Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[quadraginta]

Routine and mundane were my choice of words for being granted due process in the legal system. For getting bail, including non-excessive bail. For being allowed a lawyer, constitutional rights, and so forth. Just like anyone else. Just like thousands of people accused of crime all across the nation.

When the frenzy about Zimmerman actually being given such due process came up, I asked why he shouldn't be... a very relevant question to the discussion at large, which you chose to not answer.

I asked how sticking to the facts and not buying into the myths and gossip made anyone 'pro-Zimmerman, as had been claimed dozens of times.

That was spun by you into claiming that I brought up the notion of being on the 'pro/anti Zimmerman' teams. Which would be a specious argument, gven the fact that I was referencing several others who *had* suggested just that.

On the topic of the $1 million amountbeing somehow 'wrong', I've noted that the actual attorneys in this case didn't find it 'wrong' enough to appeal.

And on that claim, I've asked those commenting on the problem with Zimmerman getting bond, for legal cites controverting my observation.
I asked those who had something to support the notion that there is anything wrong with the amount, to please clarify. Some people did, quite logically.


Again, very relevant to the topic, and again... unanswered by you.

It apparently bothers you enough for you to not only bring it up over and over, but to conflate what i actually said into some sort of debate.

I'll stick to the facts as they exist in the law.

I've asked repeatedly for you to drop the debate tactics, and discuss such facts, I'm not going to wait any longer.

...

So you agree that a $1,000,000 bail is neither routine nor mundane?

Also a $200,000+ legal defense slush fund of found money?

 

[triforcharity]

I just explained where the term "burglary tool" for a screwdriver came from, and everyone here knows it, anyway. It did not spring into existence from this case. It's been around for a very long time. People have been being charged with "possession of burglary tools", for carrying a screwdriver, for a long time.

Incorrect. I've carried a screwdriver many time, does that make me a criminal?

Nope.

The key word, according to Florida SS is INTENT.

They couldn't PROVE intent, they couldn't even PROVE the jewelry was stolen. So, two MAJOR factors in proving a crime was committed, are missing.

Case dismissed.

(Here's the link describing burglary tools)

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0800-0899/0810/Sections/0810.06.html

 

[crimresearch]

So you agree that a $1,000,000 bail is neither routine nor mundane?

Also a $200,000+ legal defense slush fund of found money?

Asked and answered.

The process (that word you keep ignoring) of getting bail was followed in a routine manner as proven by lack of appeals being filed.

Due process is the law of the land. It is routine. This should be obvious, it is taught in every civics class and is a required part of GMT.

High bail in a murder case with questions about a flight risk is well within the standards set by the US Constitution's ban on excessive bail. Same proof as above, and lack of proof from you when asked to show otherwise..

Defense funds are raised all the time, and have nothing to do with due process. The question about them being reasonable that you've pasted on, is irrelevant to the legal process.

I'll take the repeated denial as an indication that you have no interest in a factual discussion about what was actually posted.

Feel free to prove me wrong by contributing something correct and useful on the topic. You could even try answering your own questions...

 

[johnny karate]

Those are just samples of some of the deatil that can be teased out of the witness statements and compared with Zimmerman. It seems this altercation was recorded, seen or heard throughout. These are just some examples. Zimmerman described meeting Flashlight Man, a witness saw that. Zimmerman described the enounter with Ofc. Alaya. W6 heard that.

I'm still trying to document all the points of corroboration, but this serves as a good example against the repeated claim that only Zimmerman and Martin know what happened and one is dead.

What evidence corroborates Zimmerman's claim that Martin initiated the altercation?

What evidence corroborates Zimmerman's claim that Martin repeatedly punched him?

What evidence corroborates Zimmerman's claim that Martin repeatedly bashed his head onto the concrete?

What evidence corroborates Zimmerman's claims that Martin reached for his gun?

You've provided a version of events that was careful to avoid the aspects of Zimmerman's account that are inconsistent with the facts.

I'm sure if one were equally careful and so inclined, a similar comparison could be made between a dog and a horse that might convince the reader they are in fact the same animal.

