17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

[terryg]

Does that mean the job of a LEO with a CHL is to run in circles?

[ScooterSissy]

A thought occurred to me as I was reading about Zimmerman's neighbors confirming that he was bandaged and had a swollen nose the day after the confrontation. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/ ... 9Y20120416. The article mentioned he turned himself in. I always just sort of assumed that he had, but now that I see it in written down, it got me to thinking.

Do the New Black Panters owe him a reward?

Wouldn't that be interesting to watch?

[smoothoperator]

Do the New Black Panters owe him a reward?

Wouldn't that be interesting to watch?

I would love to see his lawyer publicly call them out for not paying up the next time the MSM shoves a camera in his face.

[Rex B]

I apologize if this has already been posted. I haven't read all 51 (!) pages of this thread.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eight Minutes You Missed: George Zimmerman’s Former Lawyer’s Press Conference
from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2873221/posts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since April 11th, the MSM has known at least as much as George Zimmerman's former lawyer told them about the facts of the case. Those facts were woefully out of line with the Narrative. So the MSM just let us wonder about the strange moment and didn't find much else very interesting. Except that it was.

That's why you didn't see this.

http://fsblog.s3.amazonaws.com/zimmerman.mp4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It's part of the entire 45 minutes' presser.

Watch the whole thing from about 28 minutes on.
Full 45 minute press conference here.

http://primordialslack.com/?p=2309" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[clarionite]

What kind of world is it that someone who sees something they think is out of the ordinary in their neighborhood is supposed to cower in their home?

If (and that's a big if) Zimmerman did nothing but exit his vehicle and try to keep an eye on someone until the police arrived, then I think he did nothing wrong.
All the talk about watches not being able to carry a weapon, or CHL holders thinking they've got a Batman license is crap. Just because someone has enough civic awareness to try and make sure their neighborhood is free of crime that doesn't mean they don't have the right to self defense. And just because someone tries to be a good witness by keeping an eye on someone they think is suspicious till the police arrive, that doesn't mean they played Batman.

If the story turns out to be true, then I really don't think Zimmerman did anything wrong or stupid. If he confronted Martin, then that's another matter.

[Beiruty]

What kind of world is it that someone who sees something they think is out of the ordinary in their neighborhood is supposed to cower in their home?

If (and that's a big if) Zimmerman did nothing but exit his vehicle and try to keep an eye on someone until the police arrived, then I think he did nothing wrong.
All the talk about watches not being able to carry a weapon, or CHL holders thinking they've got a Batman license is crap. Just because someone has enough civic awareness to try and make sure their neighborhood is free of crime that doesn't mean they don't have the right to self defense. And just because someone tries to be a good witness by keeping an eye on someone they think is suspicious till the police arrive, that doesn't mean they played Batman.

If the story turns out to be true, then I really don't think Zimmerman did anything wrong or stupid. If he confronted Martin, then that's another matter.

Have anyone proposed what if:
The person who was in the shoes of TM, was real criminal and attacked GZ to evade being reported and or escape before being apprehended by LE0s?

[The Annoyed Man]

Walking Papers? The Incredibly Thin, Speculative Zimmerman Affidavit
Angela Corey's filing against George Zimmerman bears the hallmarks of a career-ender.
by BOB OWENS
April 17, 2012 - 10:06 am
Pajamas Media

Last week, Florida prosecutor Angela Corey stunned many within the legal establishment when she announced her office was filing a second-degree murder charge against George Zimmerman. The four-page affidavit of probable cause filed by Corey’s office shocked legal experts, ranging from liberal Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and liberal law blogger Jeralyn Merritt to conservative former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy and talk show host Mark Levin, among others.

The affidavit starts out typically, listing the names and qualifications of the two investigators used by the special prosecutor. It then begins to build a case against George Zimmerman:

On Sunday 2/26/12, Trayvon Martin was temporarily living at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, a gated community in Sanford, Seminole County, Florida. That evening Martin walked to a nearby 7-11 Store where he purchased a can of iced tea and some Skittles. Martin then walked back to and entered the gated community and was on his way back to the townhouse where he was living when he was profiled by George Zimmerman. Martin was unarmed and was not committing a crime.

Not one paragraph into the “meat” of the affidavit, Corey’s team already made two unsubstantiated claims.

First: there is no publicly known evidence that supports the contention that Zimmerman “profiled” Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman’s 911 call made no reference to skin color or apparel until the police dispatcher started pressing for a better description. If Corey’s team had evidence that Zimmerman racially profiled Martin, they should have included it here. They did not, which not only undermines the profiling charge in this case, but in any federal civil rights case the U.S. Department of Justice may have been considering.

