THIS JUST IN on the Zimmerman case....

[taichiliberal]

Do you have a link to the detective's affidavit allegedly calling for Zimmerman's arrest?

No, I have this, which to date has NOT been disputed by Wolfinger or the Police Chief. PLEASE read it carefully and comprehensively:

Sanford cops wanted to charge Zimmerman in Trayvon Martin case - Trayvon Martin - MiamiHerald.com

(As an aside, you are a f-ing moron.) So, you don't have a link to this alleged affidavit of the "chief detective" thinking Zimmerman should be charged. I didn't think so. Your racist shithead ilk are twisting the police capias (letting the prosecutor decide if there should be charges) as the police thinking Zimmerman should be charged. It's probably standard to do this in all self-defense shootings.

Obviously, you're not too bright and willfully ignorant. I stated that I don't have the affidavit....the article (which obviously you did NOT read) points out that no one does....YET, you have the State Attorney Wolfinger ACTING AS IF ONE EXISTED. State attorneys don't make personal appearances to intercede unless there is an actual legal action going on beyond the day to day arrests, bookings, etc. Also, you have a Chief of Police who ACTED TO PREVENT ONE FROM BEING FILED. IF IT DID NOT EXIST, THEN WHY THE ACTIONS BY THESE TWO, WHO HAVE NOW CURIOUSLY "RECUSED" AND "REMOVED" THEMSELVES?

A proper investigation by the feds will determine as to the validity of the missing affidavit that pushed Wolfinger into action. Currently, a judge will now determine if Zimmerman goes to full trial.

And in the meantime, intellectually impotent and dishonest neocon/teabagger parrots like yourself will squawk the mental myopia that you're limited to. See bunky, it's not just about the headlines. Carry on.

 

[taichiliberal]

Here is the affidavit.

CLICK HERE: The Zimmerman Affidavit - George Zimmerman - Fox Nation

He can't be convicted on this. For one thing too many lies. It looks like they got the information from the newspapers and not from police work.

You need to go back and do some honest research, as the ORIGINAL affidavit was filed BEFORE the new stories hit the national press.

Also, please explain in detail to us all what is a "lie" in this affidavit. NOT your personal opinion, supposition or conjecture, but what is documented "untrue". I'll wait.

For one thing, it was a complete lie that the dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. From the 911 tape itself we know that isn't true. There was no original affidavit to support an arrest warrant until the prosecutor determined there would be a charge which didn't come for weeks. This order not to follow came out of the papers, not what really happened.

If you are waiting for someone to come forward and attack the affidavit and think the reason they haven't done so is because it is so factual as to be unassialable you are just plain wrong. To YOU this case is being tried in the media and every word in the media is under oath., In reality any challenge to the affidavit will be made at pre-trial motion hearing when the defense brings their Motion to Quash.

You neocon/teabagger blowhards just love to LIE about facts ad nauseum. The 911 tape CLEARLY has Zimmerman stating that Martin was "running away" from him...the dispatch had already established that the cops were on the way, and then they asked Zimmerman if he was still following Martin...Zimmerman says yes, and the dispatch says "We don't need you to do that", and Zimmerman says "Okay".

THAT'S IT, bunky! Zimmerman did his job as a neighborhood watch guy AND as concerned citizen. The nano-second Zimmerman decides not only to continue pursuit of Martin and THEN get out of his car to confront him, he puts himself at liability to be charged with possible breaking of laws...which is NOW to be determined either 2nd degree murder or a lesser charge of manslaughter.

And as for the original affidavit

Sanford cops wanted to charge Zimmerman in Trayvon Martin case - Trayvon Martin - MiamiHerald.com

It'll be REAL interesting to see if Wolfinger and the Chief of Police can explain why there was all this hoop-la over an affidavit that suddenly cannot be found.

 

[taichiliberal]

Conviction comes from an investigation and TRIAL by jury....NOT just on a affidavit, which merely establishes grounds for arrest. YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS, based on your professed background.

