Trayvon Martin Case (Zimmerman charged; 2nd deg. murder)

[SirNitram]

Even if it goes to trial, get 12 scared old white folks on the jury (not hard for any competent defence attorney in Florida I'm sure) and you'll never get a conviction.

The prosecution is also involved in jury selection.

Not to mention 12 white, elderly jurors would scream 'Batson Hearing' to any non-crooked judge.

[Beowulf]

I'm in a rush, but I can't avoid commenting on the affidavit of probable cause submitted in the matter of George Zimmerman's shooting of Trayvon Martin.

It's a piece of crap.

Explaining why could be an epic post, but I don't have much time, so I will make it brief.

The affidavit is argumentative, it's conclusory, and it lacks attribution.

... snipped remainder

It's an interesting analysis of the rather brief affidavit. IANAL, but the blog author is, and was an Asst. US Attorney.

[Flagg]

Yeah I've heard it described in pretty stark terms as shit, so I'm worried about the case. I wanna see this fucker nailed to the wall and I'm afraid an elected prosecutor fucked the case up for personal gain.

[J]

It's an interesting analysis of the rather brief affidavit. IANAL, but the blog author is, and was an Asst. US Attorney.

I have a number of lawyer contacts in my social networks and they all share the same opinion; none of them can believe how shoddy everything is given the high profile of the case. One of my former professors said something to the effect of "who the hell let these clowns pass first year law?" I am not a lawyer (though I have taken some law courses in completing my degree) but I have to concur, this is something which should not be seen past a high school law class.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Yeah I've heard it described in pretty stark terms as shit, so I'm worried about the case. I wanna see this fucker nailed to the wall and I'm afraid an elected prosecutor fucked the case up for personal gain.

Sounds like they're grasping for anything to satisfy public opinion. It is likely that the original prosecutor was correct when he decided not to charge Zimmerman.

[Flagg]

I think he should have been indicted but probably for a much lesser offense, even though I think it was second degree murder. But knowing and proving are two very different things.

[aerius]

Yeah I've heard it described in pretty stark terms as shit, so I'm worried about the case. I wanna see this fucker nailed to the wall and I'm afraid an elected prosecutor fucked the case up for personal gain.

It doesn't matter if the affidavit was textbook perfect unless there's something in there that conclusively disproves key parts of Zimmerman's story, the only thing that really meets that criteria is the ballistics not being consistent with the claimed version of events. 2 examples I can think of off the top of my head, no powder burns or residue on Martin's clothes or body which would imply that he wasn't shot at point blank range, or they found the bullet a foot in the ground under Martin's body meaning Zimmerman wasn't mounted and getting beat on when he shot Martin.

[J]

It is likely that the original prosecutor was correct when he decided not to charge Zimmerman.

He was indeed correct. This case was well on the way to being forgotten and buried (rightfully so I might add) until the mainstream media caught wind of it and whipped up a frenzy, helped greatly by Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and even President Obama. Based on all evidence I've seen it's a textbook case of justified self-defence under Florida's laws.

[Flagg]

Bullshit. You have a textbook case of a botched police investigation which gave all of the benefit of the doubt to a vigilante cunt with a history of profiling blacks in his neighborhood who shot and killed an unarmed teenager who had every right to be where he was. The media caught on because the case stinks to high heaven and there are so many police fuckups that it's not funny. Why wasn't Zimmerman tested for drugs or alcohol while Martin was is just one of many fucked up questions about this case.

[J]

Bullshit. You have a textbook case of a botched police investigation which gave all of the benefit of the doubt to a vigilante cunt with a history of profiling blacks in his neighborhood who shot and killed an unarmed teenager who had every right to be where he was.

And you base this on? How do you know Martin wasn't doing something suspicious? How do you know he wasn't walking in the shadows on peoples' laws while casing their homes? Have you somehow learned to speak with the dead?

Flagg, you've been repeatedly proven wrong in this thread, but feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

[Dalton]

Let's wait for the actual trial before trying to impress each other with our armchair lawyer prowess.

[PeZook]

The (not very) funny thing about the whole case is, of course, that while everyone concentrates on the Florida shooting, 29 black men were shot by the police since then. About half of them were definitely justified, but what sort of fucked up country has ten police shootings a month? That level of violence is just mind-blowing for a supposedly first-world state not under occupation by a foreign power...

[madd0ct0r]

well america's got a big population.

It's also got very high inequality for a 1st world nation and a ready access to guns.

[PeZook]

Population doesn't explain this: it's only two-three times higher than countries like Germany and the UK. Hell, Poland has ten times less population, higher density and about as much inequality as measured by the GINI index - but rather than having regular shootings, just less of them...when police shoot someone it's national news for YEARS. Same goes for cop killings, too.

I suppose ready access to guns might contribute greatly, as it colors all encounters with the police (and not just the police...) into a "Does he have a gun?" situation. It's still absurdly fucked up.

[Flagg]

Bullshit. You have a textbook case of a botched police investigation which gave all of the benefit of the doubt to a vigilante cunt with a history of profiling blacks in his neighborhood who shot and killed an unarmed teenager who had every right to be where he was.

And you base this on? How do you know Martin wasn't doing something suspicious? How do you know he wasn't walking in the shadows on peoples' laws while casing their homes? Have you somehow learned to speak with the dead?

Flagg, you've been repeatedly proven wrong in this thread, but feel free to keep making a fool of yourself.

Oh eat a dick. How do you know Zimmerman wasn't high on meth looking for a black person to kill? Oh right, it's called "evidence" and we can use it to judge what likely happened. Asshole.

[madd0ct0r]

yeah I'm a bit surprised at the people coming down in favor of Zimmerman.

he shot someone, and created the situation where that happened. legal arguments aside, this is not a situation i'd like to see repeated.

