When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

No, they did not ask for bail today. He's in prison now.

There appears to be only three defenses against 2nd degree murder, and self-defense is the only one Zimmerman appears to have. And considering Zimmerman followed and stalked Trayvon, self-defense doesn't look good.

I know that. But he is going to ask for bail well before his next hearing (May 29).

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I know that. But he is going to ask for bail well before his next hearing (May 29).

Ah. Got it. I don't know how they would keep him safe. He certainly can't go out in public.

He's in for a hell of a life, no matter what happens to him.

Did you read the wording in the affidavit of murder charge? Zimmerman "profiled" Trayvon is what was said.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Ah. Got it. I don't know how they would keep him safe. He certainly can't go out in public.

He's in for a hell of a life, no matter what happens to him.

Did you read the wording in the affidavit of murder charge? Zimmerman "profiled" Trayvon is what was said.

"Zimmerman "profiled" Trayvon is what was said."

They can say whatever they want. Saying it doesn't prove it. They need to prove it.

While we're on this subject, I'm going to give you a hypothetical. Let's pretend you spotted me walking in your neighborhood and you didn't recognize me. You thought my body-language looked somewhat suspicious. In addition, let's say that I was black and this made you slightly more suspicious because there had been a recent string of burglaries in your neighborhood committed by black people.

So you call the police and then you follow me. You finally confront me and grab me by the arm. I punch you in the face and knock you to the ground. Then I get on top of you and continue punching you in the face and start banging your head on the cement. Then you pull out a gun and shoot me. Even in that scenario, I don't think 2nd degree murder would be a slam dunk. Even though you followed me and grabbed me by the arm, I still don't think it would be a slam dunk because when you finally shot me it was to save yourself from death or grave bodily harm. You probably couldn't claim self-defense since you grabbed me first.

Granted you would be at fault for starting the whole altercation. But if you had no plans to harm me and only wanted to hold me until the police got there, I think 2nd degree murder would be hard to prove. I think manslaughter would be more likely.

My hypothetical is a much stronger case for the prosecutor than the Zimmerman case because in the Zimmerman case I don't think there is any evidence that Zimmerman started the physical altercation.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin;852144 [b

I don't think there is any evidence that Zimmerman started the physical altercation.[/b]

None of us on-lookers know what evidence the prosecuter has...Filing for 2nd degree hints at something they have in their bag....and maybe it is a ploy to get him to plead out for a lesser charge....??

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by bigrun

None of us on-lookers know what evidence the prosecuter has...Filing for 2nd degree hints at something they have in their bag....and maybe it is a ploy to get him to plead out for a lesser charge....??

In some of these cases, they give the jury a choice. Some of the lawyers on television were saying that in cases like this, the prosecutor will often over-charge, then give the jury a choice, and then hope that the jury compromises and finds the person guilty of a lesser charge such as manslaughter.

In some cases, they don't give the jury a choice. It's murder or nothing. I'm sure they will give the jury a choice in this case.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

In some of these cases, they give the jury a choice. Some of the lawyers on television were saying that in cases like this, the prosecutor will often over-charge, then give the jury a choice, and then hope that the jury compromises and finds the person guilty of a lesser charge such as manslaughter.

In some cases, they don't give the jury a choice. It's murder or nothing. I'm sure they will give the jury a choice in this case.

This case aside, the prosecutor ALWAYS over-charges!

I'm starting to think that there must be something in the evidence not yet made public that weighs heavily on the side of this prosecutor. Would make sense, too, and would kind of justify the original conclusion 45 days ago not to arrest Z because the evidence wasn't available then.

This late-emerging evidence, I believe, has to do with either:

1. The gunshot wound that took Trayvon out. Could it possibly have been fired from other than close range? Obviously, that crushes Z's case.

2. The voice analysis on the 911 tapes. Was that Z or Trayvon yelling?

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by bigrun

None of us on-lookers know what evidence the prosecuter has...Filing for 2nd degree hints at something they have in their bag....and maybe it is a ploy to get him to plead out for a lesser charge....??

I doubt it. There would be too much of a public outcry if he was allowed to plead guilty. The state is going to roll the dice and hope the jury comes back with a responsive verdict of manslaughter at worst.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

"Zimmerman "profiled" Trayvon is what was said."

They can say whatever they want. Saying it doesn't prove it. They need to prove it.

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.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

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.

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.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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.

[pointman]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

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

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.