In short, this was about as convincing a recount of the events of that night as randomly pasting a bunch of blue arrows on a photo of Zimmerman is a convincing documentation of his injuries.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Incorrect. I've carried a screwdriver many time, does that make me a criminal?

Nope.

The key word, according to Florida SS is INTENT.

They couldn't PROVE intent, they couldn't even PROVE the jewelry was stolen. So, two MAJOR factors in proving a crime was committed, are missing.

Case dismissed.

(Here's the link describing burglary tools)

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0800-0899/0810/Sections/0810.06.html

You are absolutely correct. A legal court does not have enough information to conclude it was a crime. The public, on the other hand, can figure out what was going on pretty easily.

 

[Dan O.]

By the way, "Heaven"? I'm guessing that was more of their code, like "Peter Pan". Canada is "Heaven" and Mexico is "Hell".

That code requires an abstraction and may exceed the mental capacity of a potted palm. Besides that, Canada is quite a distance from Florida and I believe they have an extradition treaty with the US so he would just be sent back.

I'm not too familiar with the Florida area but perhaps there is some destination close to Florida that is a place where fugitives go to escape US justice and has a name similar to "Heaven".

 

[Bob001]

.... DeeDee asserts that Martin challenged Zimmerman and that the line was dropped.....

Let's consider that point. If GZ initiated the confrontation with TM -- who might well have thought he was being stalked by a mugger -- does GZ still get to claim self-defense when the fight goes against him?

 

[johnny karate]

You are absolutely correct. A legal court does not have enough information to conclude it was a crime. The public, on the other hand, can figure out what was going on pretty easily.

Yep. Just like we can pretty easily figure out what was going on with Zimmerman when he conspired to hide money and a passport from the court.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Yep. Just like we can pretty easily figure out what was going on with Zimmerman when he conspired to hide money and a passport from the court.

And that's also a fair point.

 

[KatieG]

Yep. Just like we can pretty easily figure out what was going on with Zimmerman when he conspired to hide money and a passport from the court.

I was surprised when Judge Lester at first said nothing about the passport smoke and mirrors game but I think he connected the dots fairly well. I don't really think $200,000 is a lot money if you're going on the lam, but I suppose it depends on where you're going.

I nearly died laughing when rumblings from the CTH started blasting O'Mara. Now it's the lawyers fault? Really? Or better yet, that Judge Lester should recuse himself. Why? Other than follow the law, what's he done wrong?

It's everyone's fault but GZ's, or so he seems to think.

 

[Unabogie]

Yep. Just like we can pretty easily figure out what was going on with Zimmerman when he conspired to hide money and a passport from the court.

Huge difference here. Martin's screwdriver story is told second hand with no chance for any kind of explanation or context.

While George's plot to hide money and his passport is thoroughly documented, the defense had a chance to present his side of the story (including his own testimony and an expert accountant) and it was proven in court that George attempted to defraud the court. And the judge found George was planning to flee.

So it's not even a double standard, since that would be an improvement on this standard. It's a standard in which hearsay evidence seen through "the media" is found to show a higher degree of certainty than a documented court case.

 

[Newtons Bit]

CTH?

 

[crimresearch]

Let's consider that point. If GZ initiated the confrontation with TM -- who might well have thought he was being stalked by a mugger -- does GZ still get to claim self-defense when the fight goes against him?

"His only defense against criminal charges is that he was in fear for his life, and that his fear was reasonable under the circumstances."
That's all he needs to assert, and that's all the prosecution has to overcome beyond a reasonable doubt.

He's made the assertion that Martin was going to get his gun.

The 'forcible felony' exception doesn't apply. It isn't a forcible felony to call the police and report someone. It isn't a forcible felony to follow someone and ask 'What are you doing here'? It isn't a forcible felony to shove your nose into someone's fist so hard that the nose fractures.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Incorrect. I've carried a screwdriver many time, does that make me a criminal?

Nope.

The key word, according to Florida SS is INTENT.

