Drop George Zimmerman’s murder charge
#21
(05-18-2012, 09:43 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 09:33 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 09:07 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 08:56 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 08:07 PM)tvguy Wrote: Well All righty thenRazz with all due respect the fact that he was advised not to pursue and wait for police doesn't mean a damned thing? Does it?
I keep hearing this brought up as though it does? Is there some charge he is accused of for ignoring a 911 dispatchers advice?
because isn't that what it is? just advice?
It seems logical to me that if Z really thought Martin was suspicious that he didn't want to sit and let him get away while he waited for the police.

From a legal standpoint, it might mean nothing that Zimmerman was told not to follow him.
Recently a Mexican/American man was sent to prison for 20+ years. The case was played out twice in Jackson County and MMT.
2 brothers and their friend, all from Eagle Point, went looking to start a fight with a Mexican, and that is how it started. Only a few minutes before the fight the Mexican was standing relaxed, talking to a MPD officer.
The three cruisers come upon the Mexican, one of the brother's ends up dead from a knife wound, the knife is never found. The Cruisers, are not charged with anything. So there you have it, the whole story is achived in the MMT.
I would have thought that the Cruisers would have been charged for simple assault at least because they admitted that they were the antagonists.
The rules of evidence in murder are very much to the act itself and unless it is pre-meditated, not what leads up to it.

OK It's late and I read that twice. I'm not getting the point unless you were agreeing with meTwitchBig Grin. It sounds to me like the "cruisers" should have been charged with a hate crime at the very very least

The guy was named Luis Alberto Salas-Juarez. He got life, 25 years.

Well the only similarity I see is this guy and Zimmerman both used deadly force when deadly force was not used on them.

I think the similarity is that people think that all the surrounding evidence leading up to it means something, but it doesn't.
In Salas-Juarez's case, the fact that he wasn't looking for trouble didn't mean anything for his defense.
In Zimmerman's case, the fact that he was, probably doesn't mean anything either.

It only means anything when they are going for Murder 1, premeditated.
Reply
#22
I don't claim to know all about this stand your ground law, but it doesn't make sense you can claim you are standing your ground while chasing after someone.
Reply
#23
(05-18-2012, 09:43 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 09:33 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 09:07 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 08:56 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 08:07 PM)tvguy Wrote: Well All righty thenRazz with all due respect the fact that he was advised not to pursue and wait for police doesn't mean a damned thing? Does it?
I keep hearing this brought up as though it does? Is there some charge he is accused of for ignoring a 911 dispatchers advice?
because isn't that what it is? just advice?
It seems logical to me that if Z really thought Martin was suspicious that he didn't want to sit and let him get away while he waited for the police.

From a legal standpoint, it might mean nothing that Zimmerman was told not to follow him.
Recently a Mexican/American man was sent to prison for 20+ years. The case was played out twice in Jackson County and MMT.
2 brothers and their friend, all from Eagle Point, went looking to start a fight with a Mexican, and that is how it started. Only a few minutes before the fight the Mexican was standing relaxed, talking to a MPD officer.
The three cruisers come upon the Mexican, one of the brother's ends up dead from a knife wound, the knife is never found. The Cruisers, are not charged with anything. So there you have it, the whole story is achived in the MMT.
I would have thought that the Cruisers would have been charged for simple assault at least because they admitted that they were the antagonists.
The rules of evidence in murder are very much to the act itself and unless it is pre-meditated, not what leads up to it.

OK It's late and I read that twice. I'm not getting the point unless you were agreeing with meTwitchBig Grin. It sounds to me like the "cruisers" should have been charged with a hate crime at the very very least

The guy was named Luis Alberto Salas-Juarez. He got life, 25 years.

Well the only similarity I see is this guy and Zimmerman both used deadly force when deadly force was not used on them.

Unless, somehow, Martin got the upper hand on Zimmerman and was beating his head against the pavement and the shooting took place. Let me set up a scenario.

