Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

If George Zimmerman Loses a Pretrial Motion to Dismiss, He Can Still Be Acquitted
Reason Magazine ^ | April 12, 2012 | Jacob Sullum

Posted on 04/12/2012 9:52:21 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet

Judging from a sidebar in today's New York Times, there is some confusion about how Florida's self-defense law applies to George Zimmerman's case. The law, as amended in 2005, states that someone who justifiably uses force in self-defense "is immune from criminal prosecution." Under a 2010 decision by the Florida Supreme Court, that means Zimmerman has a right to a pretrial hearing where he can get the second-degree murder charge against him dismissed if he can show, by "a preponderance of the evidence," that he reasonably believed deadly force was necessary to prevent Trayvon Martin from killing or seriously injuring him. In other words, he has to convince a judge it is more likely than not that his use of force was lawful. But if he loses that motion, he can still argue at trial that he acted in self-defense, and the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not.

By contrast, the Times leaves the impression that Zimmerman has no hope of acquittal if his motion to dismiss is denied:

The case will almost certainly include a pretrial hearing to determine whether the state’s Stand Your Ground law, which grants broad protections to people who claim to have killed in self-defense, applies; if the judge finds that Mr. Zimmerman acted appropriately, the case will end there. If the judge decides that the protections of the law do not apply, the case will go forward.

At trial, however, the question of self-defense can be brought up again and possibly will, said Robert Weisberg, a criminal law expert at Stanford Law School. That could lead to a fallback position for the jury — if allowed by the judge — of a lesser verdict of manslaughter should the jury decide that Mr. Zimmerman sincerely but unreasonably believed that he was appropriately using lethal force to defend himself, which is known as "imperfect self-defense."

Manslaughter, which carries a maximum sentence of 15 years, does seem like a more appropriate charge than second-degree murder, which carries a potential life sentence and requires "a depraved mind regardless of human life." If Zimmerman broke the law, it was probably because he overreacted in the heat of the moment, so the murder charge seems like a stretch. But contrary to the implication of the Times article, a manslaughter conviction is not the best that Zimmerman can hope for if his case goes to trial. The jury could conclude there is reasonable doubt as to whether he acted in self-defense, in which case he would be acquitted. That standard is not some weird quirk of Florida law. As Northern Kentucky University law professor Michael J.Z. Mannheimer points out, "this is true in virtually every State."

Furthermore, the Times conflates two different aspects of Florida's self-defense law. If Zimmerman's account of his fight with Martin is true, he had no opportunity to safely retreat, so the right to "stand your ground" (the "broad protections" mentioned by the Times) would not apply. In this case the unusual aspect of Florida's law is not the self-defense argument Zimmerman is making but the fact that he gets to present it before trial, along with evidence to support his version of the shooting.

In mandating that procedure, the Florida Supreme Court noted the legislative intent expressed in the preamble to the 2005 law: "The Legislature finds that it is proper for law-abiding people to protect themselves, their families, and others from intruders and attackers without fear of prosecution." The court explained that the "immunity" promised by the law was meant to provide extra protection for people who use force in self-defense:

While Florida law has long recognized that a defendant may argue as an affirmative defense at trial that his or her use of force was legally justified, section 776.032 contemplates that a defendant who establishes entitlement to the statutory immunity will not be subjected to trial. Section 776.032(1) expressly grants defendants a substantive right to not be arrested, detained, charged, or prosecuted as a result of the use of legally justified force. The statute does not merely provide that a defendant cannot be convicted as a result of legally justified force.

But to reiterate, that defense is still available even if Zimmerman does not have enough evidence in his favor to avoid a trial.

Addendum: On the issue of second-degree murder vs. manslaughter, Florida's standard jury instruction for the former crime requires that the act leading to the victim's death "is done from ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent," which does not seem to fit the publicly known facts of the shooting, although it might make sense if it can be shown that Zimmerman shot Martin out of anger rather than fear. As Mo points out in the comments, Martin's mother, Sybrina Fulton, today described the shooting this way: "I believe it was an accident. I believe it just got out of control, and he couldn't turn the clock back." That does not sound like second-degree murder.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: blackkk; florida; georgezimmerman; trayvonmartin; zimmerman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 next last
Comments?
1 posted on 04/12/2012 9:52:30 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

No way will a Sanford judge rule to acquit...that judge would be the next person lynched.

First he needs to get the trial moved out that area and then he may have a chance.


2 posted on 04/12/2012 9:55:29 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The analysis is wrong on the point of the effect of a successful self defense claim if there is a trial. Self defense = acquittal, innocent. It does not serve to reduce murder to manslaughter.
3 posted on 04/12/2012 9:59:38 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I highly doubt he will be convicted of second degree murder. If his lawyers are any good, however, they will try to move the case out of Sanford.


