I don't want to suggest that all prosecutors are bad, I have worked with very sensible prosecutors who try to do the right thing. Undoubtedly, the majority of those arrested for crimes are guilty of the crime or some lessor offense.

The problem generally comes from the top of the prosecutor's office and the win at all costs attidute. I have seen assistant prosecutors get fired for doing the right thing and getting rid of cases where they knew the evidence was insufficient for conviction.

Prosecutors love to pass the buck, they have no problem taking a case to trial they know they are going to lose so they can pass the blame, i.e., it was those 12 morons on the jury that let that creep go, I did everything I could, presented the evidence to convict and those idiots ignored it!

The problem gets manifested in a high profile case like this. She has now charged Zimmerman and you can pretty much bet that she is going to go full throttle against him at this point regardless of where the evidence leads. Likely, there is no turning back at this point.

I hope for everyone's sake Zimmerman gets a fair trial and that the evidence dictates the result, not uninformed notions of what people think or want to believe occurred or that that the result be based upon social or political agendas.

Yes, exactly. We'll see what she does. She may very well drop to manslaughter. But it doesn't appear she just pulled 2nd degree manslaughter out of her azz as a charge.

I've been against trying this case in the media from the start, as you well know, for precisely the reason you stated.

Yeah - it could be that the prosecutor will accept a lesser charge. It could be the prosecutor goes whole hog for a 2nd degree charge. It could be that Zimmerman is found innocent by a jury. It could be the case never gets to trial and a plea is taken.

That doesn't seem to go with what the public history about her professionalism has said.

Get a f.u.c.k.i.n.g. grip. I'm claiming no "expertise" here, I'm talking about it like everyone else.

Oh, poor hate-filled, prejudiced you. "People like you" disgust the majority of us. "People like you" assume what other people are to give yourself justification your hate. "People like you" act like f.u.c.k.i.n.g. spoiled children, unable to tolerate anybody who doesn't think in lockstep with their narrow little minds filled with hate.

You don't like what I post, you don't like my political views, you don't like my opinions, stop throwing out ridiculous accusations about what you imagine I think, and stick your head back up your azz and put me on ignore, rocket scientist. I don't have to suffer your moronic, out-of-nowhere personal attacks. Guess what? Other people don't agree with you. Welcome to f.u.c.k.i.n.g. adulthood. Good luck, you're not dealing with it well.

Did you listen to the interview with Dershowitz? He he seems to strongly believe that she, "pulled the 2nd degree charge out of her azz", and he explains why. You should listen to the interview. It's just a 4 minute interview.

Dershowitz may be very liberal but he doesn't always tow the company line. That is what I like about him.

http://realclearpolitics.com/video/2...unethical.html

If the prosecution can't prove the 2nd degree murder charges, then Zimmerman's attorneys have nothing to fear and should be very happy with the charges: he'll be readily and easily acquitted by a jury.

If they can prove it, Zimmerman's attorneys better start plea-bargaining, no?

The prosecutor doesn't have a reputation for losing many cases, or overstepping. If she had come back with zero charges, I would have been happy that it was looked at carefully, and it's done.

If you can't see that you are the worst offender of what you accuse me of, neither I or anyone can help you. No one on this board is unable to tolerate dissent from your opinion more than you. I love the accusation of personal attacks through a personal attack. There is no bigger hypocrite on this board than you. I am sorry that I find you and your moronic positions to be what is wrong with this country, but hey, I call it as I see it.

P.S. - I obviously don't know how to quote those sectionally, but my responses to Riots accusations are in red.

Dershowitz is one of the most respected criminal attorneys in the country. But Riot is an expert in everything, who cares what a distinguished person like Dershowitz thinks. :rolleyes:

YOU are the one who started the personal attack here. You leap from me to your Obama hate to making this a third-world country. Are you prejudiced crazy much? Your little mind whirling with your vivid imaginings of what you assume I must think or mean?

Yeah - I don't take crap personal attacks from idiots like you. Please - stop whining about it when you are confronted for it.

If you can't talk here about the Zimmerman case without personally insulting and attacking other posters, I suggest you go away and sit with the children at the little table.

There is probably a 50% chance that the judge will throw out the 2nd degree charge at the arraignment next month. The only reason that there is not a 95% chance is because of the public pressure that will be on the judge not to throw it out. If the judge does throw out the 2nd degree charge, there is still a good chance that the judge would allow the case to go forward on manslaughter charges.

If the judge does not throw out the 2nd degree charge and the case goes to trial, the jury will almost certainly be given a choice of charges. Zimmerman would almost certainly be found not guilty of 2nd degree murder but he could still be found guilty of manslaughter.

There is also the possibility of a plea deal before the case gets to trial.

There is nothing I fear more than overcharged or false charges filed against a client. It is a trap. There is no slam dunk criminal case and people can (and often do) get convicted of crimes they are not guilty of. They only thing that can go wrong in defending a person in this situation is that a grave injustice can occur.

