Alan Derschowitz: Zimmerman Charge Wont Stand

[Peach]

No one? There's a hundred people who won't be crime victims in the future because Trayvon is dead.

Where does THIS come from? Martin had no criminal record.................

 

[KevinWestern]

No one? There's a hundred people who won't be crime victims in the future because Trayvon is dead. A hundred people, and their loved ones, are happy that Trayvon is dead. They just won't link their happiness to what happened this year.

I agreed with you Ariux, on the fact that there’s been a lynch mob, ect, but this sort of comment by you just kind of derails all of your credibility in general.

How can you say something like this with a level head? Trayvon’s death was a tragedy, and there’s no way you can flip his killing into a “good thing” that brings “happiness”. That's something a psychopathic would say.
.
.
.

 

[Si modo]

No one? There's a hundred people who won't be crime victims in the future because Trayvon is dead.

Where does THIS come from? Martin had no criminal record.................

That poster is clearly a sociopath. The sociopathic statements he makes stand as shit among the sane, or relatively sane, posters and persons in the world.

 

[Peach]

To the bolded, do you have a link that the judge has done so?

George Zimmerman held pending arraignment in Trayvon shooting

It was set for arraignment, possible bond hearing the April 20th. The affidavit is NOT the charge(s), only probable cause to proceed.

You know he is still not charged with a thing, right?

The only thing the judge determined as sufficient is suspicion...that's it.

And, because of that, Zimmerman is incarcerated at the moment with no bond. Even the arraignment isn't until May 29.

Yes, that is what I posted.

 

[Contumacious]

Alan Dershowitz: Zimmerman Arrest Affidavit "Irresponsible And Unethical" | RealClearPolitics

Wow, I actually agree with this guy.

Now I have to completely re-evaluate my opinion on the Zimmerman case, lol.

Yes, indeed it is unconstitutional and unethical to stick it to a litigant in order to grandstand for a powerful political faction.

US Judges and prosecutors adopted nazi law # 69 , which immunizes them from prosecution.

.

 

[Si modo]

George Zimmerman held pending arraignment in Trayvon shooting

It was set for arraignment, possible bond hearing the April 20th. The affidavit is NOT the charge(s), only probable cause to proceed.

You know he is still not charged with a thing, right?

The only thing the judge determined as sufficient is suspicion...that's it.

And, because of that, Zimmerman is incarcerated at the moment with no bond. Even the arraignment isn't until May 29.

Yes, that is what I posted.

Actually, you completely failed to leave out that he is currently incarcerated, with no bond, on suspicion alone.

Makes one wonder why the prosecutor needed to cancel the grand jury. Well, I don't wonder too much, though.

But, I understand why you did leave that out.

 

[Peach]

[/SIZE][/B]You know he is still not charged with a thing, right?

The only thing the judge determined as sufficient is suspicion...that's it.

And, because of that, Zimmerman is incarcerated at the moment with no bond. Even the arraignment isn't until May 29.

Yes, that is what I posted.

Actually, you completely failed to leave out that he is currently incarcerated, with no bond, on suspicion alone.

Makes one wonder why the prosecutor needed to cancel the grand jury. Well, I don't wonder too much, though.

But, I understand why you did leave that out.

POSSIBLE bond hearing April 20th, sorry I did not fill up the page. His attorneys filed nothing to SET a bond that I am aware of, or perhaps that was done today.

 

[The Gadfly]

No one? There's a hundred people who won't be crime victims in the future because Trayvon is dead.

Where does THIS come from? Martin had no criminal record.................

That poster is clearly a sociopath. The sociopathic statements he makes stand as shit among the sane, or relatively sane, posters and persons in the world.

True, although he did manage to get ONE thing right: "The media sacrifices innocent people for public entertainment". That one, sadly, has been proven time and again. The vultures of the media have never had a second thought over trading blood for ratings (so long as it was someone else's blood, of course). Unfortunately there are also plenty of politicians of BOTH parties more than willing to do the same, for votes.

 

[Si modo]

No one? There's a hundred people who won't be crime victims in the future because Trayvon is dead.

Where does THIS come from? Martin had no criminal record.................

That poster is clearly a sociopath. The sociopathic statements he makes stand as shit among the sane, or relatively sane, posters and persons in the world.