We all know that Zimmerman disregarded the advice to stay in place. Let's say he continued to follow Marin anyway, came to the intersection of the walkway, didn't see Martin and Martin, for whatever reason, came at him. Let's also say that Martin got the upper hand at that point, drove Zimmerman to the ground and started beating his head against the pavement (I doubt it was dirt because of the wounds that were photographed.) Let's also say that Zimmerman, at that point thought that if Martin continued to beat his head into the pavement he might die. Some might consider that to be deadly force. Deadly force does not necessarily include being attacked with a weapon. At that point, Zimmerman drew his weapon and fired. It totally changes the scenario.

I am with you TV. I want to hear "all" of the evidence. All of this posturing and assuming guilt or lack of guilt on one side of the other is nothing more than a bunch of bloviating without any first hand evidence to consider.

Let the jury hear the evidence and then decide. I am thinking it will probably be a manslaughter charge unless evidence is introduced that Zimmerman was indeed in fear for his life at the point he discharged his weapon.


Reply
#24
(05-18-2012, 10:03 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I don't claim to know all about this stand your ground law, but it doesn't make sense you can claim you are standing your ground while chasing after someone.

Right but you are characterizing what went down as Zimmerman chasing Martin. So far all I've heard chased, followed, ran him down, pursued, hunted him down whatever.

I look at the incident as what happened when the two confronted each other. If the two started arguing and Martin attacked Zimmerman and had Zimmerman on his back and kept beating him then the SYG law might make some kind of sense.
Reply
#25
We can go on and on about the same thing forever. (and we have) As a concerned citizen and/or a neighborhood watch person, he reported a suspicious person. He was reminded that it is not his place to do more than that , right? If he did not take it upon himself to inject himself further into this situation on what was described as a dark drizzly night, none of this was likely to happen.
Reply
#26
Maybe he can be reprogrammed to shoot tweakers instead.
Reply
#27
(05-18-2012, 10:22 PM)Valuesize Wrote: We can go on and on about the same thing forever. (and we have) As a concerned citizen and/or a neighborhood watch person, he reported a suspicious person. He was reminded that it is not his place to do more than that , right? If he did not take it upon himself to inject himself further into this situation on what was described as a dark drizzly night, none of this was likely to happen.

I'm in total agreement with that.
Reply
#28
(05-18-2012, 10:11 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 10:03 PM)Valuesize Wrote: I don't claim to know all about this stand your ground law, but it doesn't make sense you can claim you are standing your ground while chasing after someone.

Right but you are characterizing what went down as Zimmerman chasing Martin. So far all I've heard chased, followed, ran him down, pursued, hunted him down whatever.

I look at the incident as what happened when the two confronted each other. If the two started arguing and Martin attacked Zimmerman and had Zimmerman on his back and kept beating him then the SYG law might make some kind of sense.
You are right, the crime is judged from what went down after they engaged each other. The DA can tell the story, but it is background. I don't understand why they charged him with Murder 2.
Reply
#29
To calm the black folks down ?
Reply
#30
(05-18-2012, 10:38 PM)Yeshuah Hamashiach Wrote: To calm the black folks down ?

It's harder to make the case for Murder ll because it requires premeditation.
Reply
#31
My husband's murderer was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder on circumstantial evidence...they couldn't prove pre-meditation.
At least in CA, the difference between 1 and 2 is pre-meditation.
Pre-meditation is, by far, the hardest thing to prove.
Reply
#32
(05-18-2012, 10:42 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 10:38 PM)Yeshuah Hamashiach Wrote: To calm the black folks down ?

It's harder to make the case for Murder ll because it requires premeditation.

We shall see because they won't be dropping the charges. They have had all the info to make that call and we are just starting to have tricked down to us.
Reply
#33
The gub will probably collapse before this even goes to trial.
Reply
#34
(05-18-2012, 11:03 PM)Clone Wrote: My husband's murderer was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder on circumstantial evidence...they couldn't prove pre-meditation.
At least in CA, the difference between 1 and 2 is pre-meditation.
Pre-meditation is, by far, the hardest thing to prove.