4 posted on 04/12/2012 10:01:09 AM PDT by abercrombie_guy_38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
The analysis is wrong on the point of the effect of a successful self defense claim if there is a trial. Self defense = acquittal, innocent. It does not serve to reduce murder to manslaughter.

Oops, I see he gets to that point.

Uses the wrong standard of proof though. At trial, the state must prove (the burden at trial goes to the state) that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense. At trial, the presumptions run strongly in Zimmerman's favor - more strongly that at the pretrial hearing.

5 posted on 04/12/2012 10:02:13 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Those in charge in Tallahassee have decided,rightly or wrongly,that the only important issue here is to avoid Rodney King II.As a result a trial *will* take place and every effort will be made to get a conviction.The only thing that can save Zimmerman,in state *and* Federal court,is at least one juror in each trial he’s subjected to.


6 posted on 04/12/2012 10:03:50 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Jimmy Carter Is No Longer The Worst President To Have Served In My Lifetime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Move the case to Los Angeles!


7 posted on 04/12/2012 10:03:50 AM PDT by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; ...

Once the procecution lays out their case we will have an idea on if this is just political or if there is a real case to be made against Zimmermann.

I decided long ago not to jump to conclusions about that aspect even though A Sharpton and Jesse make it look like another hoax, Hoax/scams are their trademark.


8 posted on 04/12/2012 10:04:13 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Obama : "I will just make insurance companies give you health care for 'free, What Mandates??' ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abercrombie_guy_38
I highly doubt he will be convicted of second degree murder. If his lawyers are any good, however, they will try to move the case out of Sanford.

Yeah, to a cold climate area.
9 posted on 04/12/2012 10:12:45 AM PDT by crosshairs (As long as there is evil, "Coexist" is impossible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton

Don’t bring it to Tallahassee. I don’t want that crap here. Let Miami have it.


10 posted on 04/12/2012 10:18:51 AM PDT by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

reason to believe not in self-defense = indictment
preponderance of evidence was in self defense = dismiss
beyond a reasonable doubt was in self defense = acquit

The first standard is barely anything, hence, a good district attorney can indict a ham sandwich.

The second standard is what the police used in deciding, on the spot, not to arrest. If there is no evidence beyond what the police had, a motion to dismiss is in order.

The third standard is a tough one, and rightfully so. Even if a court does not dismiss, it cannot be presumed that the accused will be found guilty.

And, yes, I too am wondering where the element of depravity and disregard for human life came in. Maybe the special prosecutor has a thing about ham sandwiches.


11 posted on 04/12/2012 10:20:39 AM PDT by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I suspect the state is counting on the mob intimidating the judge sufficiently that the pre-trial motion will fail. Venue arguments are going be really interesting here. Time to dig out the litigation history on the Sam Sheppard case.


12 posted on 04/12/2012 10:25:40 AM PDT by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet; JulieRNR21; kinganamort; katherineisgreat; floriduh voter; summer; ...
Now that Zimmerman has been officially charged, the wheels of widespread social unrest are once again set in motion.

All things considered, it is quite possible that Zimmerman will be found not guilty. When that happens, having personally experienced the riots in SF and Oakland after the Rodney King case back in April of 1992, I fully expect "Holder's People" to do what they have always done when their collective rage is not placated.

They will go berserk.

Florida Freeper


13 posted on 04/12/2012 10:26:01 AM PDT by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
Question: Are the actual residents of Sanford, from whom a jury pool would be drawn, more or less likely to protect one of "their own". Zimmerman fits that classification. The young fellow he shot was visiting the area and by Zimmerman's account (he is the only surviving eye witness and seems to be backed up by the 911 call records) appeared to be casing houses. Where else would he get a fairer hearing than among the people who might know him and whose homes he ostensibly was trying to protect? The protesting mobs are going to show up and cause disturbance wherever any trial is held. The people of Sanford may be more willing to give those protesters the finger. I don't know enough about the area to judge.
14 posted on 04/12/2012 10:27:23 AM PDT by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

the judge could also reserve ruling and allow the case to go to trial. Reject the motion and the motion reconsidered on appeal.

This step is really about preservation for appeal.


15 posted on 04/12/2012 10:30:20 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redmen4ever
beyond a reasonable doubt was in self defense = acquit

Wrong! It is not the obligation of the defense to prove anything. It is the obligation of the prosectution to prove it was a crime "beyond a reasonable doubt". The prosecution only needs to show reasonable doubt, that it might have been self defense.

