Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

[Rainsford]

He should have been charged, but now it's a joke. He cannot possibly have a fair trial by jury as the media has already caused far to much damage to the public opinion of him before he had charges pushed against him. It's a travesty that this has been handled the way it was, but I just can't see him getting a fair trial now and I think they should throw it out. I really think he probably would have done time on manslaughter charges if the media didn't blow this shit out like retarded mother fuckers all because they wanted to make a buck.

Media attention for a trial certainly complicates things. Although this thread should make it obvious that the media attention hasn't biased everyone the same direction, or necessarily at all. "The media" is not monolithic in its portrayal of any story, as much as some people whine about it, nor is everyone so easily swayed as you might think.

And on a more practical note, if media coverage was enough to throw out a trial, you could basically get away with anything as long as you committed an interesting enough crime to grab some headlines.

 

[a777pilot]

I've been out.

Anything happening?

 

[RampantAndroid]

He pointed the gun at tray on and shot him in the chest, that was a clear cut desire to kill.

Murder is something Corey thinks she can prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

You're still posting this crap? When it is self defense, the desire is to live. You cannot prove his intentions, only what has been said.

 

[MH2007]

Why did you post such a disgusting link here, What is your point?

Disgusting?

It's from a YouTube page that may belong to Martin. There was a video of a fight that some believed that Martin was refereeing that was removed. So it appears to be in control of the Martin family lawyers, lending some credence to the theory that it is indeed Martin's YouTube page

Just for your listening enjoyment DVC.

BITCHS AINT SHIT by Ricky Flow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmJY5Eyr6LM

 

[QueBert]

You're still posting this crap? When it is self defense, the desire is to live. You cannot prove his intentions, only what has been said.

But if they can prove Trayvon was no longer a threat, they can say the killing was unjustified. Intentions are fine, but what matter's here was justification. You cannot shoot someone simply because you're scared.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Thanks Perk. This was never meant as an insult or a thread crap. Just a poorly timed inside joke.

Certainly no offense taken by me (other than being offended by the abject shittiness of that song).

 

[MH2007]

Well eyewitnesses have been proven to "see" what they want to see, so maybe John didn't really "see" what he thought. It's happened before.

There's no rational reason to believe that applies to John. We do know that the "eyewitness" testimony of Cutcher, Lamilla, and CNN's witness are all unreliable so I guess a 75% hit rate on the phenomenon you're referring to supports your theory.

He had enough time to observe Zimmerman on the bottom in red yelling for help getting beaten up by Martin and to tell Martin to stop and to tell Martin that he was going to go call 911. Takes more than a "brief few seconds."

I do think it's possible that Martin did get off Zimmerman at that point and I think there might be a simple reason why.

I think that Martin may have approached Zimmerman when he saw Zimmerman go through the cut through that he had just been in and assumed that he was still following him. I explain how that might have happened here:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33265937&postcount=12884

Zimmerman has said that when Martin approached him and initiated a verbal confrontation (content of which is in dispute) he backed away from him and reached for his phone. I think it might be possible that Martin interpreted this as him reaching for a gun, possibly because he had heard secondhand of someone being trailed and drawn on in that manner.

If the fight then proceeded as Zimmerman claims (with Martin terrified for his life and Zimmerman not understanding why he is being attacked) it would then logically progress further as heard on the 911 call. When John comes out and tells Martin to stop, it's possible that Martin at that point decided that Zimmerman didn't really have a gun since at that point he was just yelling for help and trying to protect himself.

If Martin got off Zimmerman when John went inside that might be when Austin Brown saw someone on the ground.

If at that point Martin saw Zimmerman's gun in the inside waist holster due to him raising his arms to protect himself and shifting his jacket then Martin might at that time become again in fear for his life and believe that he needed to take the gun from Zimmerman. That might explain Zimmerman claimed that Martin said something that he apparently didn't completely understand. Something to the effect of

"You really do have a piece, it's not going to be that easy for you, you're the one who's going to die."

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I agree and I've said many times in this thread and elsewhere, I wish there had been no gun present that night and that Z had just gotten a beating and Trayvon an assault arrest, and both gone home alive.

But here's the thing. Even granting that Z could've been smarter about how he went about things... could've been more cautious, and I don't think anyone really disputes that... we know that nothing he did was illegal. It wasn't illegal to be suspicious right or wrong, it wasn't illegal to get out of his car, it wasn't illegal to keep an eye on this stranger... it wasn't illegal for him to carry the weapon, it wasn't illegal for him to fire at his assailant after a full minute of being pummeled, having his nose broken, head slammed on concrete, and then being directly threatened with murder verbally, as the assailant attempted to relieve him of his firearm.

So if no individual step of what he did that night was illegal in any way, how can it be right for him to serve time? Or even go to trial? No crime committed at any stage of it.

DVC can one really get a crime by assembling 10 non crimes?