The second unsubstantiated claim: They say Martin was not committing or preparing to commit a crime. Zimmerman became suspicious because he saw a figure who struck him as a person casing houses for burglary potential. Unbeknownst to Zimmerman at the time was the fact that Martin had been suspended from school for the possession of a “burglary tool.” We don’t know what Martin was thinking, but his actions were erratic enough to prompt George Zimmerman to want police to investigate.

That represents a lot of unsubstantiated speculation by a prosecutor trying to build an affidavit to support a second-degree murder charge, and that’s just from the first substantive paragraph.

The next troublesome claim is the lead sentence of the following paragraph:

Zimmerman, who also lived in the gated community and was driving his vehicle, observed Martin and assumed he was a criminal.

Perhaps it is hair-splitting, but there is no evidence to support Corey’s claim that Zimmerman assumed Martin was a criminal. In his first comments on the 911 call, Zimmerman claims he saw “a real suspicious guy” acting erratically: “Like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about.”

Zimmerman was merely reporting suspicious behavior, just as our own Department of Homeland Security advocates with its “If You See Something, Say Something” campaign, which has been created and promoted by cabinet officials appointed by the Obama administration. Zimmerman saw someone acting suspiciously, and did precisely what DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano wants citizens to do in that situation.

The prosecutor then made another claim not supported by the recorded evidence:

The police dispatcher then informed Zimmerman that an officer was on the way and to wait for the officer.

The second half of that claim is a complete and apparently willful misrepresentation of the conversation between George Zimmerman and the police dispatcher. The closest the dispatcher ever gets to telling Zimmerman to “wait for the officer” was when Zimmerman was attempting to follow Martin, and the dispatcher told him, precisely: “Okay, we don’t need you to do that.”

In response to the dispatcher’s comment — which isn’t a command, but an ambiguous statement — Zimmerman’s response is “Okay,” and an immediate termination of his attempt to follow Trayvon Martin.

Zimmerman spends the next 93 seconds — more than enough time for Trayvon Martin to reach where he is staying, even at a walking pace — in one location talking to the police dispatcher, informing the dispatcher that he is on the way back to his truck, and that he will meet the responding officer by the mailboxes.

Angela Corey’s team is misrepresenting the actual events as they occurred in order to fabricate a claim that George Zimmerman disobeyed police orders. Proving her behavior is one matter, but to be found deliberately misrepresenting the evidence is certainly grounds for considering disbarment.

The affidavit contained further problematic statements. The next one:

During the recorded call Zimmerman made reference to people he felt had committed and gotten away with break-ins in his neighborhood. Later while talking about Martin, Zimmerman stated “these [epithet referring to the terminal end of the alimentary canal], they always get away” and also said “these [epithet referring to procration] punks.”

John Work, a multi-decade law enforcement veteran, caught something in this prejudicial paragraph that I’d missed on my first reading:

Either Zimmerman and the investigators who wrote the affidavit knew there had been burglaries in the neighborhood, or they did not know about any burglaries. It’s not possible to credibly say that anyone, including the defendant, felt that crimes had been committed. If, in fact, there was or was not a series of unsolved burglaries in that neighborhood, the cops should have included that fact in the affidavit. It’s a lie of omission, either way.

Corey’s affidavit then made even more unsubstantiated claims:

Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and followed Martin. When the police dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and that the responding officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home.

The affidavit’s claim is in direct opposition to the facts as recorded on the 911 call.

Zimmerman was not “instructed” of anything. The use of that particular word creates the impression that Zimmerman was affirmatively told — commanded — not to do something. That isn’t what occurred. The dispatcher spoke ambiguously: “We don’t need you to do that.”

Then, the affidavit makes the completely unsupported claim that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin, even as the 911 call indicates that he stopped following Martin and was stationary for more than a minute and a half before attempting to return to his truck to meet with the responding officer. This, again, appears to be a misrepresentation by the prosecutor, unsupported (and possibly refuted) by the known evidence.

The affidavit also makes the completely unsupported claim at the end of that paragraph that Martin “was trying to return to his home.”

There is no evidence of the sort. The timeline strongly suggests that — having evaded Zimmerman initially and with Zimmerman terminating his pursuit and then heading back the way he came — Martin had plenty of time and a direct, unobstructed path home had he chosen to return directly home. We don’t know where Martin was or what he was doing between the time he fled Zimmerman and when the confrontation began. What we do know is that Martin had an opportunity to make it home, and chose not to do so for reasons we may never know.

The affidavit continues:

Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued. Witnesses heard people arguing and what sounded like a struggle. During this time period witnesses heard numerous calls for help and some of these were recorded in 911 calls to police. Trayvon Martin’s mother has reviewed the 911 and identified the voice crying for help as Trayvon Martin’s voice.

“Zimmerman confronted Martin.”

This is supposition, apparently based upon the recollection of Martin’s girlfriend. There is no physical evidence or eyewitness supporting this charge.