16 posted on 04/12/2012 10:30:32 AM PDT by Hugin ("Most time a man'll tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear"--Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hugin

Self correction” I meant to say “The defense only needs to show reasonable doubt, that it might have been self defense”.


17 posted on 04/12/2012 10:33:16 AM PDT by Hugin ("Most time a man'll tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear"--Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Mr Zimmerman is caught. The AG hasn’t ruled on this yet. I doubt he will get out jail except one way.


18 posted on 04/12/2012 10:40:52 AM PDT by winkadink (During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
The defense only needs to show reasonable doubt, that it might have been self defense

Better punctuation to express your meaning:

The defense only needs to show reasonable doubt—that it might have been self defense.

19 posted on 04/12/2012 10:58:47 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (I tried to buy a hoodie today but the store manager said they had all been shoplifted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: katana
The people of Sanford may be more willing to give those protesters the finger.

It's worth noting that Martin was killed in an event that occurred a full three weeks (Feb 26) before it became a national news story.

Further, the event was fully reported in the local media the very next day -- by Orlando TV stations and the newspaper.

And nothing happened. No outrage, no marches, no protests.

It's also worth noting that all of the local news stories led with the eyewitness account which described Zimmerman as being on the ground having the crap beaten out of him, while screaming for help.

Recall that it took days for this eyewitness to emerge in the national stories.

Will any local jurors allow the initial absence of outrage to impact their judgment? I don't know.

But it should...

20 posted on 04/12/2012 11:05:21 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs; 2ndDivisionVet; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; ...

I will stick my neck out here, and state that this trial is 100% political. Unless the info we have read regarding the evidence and witnesses is proven false, it is a sham to..

Prevent riots

Cover the DA’s butt(death threats, and political viability)

Look what the prosecutor said in public.. “justice for Trayvon”

“I prayed with Trayvon’s mother...she is sweet” HUH??

HUH? What about justice for all????

I already dislike and distrust the prosecution.

The MSM should be on trial here....they caused the whole

prosecution to happen in the first place with their lies

doctored tapes & photos. The race pimps got their ammo from

the MSM.


21 posted on 04/12/2012 11:06:27 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: katana

Good point, but I think you’re referring to the Jury Pool. I was referring to the judge.


22 posted on 04/12/2012 11:11:25 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
The prosecutor could try to assert "malice" by claiming he used the word "coons," or try to prove "aggressive stalking" by having the girlfriend claim that Trayvon told her he was being stalked. Since there is a gap of a minute or two before Trayvon attacked Zimmerman which doesn't seem to be recorded, the prosecutor may try to make Zimmerman prove what he was doing that period to show that he wasn't "stalking" the poor unarmed kid.

"Innocent until proven guilty" may sound good in theory, but if they get a bunch of jurors who are convinced that Zimmerman is guilty of cold-blooded murder (from what they have heard on TV) and the judge is a Lance Ito clone, who knows what the verdict will be?

23 posted on 04/12/2012 11:14:21 AM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

This thread seems to have some pretty calm legal opinions on this matter.

Since that odd “justice for Trayvon” press conference that Corey held, I’ve been wondering, why a 2nd Degree Murder charge, especially when taken with the tone of the presser.

The only non-political angle I can see is that the prosecution has something that the media hasn’t discovered yet. I’d speculate the most likely scenario is that Zimmerman volunteered a legally damaging statement without an attorney present.

Are there any other legal reasons that the prosecutor might go 2nd Degree Muder vs. a lesser charge?


24 posted on 04/12/2012 11:20:22 AM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Somehow the thing spun out of control between two men.

The girlfriend says she heard Trayvon ask Zimmerman something to the effect “You following me?”

To which Zimmerman replies something to the effect “What are doing around here?”

That seems to support Zimmerman’s story there was an exchange of words then he ended up on his back, perhaps with a broken nose and getting g head bounced off the concrete.

Feeling he was in a losing battle to get Trayvon to stop or end the physical conflict and that he might lose his life he took an action to save his life and yes, he shot an unarmed man.

What would everyone want to have happened ???

Should Zimmerman have accepted fate, nay, embraced it and spend the rest of his life with brain damage?

Maybe they would be comfortable in the knowledge that Trayvon prevailed in the confrontation and Zimmerman forfeited his life???


25 posted on 04/12/2012 11:21:01 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Here’s why he’s getting charged with 2nd degree murder with option for manslaughter.

They are hoping the Jury says well it wasn’t 2nd degree murder, but we have to do something...so they compromise and give him manslaughter.

If it was just manslaughter they may say not guilty, but having the option to lessen the charge they can play compromise and take the “moderate” approach.