No, one cannot. That is not what's being alleged here. You are, as I am saying for roughly the twentieth time, presuming everything Mr. Zimmerman claims is true. Obviously the prosecutors disagree, and think there is probable cause to believe he's lying about something critical that goes to whether or not he was legally justified in using deadly force in self-defense. You are falling into the same trap over and over - drawing conclusions without access to all the evidence.

 

[RampantAndroid]

But if they can prove Trayvon was no longer a threat, they can say the killing was unjustified. Intentions are fine, but what matter's here was justification. You cannot shoot someone simply because you're scared.

And I am in no way talking about what the courts will prove, I am talking about Lotus' posts where he states things as facts handed down to him by some divine power. He knows as much as the rest of us, which is to say that Zimmerman is saying self defense, and that Corey did what everyone expected (as it is well documented she very often will go ahead with charges) and charges Zimmerman with 2nd degree (that is to say, not premeditated.)

Anyone who posts in here saying stuff like "his intent was to kill" or "he is guilty" are posting their own speculation. Nothing more.

 

[Geosurface]

No, one cannot. That is not what's being alleged here. You are, as I am saying for roughly the twentieth time, presuming everything Mr. Zimmerman claims is true. Obviously the prosecutors disagree, and think there is probable cause to believe he's lying about something critical that goes to whether or not he was legally justified in using deadly force in self-defense. You are falling into the same trap over and over - drawing conclusions without access to all the evidence.

I understand that we don't know for sure Z's account is 100% true. I acknowledge he may have embellished with the "you're gonna die tonight" line, but how will we ever know otherwise?

To me it just doesn't seem right that a person should be charged with MURDER when they did not have a plan that night to kill someone, and in fact did not even have a plan to kill someone at the moment they fired their gun. I think he clearly was just trying to defend himself. Even if Trayvon didn't go for his gun, or make that verbal threat... he still *definitely* was beating him.

 

[MH2007]

Yes, now that Z is charged I want to see a trial too.

But not because of any "bloodthirsty" reason. I want to see one and not a plea deal because I believe that's the only way we'll get to see all the evidence.

I want to see it because I want to judge for myself if the investigation was bad/good, whether the initial decision to not charge seems reasonable, whether Z's story holds up (actually, to really know what his story is since we haven't heard anything from him directly). And to address the issue of whether this charge is justified, or whether 'political' pressure played a substantial role in the Murder 2 charge.

We've already been able to review many media reports and most have judged their accuracy to be poor. After the evidence all comes out how they look then?

Fern

My understanding is that if he has a hearing before the trial to establish that he acted in self defense we'll get to see all of that, just without a jury.

 

[a777pilot]

If the prosecution has evidence that Martin was three feet or more away from Zimmerman and both were standing when Martin was shot, then I would think they have sufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman.

We shall see.

 

[MH2007]

How is that obvious?

How is it even proven yet?

Before he was charged, some claimed the lack of charges proved no evidence against him and proved his innocence.

Many of you disagreed

Now that he is charged, we have some of you essentially flip-flopping: Claiming that charges prove evidence against and prove his guilt.

At this point we have two prosecutors who looking at the evidence, possibly the exact same evidence, and reaching the opposite conclusion. I think to now to claim anything is clear-cut or obvious is foolhardy and unsupportable.

We may find it a gray area type thing requiring judgement, or we may find one prosecutor looks incompetent in some fashion.

My point being, we just don't know at this time.

Edit: Another point is that today's development, the filing of charges, has done little to advance our knowledge of the facts necessary to determine if Z is guilty of a crime. We need the evidence for that and we've got nothing new.

Fern

Excellent point. Also Corey had nothing but complimentary things to say about the police investigation so completely disregarding that the evidence supported his statement would not be realistic. I believe at this point we are simply waiting for discovery.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

I understand that we don't know for sure Z's account is 100% true. I acknowledge he may have embellished with the "you're gonna die tonight" line, but how will we ever know otherwise?

To me it just doesn't seem right that a person should be charged with MURDER when they did not have a plan that night to kill someone, and in fact did not even have a plan to kill someone at the moment they fired their gun. I think he clearly was just trying to defend himself. Even if Trayvon didn't go for his gun, or make that verbal threat... he still *definitely* was beating him.

Your post entirely ignores the very real possibility that Mr. Zimmerman, not Mr. Martin, instigated their fight and/or that Mr. Martin was the one screaming for help. You are, again, just taking Mr. Zimmerman's word for what happened with respect to the most important facts of the case.

 

[Double Trouble]

Without knowing all the details it's hard to really form a conclusive opinion one way or another, but it sure seems like these charges were filed because of political pressure, especially since the prior DA was not going to press charges. The political circus now means it's highly unlikely Zimmerman is getting a fair trial.

 

[micrometers]

Well that wasn't clear from the context. As far as the law it's my opinion that the reasonable doubt burden for disproving self defense is more of an issue than Stand Your Ground itself.

as I"ve said many times, they were passed with each other at the same time.

when people say "SYG" they do mean this statute which makes it difficult to arrest.

