Unarmed Florida Teen Shot

[MJS]

Im interested in seeing where they will hold the trial and how will they find a Jury that has not already made up its mind. The president of the United States already made comments about the case and every lvl of Govt below him, you had congressmen thrown out for wearing a hoodie in congress and sports star and movie stars making comments and tweets, protests across the country. Im not sure how he gats a fair trial.

Now, the question will be can they find 12+ people in the state who have not yet been poisoned by the media to objectively do jury duty in this case?
Or in the country?

Yeah, thats going to certainly be a tough process. I certainly don't envy the lawyers.

 

[Wo Fat]

What are you implying?

I'm saying that I, among many of all stripes, won't be waiting for people who perceive themselves as head of the American table, to let me know when it's OK to be outraged at slow justice or selective justice.

 

[granfire]

I'm saying that I, among many of all stripes, won't be waiting for people who perceive themselves as head of the American table, to let me know when it's OK to be outraged at slow justice or selective justice.

So it's your party and you're outraged if you want to....

fair enough.

Just make sure your outrage is righteous and just.

And not just a bunch of grand standing.

it is my observation though that the vast majority of the professionally outraged are more often than not ignorant of the facts, not affected but the subject of their outrage or - worse yet - stand to profit a great deal from aligning themselves with 'the cause'

 

[Wo Fat]

So when the 1st prosecutor looked at the Facts and didnt find an outcome to your liking why was that not ok? And if the new prosecutor had decided there still was not enough evidence to bring charges you were already spouting off about the Justice Department stepping in and charging Zimmerman. So you dont care about the Facts you only care that Zimmerman was charged.

It was not "OK", because clearly the first prosecutor either missed or ignored material facts that were sufficient to charge Zimmerman. That the Justice Dept. readied itself, is a substantial indication of a possibility of a pattern of either missing or ignoring facts. The Special Prosecutor was appointed by Governor Scott, not by "morons" like me. Again, a substantial indication that the case deserved more than a curb-side investigation by officer so-and-so.

So ironically, the "facts" about which I supposedly care so little about, actually were sufficient to charge George Zimmerman.

 

[granfire]

It was not "OK", because clearly the first prosecutor either missed or ignored material facts that were sufficient to charge Zimmerman. That the Justice Dept. readied itself, is a substantial indication of a possibility of a pattern of either missing or ignoring facts. The Special Prosecutor was appointed by Governor Scott, not by "morons" like me. Again, a substantial indication that the case deserved more than a curb-side investigation by officer so-and-so.

So ironically, the "facts" about which I supposedly care so little about, actually were sufficient to charge George Zimmerman.

Can you be sure?
Do you know the facts?

 

[Wo Fat]

Can you be sure?
Do you know the facts?

Were you sure of the facts before Zimmerman was charged?

 

[Wo Fat]

Just make sure your outrage is righteous and just.

And not just a bunch of grand standing.

it is my observation though that the vast majority of the professionally outraged are more often than not ignorant of the facts, not affected but the subject of their outrage or - worse yet - stand to profit a great deal from aligning themselves with 'the cause'

My outrage will be what it will. If it doesn't satisfy someone's observation, too bad. Nothing new.

 

[ballen0351]

It was not "OK", because clearly the first prosecutor either missed or ignored material facts that were sufficient to charge Zimmerman.

You know that how? Could the second prosecutor simply had said well I dont want everyone pissed at me so Ill charge him and let a judge figure it out?

That the Justice Dept. readied itself, is a substantial indication of a possibility of a pattern of either missing or ignoring facts.

The same Justice Dept that thought it was a good idea to send guns to Mexico that were used to kill US Border Patrol Agent the same Justice Department that then Lied about the cover up? That Justice Dept?

The Special Prosecutor was appointed by Governor Scott, not by "morons" like me. Again, a substantial indication that the case deserved more than a curb-side investigation by officer so-and-so.

Did you see the case file or case reports? So how do you know it was a curb side investigation?

So ironically, the "facts" about which I supposedly care so little about, actually were sufficient to charge George Zimmerman.

So if a judge later decides alot of the "Facts" like a mothers "opinion" that a voice was her sons are not really Facts and tosses the case or Zimmerman gets found not guilty will you still feel justice was served or will you then demand a federal investigation?