Florida statute, Murder 2 has the element of pre-meditation.
Reply
#35
(05-18-2012, 11:04 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 10:42 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 10:38 PM)Yeshuah Hamashiach Wrote: To calm the black folks down ?

It's harder to make the case for Murder ll because it requires premeditation.

We shall see because they won't be dropping the charges. They have had all the info to make that call and we are just starting to have tricked down to us.
They may not drop the charges, but overcharging on something they can't get is also a little trick they use. So is getting a conviction from a local jury knowing full well it will be overturned in a higher court.
Reply
#36
(05-18-2012, 11:12 PM)DUNNO Wrote: They may not drop the charges, but overcharging on something they can't get is also a little trick they use. So is getting a conviction from a local jury knowing full well it will be overturned in a higher court.

Agreed.
Reply
#37
(05-18-2012, 11:15 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:12 PM)DUNNO Wrote: They may not drop the charges, but overcharging on something they can't get is also a little trick they use. So is getting a conviction from a local jury knowing full well it will be overturned in a higher court.

Agreed.
Recommended watching "MURDER ON A SUNDAY MORNING" a documentary on real Florida style justice and a good watch.
Reply
#38
(05-18-2012, 11:17 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:15 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:12 PM)DUNNO Wrote: They may not drop the charges, but overcharging on something they can't get is also a little trick they use. So is getting a conviction from a local jury knowing full well it will be overturned in a higher court.

Agreed.
Recommended watching "MURDER ON A SUNDAY MORNING" a documentary on real Florida style justice and a good watch.

This it?

Reply
#39
(05-18-2012, 11:10 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:03 PM)Clone Wrote: My husband's murderer was convicted of 2nd Degree Murder on circumstantial evidence...they couldn't prove pre-meditation.
At least in CA, the difference between 1 and 2 is pre-meditation.
Pre-meditation is, by far, the hardest thing to prove.

Florida statute, Murder 2 has the element of pre-meditation.

Overview of Florida Second Degree Murder Laws
In Florida, state laws establish several types of homicide, the unlawful killing of a human being. The state prosecutes homicides as murders and manslaughters -- it may be helpful to know the multiple types of murders established by state law and understand the differences among them. In particular, second degree murder lacks the premeditation often required for the prosecution of a first degree murder.
To prove second degree murder, a prosecutor must show that the defendant acted according to a "depraved mind" without regard for human life.
Florida state laws permit the prosecution of second degree murder when the killing lacked premeditation or planning, but the defendant acted with enmity toward the victim or the two had an ongoing interaction or relationship. Unlike first degree murder, second degree murder does not necessarily require proof of the defendant's intent to kill.

State law specifically requires a charge of second degree murder if the victim dies during the commission of one of the felony crimes specified by statute. These felonies include burglary, home-invasion robbery, kidnapping, sexual battery, and a number of other offenses. To establish second degree murder, the prosecutor must show that the victim died as a result of an act committed by a non-participant in the felony. If the defendant or another criminal participant in the felony caused the unlawful killing, state law requires a charge of first degree murder rather than second degree murder. Florida uses this law to deter and punish unintended deaths as a result of felonious activities

http://law.findlaw.com/state-laws/second...r/florida/
Reply
#40
(05-18-2012, 11:25 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:17 PM)DUNNO Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:15 PM)Valuesize Wrote:
(05-18-2012, 11:12 PM)DUNNO Wrote: They may not drop the charges, but overcharging on something they can't get is also a little trick they use. So is getting a conviction from a local jury knowing full well it will be overturned in a higher court.

Agreed.
Recommended watching "MURDER ON A SUNDAY MORNING" a documentary on real Florida style justice and a good watch.

This it?


Yes! I am not sure why the film maker knew to start rolling the film on this, but start to finish, it tells the whole story.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)