Skip to comments.George Zimmerman Case: Should Charges Be Dropped?
Posted on 05/21/2012 5:39:01 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Two prominent U.S. lawyers are among the skeptics questioning whether evidence in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin supports the second-degree murder charge against George Zimmerman, given the confessed shooter's apparent injuries and freshly released eyewitness accounts.
"There is no second-degree murder evidence in this case," Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said. "It's a very close case."
Details released in the past week add to the picture of what might have transpired on that rainy Feb. 26 before Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch captain in the Sanford, Fla., community where Martin, 17, was staying with his father's fiancée, shot the teen dead.
Previously unknown particulars, including the scrape on Martin's knuckle and photos of Zimmerman's battered and swollen face -- which were taken moments after he shot and killed Martin in what he says was self defense -- coupled with eyewitness accounts that back up Zimmerman's story, suggest for some that the prosecutor overreached.
"I'd rather play the defense than the prosecutor, because there's no way you get a murder-two conviction," journalist-attorney Geraldo Rivera said on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor" last week....
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
The phone records have her on the phone, just the same, somewhere around that time. Crump's narrative requires DeeDee to be on the phone when Martin asks Zimmerman, "Are you following me?" with a bumping or whatever happening a few seconds later - maybe 10, at the outside.
Assuming Martin prepared for the confrontation by taking out the earphones and stripping identifying details (the photo pin), it is still possible for DeeDee to be involved in a telephone dialog with Martin when he asks "Are you following me?"
The phone works if the headphones are unplugged. DeeDee would have a hard time hearing if the earphones were plugged in to the phone and the microphone is inside the hoodie. The phone was found loose, yes? I wonder if Martin was using it without earphones when he started the fight.
I believe that's correct, too, but he would have to be Acquitted on the Stand Your Ground basis; otherwise, he COULD be sued, and there's always Holder's People who would slap a "Civil Rights" Charge on him, even if he is Acquitted on the Murder II Charge.
The value of the whole case is simply to pander to the Black voters for their votes, and for their "justified" outrage (that's been ALL that is the basis for this Case since the beginning).
The distinction hinges on whether or not Zimmerman obtains a finding of "immunity from prosecution," which, at this point, has to come from a judge. The immunity is supposed to prevent arrest, detention, and all form of prosecution. But Zimmerman has been arrested and detained, and is being prosecuted.
If the case proceeds to trial, and he is acquitted by the jury on self defense grounds, then he does not have immunity. But, if he wins a Motion to Dismiss on the basis that his use of deadly force was justified, then he is immune from civil suit. Holder can still charge him, but that would be a more bogus charge than the one Corey has applied, because Holder has to allege the reason Zimmerman shot Martin was racial animus.
I both agree and disagree. It was the press making it up out of whole clothinasmuch as they started alleging this as soon as transcripts of the call appeared. The very special prosecutor's office said nothing about it until she repeated this "narrative media" allegation in her complaint. I'm concluding that the prosecutrix picked it up from the media and from the Sharptonians. This doesn't seem a stretch to me, since she seems to have picked up all her other assertions about the case from them, such as that Zimmerman was "profiling" the subject.
That's a good point. I'd forgotten it. It just damns Corey even more. I noticed one account though, that pointed to Corey as the source. Be fun watching them chew each other up.
I see you are getting a well-deserved ear-boxing for lying about what happened with the police dispatcher. Good deal.
lying? I never lie.
Just repeating what I have heard/read.
Look, all you who want the guy cut loose, it’s an emotional reaction.
Someone has to deal with the evidence and the evidence so far supports manslaughter as much as it supports no charges. It doesn’t seem to support second degree murder.
no, just because the case is dismissed in the criminal court has nothing whatsoever to do with civil liability. Totally different standards of proof. Immunity from criminal prosecution is something granted by the prosecution in exchange for testimony.
And that he escalated the level of violence, i.e. brought a gun to a fistfight.
Actually, the thug should have determined whether or not Zimmerman was armed before attempting to bash his brains out on the pavement.
Obviously Treyvon wasn’t too bright. He brought his fists to a gun fight.
It would be nice to leave it to a court of law, but nooooooooo, we have you to find him guilty of manslaughter. Do you have any idea of what is truly at stake here? I’d guess not, if you think Zimmerman should stand trial at all.
(Hint: Libs hate “Stand Your Ground.”)
FL Statute 776.032 provides immunity from prosecution for justified use of force. If found, the immunity extends to immunity from civil action, and an award of defense fees against anybody who sues you anyway.
There is a process in FL law for hearing a motion for a finding that the person who used force, is immune under the provisions of FS 776.032. The Florida Supreme Court, in Dennis v. Florida (2010), held that the statutory immunity hearing is one where the court must hear evidence and weigh competing narratives. If the judge finds that the use of self defense was justified, to a standard of proof of more likely than not (preponderance of the evidence), then the defendant meets the requirements for obtaining immunity.
If a defendant is denied immunity, he can still argue self defense at trial. But, lacking immunity, he is at risk of criminal conviction, and he is at risk in civil court.
In the criminal case, self defense is an affirmative defense, raised by defendant. He puts on his case, then it is up to the state to disprove it. The burden of (dis)proof here is on the state, and the state must show that defendant's use of deadly force was NOT justified, beyond a reasonable doubt.
And, as you know the civil court is about the same, except the standard of proof to obtain a wrongful death money judgment is preponderance of the evidence, rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.
-- Immunity from criminal prosecution is something granted by the prosecution in exchange for testimony. --
Yes, that form of immunity also exists, as does immunity granted by Congress or a legislature, again usually in return for testimony against bigger fish.
But in the context of the Zimmerman case, "immunity" is a reference to FS 776.032 immunity for justified use of force; and "immunity hearing" is a reference to a hearing conducted to the standard of Dennis v. Florida, to determine whether or not a person who used force, did so within the boundaries of Florida Chapter 776.
but it is immunity from criminal prosecution?
And has nothing to do with civil liability?
I didn’t find him guilty of manslaughter. I said from what I have heard of the evidence, there wouldn’t be enough to try him for second and that trying him for manslaughter is indicated as much as dropping the charges. It’s an analysis of the evidence.
sheesh, calm down
Here is the link to the Florida criminal and civil immunity for justifiable use of force statute, again, with its title and an excerpt this time.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force ...