Do you think Zimmerman will be convicted of murder?

If u, or the people u favor,
ever succeed in fending off predatory violence,
as Zimmy did, I hope that u will have as much or better comfort than Zimmy did from the police.

Becoming a victim of violence is bad enuf,
without having government go into partnership with the predator
to make it WORSE, subjecting u to additional annoyances and inconveniences,
such as being financially wiped out by lawyers' fees, even if u WIN
both civil and criminal cases against u.





David

there probably would have been an arrest in that case

I really think the racial component of this fiasco has been greatly over played. Remove race from the situation and we have, well, the exact same situation.

Actually, Bill, some of the stuff you are saying on this issue says something about a segment of society that disgusts me. The fact that there are people here agreeing with your take...disheartens me. In any case, that a segment of our society feels the way you folk do, in my opinion, is not a good thing for our nation or for humanity in general.

Sorry dear but that is not what I said that Trayvon was a black gangbanger I said that if he was killed by one no one would give a **** outside of his family.

If he had been at the wrong place at the wrong time during a drive by for example.

Black young men are being gun down by other black young men by the thousands not by evil white men and the risk of being kill by a fellow black man is many many many times greater then by the police or by a white racist.

I agree but he was young enough that this behaviorS that ended his life might not had been an indication of the kind of man he might had grown up to be.

Yep.

I do think that Zimmerman would have been more likely to have been arrested right off if Trayvon was white, or if Zimmerman was black, and especially if both of those were true.

But the basics are just, an unarmed 17-year-old kid was shot and killed under unclear circumstances, and there should have been an investigation and then a trial.

Now that both of those things are in fact happening, I'm just waiting to see what emerges. And hoping that there's some real slam-dunk, incontrovertible evidence one way or another. (But I know that's not super-likely. Fingers crossed anyway.)

I would not count on it that a drive by killing in error would had been solve.

And that's exactly what I responded to.



If he had been gunned down by a gangbanger, and the police knew who that gangbanger was, and brought him in for questioning, and then let him go with no further investigation, case closed, I'd be every bit as pissed.

Sorry dear but Zimmerman is a member of the new 'blacks' IE he is Latino that in some states he would need to prove citizenship to the police.

I do not off hand think that him being a Latino give him any standing with the police over a black citizen.

But Zimmerman's story wasn't accepted without question. The lead investigator on this case the night of the shooting was not convinced the shooting was justified and he sent an affidavit to the state attorney requesting that Zimmerman be arrested and charged with manslaughter. It was the state attorney who made the decision not to charge him, although no one from the state attorney's office came to either the crime scene or the police precinct to gather more info. So the police had no choice, they couldn't arrest Zimmerman if the state attorney was unwilling to press charges.

I think the police chief has really become the fall guy in this situation.

Because it was the state attorney's office that made the initial call not to charge Zimmerman, that became a major reason a special prosecutor had to be appointed to look into the matter.

So, just for accuracy, it is not true that the police just initially accepted Zimmerman's story--the lead invesigator was not convinced by his story, and he had wanted Zimmerman to be arrested that night and charged with manslaughter. Had the state attorney done that, Zimmerman would probably be better off than he is right now. But, hindsight is 20/20.

Sorry dear being arrested for a crime you did not do no matter what the timing is never never being better off.

As far as manslaughter instead of second degree murder charges his being over charge is just the standard means of trying to force a plea deal and no matter if the police had at first charge him with 'just' manslaughter the DA would had likely kicked it up to murder charges in any case.

We do not have a working and fair justice system as had been shown over and over in the US.

I think what Firefly is trying to say here is that if Zimmerman had been arrested and charged with manslaughter on the night of event, he would have had the advantage of no media attention, no national outcry, no extreme focus. He would have faced a Florida jury on the lesser charge, told his story, showed his wounds, maybe shown a little remorse that the situation had gone badly, but he would have (if Bill and David's theories are correct) been a free man by now.

Joe(The verdict wouldn't have even made the local nightly news.)Nation

If the public outcry hadn't occurred, that would have been the end of this case as far as law enforcement was concerned. But the outcry was more about how law enforcement dismissively handled the homicide of an unarmed black teen, who had been engaged in no criminal activity when he was targeted and followed by the shooter. The outcries were for an arrest so that the shooting could be appropriately legally scrutinized to determine whether or not it was self defense, rather than just taking the word of the shooter without further examination.

Whether or not Zimmerman had engaged in racial profiling, or had any racial motivation, was not really the main issue behind the initial outcry--the main issue was why law enforcement (in this case the state attorney's office) had been unwilling to move forward with charges the lead investigator had recommended, or to even look for evidence that would suggest this was not justifiable self defense. It was, and still is, more about how blacks, and black victims, are treated by the criminal justice system. And that has always been Al Sharpton's main issue.

Zimmerman's racial mind-set may have determined why he initially responded to Trayvon Martin the way he did and, while that may have set the wheels of this tragedy in motion, it's not actually relevant regarding the issue of whether the shooting itself was a justifiable act of self defense. The issue of racial profiling is certainly worthy of more discussion and examination on a national level, and this case has certainly provoked that conversation, but it may not be at all relevant in determining whether the shooting was a valid act of self defense. Even if Zimmerman were an out and out racist, he would still be entitled to defend his life if the other person was the aggressor, and if he believed his life were in jeopardy. It's those "ifs" that are the focus of this case as a legal matter.

I didn't know until yesterday that Florida really has a specific way of handling this sort of homicide situation, where self defense is offered as an affirmative defense. A specific pre-trial hearing is held to allow the defendant to present evidence to the judge that the killing was justifiable, and the judge's decision on the matter is based only on whether a preponderance of the evidence supports self defense, rather than whether the evidence supports self defense beyond a reasonable doubt--so it's a much lower burden of proof that's required to convince the judge. If the judge affirms the self defense argument of the defendant, the case is dismissed, otherwise it continues to trial.