The next part of that crucial sentence has already been ripped apart by legal experts — the passive “and a struggle ensued.”

This entire case hinges upon who started the confrontation and then escalated it into a deadly force event that left a young man dead. If the prosecution has evidence that Zimmerman indeed triggered the confrontation and initiated the struggle, then Zimmerman’s self-defense claim becomes much harder to support. If the events occurred as Zimmerman described it — with the confrontation initiated by Martin, the physical assault initiated by Martin, and Martin then escalating the fight to assault with a deadly weapon by attempting to smash Zimmerman’s head on the concrete — and the evidence supports Zimmerman’s claims, then we have a justified use of deadly force in self-defense.

Sybrina Fulton’s contention that the voice she heard crying for help on the 911 calls was her son certainly adds emotional pain to the case; her claim is not one I would personally wish to challenge at a trial if she is called as a witness. However, competent attorneys routinely cast doubt on such testimony, perhaps by citing confirmation bias and the trauma of losing a child. No known audio experts have come forth to claim they can confirm with any degree of certainty that the voice calling for help is Martin’s. I would venture that Fulton’s claim is included in the affidavit only to elicit an emotional response from the public, which would be a grandstanding ploy, and perhaps an especially cynical one by a veteran prosecutor seeking reelection just a few months from now.

There are simply no facts in this affidavit to remotely support the charge of second-degree murder according to Florida’s statute,which reads:

The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree …

There is nothing in this affidavit nor among the publicly known facts about the case — nor even among the allegations from the victim’s family or their attorneys — that comes even remotely close to reaching the “depraved mind” standard. At most, the prosecutor would face making a difficult manslaughter case, and even then would risk having the lesser charge thrown out for insufficient evidence.

I am comfortable with saying that Corey’s multiple references to “justice for Trayon” during her press conference combined with this breathtaking affidavit strongly suggest a political motivation.

I live and work in central North Carolina, just miles away from where an overzealous, politically minded prosecutor named Mike Nifong attempted to railroad athletes from the Duke University lacrosse team in a similarly racially charged environment just a half-decade ago.

Nifong was disbarred and found guilty of criminal contempt for his actions. Angela Corey’s affidavit against George Zimmerman looks to be treading dangerously close to that same path.

Bob Owens blogs at Bob-Owens.com

I mentioned in a previous post in this thread that as soon as I heard the first two sentences of Angela Corey's presser announcing the indictment, I knew the fix was in. She opened by saying that she had been in close communication throughout with the "sweet parents" (her words) of Treyvon Martin. She thanked his parent's attorneys (two well-known rabble rousers) for their constant efforts on behalf of developing the case. And she spoke of, not impartial justice, but rather "justice for Treyvon."

This case is so full of holes, suppositions, and outright falsehoods that it is my fervent prayer for Angela Corey to be disbarred. Maybe she can join Mike Nifong in forming a consultancy which advises attorneys of dubious integrity on what NOT to do.

[sjfcontrol]

Fox is reporting that the judge in the case is going to recuse herself. The case will go to the next judge in line.

[BillT]

I know this may sound preposterous to the majority on this forum but has anyone considered the possibility that Zimmerman was involved in a "questionable" self defense shooting and possibly lied to the police to protect himself. Is it possible that somewhere in the investigation there was a flaw identified in his story? Or his story changed? Or the physical evidence didn't match what he described? Has everyone on this forum personally read the investigators reports or personally interviewed the witnesses? Reviewed the time lines of the 911 calls and cell phone calls? Unfortunately I have only had access to what has been in the media and it's certainly not complete nor in many cases, accurate. All the ranting and raving on this post about "the fix is in" and the injustice being done to George Zimmerman is just the opposite, but just as extreme, as we saw by Travon Martin's family, friends and supporters in the six weeks after he was killed.
I still believe in this country's justice system. I have visited too many other countries where justice is not possible and I very much value our system even though it's not perfect. It is now time for Mr. Zimmerman to be "judged by 12 instead of carried by 6" as we see so often posted on this forum regarding hypothetical situations. Now it's time to live up to the saying that we all love so much. I have no favorites in this case. Since I am not on the jury and can't know all the facts I will just follow it like everyone else. Many live were affected by this and we all must accept the outcome once the case is tried in a court of law.