The affidavit does it job.

You think she's a victim of embellishing to try to seem more important...or is she an out and out damned liar?

I don't claim any importance and I try hard not to embellish whatever modest credentials I have. I am only pointing out why I think my opinion is informed. Of course those dismissing my opinion as purely opinion do not seem to dismiss their own opinion do they?

Nor do those asking the combative, snarky, judgmental questions.

I am no fan of Alan Dershowitz. But I do consider him to be of sufficient experience, education, and credibility to accept his opinion as an informed opinion.

Bottom line: YOU made a assertion that YOU backed up with reference to your legal experience....I merely pointed out that your statement was logically and factually WRONG.
Unlike MarcATL, I'm not accusing you of lying on this point....just being wrong.

 

[Peach]

Zimmerman's attorney gets a new judge:
Judge quits Trayvon Martin case, cites conflict | Fox News

 

[taichiliberal]

Zimmerman's attorney gets a new judge:
Judge quits Trayvon Martin case, cites conflict | Fox News

Let the vetting process begin!

 

[Foxfyre]

You think she's a victim of embellishing to try to seem more important...or is she an out and out damned liar?

I don't claim any importance and I try hard not to embellish whatever modest credentials I have. I am only pointing out why I think my opinion is informed. Of course those dismissing my opinion as purely opinion do not seem to dismiss their own opinion do they?

Nor do those asking the combative, snarky, judgmental questions.

I am no fan of Alan Dershowitz. But I do consider him to be of sufficient experience, education, and credibility to accept his opinion as an informed opinion.

Bottom line: YOU made a assertion that YOU backed up with reference to your legal experience....I merely pointed out that your statement was logically and factually WRONG.
Unlike MarcATL, I'm not accusing you of lying on this point....just being wrong.

Well you'll have to show how I was wrong. I gave my opinion about the affidavit. If you can show how that affidavit can be used to make a second degree murder charge stick, go for it. Alan Dershowitz says it is not sufficient and I agreed with him. Neither of us said that it was the ONLY factor in this case; however in his opinion the prosecution does not have a sufficient case from any evidence to make it stick. I have not said that or agreed with him because I don't know. But I do believe his credentials are sufficient to characterize his opinion as an informed opinion.

 

[Liability]

Noooo, no, no, no.....a "grand jury" doesn't have the same in depth cross examination and open examination of the evidence that a regular trial does.

No shit.

But we aren't talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We're still discussing the bringing of a mere set of charges.

For that, there were two options.

1) Evade the function and risks associated with a Grand Jury presentment by lodging the chicken-shit prosecutor's information

OR

2) take the risks, and do things the RIGHT way by letting a Grand Jury decide.

And I STILL reject that the notion that the first way doesn't violate the 5th Amendment.

And let me just deflate your gasbag here from the the top:


No shit.

But we aren't talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We're still discussing the bringing of a mere set of charges.

You acknowledge that I'm right with your first two words. So anything else is just a parroting of your original opinion, which is meaningless. Also, whether you like it or not, we ARE discussing the basis for arrest, which is blatantly apparent...so much so that you had a State Attorney go out of his way to prevent and then try to shield himself from his dubious decision by recusing himself. Well bunky, the charges have been made, the arrest has been made and NOW it's up to the judge to bring it to court so Zimmerman can be judged by his peers, and where "reasonable doubt" is paramount in establishing his credibility and innocence or guilt. Deal with it.

You are truly an idiot.

You were arguing AGAINST a proposition I had never made, jerkoff.

Damn, you are one thick douche.

Let's take it from the top, you hack.

The victim is dead. Shot and killed.

The shooter (Zimmerman) is finally under arrest.

His case was NOT presented before a Grand Jury.

instead, the special prosecutor lodged a prosecutor's information. Then, to support it, she laid out allegations to convince a judge that there is probable cause.