They couldn't PROVE intent, they couldn't even PROVE the jewelry was stolen. So, two MAJOR factors in proving a crime was committed, are missing.

Case dismissed.

(Here's the link describing burglary tools)

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0800-0899/0810/Sections/0810.06.html

Typical game playing. NO ONE, not one person has asserted that TM should have been prosecuted for being caught with a screwdriver. I also love how you mention the screwdriver and ignore the woman's jewelry. What people have asserted is that a teenage boy that gets caught with a bunch of woman's jewelry that he can't explain along with a screwdriver is likely involved with burglary or stolen goods.

But when that simple statement of fact is made, what do we get? Endless game playing, obfuscation and straw men arguments. Anything to deny the obvious.

And the strange thing is, why deny? If a person is interested in the truth, why deny it? Does it suddenly mean GZ had a right to shoot TM? NO. But it might mean TM isn't the innocent child he's been made out to be and I guess we can't have that under any circumstances.

p.s. Please respond civilly and remember rule 12 .

 

[GWCarver]

Unless the accused gets caught with a "burglary tool".

Remember the Gainesville (Florida) Ripper?

Matching toolmarks found at three of his murder scenes to a screwdriver found at Danny Rolling's campsite led to his eventual death by lethal injection.

 

[Dcdrac]

Can someone point me to a non biased source for this screwdriver story only been finding Ann Coulter's site so far and would prefer a nuetral source .

 

[Dan O.]

The 'forcible felony' exception doesn't apply. It isn't a forcible felony to call the police and report someone. It isn't a forcible felony to follow someone and ask 'What are you doing here'? It isn't a forcible felony to shove your nose into someone's fist so hard that the nose fractures.

Would it be a forcible felony if George had turned south at the tee and attempted to physically detain trayvon to keep him from getting away before the cops arrived? And now you are going to ask "where's the proof of that hapening"? To which my reply is: proof is not necessary. It is only necessary to convince a jury that it is a sufficiently likely chain of events

 

[Cylinder]

Let's consider that point. If GZ initiated the confrontation with TM -- who might well have thought he was being stalked by a mugger -- does GZ still get to claim self-defense when the fight goes against him?

If Zimmerman is found to have provoked the use of force he would still have available a self-defense justification provided that he is also found to discharged his duty to retreat. Florida 776.041 allows use of force by the aggressor when:

(a)Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Of course, there is no evidence that Zimmerman took any offensive role in the altercation and a good bit of evidence that he didn't. Martin's suspicion that Zimmerman was following him would not really satisfy his role as an aggressor.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I don't see the point of this thread if people aren't even going to read the posts.

I really don't.

I have maintained from day one that a manslaughter charge is probably appropriate for GZ.

Yes, but you aren't an authorized TT, so that's unacceptable. To be a TT you have to believe that:

1. GZ is a murderer. He murdered TM because he was angry and he's lying about it. He was not in fear for his life.
2. GZ is a "known criminal with a history of violence". We know this because 6 years ago he pushed someone in a bar. In fact it was this thread that taught me what a "criminal with a history of violence" is. Before this thread I thought it was someone that had, you know, a criminal history of violence .
3. There are NO circumstances in which GZ was justified in defending himself against TM. TM on the other hand, was fully justified in using any force against GZ, and even if he attacked him, he was fully justified, because GZ was a "creepy guy following him".
4. GZ is a racist! There is no middle ground here, no intelligent discussion of racial bias, the guy said something about "Mexicans and knives" on his MySpace page 5 years ago and he's a damn racist!
5. GZ broke his own nose, if it was broke at all.

So hell no I don't accept your "manslaughter is appropriate for GZ" stance, get with the program and become an authorized TT.

 

[triforcharity]

Let's consider that point. If GZ initiated the confrontation with TM -- who might well have thought he was being stalked by a mugger -- does GZ still get to claim self-defense when the fight goes against him?

Possibly. He would have had to make every reasonable effort to stop the altercation, to flee, or to back away from the fight. Only then could he claim self defense.