[Rex B]

I know this may sound preposterous to the majority on this forum but has anyone considered the possibility that Zimmerman was involved in a "questionable" self defense shooting and possibly lied to the police to protect himself. Is it possible that somewhere in the investigation there was a flaw identified in his story? Or his story changed? Or the physical evidence didn't match what he described? Has everyone on this forum personally read the investigators reports or personally interviewed the witnesses? Reviewed the time lines of the 911 calls and cell phone calls? Unfortunately I have only had access to what has been in the media and it's certainly not complete nor in many cases, accurate. All the ranting and raving on this post about "the fix is in" and the injustice being done to George Zimmerman is just the opposite, but just as extreme, as we saw by Travon Martin's family, friends and supporters in the six weeks after he was killed.
I still believe in this country's justice system. I have visited too many other countries where justice is not possible and I very much value our system even though it's not perfect. It is now time for Mr. Zimmerman to be "judged by 12 instead of carried by 6" as we see so often posted on this forum regarding hypothetical situations. Now it's time to live up to the saying that we all love so much. I have no favorites in this case. Since I am not on the jury and can't know all the facts I will just follow it like everyone else. Many live were affected by this and we all must accept the outcome once the case is tried in a court of law.

Bill, I think most here, including me, agree with you. If this were handled like it should be, the police would have done their professional investigation, decide if the facts support an indictment, and if so present the results to a grand jury and work with the result.
That did not happen. Whether Zimmerman was right or wrong, an injustice and a misuse of authority is apparently taking place.

[sjfcontrol]

That possibility was popular with a number of people on this forum when the situation was first exposed. However, as more and more information (both right, wrong, and altered) was released/leaked, those people mostly fell by the wayside. At this point, the only official statement is the "affidavit of probable cause", which appears to be full of unsupported claims, speculation, and willful misrepresentations, with no mention of any evidence not already known. We also have the 911 calls. We only know what we know. Thats all we have to go on.

Since you seem to think that more is known, why wasn't additional evidence mentioned in the affidavit? The experienced prosecutor MUST have know that was a very weak affidavit.

[BillT]

That possibility was popular with a number of people on this forum when the situation was first exposed. However, as more and more information (both right, wrong, and altered) was released/leaked, those people mostly fell by the wayside. At this point, the only official statement is the "affidavit of probable cause", which appears to be full of unsupported claims, speculation, and willful misrepresentations, with no mention of any evidence not already known. We also have the 911 calls. We only know what we know. Thats all we have to go on.

Since you seem to think that more is known, why wasn't additional evidence mentioned in the affidavit? The experienced prosecutor MUST have know that was a very weak affidavit.

IANAL but... Here (I think) is the quick answer to your question: http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/affida ... ble-cause/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Angela Corey did not indict George Zimmerman. A judge did. The judge considers the affidavit or affidavits as well as any other evidence and then decides whether to issue an arrest warrant The affidavit does not have to include the most specific details of an alleged crime, but only the basis that the prosecution believes that the crime was committed. The affidavit certainly accomplished that. Perhaps there are not more specific details because they choose not to have them debated by the public additionally contaminating the jury pool. They still have the burden of proof to present in court in order to convince a jury of guilt. My guess is that there is additional evidence that will be presented at the trial that will attempt to support the 2nd degree murder charge. What I have seen debated in the media doesn't appear to support anything worse than a manslaughter charge. It is only speculation on my part and I am ready to withhold judgement until both sides present the case and a jury reaches a decision. It's that "due process" thing and we all will have to wait to know the outcome.

[sjfcontrol]

My guess is that we'll find out the prosecution has precious little more that has already been discussed. The affidavit seemed long on innuendo and short on "fact" for a "sworn statement ... that outlines the factual justification...". But we'll all find out eventually.

[57Coastie]

BillT,

You are so right.

It is not at all unusual for an arrest warrant to be issued with just the barest information in the affidavit needed for the judge to support his issuance of the warrant. Indeed, my experience has been that that is usually the case. The prosecution has no desire to tip its theory and tactics off to the defense earlier than it is compelled to do so (even then, in too many cases). Similarly, when charges are brought by information, rather than by a grand jury indictment, as in this case, it is not at all unusual for the barest of evidence to be put forth in a probable cause hearing to support reference to trial and, in an appropriate case, denial of bail. Again, I believe that is usually the case.

It will be an unusual case indeed where you will find all the government's evidence laid out in either an arrest warrant affidavit or the information/indictment.

Jim

[sjfcontrol]

BillT,

You are so right.

It is not at all unusual for an arrest warrant to be issued with just the barest information in the affidavit needed for the judge to support his issuance of the warrant. Indeed, my experience has been that that is usually the case. The prosecution has no desire to tip its theory and tactics off to the defense earlier than it is compelled to do so (even then, in too many cases). Similarly, when charges are brought by information, rather than by a grand jury indictment, as in this case, it is not at all unusual for the barest of evidence to be put forth in a probable cause hearing to support reference to trial and, in an appropriate case, denial of bail. Again, I believe that is usually the case.

It will be an unusual case indeed where you will find all the government's evidence laid out in either an arrest warrant affidavit or the information/indictment.

Jim

Seems strange, then, that so many people from both sides are knocking it. Calling it unprofessional and inadequate.