood.

 

[LkWd_Don]

Elegant it may be, but it's also immoral. It's playing craps with Zimmerman's life. He is not a pawn to be sacrificed to satiate black people's lust for blood.

If that is truly the case and Angela Corey (the special prosecutor investigating the case) is simply using Zimmerman as a pawn, then I would hope that she be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for failing to uphold it.

The focus should be put on upholding the law and if the evidence is so weak that there is no possibility of getting a conviction, to press charges just to avoid rioting, serves little more than to give in to the hysteria. It the evidence were that weak, then she should be going on National Television explaining that no Charge would be filed, then explaining the facts as to why.. or vice-versa and then explaining that anyone found rioting would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Thereby.. Upholding the law.

In any stretch of the imagination, how do you prove what her motive or intent is?

All we can do is sit back, watch and hope the fall-out does not create a national crisis.

 

[randian]

The focus should be put on upholding the law and if the evidence is so weak that there is no possibility of getting a conviction, to press charges just to avoid rioting, serves little more than to give in to the hysteria.

There's a possibility of getting a conviction any time charges are brought, no matter how weak the case, even absent the political issues that surround this case. It should be noted, however, that just a day or two ago the special prosecutor was saying there wasn't enough evidence to bring a case. Now she's charging murder 2? I can't prove her motive, but such a drastic change offers the appearance of a political, rather than an evidentiary, motive for filing charges. The only other thing I can think of is that one or more witnesses in Zimmerman's favor are refusing to testify, have changed their story, or have recanted.

 

[LkWd_Don]

~~ clipped ~~ It should be noted, however, that just a day or two ago the special prosecutor was saying there wasn't enough evidence to bring a case. ~~

What I read a couple days ago was that she stated she would not take it before the grand jury as the evidence did not justify a First Degree Murder charge. The difference between 1st and 2nd degree Murder is Premeditated Intent.. If whatever evidence she has did not point to Z planning on killing, even the second before the skirmish occurred.. then 1st Degree is out. This in no way said that there was no evidence or probable cause to arrest him on a lesser charge..

I was commenting that if she arrested him solely to placate the Mob-Mentality.. Then she has failed at doing her job and is not living up to the Oath of Office that most in her position have to give before assuming such a position.

 

[We-the-People]

While this entire case has been blown out of proportion by the media, race players such as Sharpton, et. al., there is another factor that no one has mentioned.

There is no statute of limitations on a murder charge. If Zimmerman is not charged and tried now, at any time in the future he could be. While it's not a great thing to have to go through, going through a trial now, rather than at some future date, an acquittal will mean that he can not be charged again. There have been a number of cases where no charges were brought and years later they are.

We just had a local man convicted of a murder about 10 years after the fact. While he was extensively investigated at the time the victim disappeared and massive searches were conducted (including his home and the surrounding area) no body was found. Recently, the victims body was found, laying on top of the ground, in a nearby field. Significantly, that field had been searched with people and dogs at the time and nothing found.

The only evidence they had was the body and that he had been the last person to see the victim (and so had been a "person of interest"). There was no motive, no physical evidence of any kind to link him to murder, etc. In fact, the medical examiner could not determine a cause of death (it could have been natural for all the evidence shows). That searchers, using dogs as well as "arm to arm" field walking hadn't found a body laying on top of the groun at the time at least suggests that the body was placed there after the searches

Yet he was convicted.

This is just food for thought. It doesn't indicate whether its better to stand trial immediately or at some time in the future, just that the system can be screwy. The criminal justice system we have is good, probably the best and most fair in the world, but it still has problems. This case is going to be one of those problems no matter what happens.

 

[Gray Rider]

Thoughts on posts

Post #4 - Couldn't help but notice the highly forceful effect of the 9mm round described in p.2: "The impact of the shot thrust Trayvon upward, backward, and partially spun him around to land on his stomach."

Should ammo that powerful be banned? Don't be suprised if an anti tries an end run with that one.

Post #39 - "776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27.
s. 776.013

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony"

Add :
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.

If you are pinned to the ground, retreat is not an option, so who initiated the altercation may not matter.

Post #58 - "The only evidence they had was the body and that he had been the last person to see the victim (and so had been a "person of interest"). There was no motive, no physical evidence of any kind to link him to murder, etc. In fact, the medical examiner could not determine a cause of death (it could have been natural for all the evidence shows). That searchers, using dogs as well as "arm to arm" field walking hadn't found a body laying on top of the groun at the time at least suggests that the body was placed there after the searches

Yet he was convicted."

Juries are indeed a crap shoot. Cases that are virtually indefensible sometimes walk, and cases where the evidence barely meets the standard of probable cause get convicted. Also, do not expect a jury of your peers in a self defense trial. Your peers will be struck.

 

[Grapeshot]

6-shooter - It is much better if you quote or use the multi-quote function, rather than bouncing the reader over several pages and looking for posts by number - frankly few to none are going to do that.


Don't expect any likelihood of getting SD ammo banned - been defeated before and don't see a problem now.