The PREFERABLE rout, you moron, is to go before a Grand Jury.

What the fuck are you afraid of?

The BASIS for the arrest are CLAIMS made but not presented to a fair and objective fact finder, like the Grand Jury. The very official who will be "prosecuting" the case is the one BRINGING the charges. No filter. Why the FUCK do you pinheads imagine there IS a guarantee in the Fifth amendment for the right of a Grand Jury Presentment?

What you understand about the legal system -- much less "justice" -- could fit in the smallest dimple of a thimble with plenty of room to spare.

 

[MarcATL]

You think she's a victim of embellishing to try to seem more important...or is she an out and out damned liar?

I don't claim any importance and I try hard not to embellish whatever modest credentials I have. I am only pointing out why I think my opinion is informed. Of course those dismissing my opinion as purely opinion do not seem to dismiss their own opinion do they?

Nor do those asking the combative, snarky, judgmental questions.

I am no fan of Alan Dershowitz. But I do consider him to be of sufficient experience, education, and credibility to accept his opinion as an informed opinion.

Bottom line: YOU made a assertion that YOU backed up with reference to your legal experience....I merely pointed out that your statement was logically and factually WRONG.
Unlike MarcATL, I'm not accusing you of lying on this point....just being wrong.

Hold on there my good friend....I'm merely asking questions.
You know like Glen Beck, Bill O'Reilly and the rest of the good folks at the FOXNEWS

 

[WorldWatcher]

The affidavit offered to establish "probable cause" might meet the test -- more or less.

But a fair and honest presentation of actual evidence before a Grand Jury would have been the preferable route.

Would like your opinion.

Some talking head lawyers were on the other day. They were saying that not having a Grand Jury could be an advantage to the defense as now they can petition for a preliminary hearing (separate from the immunity hearing) where the prosecution will have lay out their evidence and the defense won't have to do much of anything.


Is that true?


>>>>

 

[Peach]

907.045, Florida Statutes.

 

[WorldWatcher]

907.045, Florida Statutes.

Thanks. I think that answers that.


>>>>

 

[Peach]

907.045, Florida Statutes.

Thanks. I think that answers that.


>>>>

You are welcome.

 

[taichiliberal]

I don't claim any importance and I try hard not to embellish whatever modest credentials I have. I am only pointing out why I think my opinion is informed. Of course those dismissing my opinion as purely opinion do not seem to dismiss their own opinion do they?

Nor do those asking the combative, snarky, judgmental questions.

I am no fan of Alan Dershowitz. But I do consider him to be of sufficient experience, education, and credibility to accept his opinion as an informed opinion.

Bottom line: YOU made a assertion that YOU backed up with reference to your legal experience....I merely pointed out that your statement was logically and factually WRONG.
Unlike MarcATL, I'm not accusing you of lying on this point....just being wrong.

Well you'll have to show how I was wrong. I gave my opinion about the affidavit. If you can show how that affidavit can be used to make a second degree murder charge stick, go for it. Alan Dershowitz says it is not sufficient and I agreed with him. Neither of us said that it was the ONLY factor in this case; however in his opinion the prosecution does not have a sufficient case from any evidence to make it stick. I have not said that or agreed with him because I don't know. But I do believe his credentials are sufficient to characterize his opinion as an informed opinion.

Once again, you make the blatant error that an affidavit stands alone sans an actual review by the judge and then an actual trial by jury (if the judge rules such). The affidavit merely facillitated the arrest...no more, no less.

THAT was my only point.

 

[taichiliberal]

No shit.

But we aren't talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We're still discussing the bringing of a mere set of charges.

For that, there were two options.

1) Evade the function and risks associated with a Grand Jury presentment by lodging the chicken-shit prosecutor's information

OR

2) take the risks, and do things the RIGHT way by letting a Grand Jury decide.

And I STILL reject that the notion that the first way doesn't violate the 5th Amendment.

And let me just deflate your gasbag here from the the top:


No shit.

