Florida vs. Zimmerman discussion thread

[Jaybee]

Originally Posted by 6285108

911 operator did not say " Stop following him" , the operator said " we don't need you to do that", big difference, one is an order and the other can be at the most described as advice or a suggestion. Dispatcher orders and lawful orders given by police officers who have been vested with the authority to do so are quite different.

The 911 operator from the Joe Horn case told him specifically not to shoot during his call, look how that case turned out! He wasn't even attacked!

[6285108]

.

[6285108]

Originally Posted by Jaybee

The 911 operator from the Joe Horn case told him specifically not to shoot during his call, look how that case turned out! He wasn't even attacked!

p

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by HT77

If that is really true, this is one of the weakest murder cases I have ever seen or heard of. A man at his residence legally following another whose purpose and identity is in question, is criminally assaulted and then in legitimate fear for his life uses deadly force and is charged with murder? That is outrageous and she needs to be reprimanded for prosecutorial misconduct at some point. They would not charge this in most foreign countries whose justice systems we normally laugh at.

Welcome to Florida!

Believe it or not, that is why the state legislature passed the "Stand Your Ground" statutes to make the rules easy for the Police and the prosecutor's to follow a well established set of guidelines when there is justified homicide.

The courts in Florida have always allowed common law "stand your ground" defenses when there was no possibility of someone escaping serious injury, but prosecutors are politically motivated and they routinely have imprisoned people to await trial... only for people to be acquitted and unjustly served years awaiting trial. The codification was suppose to avoid jailing someone who would very likely prevail on a affirmative defense.

I posted a thread here a a number of weeks ago on a similar case in Miami-Dade where a man spent three years in Jail awaiting his trial only to be acquitted.

http://forums.1911forum.com/showthread.php?t=354930

The codification of the law was intended to remove anti-gun liberal prosecutors from punishing law abiding citizens from defending themselves.

Of course this current case is a doozy, fueled by the anti-gun media and the Al Sharpton faction.

This case is 99% political, 1% legal.

Zimmerman in my humble opinion will be able to recover all his legal fees in this case if he is acquitted.

[joedel]

After seeing what is in the prosecution's accusatory affidavit, I now see why she chose not to present to a Grand Jury. If that's what she has, the Grand Jury would have almost certainly no-billed the case.

I assume there will be an Evidentiary Hearing to try and get the charges dismissed due to justifiable homicide/self-defense but I seriously doubt a judge will have the guts to throw the case out before trial.

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by joedel

After seeing what is in the prosecution's accusatory affidavit, I now see why she chose not to present to a Grand Jury. If that's what she has, the Grand Jury would have almost certainly no-billed the case.

I assume there will be an Evidentiary Hearing to try and get the charges dismissed due to justifiable homicide/self-defense but I seriously doubt a judge will have the guts to throw the case out before trial.

I agree. If a Grand Jury heard the evidence in this case, and the public awaited an indictment for weeks like sometimes it takes... there would have been violence if they came back without an indictment.

[Mr. T]

Originally Posted by joedel

After seeing what is in the prosecution's accusatory affidavit, I now see why she chose not to present to a Grand Jury. If that's what she has, the Grand Jury would have almost certainly no-billed the case.

I assume there will be an Evidentiary Hearing to try and get the charges dismissed due to justifiable homicide/self-defense but I seriously doubt a judge will have the guts to throw the case out before trial.

I agree the prosecutions affidavit of probable cause looks weak.

[joedel]

Originally Posted by PolymerMan

I agree. If a Grand Jury heard the evidence in this case, and the public awaited an indictment for weeks like sometimes it takes... there would have been violence if they came back without an indictment.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the affidavit seems to indicate that the 2nd Degree Murder charge is primarily based on the statements of Trayvon Martin's mother and girlfriend, who were both in Miami at the time of the shooting. Kind of shocking.

[Mr. T]

Originally Posted by joedel

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the affidavit seems to indicate that the 2nd Degree Murder charge is primarily based on the statements of Trayvon Martin's mother and girlfriend, who were both in Miami at the time of the shooting. Kind of shocking.

I know two voice analysis professionals previously stated it wasn't Zimmerman calling for help on the 911 call's, but they were hired by one of the Florida newspapers. I would imagine the prosecutor will have other investigators do a voice analysis to try and rule out zimmerman as the one calling for help. Of course Martin's mom is going to say 'that was my son calling for help". But that means nothing to me without a real voice analysis.

[1saxman]

I like the 2nd degree charge, since it will be nearly impossible to prove in this case. This would make it easier for the jury to acquit since there in all probability will be some credibility for the self-defense claim. I'm one of those who thinks Z is being railroaded, but of course like everyone else, I don't know yet what really happened. I just hope it's a fair trial.