 

[Fern]

True, but something caused them not to believe Z's version of events. Otherwise no charges would have been filed.

Yes, something led them to file charges.

I think this development (charges filed) just speaks to anyone who was very confident that the lack of charges meant all the evidence was in Z's favor.

They'll need to be a little less confident now.

Perhaps all the evidence IS in Z's favor, and the charges are the result of the Spec Pros just wanting a jury to be the one to judge whether Z's fear of death etc was 'reasonable' under the circumstances.

I gathered from remarks about the press conference she didn't explain why the (apparently) new/different decision. We'll just have to wait to see. Who knows, maybe they obtained some additional evidence with the FBI's help. They do have far more resources and expertise than a local PD.

Fern

 

[micrometers]

Excellent point. Also Corey had nothing but complimentary things to say about the police investigation so completely disregarding that the evidence supported his statement would not be realistic. I believe at this point we are simply waiting for discovery.

I will say that it was pretty much a no-brainer to charge him. Even if he successfully invokes SYG at the pretrial motions and gets off that way, at least something will have been done, and the authorities can "wash their hands" of this mess.

 

[classy]

Without knowing all the details it's hard to really form a conclusive opinion one way or another, but it sure seems like these charges were filed because of political pressure, especially since the prior DA was not going to press charges. The political circus now means it's highly unlikely Zimmerman is getting a fair trial.

Or it could be that political pressure fnally go them to do the right thing that they should have done from the beginning. Remember the path we took to get here, not every stop along the way was the right thing to do in the first place.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
To me it just doesn't seem right that a person should be charged with MURDER when they did not have a plan that night to kill someone

IANAL, but I do not believe you need a "plan to kill someone" to be charged with Murder #2.

I think M2 is killing someone in the heat of the moment.

M1 requires a "plan" (of some sort).

Fern

 

[micrometers]

Or it could be that political pressure fnally go them to do the right thing that they should have done from the beginning. Remember the path we took to get here, not every stop along the way was the right thing to do in the first place.

I recommend that you read about John McNeil's killing of Brian Epp. While everything I've read indicates that McNeil's actions was within self-defense, the prosecutor waited one year before charging him and ultimately sentencing him.

 

[Fern]

My understanding is that if he has a hearing before the trial to establish that he acted in self defense we'll get to see all of that, just without a jury.

Excellent. Works for me.

Fern

 

[ericlp]

Your post entirely ignores the very real possibility that Mr. Zimmerman, not Mr. Martin, instigated their fight and/or that Mr. Martin was the one screaming for help. You are, again, just taking Mr. Zimmerman's word for what happened with respect to the most important facts of the case.

And what word are you gonna take? The dead mans word?

C'mon. Hard to get any other evidence if NO ONE SAW anything and the person that got shot can't tell his side of the story. It's been this way for years. They even tell you if your going to shoot a robber in your home make sure you shoot to kill so he can't sue you in court later.

Oh well! I don't think zimmerman's intentions were to kill anyone. If it was I would have emptied the entire clip into the bastard. I believe his intentions was to get him to stop beating the crap out of him. Tho, of course that's my take.

Personally I doubt he will be charged with anything ... unless you can call jesus down here and bring him back to life.

No? Oh sorry, you have no case or leg to stand on.

 

[MH2007]

I understand that we don't know for sure Z's account is 100% true. I acknowledge he may have embellished with the "you're gonna die tonight" line, but how will we ever know otherwise?

To me it just doesn't seem right that a person should be charged with MURDER when they did not have a plan that night to kill someone, and in fact did not even have a plan to kill someone at the moment they fired their gun. I think he clearly was just trying to defend himself. Even if Trayvon didn't go for his gun, or make that verbal threat... he still *definitely* was beating him.

If Martin thought that Zimmerman was going for a gun when he reached for his phone, when he saw the gun later he may have felt that Zimmerman had intended to kill him with it all along and that he needed to take the gun to save his own life.

That might explain the "you're gonna die tonight" line (it seems that he didn't hear whatever was said very clearly, possibly it was something like "you're the one who's going to die tonight") as well as the "you got me" line. I haven't been able to figure out any other scenario where "you got me" makes sense and it isn't something that Zimmerman would likely add to his narrative because it doesn't help him in any way and if anything makes him less believable.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

And what word are you gonna take? The dead mans word?

C'mon. Hard to get any other evidence if NO ONE SAW anything and the person that got shot can't tell his side of the story. It's been this way for years. They even tell you if your going to shoot a robber in your home make sure you shoot to kill so he can't sue you in court later.

Oh well! I don't think zimmerman's intentions were to kill anyone. If it was I would have emptied the entire clip into the bastard. I believe his intentions was to get him to stop beating the crap out of him. Tho, of course that's my take.

Personally I doubt he will be charged with anything ... unless you can call jesus down here and bring him back to life.

No? Oh sorry, you have no case or leg to stand on.

Hee hee - you're a piece of work, and apparently haven't been following the news. http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/11/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1