But we aren't talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

We're still discussing the bringing of a mere set of charges.

You acknowledge that I'm right with your first two words. So anything else is just a parroting of your original opinion, which is meaningless. Also, whether you like it or not, we ARE discussing the basis for arrest, which is blatantly apparent...so much so that you had a State Attorney go out of his way to prevent and then try to shield himself from his dubious decision by recusing himself. Well bunky, the charges have been made, the arrest has been made and NOW it's up to the judge to bring it to court so Zimmerman can be judged by his peers, and where "reasonable doubt" is paramount in establishing his credibility and innocence or guilt. Deal with it.

You are truly an idiot.

You were arguing AGAINST a proposition I had never made, jerkoff.

Either you're too dumb to realize that people who read beyond the 8th grade level understand EXACTLY the intent of your previous post, or you're now lying to try and cover your blunder....I merely just pulled the rug from under your failed premise and you don't like it. Tough donuts, bunky....logic and facts will always be your foil.
Damn, you are one thick douche.

This is about the third grade school insult, which indicates you're just going to blow smoke and repeat your drivel.

Let's take it from the top, you hack.

The victim is dead. Shot and killed.

Moot, generic point

The shooter (Zimmerman) is finally under arrest.

Moot, generic point

His case was NOT presented before a Grand Jury.

Moot, generic point

instead, the special prosecutor lodged a prosecutor's information. Then, to support it, she laid out allegations to convince a judge that there is probable cause.

Moot, generic point


The PREFERABLE rout, you moron, is to go before a Grand Jury.

YOUR PERSONAL PREFERENCE AND OPINION, which does not bare out with the facts of the case.

What the fuck are you afraid of?

Willfully ignorant and intellectually bankrupt/dishonest clowns like YOU who have the right to vote and to propagandize corporate/right wing agendas to impressionable young minds.

The BASIS for the arrest are CLAIMS made but not presented to a fair and objective fact finder, like the Grand Jury. The very official who will be "prosecuting" the case is the one BRINGING the charges. No filter. Why the FUCK do you pinheads imagine there IS a guarantee in the Fifth amendment for the right of a Grand Jury Presentment?

Spare us all the buffoonish neocon/teabagger outraged babbling....the basis of the arrest are the inconsistencies of Zimmerman's statements when reviewed against the 911 tapes and the review of the evidence. Period. No one really cares if YOU don't like it, but YOU cannot logically or factually get around the chain of events.

What you understand about the legal system -- much less "justice" -- could fit in the smallest dimple of a thimble with plenty of room to spare.

Your "opinion" is your greatest mental Libability if you keep treating it like bonafide fact. Carry on. (I wonder if this joker will just copy this sentence and in a "I know you are but what am I" retort?)

 

[Too Tall]

For those who questioned that he was even *at* a 7 Eleven:
Georgia Students Gather In Sanford For Trayvon Martin - Trayvon Martin Extended Coverage News Story - WESH Orlando

It was less than a 15 minute walk from 7 Eleven to where Trayvon was staying. Why did it take him an hour to get back? He had to be doing something other than walking. He may have been casing homes. He also had over 6 minutes to go 800 feet to get into the house he was staying at after Zimmerman dialed 911. It should have only taken 1 or 2 minutes. Martin had to have circled back or hid & launched an ambush on Zimmerman.

What the fuck do you care? Did Martin commit a crime before Zimmerman profiled him, stalked him, chased him, and then killed him? Do you think that those who Zimmerman called "fucking coons" don't have the right to walk around?

You're quite a pig.

Zimmerman did NOT call Martin a "fucking coon" you ignorant lying racist pissant!