True, although he did manage to get ONE thing right: "The media sacrifices innocent people for public entertainment". That one, sadly, has been proven time and again. The vultures of the media have never had a second thought over trading blood for ratings (so long as it was someone else's blood, of course). Unfortunately there are also plenty of politicians of BOTH parties more than willing to do the same, for votes.

Yes, that is right.

But, plenty of others have said the same.

Even monkeys tapping on a keyboard can write Shakespeare, eventually.

 

[The Gadfly]

Yes, that is what I posted.

Actually, you completely failed to leave out that he is currently incarcerated, with no bond, on suspicion alone.

Makes one wonder why the prosecutor needed to cancel the grand jury. Well, I don't wonder too much, though.

But, I understand why you did leave that out.

POSSIBLE bond hearing April 20th, sorry I did not fill up the page. His attorneys filed nothing to SET a bond that I am aware of, or perhaps that was done today.

Peach, it's possible they may not want to; assuming he's being carefully watched, Zimmerman is probably safer in custody, for the time being. I assume the next step is to take him before a judge of the appropriate court (that would be a Circuit Court judge here; not sure what the terminology is in FL), for arraignment, at which time he will be formally charged. Either then, or at pre-trial motions (not sure which, in FL) I assume his attorney may move for a hearing on dismissal of charges on statutory grounds-is that correct?

 

[The Gadfly]

That poster is clearly a sociopath. The sociopathic statements he makes stand as shit among the sane, or relatively sane, posters and persons in the world.

True, although he did manage to get ONE thing right: "The media sacrifices innocent people for public entertainment". That one, sadly, has been proven time and again. The vultures of the media have never had a second thought over trading blood for ratings (so long as it was someone else's blood, of course). Unfortunately there are also plenty of politicians of BOTH parties more than willing to do the same, for votes.

Yes, that is right.

But, plenty of others have said the same.

Even monkeys tapping on a keyboard can write Shakespeare, eventually.

I almost added the comment that even a blind squirrel can find a nut occasionally, but I think I like yours (above) better, in this instance.

 

[JakeStarkey]

By not adhering to the advice to break off his pursuit when told to stop...

... is a problem...

... a big one...

... it contradicts the image of a law abiding citizen.

1) It's not established that Zimmerman continued to follow the African. On the contrary, Zimmerman agrees not to follow the African, and apparently Zimmerman loses track of the African.

2) There is nothing sinister about Zimmerman trying to keep track of the African. The 911 operator discouraged following the African for Zimmerman's own safety, not because Zimmerman was breaking any law, moron.

Maybe you should review some of the many relevant threads in this forum to see that there's no case against Zimmerman. Or, maybe your racist bigotry tells you all you need to know.

You just demonstrated a good reason for continuing civil rights against neanderthals like you.

 

[Peach]

Actually, you completely failed to leave out that he is currently incarcerated, with no bond, on suspicion alone.

Makes one wonder why the prosecutor needed to cancel the grand jury. Well, I don't wonder too much, though.

But, I understand why you did leave that out.

POSSIBLE bond hearing April 20th, sorry I did not fill up the page. His attorneys filed nothing to SET a bond that I am aware of, or perhaps that was done today.

Peach, it's possible they may not want to; assuming he's being carefully watched, Zimmerman is probably safer in custody, for the time being. I assume the next step is to take him before a judge of the appropriate court (that would be a Circuit Court judge here; not sure what the terminology is in FL), for arraignment, at which time he will be formally charged. Either then, or at pre-trial motions (not sure which, in FL) I assume his attorney may move for a hearing on dismissal of charges on statutory grounds-is that correct?

All I know is bond hearing 4/20; still, I would expect a Motion under the Stand Your Ground law, but have no first hand knowledge. Yes, after an Information is filed, one can move to Dismiss.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

By not adhering to the advice to break off his pursuit when told to stop...

... is a problem...

... a big one...

... it contradicts the image of a law abiding citizen.

Except he did stop, he was returning to his vehicle when attacked.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If that is true, RGS, the fact finders, after being instructed by the law finder, the judge, will have to determine if his alleged retreat returns the defense to him.

 

[American Horse]

Corey looked absolutely giddy (guilty? her smiles were inappropriate to the serious duty she was performing...) when she entered onto the podium. She might''ve been guilty of setting herself up for re-election; in a way snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.. Robert Woodson (a black guy) said yesterday that Corey is a black woman. So her "information" to the court serves a double purpose. She secures her reputation in her "community" and prosecutes Zimmerman, letting the chips fall where they may.