[6285108]

Originally Posted by Mr. T

I know two voice analysis professionals previously stated it wasn't Zimmerman calling for help on the 911 call's, but they were hired by one of the Florida newspapers. I would imagine the prosecutor will have other investigators do a voice analysis to try and rule out zimmerman as the one calling for help. Of course Martin's mom is going to say 'that was my son calling for help". But that means nothing to me without a real voice analysis.

.

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by joedel

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but the affidavit seems to indicate that the 2nd Degree Murder charge is primarily based on the statements of Trayvon Martin's mother and girlfriend, who were both in Miami at the time of the shooting. Kind of shocking.

No, you're not reading anything wrong. They have nothing of substance. They only have fluff.

I expected hard evidence. Perhaps an eye witness that saw Zimmerman corner and grab Martin... perhaps defensive wounds, as if Martin was fighting off Zimmerman. Any kind of hard evidence to show that Zimmerman confronted Martin with any degree of force.

If they do get a qualified audio expert to testify, and Zimmerman is able to scream out a test audio and they are able to match Zimmerman's voice scientifically to the recording, that Prosecutor will have committed essentially career suicide.

[joedel]

Originally Posted by Mr. T

I know two voice analysis professionals previously stated it wasn't Zimmerman calling for help on the 911 call's, but they were hired by one of the Florida newspapers. I would imagine the prosecutor will have other investigators do a voice analysis to try and rule out zimmerman as the one calling for help. Of course Martin's mom is going to say 'that was my son calling for help". But that means nothing to me without a real voice analysis.

I believe the experts hired by the media also stated that because they had no baseline recordings of Martin and Zimmerman to compare to, their opinions would likely not have been admissible. And that the 911 recording in question, because of the distance from the phone, could never be examined to the point of it being admissible under the standards of their profession. I suspect that's why the prosecution used the mother's statement and no expert opinions in their affidavit.

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by 1saxman

I like the 2nd degree charge, since it will be nearly impossible to prove in this case. This would make it easier for the jury to acquit since there in all probability will be some credibility for the self-defense claim. I'm one of those who thinks Z is being railroaded, but of course like everyone else, I don't know yet what really happened. I just hope it's a fair trial.

Well as someone else stated, in Florida the jury is allowed to convict on a lesser included charge. They can vote to convict on 3rd Degree manslaughter.

The more and more I read about this, the more that it is clear that Prosecutor Corey's decision is pure politics.

But this could be a long fight costing Zimmerman millions and the state even more millions, especially if appeals are taken, and I bet there will be appeals at every stage of the litigation.

[joedel]

Originally Posted by PolymerMan

No, you're not reading anything wrong. They have nothing of substance. They only have fluff.

I expected hard evidence. Perhaps an eye witness that saw Zimmerman corner and grab Martin... perhaps defensive wounds, as if Martin was fighting off Zimmerman. Any kind of hard evidence to show that Zimmerman confronted Martin with any degree of force.

If they do get a qualified audio expert to testify, and Zimmerman is able to scream out a test audio and they are able to match Zimmerman's voice scientifically to the recording, that Prosecutor will have committed essentially career suicide.

Yeah the more I look at what's happened the last few days, the avoidance of the Grand Jury by the prosecution, the 2nd Degree charge instead of Manslaughter, and the remarkably thin accusatory affidavit lead me to believe you are 100% correct - this was all done to appease the mob (at least temporarily).

[PolymerMan]

Originally Posted by joedel

I believe the experts hired by the media also stated that because they had no baseline recordings of Martin and Zimmerman to compare to, their opinions would likely not have been admissible. And that the 911 recording in question, because of the distance from the phone, could never be examined to the point of it being admissible under the standards of their profession. I suspect that's why the prosecution used the mother's statement and no expert opinions in their affidavit.

Those were my precise thoughts when those two bozos claimed to have evidence that Zimmerman was not the screamer heard on the tape. They would have needed a sample test audio of both Martin and Zimmerman to make a comparison. In addition people have different voice prints when they sing, scream or speak in a normal tone. Not to mention the limited frequency response of the cell phone audio dynamics, the compression algorithm used in the digital transmission limits the frequency harmonic dynamics to like 1500 hz; plus a million other "scientific" reasons why such a comparison would have been hogwash. Yet we saw a dozen media outlets present the information like it was irrefutably God's given word.

[HT77]

Originally Posted by joedel

Yeah the more I look at what's happened the last few days, the avoidance of the Grand Jury by the prosecution, the 2nd Degree charge instead of Manslaughter, and the remarkably thin accusatory affidavit lead me to believe you are 100% correct - this was all done to appease the mob (at least temporarily).

Pretty much the gutless move some of us predicted early on. Pass the responsibility to a jury instead of properly declining to prosecute and then dealing with the fallout. Then when the riots and looting come, as they will if he is found not guilty, they can say their hands are clean and they tried their best to "get justice for poor Treyvan".