26 posted on 04/12/2012 11:23:10 AM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Redmen4ever

But this is about justice for Trayvon as the exuberant and flashy smiling prosecutor proclaimed.

The only thing missing from her news conference was ladies tossing rose petals and a chorus of trumpets.

Weird lady.


27 posted on 04/12/2012 11:25:32 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1

Don’t Talk to the Police
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc


28 posted on 04/12/2012 11:27:37 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet (Ich habe keinen Konig aber Gott)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus

Given that the 911 tape has Zimmerman saying he could no longer see Martin (”he ran away”), and that he was heading to the community mailboxes to meet the police, the whole idea that he hunted down and killed Martin simply doesn’t hold water. Moreover there is only one witness who saw what happened, and he says Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating him. It’s a travesty that charges were ever brought. The governor and AG clearly bypassed the normal system to get an indictment to placate the lynch mob. It’s disgusting.

If anyone cares to donate to zimmerman’s defense, they can do so at...

http://therealgeorgezimmerman.com


29 posted on 04/12/2012 11:34:35 AM PDT by Hugin ("Most time a man'll tell you his bad intentions if you listen and let yourself hear"--Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Agreed. It seems that Mr. Zimmerman either ignored or did not have knowledge of this most excellent advice, and decided to “do the right thing, since I am innocent, had no choice but to shoot, and what harm could come of the truth?” and talked a whole bunch.

He consented to voice stress test. According to his former attorneys, he contacted the media and the prosecutor on his own. This does not bode well for his defense.


30 posted on 04/12/2012 11:36:07 AM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
They are hoping the Jury says well it wasn’t 2nd degree murder, but we have to do something...so they compromise and give him manslaughter.

Zimmerman will be convicted of one or the other. The jurors will be afraid of getting a bounty put on their heads. Throwing Zimmerman under the bus will be an easy choice for the jurors, as they will understand it's a political trial and not worth the sacrifice to pretend otherwise.

Welcome the the USSA, Comrades. You're getting a preview of the future.

31 posted on 04/12/2012 11:36:15 AM PDT by damper99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: M1911A1
I think we need to remember that all the “evidence” we are relying on is partial truth, rumor and conjecture. The true evidence is not yet public. Zimmerman's lawyer just stated on local news he had not seen the prosecution's information yet. And that he made the decision not to request bond at this time because Z is in protective custody in jail, and he needs to secure a safe place he can be released to when bond is granted.

Potentially important evidence would be toxicology reports indicating drug or alcohol presence in either person, gunshot residue, fingerprints on the weapon, Zimmerman's medical records, and the ME’s report.

Charging second degree murder seems a stretch to all the talking heads, which is proof to me that there is a lot of evidence we are not privy to. But as the process unfolds, we will finally get the whole truth. Meanwhile, we should all be cautious about jumping to conclusions or rushing to judgment.

32 posted on 04/12/2012 11:38:56 AM PDT by Goldwater Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Redmen4ever
"And, yes, I too am wondering where the element of depravity and disregard for human life came in. Maybe the special prosecutor has a thing about ham sandwiches.

One way to force a jury acquittal is to inflate the charge to one that has no hope of being proven.

33 posted on 04/12/2012 11:45:31 AM PDT by In Maryland (Liberal logic - the ultimate oxymoron!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The New Nifong

34 posted on 04/12/2012 11:48:26 AM PDT by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Like I said, now that he is charged we will know the evidence on both sides and it should be easy to tell if there was a real case or not.

If it doesnt make to trial because all the charges are dropped, or alternatively he makes a plea, I will know how to come to a fast conclusion.


35 posted on 04/12/2012 11:57:46 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Obama : "I will just make insurance companies give you health care for 'free, What Mandates??' ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
All things considered, it is quite possible that Zimmerman will be found not guilty. When that happens, having personally experienced the riots in SF and Oakland after the Rodney King case back in April of 1992, I fully expect "Holder's People" to do what they have always done when their collective rage is not placated.

And then there will be a whole lot more Trayvons! They're outmanned and outgunned. Fish in a barrel.

36 posted on 04/12/2012 11:58:20 AM PDT by roadcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: In Maryland

Inflating the charge hoping for acquittal would be pretty darn cagey, and given the tone of the press conference, if that’s really the goal the Corey has big brass ones.

She not only looked and sounded like she was a member of the Trayvon fan club, she was positively smug.

She’s either a consummate showman or she’s got something we don’t know about that is making her supremely confident.

I just can’t see any advantage to the murder charge and holding that press conference with just the information we have via the press.