 

[American Horse]

By not adhering to the advice to break off his pursuit when told to stop...

... is a problem...

... a big one...

... it contradicts the image of a law abiding citizen.

Except he did stop, he was returning to his vehicle when attacked.

You may not have seen the map of the scene of the incident, but it is clear that Zimmerman turned off the outer peripheral sidewalk and took the interior sidewalk down between the back of the units when he was encountered by Martin. He might or might not have expected that encounter, which was frontal not from the side.

It was totally dark, about 20 minutes past civil dusk, and it was raining. Martin was dressed in dark hoodie and might not have been visible as he approached until he was very near; near enough to say to Zim: "do you have a problem?" after which Zim answering "No I don't have a problem", Zim says he was struck across the nose, and was knocked to the ground, stunned.

Zim also says that Martin then jumped on top of him, saw the gun he was carrying, and said after seeing it "You are going to die tonight."

To me that situation would mean that a reasonable next action for him would be to get the gun before Martin could, and if then there were a brief struggle for the gun (Martin's fingerprints should be on the gun unless he was gloved), that it could easily be discharged, with Martin being the victim of that discharge.

 

[The Gadfly]

If that is true, RGS, the fact finders, after being instructed by the law finder, the judge, will have to determine if his alleged retreat returns the defense to him.

The problem is, Jake, that it's not clear what happened when Zimmerman got out of the vehicle. Did he still see Martin, and chase him? Or, had he lost sight of Martin, and got out to see if he could get him in sight to see where Martin was going? Meanwhile, where did Martin go? Looking over the vertical map of the area, there are several routes he might have taken; but which one? Did Martin double back, or did he simply duck around the corner of a building? Where did the actual confrontation between the two begin; was it at the shooting scene, or did it end up there, after starting somewhere else? How did the encounter begin? Who said what?Who did what? Once the physical altercation began, did one party or the other unreasonably continue it, after being in a position to break it off?At what point did the gun come out? Did Zimmerman draw it, or did Martin attempt to snatch it during the scuffle? Are Martin's fingerprints and/or DNA on the weapon? Did the gun discharge during the struggle, or did Zimmerman deliberately fire it? What were the relative positions of the two, at the moment the shot was fired? We don't have definitive answers (yet) to any of those points, and yet the answers to those questions are essential to showing whether this was an unlawful homicide, or self defense. Some people are treating this as if Zimmerman chased Martin, caught him, confronted him, and simply shot him, which would be a clear cut case of 2nd degree murder; but we have no evidence to this point that it happened that way at all.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If that is true, RGS, the fact finders, after being instructed by the law finder, the judge, will have to determine if his alleged retreat returns the defense to him.

The problem is, Jake, that it's not clear what happened when Zimmerman got out of the vehicle. Did he still see Martin, and chase him? Or, had he lost sight of Martin, and got out to see if he could get him in sight to see where Martin was going? Meanwhile, where did Martin go? Looking over the vertical map of the area, there are several routes he might have taken; but which one? Did Martin double back, or did he simply duck around the corner of a building? Where did the actual confrontation between the two begin; was it at the shooting scene, or did it end up there, after starting somewhere else? How did the encounter begin? Who said what?Who did what? Once the physical altercation began, did one party or the other unreasonably continue it, after being in a position to break it off?At what point did the gun come out? Did Zimmerman draw it, or did Martin attempt to snatch it during the scuffle? Are Martin's fingerprints and/or DNA on the weapon? Did the gun discharge during the struggle, or did Zimmerman deliberately fire it? What were the relative positions of the two, at the moment the shot was fired? We don't have definitive answers (yet) to any of those points, and yet the answers to those questions are essential to showing whether this was an unlawful homicide, or self defense. Some people are treating this as if Zimmerman chased Martin, caught him, confronted him, and simply shot him, which would be a clear cut case of 2nd degree murder; but we have no evidence to this point that it happened that way at all.

We do however have CLEAR evidence that Zimmerman was attacked. His bloody nose, his bloody head and the grass stains and dampness on the back of his shirt. Further we have an eye witness that places Zimmerman under Martin and yelling for help. None of which the Prosecutor put in the finding of facts. Thus why it is unethical.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We have CLEAR evidence that an altercation occurred, not that GZ was attacked. Not he yet. We don't have all the evidence.