Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vanity: State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman: Affidavit of probable cause
http://www.foxnews.com/us/interactive/2012/04/12/state-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-affidavit-probable-cause/ ^

Posted on 04/12/2012 6:26:26 PM PDT by dewawi

Oh my God, no wonder Allen Dershowitz is calling it a disgrace. This looks like something a 3rd grader would put together. It even makes a mistake as to what the Dispatcher told Zimmerman when he said he was following him. Remember: the Dispatcher said "You don't have to do that". Well in this affidavit, the State claims the Dispatcher said something else DESPITE IT BEING ON TAPE!

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: affidavit; angelacorey; coreyfong; probablecause; sourcetitlenoturl; trayvonmartin; zimmerman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-118 next last
To: Lancey Howard

That face could keep the vampires away.


51 posted on 04/12/2012 8:06:47 PM PDT by Josa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

Saving your comment because I agree completely. We shall see!


52 posted on 04/12/2012 8:10:31 PM PDT by chip.litch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew

I’m curious as to why no one has made mention of the fact? that it appears after hearing portions of the 911 call, that the dispatcher asked Zimmerman - “which way is he running” - well that is basically the same as the dispatcher IMO telling/asking Zimmerman to “follow” and tell me where/which direction the “suspicious” person is heading - shortly after that question was put to Zimmerman you can hear an out of breath/heavy panting Zimmerman (because he ran? to “follow” so as to find out which direction the kid was going so he could reply to dispatchers question?) dispatcher hears him out of breath and asks if he following... yes...”we don’t need you to...” “OK” says Zim and he was probably glad he could finally stop ... but he told dispatcher he “lost him and had no idea where he was now”. My Conjecture - kid circled around thru the walkways and snuck up on Zimmer... catching him unawares as he headed back to his vehicle...so now we have a young, athletically fit teen confronting older out of shape and still trying to catch his breath male... just my take on things


53 posted on 04/12/2012 8:11:16 PM PDT by recycledchild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

54 posted on 04/12/2012 8:12:34 PM PDT by VRWC For Truth (Throw the bums out who vote yes on the bailout)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

[[The testimony of the mother as to the voice crying for help will be contradicted by Zimmerman’s family and friends]]

It will also contradict hte father’s testimony that the voice was definately not hisw son’s voice


55 posted on 04/12/2012 8:22:16 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

Wasn’t he moving away from his house?


56 posted on 04/12/2012 8:22:45 PM PDT by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

[[A prosecutor’s job is not to win a conviction at all costs, but rather to *uncover the truth*

Therefore, why would the prosecution even *attempt* to discredit an eyewitness?]]

Why would the prosecutor pray with hte martins, and why would the prosecutor declare that ‘justice for trayvon’ is what is being sought? Doesn’t sound like her objective is to ‘find hte truth’


57 posted on 04/12/2012 8:26:12 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
[[A prosecutor’s job is not to win a conviction at all costs, but rather to *uncover the truth*

To the extent that it will win his case, period.
58 posted on 04/12/2012 8:28:00 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

[[A prosecutor’s job is not to win a conviction at all costs, but rather to *uncover the truth*

Therefore, why would the prosecution even *attempt* to discredit an eyewitness?]]

Why would the prosecutor pray with hte martins, and why would the prosecutor declare that ‘justice for trayvon’ is what is being sought? Doesn’t sound like her objective is to ‘find hte truth’


59 posted on 04/12/2012 8:29:38 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1

It’s a little over eight tenths of a mile away.


60 posted on 04/12/2012 8:33:20 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

I think it will be damned hard to comvince a jury of guilt given all of this:
http://www.wagist.com/


61 posted on 04/12/2012 8:34:38 PM PDT by Halcontent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

I think it will be damned hard to comvince a jury of guilt given all of this:
http://www.wagist.com/


62 posted on 04/12/2012 8:34:45 PM PDT by Halcontent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

yes- he was moving i nthe oposdite direction
I beleive when he followed zimmerman who was headed back to his truck to leave the scene to meet with the police when martin attacked him- the kid was apaprently less than 20 seconds away from his own father’s home, but decided NOT to go there and instead turned around and confronted zimerman which was asd we know a fatal mistake for the punk- and I say punk, because it is now pretty clear that martin could have avoided the hwole hting by just heading toward his fathers house but decided apaprently that he was ‘gopign to teach zimmerman a lesson’ and ifact apparently told zimmerman he was goign to kill him- he acted like a punk, and payed the price by picking on someone that was actually able to defend himself agaisnt a punk


63 posted on 04/12/2012 8:39:25 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

If this is to be the evolution of justice, it would make no sense to ever call the police. Plain ol vigilante justice will be the only way to remain safe.