[randian]

Originally Posted by Mr. T

I would imagine the prosecutor will have other investigators do a voice analysis to try and rule out zimmerman as the one calling for help. Of course Martin's mom is going to say 'that was my son calling for help".

If I recall correctly, Martin's father said it wasn't Trayvon screaming on that tape. The spectable of dueling parents in this trial will be interesting. I think the timing makes the father's statement much more credible. He didn't have the luxury of time before he made it.

[SRJim]

Originally Posted by dsk

It looks like the prosecution is going after him specifically because he continued to follow Martin after being told not to, thus setting up the confrontation:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...on-martin?lite

Things are settling now, to the common sense side.

I think from everhing that is out so far, that is the one thing that keeps standing out as the single turning point. Beyond that, maybe he was justified in the shooting, but he still created the situation.

[randian]

Originally Posted by PolymerMan

Well as someone else stated, in Florida the jury is allowed to convict on a lesser included charge. They can vote to convict on 3rd Degree manslaughter.

That's hugely in favor of the prosecution. Juries are much more likely to convict, especially on a marginal case, if you let them off the hook with a lesser included charge.

[Mr. T]

If people blatantly disregard the rules set forth by the admin and mods the thread will be closed. I would like to see it remain open. Back to the topic at hand.

[HarryT]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/02/91...borates-story/

"Zimmerman’s story from the beginning to police and to the media has been that he stopped following when the dispatcher told him to."



"Zimmerman can still be heard breathing into the phone until about 2:39, at which point the heavy breathing stops entirely, a mere 13 seconds after the dispatcher asked him to stop following. A very calm and collected Zimmerman then proceeds to give the dispatcher his own information, directions and a description of his location for another 1 minute and 33 seconds."


"The point is this: With no witnesses stating that Zimmerman defied the dispatcher’s wishes and continued following Martin and no evidence to suggest he did, how did the idea that he pursued Martin after the dispatcher told him not to become a universally recognized, undisputed fact?"

[MPJMP]

Originally Posted by Lordofbarbeque

On Fox News last night a FL defense attorney stated it was not a SYG but more of a self defense issue. She explained difference, and it was an interesting segment.

Yes. I've been arguing for a while now that Zimmerman's version of the facts (as announced to the public by family members and his attorneys) never approach a true "stand your ground" analysis. It is a "reasonable belief" defense. Even if there was a duty to retreat his defense would remain the same, as his claim is that, at the moment he was in fear for his life, he couldn't safely retreat.

Those speculating that Zimmerman followed Martin, confronted him and essentially provoked a fight mistakenly believe that "Stand Your Ground" is what enabled him to avoid immediate arrest. If there is evidence to support that theory, then he may not be allowed to make a self-defense claim at all in court, per 776.041(2). There are some exceptions, but even the exceptions seem to revert back to a "duty to retreat" analysis.

More than likely, the reason Zimmerman was not arrested from the outset is due to a separate provision of the Florida self-defense law, 776.032(2), that shields one from arrest unless the police can prove (probable cause standard) that it wasn't lawful self-defense. This is hard to do when the only other eye-witness is deceased. If the physical evidence corroborrates his story, as opposed to refuting it, it would be even more difficult to charge.

[Mr. T]

Originally Posted by HarryT

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/02/91...borates-story/

"Zimmerman’s story from the beginning to police and to the media has been that he stopped following when the dispatcher told him to."



"Zimmerman can still be heard breathing into the phone until about 2:39, at which point the heavy breathing stops entirely, a mere 13 seconds after the dispatcher asked him to stop following. A very calm and collected Zimmerman then proceeds to give the dispatcher his own information, directions and a description of his location for another 1 minute and 33 seconds."


"The point is this: With no witnesses stating that Zimmerman defied the dispatcher’s wishes and continued following Martin and no evidence to suggest he did, how did the idea that he pursued Martin after the dispatcher told him not to become a universally recognized, undisputed fact?"

People listen to the media reporting that Zimmerman chased him down and killed him in cold blood.

[BDA45]

Originally Posted by HT77

Based on the evidence we know I don't see that unless the jury is stacked with Martin supporters.

More info has become available since I posted and you replied. And a few comments.

The prior part to my post dealt with a jury deciding whether Zimmerman's use of his gun was "reasonable" and/or "necessary" force. I can't comment on the possibility of finding an impartial jury or stacking a jury. I would, however, be worried how a jury who states they only have a superficial knowledge of the case and know nothing of the details given just what we know now would interpret reasonable and necessary force.

The other side of this is that the arraignment isn't until May 29. Much can happen before then. The "affidavit" info I saw was from the Orlando paper that said it got a copy - but did they quote the affidavit correctly? If they did - it sure looks like the state is willing to let a jury decide - if it gets that far.