DiamondDave
Army Vet
Why? No.
What? Yes.
And the fact that you aren't disputing they didn't follow best practices says that you know they fucked up.
And they did.
No.. because I do not have all the information and it has not been brought as evidence in the trial... You are making an assumption.. I am not
Making what "assumption"?
Did they have urine and blood from Zimmerman? No. Did they bother to ask him for any? No. Did they xray Zimmerman's head? No. Did they secure the crime scene? No. Did they keep Zimmerman overnight? No. Did they bag Martin's hands? No. Did it occur to them that if they didn't have Martin's fingerprints in the system and he was a young kid that maybe, just maybe, he lived in or was visiting someone in the complex? No.
That's routine shit.
It wasn't until three days after the murder did anyone do any real investigation.
And THAT was stopped until Sharpton came in.
You make assumptions on GZ's actions and interpretations as if they are fact... when evidence shows the contrary... You also make assumptions as to what and why the cops did whatever, without any evidence to back any of your assumptions up...
As they gathered evidence as the case went on, they could still arrest the 'suspect' if evidence shows something supportive of the crime of murder or manslaughter rather than self defense...
But it was not the evidence that brought this to trial.. it was political pressure...