64 posted on 04/12/2012 8:41:03 PM PDT by FreeInWV (Have you had enough change yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

I flip thru the channels and I hear this Nancy Grace woman just totally convinced Zimmerman is the epitome of evil - like she isn’t even listening to any reason. Can someone give me some insight into why she is so whacked out about this?


65 posted on 04/12/2012 8:46:14 PM PDT by RushingWater (Let's have a brokered convention and page Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

All very good points.

I am curious about the alleged phone call with the girl friend. In the affidavit, Martin’s actions and feelings about what was happening are described based on this alleged call. Now I’m assuming there is some verification of a call having been made (although I’ve not read about it). Have you read if Zimmerman ever mentions that Martin is on his phone when Zimmerman is talking to the 911 operator?

I have not seen that Zimmerman makes any note of that. Have you?


66 posted on 04/12/2012 8:46:54 PM PDT by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Scoutmaster

Not exactly lying but very loose with the facts. They use hearsay evidence from Martin’s girlfriend, assume that Zimmerman ignored the dispatcher’s advice (which they deceptively made to sound like an order) and took the mother’s word that it was Martin screaming, while his father originally said it was not his son. They assume that Zimmerman confronted Martin when there is no evidence of it. Zimmerman’s only response to the dispatcher’s advice was okay.


67 posted on 04/12/2012 8:47:36 PM PDT by freedomrings69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

The dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that”.


68 posted on 04/12/2012 8:49:14 PM PDT by Terry Mross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AU72
"I heard Alan Dershowitz on Jay Severin say any decent defense attorney should make short work of the charge of 2nd degree murder."

That seems to be the consensus with most of the legal panels.

69 posted on 04/12/2012 8:50:13 PM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV

When seconds count the police are minutes away.

In the affidavit it says Zimmerman “profiled” Martin. Interesting, I thought only the police could legally be charged with profiling anyone...he may have been biased against him due to his perceived race but to say he profiled him is not a valid legal argument in my opinion.
In fact, the only bias shown on the tape recording is he was biased against punks and assholes.


70 posted on 04/12/2012 8:51:47 PM PDT by Mouton (Voting is an opiate of the electorate. Nothing changes no matter who wins..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

I always thought hearsay evidence was inadmissable.


71 posted on 04/12/2012 8:53:07 PM PDT by freedomrings69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dewawi
Remember: the Dispatcher said "You don't have to do that". Well in this affidavit, the State claims the Dispatcher said something else DESPITE IT BEING ON TAPE!

But...but...the official "narrative" is that the dispatcher "told him not to do that". Apparently they don't seem to understand that a court of law is not a network newscast.

72 posted on 04/12/2012 8:53:38 PM PDT by denydenydeny (Admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt one has for others.-Tocqueville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

Law and facts are irrelevant to Zimmerman’s case. He must and will be convicted. Zimmerman’s conviction is too important not to occur.


73 posted on 04/12/2012 8:54:37 PM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RushingWater

Nancy never heard of a defendant, that she didn’t think was guilty as hell.


74 posted on 04/12/2012 8:57:16 PM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Based on the affidavit, the state’s case rests entirely on:

1. the girlfriend on the cellphone and
2. the mother claiming it was Trayvon’s voice crying for help.


I have not seen it posted that Zimmerman ever mentions he noticed Martin on the phone with anyone. Have you?

When was Martin on the phone with this girl friend? If they did talk, it was likely after Zimmerman stopped "pursuing" and was waiting on the police to show up. If that's the case, and Zimmerman was not pursuing Martin, why did she allegedly tell him to run? What did she actually tell him?

Seems that's pretty important to know since the second degree murder charge is partially based on her allegations of what Trayvon Martin was doing and thinking.
75 posted on 04/12/2012 9:18:29 PM PDT by Girlene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mouton
Is there a legal concept of "profiling"? Or is it just something activists have bandied about so much in recent years people assume it is somehow a crime?

Is it normal for an affidavit to be so slanted? It asserts that Martin "was not committing a crime." Yes, at the moment, but he was behaving in such a way that a reasonable observer might suspect he was planning to commit a crime (burglary). It should be easy enough to establish whether the neighborhood had in fact experienced several recent burglaries--the affidavit assumes that Zimmerman is imagining the danger (based on his assumed prejudices against people who look like Trayvon).

