25 years of Prosecution here. There is NO doubt there is probable cause for Voluntary. I am a little surprised at 2nd degree but just carrying the gun and following when told not to gets you there.
None of this means he is guilty, but the analysis is replete with ppl with agendas and who know nothing about what they speak.
Charging Zimmerman is an EASY call.
The political wags will weigh in ad nauseum. Ppl who actually think they “know the Constitution” will do so too. Fortunately, none of these people are involved in the case. Good attys on both sides. The system is working.
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.
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.
[[There is NO doubt there is probable cause for Voluntary.]]
It can’t be voluntarty manslaughter because someoine in iminent danger has the right to defend themselves with deadly force- voluntary manslaughter suggests a person actsi n in the heat of passion; and heat of passion was caused by adequate provocation- in order for there to be provocation, they would have to prove he acted afgter ‘losing self control’ ‘in hte heat of the moment’ act on impulse and without reflection. Defending oneself with deadly force it woukld seem is not infact ‘losing self control,’ but raqther a determined and rational act intended to preserve one’s own life’.
Acting WITH Reflection is a deliberate act, whereas acting WITHOUT relfection (which is the requirement for voluntary manslaughter) is acting without thinking-
I’m no lawyer- it just seems to me that htere is aq definate distinction between defending oneself with deadlty force, and voluntary manslauighter- which is an irrational or rather an act without reflection or rather thinking and deciding
“easy call” you are smoking dope. The local DA and police chief have already declined to arrest based on the evidence that they collected. The DA and police chief will be called as witnesses for the defense.
“There is NO doubt there is probable cause for Voluntary.”
But that’s not what he’s charged with. Where does probable cause come for arresting him on murder 2?
“I am a little surprised at 2nd degree but just carrying the gun and following when told not to gets you there.”
Huh? He has every right to conceal and carry according to his license. As for following when told not to, that’s irrelevant. It wasn’t a lawful order, not given to him by any kind of authority, and we don’t even know for sure whether he disobeyed it, do we?
“Fortunately, none of these people are involved in the case. Good attys on both sides. The system is working.”
If he had been charged with manslaughter we wouldn’t have people on both sides of the aisle suggesting prosecutoral misconduct. This is not “the system working.” There’s no evidence of a “depraved mind,” if nothing else.
Carrying a gun and possibly ignoring some random telephone operator does not amount to murder 2, and nothing will, unless the prosecution pulls a rabbit out of its hat. But if their secret evidence is so damning, why wasn’t what it demonstrates laid out in the affidavit? Because even if they prove everything they talk about there beyond the shadow of a doubt, it wouldn’t amount to murder 2.
I hope in your 25 years of prosecution you didn’t so grossly overcharge people.
From what I read, when asked not to follow he stopped.
But...
The 911 operator also wanted to know where Martin went so that the police who were in route could follow up. He said he didn’t know where Martin went. When Zimmerman went around the corner to an open area between houses to take a look is when Martin attacked him.
If that’s true, Zimmerman did nothing wrong in looking. He was attempting to provide the 911 operator what he/she requested.
At least 3 nationally known attorneys disagree.
Mark Levin, former chief of staff to Attorney general Ed Meese.
Andrew C. McCarthy, U.S. Attorney who prosecuted the 1993 WTC terrorists.
Alan Dershowitz, the youngest ever full Professor of Law at Harvard who has won 13 of 15 murder appeals.
All three have given blanket condemnation of the affidavit.
Not one of them has even hinted there are grounds for Voluntary Manslaughter.
Zimmerman was licensed and trained for concealed carry.
Zimmerman requested and attended a Sanford Police Department training seminar for his Neighborhood Watch group BEFORE the shooting.
The civilian employee Zimmerman spoke to on the non-emergency police line NEVER ordered Zimmerman to do anything.
When Zimmerman asked if he should follow Martin - whom he had observed for AT LEAST 2 minutes and 14 seconds - the civilian operator said “we don't need you to do that.”
Guess those "25 years as a prosecutor" did little to improve on your ability to "Comprehend" the English language nor grasp the facts as they are known?
Z was NOT "TOLD NOT TO"
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yes
Dispatcher: OKAY WE DON'T NEED TO DO THAT"
For all of you Freepers who keep advancing this FALSE, narative (in spite of the 911 call available to anyone who cares to take the time to review it) I have this advice
I'm reminded of Mark Twain's supposed quote: "Get your facts straight, then distort them as you please."
just carrying the gun and following when told not to gets you there.””
Zimmerman had a legal Florida certificate for CCW. As I understand, he had had such paperwork for quite some time.
Neighborhood Watch is just that-—watching—observing—approaching people who do not seem to fit in your area or whom you do not recognise.
Zimmerman had been doing Neighborhood Watch for a long time. He did so with his unpaid time & unpaid car expenses, as do all the other volunteers.
Records show that he had called 911 a number of times over the prior year, about once a week. There has been no information brought forward about how many days of the week Zimmerman was on patrol, trying to protect his neighborhood & his area.
Calling 911 an average of once a week tells me that he is NOT a ‘renegade’ or a ‘cowboy’ out of control, looking for a target. He called when he saw something suspicious.
I have lived where we had Neighborhood Watch. We did it on foot up and down a number of streets where there had been chronic break ins. Just the presence of people walking the area did alot. We were NOT armed, nor did we have cell phones then. We walked in pairs, but at that time—the late 70’s, the thugs were not quite so brazen.
Our watch menbers worked the days as well as the nights.
The activity and increase in break ins rose expotentially when bussing kids from poorer neighborhoods started. Those kids didn’t even enter the school grounds—they were being chauffered to their criminal activities!! After a number of them were caught—it became plain that they were being assisted in their activities by the bussing policies.
This isn’t racist——it is just plain FACT!!
It is spelled prostitution.
“Charging Zimmerman is an EASY call.”
Why? Do you mean that a charge can be filed is an easy call? That it is possible to file a charge with being fired does not mean it is an easy call that charges are warranted. This is particularly true, if there evidence on the other side, as the public record so far suggests.
I agree that her claim will be that he followed someone with a loaded gun. Anyone with any respect for the right to bear arms should not stand for that kind of standard by the state.
That you claim 25 years of prosecution experience here and come to this conservative website with such a weak argument makes me wonder, if you are being truthful about your experience or if you are a statist who thinks they are conservative?
You demonstrate that contrary to Corey's claim that prosecutors are "seekers of truth",
they are actually seekers of convictions, often without regard for the truth.