I read the page and a half statement of Prob cause (P/C) and there wasnt much "FACT" at all in it. Ive written longer P/C for a guy pissing in an alley then that page and a half for a Murder Charge. I hope they have more evidence then that or this case wont last very long in the court system.

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

 

[punisher73]

It was not "OK", because clearly the first prosecutor either missed or ignored material facts that were sufficient to charge Zimmerman. That the Justice Dept. readied itself, is a substantial indication of a possibility of a pattern of either missing or ignoring facts. The Special Prosecutor was appointed by Governor Scott, not by "morons" like me. Again, a substantial indication that the case deserved more than a curb-side investigation by officer so-and-so.

So ironically, the "facts" about which I supposedly care so little about, actually were sufficient to charge George Zimmerman.

I was involved in a political case where no crime actually occurred. Some leaders of the community heard various versions of what they THOUGHT happened, and I was told to do a warrant request on one of the parties involved. It had nothing to do with "facts" and everything to do with political grandstanding and covering people's behinds. Things are not as they seem, and only when everything is brought out in trial will we have a better picture (not the truth).

 

[jks9199]

I see your point and I can't say I completely disagree with it. I do think the justice system is run by human beings and sometimes that means things break down. In those cases it takes people willing to be loud and create a stir to get things moving again. This particular case did not happen in a vaccumn. Trayvan Martin is not the first young black man to be killed using the no retreat law as justification. In many of those previous cases there was little follow up investigation. I don't blame that all on police, but I can see where the family feared the same thing would happen again.

Ballen, I do have to give you props for not taking the easy way on your investigations and doing the work neccesary to get a solid case. If only more people would do the same in both thier personal lives and work the world would be a much better place.

Most law enforcement officers, at all levels of the system in the US, do their jobs properly and carefully, and conduct complete investigations. There's a reason that the cases where they don't make the news...

We have no way of knowing what investigative steps were being taken or weren't without the outcry and hullabaloo in this case. The fact that Zimmerman was released that night doesn't mean that there was no further investigation or that he would never have been charged. You claim that others have been killed using the Stand Your Ground laws as justification; support that. But -- realize that justification is exactly what the law does. It justifies an act that would, otherwise and without that justification, be illegal.

 

[jks9199]

I'm coming to the realization that I'm tired of outrage. I'm tired of populist anger. I'm tired of protests and screaming and yelling and wearing hoodies and Guy Fawkes masks and demands for this and for that. People run from one popular outrage to the next, whipped by the pandering media and I'm talking about on the left and the right. Is there injustice in the world? Yes. Is there racism and bigotry? Yes. But it's all gone too far. Shooting up police cars, black separatists issuing 'dead or alive' bounties, white separatists patrolling the streets with bad intent, it's time all ya'll morons sit down, shut up, and let justice do what it does. Enough hate, enough threats, and definitely enough gunplay. Not one of you knows what happened in the moments before Zimmerman pulled that trigger; and neither do I. So all of our opinions on what occurred are worth precisely dick.

And the outrage won't stop -- especially if Zimmerman is found guilty of a lesser offense, or even worse, acquitted. The federal prosecutors are, I'm sadly all too sure, already drawing up their own charging documents, and if Florida's courts don't come to the "right" decision, we'll see Zimmerman prosecuted federally. Maybe even if they do...

He will be sued for wrongful death -- and may well find himself signing over a noteworthy portion of his paycheck to the Martin family for the rest of his life. And that may well be quite appropriate; there's plenty he could have done just in the facts at hand, that would have prevented this tragedy. But that doesn't mean he was automatically criminally liable, as well.

 

[jks9199]

Now, the question will be can they find 12+ people in the state who have not yet been poisoned by the media to objectively do jury duty in this case?
Or in the country?

Actually, Zimmerman may be better off going with a judge anyway... Odds are that he's going to be presenting a rather complex case of justification. Juries may discard the evidence and only look at the emotions, while one hopes that judges are less likely to.

 

[Wo Fat]

You know that how? Could the second prosecutor simply had said well I dont want everyone pissed at me so Ill charge him and let a judge figure it out?


