Posted on 04/13/2012 7:05:10 PM PDT by doug from upland
The charges brought against George Zimmerman sure look like prosecutorial misconduct. The case as put forward by the prosecutor in the “affidavit of probable cause” is startlingly weak. As a former chief economist at the U.S. Sentencing Commission, I have read a number of such affidavits, and cannot recall one lacking so much relevant information. The prosecutor has most likely deliberately overcharged, hoping to intimidate Zimmerman into agreeing to a plea bargain. If this case goes to trial, Zimmerman will almost definitely be found “not guilty” on the charge of second-degree murder.
The prosecutor wasn’t required to go to the grand jury for the indictment, but the fact that she didn’t in such a high-profile case is troubling. Everyone knows how easy it is for a prosecutor to get a grand jury to indict, because only the prosecutor presents evidence. A grand-jury indictment would have provided political cover; that charges were brought without one means that the prosecutor was worried that a grand jury would not give her the indictment.
Advertisement The affidavit consists of six main points:
● Zimmerman was upset about all “the break-ins in his neighborhood” and expressed anger at how criminals “always get away.”
● According to a discussion with Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend, who said that she was talking to Martin before the attack, Zimmerman followed Martin. He did so despite the police operator’s saying “we don’t need you to do that.”
● Zimmerman “confronted Martin and a struggle ensued,” though no evidence is cited on this point.
● Trayvon Martin’s mother identified the voice crying for help on a 9-1-1 call as her son’s.
● Zimmerman shot Martin in the chest, and this is confirmed by both Zimmerman’s statement and ballistics tests.
● Martin died from the gunshot wound.
Note some of the points that are missing. The prosecution doesn’t claim Zimmerman had racial animus against blacks. There was no “f***ing coons” on the police call. Some extremely relevant information from the police report is completely excluded: There is no mention of the grass and wetness found on the back of Zimmerman’s shirt, the gashes on the back of his head, the bloody nose, or the other witnesses who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, beating him, before the shot was fired. There is not even an attempt to say that the police report was in error; instead the affidavit just disregards it.
Even if everything in the affidavit is correct, it does not even begin to deal with the most crucial question: Who attacked whom? Even if it is true that “Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued,” there may have been no wrongdoing on Zimmerman’s part. “Confronted” does not mean “provoked” or “assaulted.” It could simply mean that Zimmerman followed Martin and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood. Surely Zimmerman had the right to investigate a strange person in his neighborhood. The police operator’s advice that “we don’t need you to do that” was merely suggestive, not an order to stop. Indeed, the police had no authority to give Zimmerman such an order.
Now take the charge of “second degree” murder. There is no way that the affidavit justifies such a charge. In Florida, second-degree murder is defined as “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.” But if Zimmerman was being beaten, there was no “depraved mind regardless of human life,” and the act “imminently dangerous to another” would be justified as self-defense.
Angela Corey, the special prosecutor who filed charges, claimed multiple times on Wednesday that the prosecutors “are seekers of the truth.” In our legal system, grand juries can sometimes provide a check on prosecutors who indict based on political pressure or the desire to seek the limelight. It is no surprise that Corey avoided the grand jury.
— John R. Lott Jr. is a FoxNews.com contributor and a co-author of the just-released Debacle: Obama’s War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future (John Wiley & Sons, March 2012).
lol
so now just that act of “carrying a gun” and walking through you neighborhood against the advice of an opperator is proof that you are “evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life”
ROFL
this is a screwed up world.
It may go beyond the “Stand Your Ground” law which the liberals want to get rid of. It’s the right of self-defense. If someone is beating you up and threatening to kill you, and you save your own life but the attacker winds up dead, you can be put away for life...at least if the attacker is a member of a protected group.
I sure hope you are wrong but I would no longer bet a nickel on it.
Have you listened to the 911 call in its entirety? It’s available at the Sanford PD site. 911 guy said “We don’t need you doing that” ( following Martin). Zim said “OK” then conversed with 911 guy about where his truck was. He had lost sight of Martin and walked on a bit further until he could find an address to tell police. He was arranging to meet police. It is a stunning audio and nothing like conventional wisdom.
You may call this nit picking but he was not told to stop following Trayvon.
The words were, “you don’t need to do that.”
The half-truth has become so prevalent now most people believe it.
Okay, I should have looked up “Capital crime” in a dictionary
first.
So long as the penalty for the offense is not death, then
a grand jury is not required. Got it.
Mike
http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/martinpolicreport.pdf
“Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head.”
That might be more persuasive if the facts supported you, champ.
They don't.
Charging Zimmerman is an EASY call.
How about CONVICTING Zimmerman? Could this be why he was not charged initially?
To clarify:
1) He wasn’t told not to. The dispatcher said, “We don’t need you to do that.”
2) He responded in 2 ways: A) He said, “OK.” and B) He headed back toward his truck.
So a latino wannabe cop encountered a black wannabe gangsta thug on that fateful night and now all the white people are being blamed. It’s a perfect storm.
Unfortunately foe Zimmerman, cowardly politicans and mob rule is what happening today. Therefore Zimmerman is in trouble. If his lawyer has not advised him that,judging by today's political climate, he can look forward to being convicted and a long prison sentence. I don't like it but that is the way things go.
The dispatcher (not a police officer) advised Zimmerman, and I quote, “You don’t have to do that.” Falls somewhat short of an order or directive,
It’s not nitpicking at all. Words are supposed to have meaning. Taken literally (which is the only way that words from a 911 operator should be taken), the operator merely stated what he didn’t need. At best, it was a very ambiguous statement. It would have been perfectly reasonable for Zimmerman to respond: “That’s okay, I don’t mind”. For all we know, that’s what Zimmerman was thinking.
“Have you listened to the 911 call in its entirety? “
We have to weigh the fact a huge number of people here don’t research ANYTHING on their own.
They just “watch tv”.
That how they get their information and make their judgements.
By watching a “TV”. That’s how they get their “facts”.
Frightening. This has been going on for WEEKS and all that wealth of information is out there and still these people don’t remotely grasp the logical chain of events.
Reminiscent of Mike Nifong.
It never happened. When asked if he was following, Zimmerman responded affirmatively and the dispatcher only said, "We don’t need you to do that."
That is not an order. That is not a warning (like CBS characterized it).
Such perpetuated characterizations are false, misleading an affront to justice.
It ranks up there with NBC's blatant racist editing of the 911 call and CNN's magically discovered (and later undiscovered) "racial slur" in the 911 call.
The deliberate perversion and narrative shaping seen in the Media coverage and from race-based activists is truly appalling, wholly unacceptable and needs repudiating at every turn.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.