I am not impressed that she does not lose many cases. That is probably more of a sign of a person who wins at all costs as opposed to one who seeks justice.

I think that, with the keeping the case sealed as they've done, they are trying to let the public simmer down and get out of it. Meanwhile they work out a plea, and the case never becomes the circus a public trial. Zimmerman's attorney now seems pretty sharp, compared to the two previous ringmasters.

No one levels more personal attacks on this website than you. Why are you constantly fighting with and belitting numerous posters who disagree wit you while I am not? In this thread alone you have gone after at least 4 or 5 posters who disagreed with you. Get a grip, you are the problem not me.

You do not set the parameters as to when and what I post on here.

Prosecutors win cases , get promoted and receive more money.
Detectives solve cases, get promoted and receive more money.

See the incentives here? Scary.

Once again: YOU are the one who started this personal attack here. No, I don't take crap personal attacks from idiots like you.

Stomping your feet and screaming, "You are not the boss of me!" just makes you look even more ridiculous. Just stop it.

Riot in full on Psychotic Meltdown Mode!! BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :tro::tro:

Take your meds, sweetie

Click.

Treat.

ROFLMAO.

That is her default setting. Pointman must have written something to trigger her persecution complex.

The bail hearing is this Friday. It will be interesting to see whether the judge grants Zimmerman bail.

There is little chance that Zimmerman will be granted bail unless the Judge has a wish to destroy his or her career.

When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand
 

Would the bail hearing be the appropriate time for Z's lawyer to move that the case be dismissed under the "Stand Your Ground" law, or is that off the table at this time?

I would not rule out the possibility of bail in this case, but the question of Z's safety looms large, so it might be better for him to be in protective custody. I am sure he is totally sequestered wherever he is being held now.

Trayvon Martin: There are other issues.


Editor, Times-Dispatch:

He may have stood his ground, we have no idea if he did or not because he is not here to tell us.

This is not the hearing where Zimmerman's lawyer will ask to have the case dismissed. That will happen next month.

I think that is a valid point. Martin would certainly have a valid right to defend himself from some guy that is following him and coming towards him.

However, Zimmerman claims that Martin attacked him from behind while he was walking back to his car. If that is what happened, Martin could not argue that he was standing his ground.

Even if Martin was simply "standing his ground", at some point he is on top of Zimmerman pounding him in the face and banging his head against the pavement. At what point does Zimmerman have the right to use deadly force to save himself from death (plenty of people have died in fist fights) or great bodily harm, such as ending up in a coma from head injuries?

That is an issue in any legal case where a life is lost. It certainly has not stopped prosecutions and convictions for murder. There are ways other than testimony to prove a case.

The forensic evidence of how close the gunshot was to Trayvon, if Trayvon's fingerprints are on the gun, if Trayvon has evidence of a fight on his person (Zimmerman's skin under fingernails, bruising, etc.) will help clear that up.

If evidence was even processed by the police department, which I understand is a concern here (although we don't know for sure, it's sealed).

There is evidence that Trayvon was on the phone with his girlfriend, worried that someone was following him and scaring him.

Cosby: Trayvon Martin case about guns, not race


Actor and comedian Bill Cosby says the debate over the killing of Trayvon Martin by a neighborhood watch volunteer should be focused on guns, not race.

In an interview on CNN's "State of the Union" aired Sunday, Cosby said calling George Zimmerman a racist doesn't solve anything. Cosby says the bigger question is what Zimmerman was doing with a gun, and who taught him how to behave with it.

The shooting of the 17-year-old Martin on Feb. 26 has ignited a nationwide debate about race and self-defense.

Cosby said during the interview, which was taped Thursday afternoon, that he once owned a gun but no longer does. He says there is a need to get guns off the streets, and that people should be taught to use every possible alternative before shooting someone.

I don't think anyone denies what you are saying. Martin was obviously concerned and/or worried as to why this stranger was following him. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

Two guys standing their ground, with a gun involved. Now one's dead. As Big posted, "What's the real problem here?" America?

With regard to guns, I think anyone's gut instinct (myself included), would be that people carrying concealed weapons is dangerous and that this would lead to more people getting killed. That seems like a reasonable hypothesis.

However, the evidence doesn't support that hypothesis. Quite to the contrary, all the evidence I have seen shows that there is less violent crime in states after they pass laws allowing people to start carrying concealed weapons. There will obviously be some unfortunate incidents such as this case. You can't make a decision based on one incident. You have to view the overall results of what happens when a state allows people to carry concealed weapons. I think the evidence shows that the overall results are positive (there are less deaths and less violent crimes).