The same Justice Dept that thought it was a good idea to send guns to Mexico that were used to kill US Border Patrol Agent the same Justice Department that then Lied about the cover up? That Justice Dept?


Did you see the case file or case reports? So how do you know it was a curb side investigation?


So if a judge later decides alot of the "Facts" like a mothers "opinion" that a voice was her sons are not really Facts and tosses the case or Zimmerman gets found not guilty will you still feel justice was served or will you then demand a federal investigation?



I read the page and a half statement of Prob cause (P/C) and there wasnt much "FACT" at all in it. Ive written longer P/C for a guy pissing in an alley then that page and a half for a Murder Charge. I hope they have more evidence then that or this case wont last very long in the court system.

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

First, I don't know if I'll be any more accepting of a not-guilty verdict, than you will be accepting of a guilty verdict. As much as some suspect (or think they know of) my/our/those people's motivations, I suspect the same of theirs. That said, this particular prosecutor appears to be worthy of all people's trust. So is Zimmerman's lawyer. If a seated jury is of the same competence and integrity as the prosecution and the defense, I for one, will accept whatever verdict comes.

Second, a criminal complaint or probable cause document is written in very much the same style as a civil complaint. Neither one is going to load up the document with "facts" that will educate the other side. It's the way things are done in the practice of law.

 

[jks9199]

I read the page and a half statement of Prob cause (P/C) and there wasnt much "FACT" at all in it. Ive written longer P/C for a guy pissing in an alley then that page and a half for a Murder Charge. I hope they have more evidence then that or this case wont last very long in the court system.

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

Wow... A lot of loaded language and assumptions without facts to support them. It's not even clear when some of Zimmerman's statements were made, or how they know what he thought and believed at the time. Granted that an affidavit to support PC is one-sided -- there's a lot left out of that one.

 

[ballen0351]

Wow... A lot of loaded language and assumptions without facts to support them. It's not even clear when some of Zimmerman's statements were made, or how they know what he thought and believed at the time. Granted that an affidavit to support PC is one-sided -- there's a lot left out of that one.

Thats exactly what I thought when I read it WOW was the first thing that popped in my mind. I wish I could get away with PC statements like that

 

[Bill Mattocks]

When OJ was found not guilty, you know what I thought? I thought that a jury had found that the state had been unable to prove OJ guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. And that's how our justice system works. In fact, it has often been said that it is better for 100 guilty men to go free than that one innocent man be sent to prison.

Was OJ guilty? I have no idea. It sure seems like it from that I read. And he lost a civil lawsuit, which had a much lower burden of proof (preponderance of evidence versus beyond a reasonable doubt).

But you know what? That's how our system works. And it's the best system on the planet. Warts and all. I must some kind of idiot; when a jury presents its findings, I ACCEPT IT.

I may choose to believe that the jury was wrong; that's my right to have an opinion. But I'm not going to go out and demonstrate in the streets, I'm not going to riot, I'm not going to burn the damned city down or throw Molotov cocktails and rocks at the police. The system doesn't always produce the correct results, but it's not designed to be 100% accurate; it's designed to follow the rules and procedures we have to determining guilt and innocence. Could it be better? Yes, it could. And working to make it better is a good and noble thing. I don't for a moment suggest that nothing needs to be fixed with our justice system. But those are questions for the system; not questions for an individual case.

Zimmerman may be found guilty. If he is, I am going to believe that the jury, good people and true, weighed the facts in evidence and came to a conclusion that they unanimously supported.

Zimmerman may be found innocent. If he is, I'm going to believe the same thing about the jury.

That doesn't mean that Zimmerman did or did not commit a crime. It does not mean he was or was not lying in the statement he gave to police. It does not mean that I won't have an opinion on the matter that differs from that of the jury.

But the answer will be what the answer will be. I do not control that, I have faith in our system to work correctly far more often than it does not, and I am prepared to accept the conclusion our system reaches.

I know, insane. How dare I believe our system works? How dare I believe that the outcome, whatever it ends up being, is just and fair? How dare I?

 

[ballen0351]

First, I don't know if I'll be any more accepting of a not-guilty verdict, than you will be accepting of a guilty verdict.