[PeZook]

I think people would be more inclined to accept Zimmerman's story if the police took the whole thing seriously from the start.

[Flagg]

I think people would be more inclined to accept Zimmerman's story if the police took the whole thing seriously from the start.

That and if his story hadn't changed like 3 times.

[CarsonPalmer]

He was indeed correct. This case was well on the way to being forgotten and buried (rightfully so I might add) until the mainstream media caught wind of it and whipped up a frenzy, helped greatly by Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and even President Obama. Based on all evidence I've seen it's a textbook case of justified self-defence under Florida's laws.

Except for the part where Zimmerman didn't have to and shouldn't have followed Martin. Even if he gets off, which he might, he still bears some moral responsibility for trying to play cop.

The initial impression that was given off (and that I still believe to be the case) was that you had somebody who wanted to be a vigilante and a death that wasn't taken particularly seriously by the Sanford PD. At least now it was taken seriously, which is what the parents of any dead child deserve.

[aerius]

yeah I'm a bit surprised at the people coming down in favor of Zimmerman.
he shot someone, and created the situation where that happened. legal arguments aside, this is not a situation i'd like to see repeated.

In civilized countries we have this thing called presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. So far there is no evidence which proves he's guilty of manslaughter or murder 2, which is why I presume he's innocent of those charges. He killed Martin, but there's no proof that the circumstances of the killing satisfy the conditions of manslaughter or murder 2.

I think people would be more inclined to accept Zimmerman's story if the police took the whole thing seriously from the start.

That and if his story hadn't changed like 3 times.

Really? Prove it. Produce the raw interviews with Zimmerman where his story has changed 3 times as you claim. Don't give me some shit in the media which was reported in interviews with his lawyer, his family, or some other dumbass, because that's about as reliable as NBC's doctored 911 tapes. I want the raw transcripts or audio of the interviews with Zimmerman himself.

He was indeed correct. This case was well on the way to being forgotten and buried (rightfully so I might add) until the mainstream media caught wind of it and whipped up a frenzy, helped greatly by Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and even President Obama. Based on all evidence I've seen it's a textbook case of justified self-defence under Florida's laws.

Except for the part where Zimmerman didn't have to and shouldn't have followed Martin. Even if he gets off, which he might, he still bears some moral responsibility for trying to play cop.

Was he ever explicitly told to not follow Martin? No. After being told by Zimmerman that he was following Martin, the 911 dispatcher said, and I quote "OK. We don’t need you to do that." You can confirm this from the original audio or any of the transcripts which are floating around. He did not have to follow Martin but there isn't anything to indicate that he shouldn't do so. Put it another way, it's like your teacher telling you "you don't need to do your homework tonight", it doesn't mean "don't do your homework" or "you shouldn't do your homework", you might still have a good reason for doing your homework anyway even though you've been told you don't need to.

[Flagg]

I think people would be more inclined to accept Zimmerman's story if the police took the whole thing seriously from the start.

That and if his story hadn't changed like 3 times.

Really? Prove it. Produce the raw interviews with Zimmerman where his story has changed 3 times as you claim. Don't give me some shit in the media which was reported in interviews with his lawyer, his family, or some other dumbass, because that's about as reliable as NBC's doctored 911 tapes. I want the raw transcripts or audio of the interviews with Zimmerman himself.

The story as told by family members and his attorneys you twat. You knew exactly what I was saying so don't be all obtuse about it. Unless these people were just making shit up, they were getting the story from Zimmerman. And it kept changing. And of course it's more reliable than doctored tapes, because as pointed out, it must have been coming from Zimmerman unless they were just making shit up which makes him look even worse.

[Aaron MkII]

Population doesn't explain this: it's only two-three times higher than countries like Germany and the UK. Hell, Poland has ten times less population, higher density and about as much inequality as measured by the GINI index - but rather than having regular shootings, just less of them...when police shoot someone it's national news for YEARS. Same goes for cop killings, too.

I suppose ready access to guns might contribute greatly, as it colors all encounters with the police (and not just the police...) into a "Does he have a gun?" situation. It's still absurdly fucked up.

I doubt it, police in Canada are trained to always assume a gun on a call and we have an estimated 20+
million guns for 35 million people, yet lack this issue.

More likely its cultural, you have a nation there that is big on fighting crime, militant police and a seige mentality. Its a breeding ground for this.

[Ryan Thunder]

In civilized countries we have this thing called presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm sure he applied that to Trayvon. :v

[Flagg]

In civilized countries we have this thing called presumption of innocence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I'm sure he applied that to Trayvon. :v

Not to mention that doesn't preclude people not involved in the trial from making up their own minds.

[CarsonPalmer]

Was he ever explicitly told to not follow Martin? No. After being told by Zimmerman that he was following Martin, the 911 dispatcher said, and I quote "OK. We don’t need you to do that." You can confirm this from the original audio or any of the transcripts which are floating around. He did not have to follow Martin but there isn't anything to indicate that he shouldn't do so. Put it another way, it's like your teacher telling you "you don't need to do your homework tonight", it doesn't mean "don't do your homework" or "you shouldn't do your homework", you might still have a good reason for doing your homework anyway even though you've been told you don't need to.

How about common fucking sense? He shouldn't have been playing vigilante out there-he wasn't actually in a Neighborhood Watch, he was just some guy who was taking it on himself to patrol the streets, and even if he had been in a Neighborhood Watch, those organizations specifically urge their members not to carry weapons and not to follow people they suspect of doing things.

Its one thing to intervene if a person is in imminent danger of harming another; its another to follow someone who "looks suspicious" for blocks.

What was the "good" outcome of Zimmerman following Martin? He scares a teenager? And we know what the bad outcome is-somebody ends up getting killed.