If you have any evidence that shows the opposite, feel free to present it.

criminals become emboldened when there is a populace unable to defend itself. one only need look at cities with strict gun laws to know that. law-abiding citizens are just that. gun laws don't make a criminal suddenly concern himself with following the laws of the land, but he knows those of us who have no desire to ever go to jail will follow them. and all that does is give him ready victims, who have only 911 as a recourse.
you can pass a million laws or more; that won't solve the problem of the occasional dumbass like zimmerman.

I agree with everything you said except for the part about Zimmerman. Based on everything I have heard so far, Zimmerman had done a good job helping to watch the neighborhood and keep the neighborhood safe for several years. This was an unfortunate incident. Hindsight is 20/20. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. Neighborhood watch programs (formal and informal) work. They reduce crime.

I highly doubt Zimmerman intended to get into any type of physical altercation. I think there is a good chance that he never intended to get within 50 yards of Martin. But he lost him on foot and at some point I think he turned a corner and found himself in close proximity to Martin. It was probably a fluke thing. We don't know for sure what happened after that. Zimmerman claims they had words but then the words ended and he was walking back to his car when he was attacked from behind.

Hindsight is 20/20 but as I said before, I highly doubt Zimmerman had any plans of getting into close proximity with Martin. If he was just some type of vigilante, why did he even bother calling the police? If he thought he was just some tough guy, he would have probably just pulled up to Martin in his car and rolled down his window and asked, "Who are you and what are you doing in this neighborhood?" But he didn't do this. He called the police. I think the whole thing was an unfortunate incident. I wouldn't recommend following someone on foot because if you lose them there is always the chance that you could end up face to face with them after turning a corner. I don't think Zimmerman ever dreamed that he would be jumped from behind (if that is in fact what happened).

I'm sure Zimmerman had followed people hundreds of times over the years (while doing his informal neigborhood watches) without incident. This incident was an aberration.

I agree that concealed carry states have less murder and violent crime once it becomes common there. But - the evidence to the contrary is countries that do not have a handgun/assault weapons available to the public culture (say, Canada or England), and those that do (us).

We murder each other with guns in the thousands compared to less than 100. Why does a 20-bullet clip for a handgun need to be legal here? You can still have gun ownership, but with hard restrictions and responsibilities. Trouble is, in America we think that violates our freedomz. The definition of "responsible gun laws" varies widely among Americans.

It's not exactly true that concealed-carry states saw a drop in crime. Some did, some didn't. And some non-concealed-carry states saw a drop in crime. This is a very good, and, I think, fair look at concealed carry:

Happiness Is a Worn Gun

If it doesn't link right, a google search of the title will take you to it.

bond set at 150,000


I really doubt Zimmerman gets convicted of 2nd degree murder. I just dont see how that case will be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. They should have went with a lesser charge, because the man does deserve to spend a couple of years locked up.

I do not think Zimmerman set out to kill Martin. I also wouldnt be surprised if Martin began the physical altercation.. because many people in Martin's situation (being followed and harrassed by a stranger) would resort to a few punches. But you can not act like a wanna be cop and get away with ending a life unpunished. While I do not see 2nd degree murder, Zimmerman deserves a 3-5 year sentence IMO.

This was posted at another forum...Is this in evidence of his head injuries?..or a photoshopped bit..jus askin..


[/quote]

When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand
 

Based on what I saw in court this morning, he will walk. Prosecutors are idiots for using loaded words like "profiled" and "confronted" in the affidavit. Defense attorney looks like he's on the ball, and judge set remarkably low bail. Unless some really startling evidence is produced, he ultimately beats the rap.

As to what he "deserves," who can say; did think that his "apology" was self-serving, and I was really surprised that O'Mara let him get up there.

[/quote]

That picture must be forged because Danzig told me that there was no struggle. She had strong evidence too. Her evidence was that the funeral director (who works for the Martins) said that Trayvon had no bruises. LOL.

I'm sorry Danzig. I couldn't resist.

ABC must have a massive contact leaking information to them from inside the prosecutors office - they've had all the "good stuff" in this case. I wonder if the prosecutor will freak out about this new leak, especially after the case has been sealed by the judge?

That looks like real blood to me. But you see how the pattern is running down to the left and right of the back-top of the head? [although there appears to be two contusions in a linear fashion (like the edge of a curb?) ] - there is no blood smear.

If his head was "being beaten" against the concrete, how come none of the blood is smeared?

So, say it's real, his head was beaten against the concrete to get the two contusions - he must have immediately gotten up and regained the upper hand, because the blood is running down both sides, consistent with how he's sitting now: with his head up, facing downward a little.

If his head was beaten against the concrete to get that, then he immediately got up before he started bleeding from the wounds, because none of the blood is smeared (is there blood on the concrete at the scene?)

And if he was standing after the injury, the blood would have run straight down his collar. It appears the head was bent over, as the blood ran down the left and right sides from the wounds.

I wonder if he shot Trayvon while laying on his back with Trayvon on top, then pushed dead Trayvon off and immediately stood up. Could be.

Yes. I believe that is what the claim has been all along.