37 posted on 04/12/2012 11:58:26 AM PDT by M1911A1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Either George Zimmerman gets the death penalty,
or the appeasement of the mobocracy ends with riots.

They’ve already started on the appeasement route.
There are only two outcomes possible.


38 posted on 04/12/2012 12:02:02 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: damper99

All it will take is one juror to hold out and do the right thing. I think there will be at least 1 American who will (I hope).


39 posted on 04/12/2012 12:05:56 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
I unfortunately started my car in the Costco parking lot with the radio tuned to WABC -- just as Geraldo was talking to Dershowitz (UGH!!) ...

But, oddly, both of them seemed to believe that the Murder charge was politically motivated (barring some piece of evidence that the prosecutor has that we haven't heard nor seen yet). And Dershowitz added that whatever you thought of the Stand your Ground law, it's still the law the case has to be argued under. You can't (he says) argue the case under what you think the law should be.

Surprising enough that I listened to the rest of the segment before switching over to Mike Gallagher or Dennis Miller or somebody.

40 posted on 04/12/2012 12:15:36 PM PDT by Tanniker Smith (I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; sickoflibs; 2ndDivisionVet; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy
Look what the prosecutor said in public.. “justice for Trayvon”

She should have said, Justice for Trayvon and Zimmerman. And she certainly had enough time to get her public statement right before going on camera.

It's not just Zimmerman on trial of course. It's the "stand your ground" law (I'll bet Fla. changes it in the legislature), and many will claim that we need new "hate crime" laws in Fla., other states, and at the federal level.

I think we have too many thought crime laws already.

41 posted on 04/12/2012 12:23:53 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Fool me once, shame on you -- twice, shame on me -- 100 times, it's U. S. immigration policy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MrB
RE :”Either George Zimmerman gets the death penalty,
or the appeasement of the mobocracy ends with riots.”

Silly, that particular Mob opposes the death penalty.

But they do like to see those who they identify as racists (ie Republicans) going to jail.

I wasn't thinking of trusting a jury, once I see both sides present their cases I will be my own jury.

42 posted on 04/12/2012 12:24:27 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Obama : "I will just make insurance companies give you health care for 'free, What Mandates??' ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Leftists, ie communists, don’t see non-communists as even human, or as worthy of life at all,

so their opposition to the death penalty probably wouldn’t extend to us.


43 posted on 04/12/2012 12:28:27 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; 2ndDivisionVet; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy
RE :”It's not just Zimmerman on trial of course. It's the “stand your ground” law (I'll bet Fla. changes it in the legislature), and many will claim that we need new “hate crime” laws in Fla., other states, and at the federal level

Since blacks are already covered by the federal ‘hate’ crime it is hard to make that argument.

Convicting him of a hate crime will be very difficult unless they have a witness that can show specific evidence that race was his motive, based on his observed statements.

44 posted on 04/12/2012 12:32:38 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Obama : "I will just make insurance companies give you health care for 'free, What Mandates??' ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton
I was referring to the judge.

Also a good point. I'm just not sure a change of venue would improve rather than damage the man's chances in this case.

45 posted on 04/12/2012 12:35:50 PM PDT by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: okie01
I want to see what the prosecution is using to justify the charge of second degree murder. We should be able to determine whether facts or the mob persuaded the prosecutor. I have to say I didn't like Corey's phony act in front of the cameras yesterday.
46 posted on 04/12/2012 12:38:10 PM PDT by peeps36 (America is being destroyed by filthy traitors in the political establishment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]




Click the Drop!

It may seem like a drop in the ocean
But even small monthly donations
Will keep Free Republic running smoothly


Sponsors will contribute $10
every time a new monthly donor signs up

47 posted on 04/12/2012 12:39:45 PM PDT by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: goseminoles

In the Casey Anthony trial they imported the jury from here in Pinellas County and still held the trial in Orlando.

I like that approach because the charging district has to handle the expenses of security instead of pawning it off on some supposedly “unaffected(clueless)” community.

Still a change of venue is likely as even the judge could be a target when Mr. Zimmerman brings a pre-trial motion to dismiss which is guaranteed to be held. Trust me. ;-)


48 posted on 04/12/2012 12:43:54 PM PDT by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: abb

She looks like she got her makeup tips from a John Waters’ film.


49 posted on 04/12/2012 12:44:10 PM PDT by windcliff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: for-q-clinton

Yes, and I hope they remember to keep their mouths shut. Because if other jurors find out they’re leaning to acquit they’ll be thrown off the jury...ala OJ.


50 posted on 04/12/2012 12:45:23 PM PDT by bjorn14 (Woe to those who call good evil and evil good. Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-89 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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