 

[Too Tall]

I'm sure somebody has already posted this but just for an update, this is significant because not only is Dershowitz a Democrat but when he is featured saying this on a channel like MSNBC, it is probably significant. And Dershowitz's opinion is also being expressed by others as I heard on the early morning new this morning:

Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball where fill-in host Michel Smerconish asked him his opinions of the arrest warrant issued and carried out for alleged Trayvon Martin murderer, George Zimmerman. Dershowitz called the affidavit justifying Zimmerman’s arrest “not only thin, it’s irresponsible.” He went on to criticize the decision to charge Zimmerman for second degree murder by special prosecutor Angela Corey as being politically motivated.

“You’ve seen the affidavit of probable cause. What do you make of it,” Smerconish asked. “It won’t suffice,” Dershowitz replied without hesitation.

“Most affidavits of probable cause are very thin. This is so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge,” Dershowitz said. “There’s simply nothing in there that would justify second degree murder.”

Harvard Prof. Alan Dershowitz: Zimmerman Arrest Affidavit ‘Irresponsible And Unethical’ | Mediaite

Now if Dershowitz (and others) have a valid point here--I'm not saying they do but am purely the messenger in this case--but IF they do--couldn't that also be a strong factor in why the prosecutor waived a grand jury investigation? She KNEW that a grand jury would never recommend that Zimmerman be charged and she would miss out on all the media glory?

Again it may not be that way at all. But this fish is definitely beginning to smell a bit.

Dershowitz OPINION is just that....HIS OPINION!

The chief Det. at the scene saw enough holes in Zimmerman's story to file for arrest. To date, the more information comes out, the more Zimmerman's story stinks to high heaven.

2nd degree murder is being charged so that you have the option of convicting ON A LESSER CHARGE....as opposed to just going for the lesser charge and then having a total dismissal.

I seldom agree with any of Dershowitz's opinions, but it is an INFORMED opinion, based on his qualifications. What are your qualifications to dispute him with?

 

[Katzndogz]

This just in. Zimmerman got bail.

I watched the bail hearing. It was one of the strangest bail hearings I have ever seen. The DA was actually bringing up questions of guilt or iinnocence and the judge let him! Eventually, the law was followed, the Judge considered only the risk of flight and set $150,000 bail which will be easily met.

 

[Foxfyre]

Bottom line: YOU made a assertion that YOU backed up with reference to your legal experience....I merely pointed out that your statement was logically and factually WRONG.
Unlike MarcATL, I'm not accusing you of lying on this point....just being wrong.

Well you'll have to show how I was wrong. I gave my opinion about the affidavit. If you can show how that affidavit can be used to make a second degree murder charge stick, go for it. Alan Dershowitz says it is not sufficient and I agreed with him. Neither of us said that it was the ONLY factor in this case; however in his opinion the prosecution does not have a sufficient case from any evidence to make it stick. I have not said that or agreed with him because I don't know. But I do believe his credentials are sufficient to characterize his opinion as an informed opinion.

Once again, you make the blatant error that an affidavit stands alone sans an actual review by the judge and then an actual trial by jury (if the judge rules such). The affidavit merely facillitated the arrest...no more, no less.

THAT was my only point.

The affidavit is also being cited by ALL the media sources as the primary justification for the arrest AND bringing charges against Zimmerman. Neither they, nor I, nor Dershowitz has suggested that the afrfidavit alone will be used in an attempt to convict him. Geez, some of you people would argue with a post and manufacture all manner of myths rather than just have a conversation about a point in this case.

 

[Foxfyre]

This just in. Zimmerman got bail.

I watched the bail hearing. It was one of the strangest bail hearings I have ever seen. The DA was actually bringing up questions of guilt or iinnocence and the judge let him! Eventually, the law was followed, the Judge considered only the risk of flight and set $150,000 bail which will be easily met.

I saw that. Along with Zimmerman giving up his passport to ensure that he was not a flight risk. $150,000 is a pretty lenient bail for a crime that could carry a sentence of life imprisonment.

 

[syrenn]

how about this for just in? A bloody zimmerman head

New Photo Shows George Zimmerman's Head Was Bleeding Night Of Trayvon Martin Shooting: Gothamist