I got no problem with Zimmerman being found guilty I dont care either way. i do care about somone being railroaded but the media.

That said, this particular prosecutor appears to be worthy of all people's trust.

Not after reading that PC statement. I hope she has alot more real evidence then that

So is Zimmerman's lawyer. If a seated jury is of the same competence and integrity as the prosecution and the defense, I for one, will accept whatever verdict comes.

No you have already said you hope the jury remembers its not the 50's in the south so your only concerned about a guilty verdict.

Second, a criminal complaint or probable cause document is written in very much the same style as a civil complaint. Neither one is going to load up the document with "facts" that will educate the other side. It's the way things are done in the practice of law.

Sorry but you have to provide information to the other side its the law its called discovery. The only thing I saw in that PC that was even PC was Zimmerman said he shot him and we found a shell casing and Martin was dead the rest was all opinons with no facts to back them up. Its ok to use you opinion in a PC if you can show why your right. For example I was a drug investigator I always used my opinon to say if somene was possing drugs for more then personal use. But I had to back that opinon up with factual statements like the quanity or weight, street values, lack of paraphernalia, packaging products, the way it was packaged, presence of other items like scales, ledgers, large sums of currency. I cant just say yeah he sells drugs because I say so I have to prove it.

 

[granfire]

Were you sure of the facts before Zimmerman was charged?

Unlike you I don't jump to conclusions.
I have no facts, because I don't follow the case in the media.

I don't watch the news, hardly go on FB and never tweeted. I usually turn off the TV during the day when i can get away with it, right after Pokemon is over (I kid you not)

I don't assume that because the parents made a public ruckus that they are right.

I don't assume because Zimmerman was not thrown under the jail that night that he was getting off or in fact innocent.
(matter of fact I am of the opinion that he is a wannabe cop and got himself into a heap of trouble! How it legally pans out remains to be seen.)

 

[Wo Fat]

I got no problem with Zimmerman being found guilty I dont care either way. i do care about somone being railroaded but the media.


Not after reading that PC statement. I hope she has alot more real evidence then that



No you have already said you hope the jury remembers its not the 50's in the south so your only concerned about a guilty verdict.


Sorry but you have to provide information to the other side its the law its called discovery. The only thing I saw in that PC that was even PC was Zimmerman said he shot him and we found a shell casing and Martin was dead the rest was all opinons with no facts to back them up. Its ok to use you opinion in a PC if you can show why your right. For example I was a drug investigator I always used my opinon to say if somene was possing drugs for more then personal use. But I had to back that opinon up with factual statements like the quanity or weight, street values, lack of paraphernalia, packaging products, the way it was packaged, presence of other items like scales, ledgers, large sums of currency. I cant just say yeah he sells drugs because I say so I have to prove it.

First, I've worked in the law field for over 20 years, so you need not try explain discovery to me. It occurs on it's own timelines and according to its own procedure (criminal and civil). You may be experienced in dealing with criminal activity, but if you gonna try to explain litigating--criminal or civil--then know your stuff.

No you have already said you hope the jury remembers its not the 50's in the south so your only concerned about a guilty verdict.

A jury in the 50s had no problem with nullification. That's what I'm talking about. If a modern jury, reflective of the state of Florida says thumbs up to Mr. Zimmerman, so be it.

 

[granfire]

First, I've worked in the law field for over 20 years, so you need not try explain discovery to me. It occurs on it's own timelines and according to its own procedure (criminal and civil). You may be experienced in dealing with criminal activity, but if you gonna try to explain litigating--criminal or civil--then know your stuff.



A jury in the 50s had no problem with nullification. That's what I'm talking about. If a modern jury, reflective of the state of Florida says thumbs up to Mr. Zimmerman, so be it.

First, how can anybody know what your background is.
Second, for somebody with that background you do sound like nothing but a guilty verdict will do.

And that is a dangerous, preconceived notion.

I am of the opinion that aside form the DA's office and the police department all 'facts' are conjecture and hearsay.

I am guessing that as soon as the deliberation is underway the police will get on high alert, for the case Mr Zimmerman should be acquitted....

I think this case will leave the system with a black eye.