This pre-trial procedure allows these cases to be legally adjudicated and dismissed relatively quickly if a preponderance of the evidence leans toward self defense. That makes it all the more puzzling why the state attorney's office did not take that route in the first place, given the ambiguities surrounding the shooting, since it would have been the best option for providing legal clarity and quick dismissal if the facts so warranted.

That sort of hearing will still be held in Zimmerman's case, and it well may result in a dismissal of the charges. But because of the emotional firestorm that has been allowed to take hold, because an arrest was not immediately made, it is now unlikely that such a dismissal will be accepted by many as a valid exoneration of Zimmerman because the issues, in the court of public opinion, have become so muddled and so heated. The only real issue legally is whether the killing was justified self defense, in response to a life threatening attack, and not what Zimmerman did in the minutes before that encounter, or what his state of mind was when he initially spotted Martin. And that's the problem with the state's affidavit of probable cause in support of a second degree murder charge--it presents no evidence that the shooting itself was unjustified, and it makes no attempt to refute Zimmerman's explanation of how he received injuries, and, in fact, doesn't even note his injuries.

If the state can find voice analysis experts who will testify that the person screaming, "Help!" in the background of one of the 911 calls the police received from a neighbor was Martin, and not Zimmerman, they might well be able to refute Zimmerman's claim of self defense. Short of that, I think this case will either be dismissed pre-trial or Zimmerman will be acquitted. There are no consistent witness reports as to what actually took place immediately before, or at, the time of the shooting. There seems to be no forensic evidence that can clarify who was the aggressor in that final fatal encounter. Even if Zimmerman provoked the entire situation, if he was, in fact, justifiably in fear for his life when he pulled the trigger, Florida law would not hold him accountable for the death.

I don't think the actual legal outcome of this particular case is the main issue any more--regardless of the final legal disposition in this matter, a great many people won't be happy with it.

But I do think the national discussion it has provoked, regarding the treatment of the black community by law enforcement, including the treatment of black victims, and the very real issue of racial profiling, and it's destructive effects, as well as the discussion of problems that may be inherent in the "stand your ground laws", has been more than worthwhile.

George Zimmerman will receive a just hearing regarding his claims of self defense. Whether Trayvon Martin will get justice in this situation is rather moot, but the dialogue his death has provoked may help to bring more awareness of the racial biases that still operate in the law enforcement and criminal justice systems, and that awareness is a necessary first step in addressing the problem. If that happens, and change comes from it, Trayvon's death won't seem so completely senseless to me because some good might come of it.

I wonder what that lead investigator on the night of the shooting is thinking by now. He (haven't noticed if it was a he or she) has been admirably quiet, appropriately. Or what the state prosecutor the case was directed to that night is thinking. I figure both were acting as they saw fit at the time.

Well, I figure everyone was acting as they saw fit, including Zimmerman and Trayvon. The catch-22 of life.

Pretty good analysis from my standpoint. It leaves more questions than answers, but that's for the jury to determine.

Noted. I hadn't actually read about that, looked for a cite:



Adding to the confusion, the Sanford police chief initially insisted that there had been no probable cause:



both from: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/27/2718130/sanford-cops-wanted-to-charge.htm

Not sure if this has all been clarified since the article was written (almost a month ago).

At any rate, my overriding point is the same whether the word used is "the police" or "the state attorney." The circumstances were such that some sort of further action was warranted. The fact that no further action was taken is what I found problematic (not the race of the people involved).

You read me correctly, Joe, that's what I was saying.

BillRM's problem is that he doesn't fully appreciate the fact that Zimmerman wasn't "innocence"--he had committed a homicide, he had killed an unarmed person. And this wasn't a person who had broken into his home, or who had committed any crime against him that would automatically explain the justification for the killing of a stranger on the street. Zimmerman's clothing wasn't significantly blood-splattered, he wasn't covered with bruises, and the victim, who had been shot at point blank range, was found face down with his arms under him. And no one else saw what happened. The situation did cry out for some legal support of a self defense claim.

In such situations, the law does allow for an affirmative defense that the killing was done in self defense, out of a fear for one's life, in the face of a valid threat. But that has to be legally established if there are any questions that was the case. That was not done in this instance--even though the lead investigator had questions and doubts about the self defense aspect--it never got to the point of an arrest and charge, it never got to a courtroom where the claim of self defense could be legally examined in a pre-trial hearing. And that was the problem.

And it did wind up being very unfair to Zimmerman, for the reasons you have mentioned. He might be a free man, and still have his life, and his reputation, and his privacy intact, if he had been allowed to present his self defense claim to a judge at a hearing that would have attracted little or no notice. The state attorney did not do him a favor, or anyone a favor, by not lodging a manslaughter charge in the first place.

I previously posted this in this thread--about 2 or 3 pages back.

And the state attorney's office never sent anyone to the crime scene, or the police precinct that night, to see if additional evidence could be gathered, or was being overlooked--they didn't do anything other than turn down the recommendation to file charges.

That's why there is now a special prosecutor in this case.

What prohibited the police from making an arrest was the state attorney declining to file charges.

None of these people are really free to start talking and pointing fingers at each other now. And, no matter what they would say now, it wouldn't undo anything. But this entire issue is probably one reason that the police chief's resignation wasn't accepted--he may just be the fall guy for someone else's mistake, and people are aware of that.

firefly, Thanks for bringing some "sanity" into this discussion. We need facts, not speculations.