The statement that "Zimmerman confronted Martin" seems to be conjured out of thin air. Zimmerman claims Martin confronted him, and no witness saw anything other than that.

Does Zimmerman get to have impartial experts determine that the voice calling for help is his, or would it be racist to question the assertion of Trayvon's sweet mother?

76 posted on 04/12/2012 9:29:54 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Girlene

That’s why I wonder how long the girlfriend had between the killing and when she was questioned, to learn what was known about the incident and think up details that would make it sound like Trayvon was being pursued.


77 posted on 04/12/2012 9:32:31 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

I’m guessing the girlfriend said something like, “Go get him!” or worse.


78 posted on 04/12/2012 9:38:30 PM PDT by AZLiberty (Reading Righteous Indignation so I can be Andrew Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Girlene
I have not seen it posted that Zimmerman ever mentions he noticed Martin on the phone with anyone. Have you?

According to the girlfriend, his cell phone was in his pocket and Trayvon was wearing a headset, so it was not necessarily noticeable that Trayvon was speaking on the phone.

79 posted on 04/12/2012 9:38:30 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

I thought the dispatcher said, “we don’t need you to do that”. Basically the same thing, though.


80 posted on 04/12/2012 9:38:44 PM PDT by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedomrings69
I always thought hearsay evidence was inadmissable.

Her testimony, truthful or not, is not hearsay. She was a primary witness, albeit subject to the limits of telephony and the length of the call.

Hearsay doesn't refer to the human ear. What the ear hears is admissible, if the ear was listening to an actual event. Hearsay is second-hand accounts. So and so told me such and such is not admissable, whether by ear or by email, letter or whatever.

81 posted on 04/12/2012 10:12:53 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: dewawi

Leave it to Florida to screw this up....They can’t even count votes with major chaotic issues.


82 posted on 04/12/2012 10:18:31 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
That’s why I wonder how long the girlfriend had between the killing and when she was questioned, to learn what was known about the incident and think up details that would make it sound like Trayvon was being pursued.

Excellent question!

What I recall reading is that Benjamin Crump took her deposition shortly after the incident, in preparation for ginning up the lynch mob. But, amazingly, the Man didn't talk to her until Corey took over the case. It will be most interesting to see how her account "evolved" between the those two points in time.

83 posted on 04/12/2012 10:20:32 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
The special Prosecutor is a Republican

No, the prosecutor is a an arrogant idiot, who instead of having a brief news conference, instead made a major production out of it, and proceeded to give a long speech.

All this as she's smiling and winking at her media and government employee friends in the audience..

The prosecutor Corey, is a freaking moron.

84 posted on 04/12/2012 10:24:48 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dewawi
Leave it to Florida to screw this up....They can’t even count votes without major chaotic issues.
85 posted on 04/12/2012 10:26:46 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
Later, it says “Martin attempted to run home but was followed by zimmerman”. That almost certainly is false — Zimmerman was not in very good shape, and Trayvon was. Trayvon was only 100 yards from where he was living — that’s 20 seconds max of running. And the shooting was minutes after the dispatcher started, so if Trayvon ran home, he’d make it in plenty of time.

The affidavit didn't even say how they knew Martin attempted to run home. Was this what the person/friend of Martin said who was not even present or a witness?

Is this a joke?

86 posted on 04/12/2012 10:40:28 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
This ABCNews article dated March 20 suggests that ABCNews reporters were actually present when she gave the account to the Martin attorney Crump.

"ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life."

"The lawyer said he would give the details of the phone call to the federal investigation."

So it appears that the girl is giving this account to ABCNews and Crump about three weeks after the incident, and that Crump is writing the interview up into a statement to give to investigators.

Of course any ABCNews article cannot be taken as objective, especially by Matt Gutman.

Was this a "reenactment" of an earlier account given to Crump by the girl, or the first time? If it was the former, it is sleazy of ABCNews to suggest otherwise, but then again ABCNews is sleazy.

87 posted on 04/12/2012 10:50:43 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Cow clown

This one could be on a twilight zone episode. Call it the "Rubber mask".

88 posted on 04/12/2012 10:55:34 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: freedomrings69

Maybe it was 0bamaz son on the recording.


89 posted on 04/12/2012 10:56:40 PM PDT by BigIsleGal (Wake Me Up When the Stupid Wears Off)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
It's mostly not hearsay. Anything she hears as to the altercation is direct evidence.

