Civil rights case vs. Zimmerman won't be simple

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/2013/07/15/civil-rights-case-zimmerman-won-simple/u4NNXk5VRdpQMPZIB5R23M/singlepage.html ^

[shineon]

Lauren Resnick, a former federal prosecutor in New York who secured a conviction in the killing of an Orthodox Jew during the 1991 Crown Heights riots in Brooklyn, said the Justice Department could conceivably proceed under a theory that Zimmerman interfered with Martin’s right to walk down a public street based on his race. But even that is difficult since the conflict occurred in a gated community, which may not fit the legal definition of a public facility. Prosecutors would also probably need to prove that trailing Martin on the street constituted interference, she said.

‘‘One could argue it did, if it freaked him out and he couldn’t comfortably walk down the street — there’s an argument here,’’ said Resnick, who now specializes in white-collar defense and commercial litigation.

But she said federal prosecutors were likely to encounter the same hurdles as state prosecutors in establishing that Zimmerman was driven by racial animus and was the initial aggressor, as opposed to someone who acted in self-defense.

Samuel Bagenstos, a former No. 2 official in the Justice Department’s civil rights division, said: ‘‘This is an administration that hasn’t shied away from bringing hate crimes cases that are solid prosecutions based on the facts and the law, but from what I've seen this would be a very difficult case to prosecute federally because the government would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman acted because of Trayvon Martin’s race. If you’re trying to prove racial motivation, you are usually looking for multiple statements related to why he is engaging in this act of violence. I think it’s a difficult case to prove.’’

[ExTxMarine]

Once again, as always, how did Martin have the right to go wherever he wanted but Zimmerman didn’t?

I have asked that of many people, especially those who say, "If Zimmerman never got out of his truck..." I asked them, when was the last time you called the police to get permission to get out of your truck, in your own damn neighborhood? These people really have no logic, nor reason to their mindset - they are zombie-like drones repeating folklore like it has some kind of actual meaning.

They are simply a bunch of idiots grasping, reaching and contriving a reason to be zombie-like drones.

Basically, if the feral chill-runs are out wilding in your neighborhood, your only legal recourse is to stay inside where ever you are and hope/pray they don't attack your location. Because you have no right to see what is happening. You have no right to interfere with their "right" to wilding. And you definitely have no right to defend yourself from the actions of any feral chill-runs; it is your duty to lay there and take the ass-kicking that you deserve for trying to interfere with their wilding - hopefully you don't get killed in the process. Of course, it is your own fault for getting involved.

Please note: I am not saying, inferring or suggesting that Saint Martin was out "wilding." I am simply exaggerating their premise to show the absolute stupidity of the "he got out of his truck" argument.