To the extent the prosecution uses her to testify to a declaration that Trayvon made in order to prove the matter asserted in the declaration that would be hearsay. Such as "Trayvon told me on the phone it was raining" in order to prove to the jury that it was raining.

An example of such a statement I expect the prosecution to introduce would be her testimony that Trayvon told her that he was being followed, in order to establish the fact that Trayvon was following her.

Nevertheless, even though some of these statements may be literally hearsay, I expect the court to allow all or nearly all of these statements into evidence under the residual exception if necessary.

90 posted on 04/12/2012 11:01:56 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

I meant to write “in order to establish the fact that Zimmerman was following Trayvon”.


91 posted on 04/12/2012 11:03:05 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
If her testimony is offered to prove what Trayvon said, then it is not hearsay. But it is offered to prove the truth of what Trayvon said, then it is hearsay. The dying declaration exception might apply, but probably not, unless she testifies about something he said after the fight began.

What she heard in terms of struggle is not hearsay.

92 posted on 04/12/2012 11:18:42 PM PDT by Defiant (If there are infinite parallel universes, why Lord, am I living in the one with Obama as President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Defiant

See my post in 90.

The dying declaration exception does not appear relevant.


93 posted on 04/12/2012 11:24:29 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Anything she hears as to the altercation is direct evidence.

What I recall reading is, she said the call dropped before she heard anything other than words being exchanged.

If Zimmerman initiated the fisticuffs, she should have heard quite a lot, judging by what turned up on the 911 audio, recorded from much further away.

On the other hand, if Martin pressed End before setting about messing up the Man, she would have heard just about what she heard.

94 posted on 04/13/2012 12:01:51 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
I thought the dispatcher said, “we don’t need you to do that,” which does carry an implication that he shouldn’t “do that”, even though it is not an instruction per se. Also, some are saying that Zimmerman did stop following him, and that he was then jumped from behind as he was going back to his car. It will be interesting to see how the defense presents its case.

Might as well get some facts before you use it as a negative. The dispatcher carries no legal authority. Following their advice, from an insulated deaf and blind distance, can and probably has gotten the good guys killed. If some goon is coming at you or yours, and you're trying to give a 911 operator the dope on it, would you listen to them if they told you your best best was to drop to the ground and roll in a ball, vs. shooting their ass? Unless you can say yes to that, stop convicting a guy with nonsense. (I know you didn't actually convict him, but that kind of uneducated opinion is exactly what the haters will try to use when real evidence won't get the job done.)

95 posted on 04/13/2012 3:15:42 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

What don’t you understand about the definition of HEARSAY. Legally AND technically it is HEARSAY; She HEARD what he SAID. She is reiterating what she heard TRayvon say to Zimmerman. HEARSAY!


96 posted on 04/13/2012 3:15:42 AM PDT by dewawi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: okie01

They don’t technically care a whiff about stand your ground laws, per second. Instead, what they see here is a wedge issue that they think they can use to drive up voter turnout for this fall’s elections. This will be the issue that every candidate has to choose sides on in the fall campaign. Liberal, even those who fully supported the law when it was passed, will line up against it and the narrative will be that President Obama is the sensible candidate who is against these racist and dangerous stand your ground laws.


97 posted on 04/13/2012 3:32:45 AM PDT by RightFighter (It was all for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RightFighter

Per second = per se.


98 posted on 04/13/2012 3:34:02 AM PDT by RightFighter (It was all for nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: DarkWaters
I think its becoming clear to me that this whole thing is a charade. Obama needs a race riot now, not after the election.

I don't think so. What Obama needs is to build up guilt in the stupid white voters and so far he and the media are doing a great job without riots. There are very few people who read what we do and understand Zimmerman's innocence. Most people believe the media and think Z is guilty of profiling and murder.

99 posted on 04/13/2012 3:43:11 AM PDT by palmer (Before reading this post, please send me $2.50)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Texas resident

Angela Corey “We don’t “usually” prosecute by public pressure or petition. But in this case we have made an exception. We believe the Sanford police department is full of incompetents who let murderers roam free for no reason. We do not want black people rioting around the streets of Florida so we decided to charge George even though there are witnesses, facts, and evidence to prove he was defending himself” this is what she really meant at the press conference


100 posted on 04/13/2012 4:23:24 AM PDT by JJTHEBULL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-118 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson