"That's all people want. Zimmerman killed a boy. Let him explain why he had to do that to a jury of his peers. And let's have another investigation into why the state prosecutor did not bring charges and find out why he had a conflict of interest in the case."

Rec

kick/rec

was black - they figured, who would care?

I'm eagerly waiting to see how the State's Attorneys' office and the Sanford Police Dept (which does not have a good record to begin with, apparently) are going to be dealt with in this.

why would Florida even know who he is or give him and his family special treatment
makes no sense to me

In his police academy application. So that tells me, they knew.

scary thought

I wonder how many of the social circle think criminal judge? Impressive...instead of realizing what dad did, or cared what he did...he's a judge.


It makes some people feel important. In some cases it's maybe justified. But here, sonny boys seems to have cover of some type.

Why, I suspect, the Feds are also involved. If they find evidence peddling. It's a crime. For that they need a pattern. It may sink more than Zimmerman. The department has a creative history with relatives getting away.

Somehow, he was able to influence both the local PD and the prosecutor's office to free his son. A son who has avoided charges in previous assaults.

Something very, very strange is going on here and it goes beyond the fact this father was a mere magistrate. This father refused to let his face be shown on TV. This father has the ability to make PDs and prosecutors do what he wants.

This father is frighteningly powerful.

So let me offer this.

He was a magistrate judge.

He came to Florida and plugged himself into the local political machine. To be a judge he had to run, so he knows something about that.

He is probably well connected with money donations and social connections. This means some folks owe him socially and politically.

Yes, he s part if the group, insert town here, that run the local party...and have connections everywhere that matters locally.

Son might ruin that, so son might actually have reason to fear from that if indeed he costs dad all those connections.

Been looking at my local politics and this is indeed at play.

(1) Zimmerman was not derfending his home or the real estate immediately surrounding it;
(2) He was pursuing someone (Martin) he described as suspicious (but who he did not describe as being in the act of committing a crime); and
(3) He continued to follow and pursue Martin even when directed by authorities not to do so.

It should not be surprising that an altercation followed - or that deadly force was used.

This is a case about vigilante justice.

Zimmerman needs to face criminal charges - and Martin's family needs to sue him for wrongful death so that judgment will follow him for the rest of his life.

Vigilante "racism/profiling/nepotism/harassment/murder...." take your pick

First of all, what is Zimmerman going to be charged with? Manslaughter? First degree murder? Second degree murder? Assault with a deadly weapon? Criminally negligent homicide?

I don't pretend to be an expert in the definition of those charges or of Florida or Sanford County criminal law. The State prosecutor is, and he decided to not press charges.

The state prosecutor has recused himself. Why? I am guessing that since the call to not press charges is also being looked at, that he/she would have a conflict of interest. He/she would have a vested interest in re-affirming the original decision. Now somebody else is looking at it.

With my vast legal experience of watching many episodes of SVU (sarcasm), it seems to me that many times charges are not pressed because the police need to gather more evidence.

I am not living and breathing this story 24/7, have not read every report been written on it, but I have heard that two witnesses did confirm Zimmerman's version of events.

And actually I think the police can compell witnesses to speak. Failure to do so, unless it leads to self-incrimination, would be obstruction of justice.

And was overruled by DA, Chief and Shift Captain

Need more dots?

Oh and one of the witnesses that came out was John, who we have established since, from his media interviews was not even in the neighborhood.

I think it's possible that Zimmerman accidentally fired the gun and shot the kid. None of that excuses his extremely poor judgment in pursuing a person that was committing no crime, and waving around a gun, which is why it would be manslaughter. It may not have been "intentional" (though many can debate that - I won't and I'm just looking at it in the best light possible for Zimmerman), but it's still negligent homicide of some type, so manslaughter.

And later raise the stakes. It is usually the other way. It depends on evidence and what they think can prove.

Manslaughter would have meant processing and clock starts to tick. I am amazed some folks are still defending, even when more and more evidence emerges.

there'd be some sort of manslaughter charge in that case, right?

There seems little dispute that Zimmerman created the situation that led to his gun being fired and killing the boy. Therefore he is responsible for the death whether it was at the moment intentional or not.

It seems ludicrous that no charges have been filed yet. I could see there being some circumstance where charges weren't filed immediately, where they were deciding what was appropriate. But a MONTH?

A child is dead. Zimmerman killed him. The child was unarmed.

These facts are not in dispute. What kind of country do we live in, where someone can shoot a child and get off with "oops, my bad"??

Then there'd be no charges, but the kid would be just as dead.

Point is, there are some cases where death happens and nobody is charged.

Zimmerman created the situation? So what? In my view, Zimmerman was trying to do something noble. Trying to prevent his neighbors from being robbed. Put aside the profiling, and isn't that a good thing? Keeping a neighborhood safe from thieves. He did nothing illegal either in profiling Trayvon or in following him. If he did act in self defense, then should he still be charged?

If an unarmed Zimmerman had been beating Trayvon and been shot and killed, should Trayvon be charged with manslaughter? Does being unarmed mean that nobody can shoot you in self defense?

I used "drunk" because I think it is more analogous to using a deadly weapon irresponsibly.

"So what?" that Zimmerman created the situation and an unarmed child ended up dead? REALLY? "So what?"

Wow.

The 911 dispatcher told him not to follow. He followed anyway. I'm not a legal expert. I don't actually know whether Zimmerman did something illegal by following in that case. When does following and threatening a person on the street become illegal? I don't know, but if some guy I didn't know started following me, I might have my hand on my mace, and I'd consider calling the cops.

Keeping the neighborhood safe? Why was Zimmerman alone? I'm pretty sure normal "neighborhood watch" programs tell people to go out in groups or at least two together. That's the ONLY approach that makes any sense at all. In any case, once he'd called the cops, he'd done any "duty" he should have thought he had. But if he was really interested in doing true neighborhood watch, he should have been doing it correctly, not as a lone vigilante.

I don't believe for one second that he acted in "self-defense". An UNARMED CHILD died at the hand of an ARMED adult, who clearly PURSUED him after being told not to.

And yes, in your final question, I would think in that situation that Trayvon absolutely WOULD have been charged, and probably SHOULD have been charged, especially if it was clear that he provoked the situation in the first place, as Zimmerman did. Carrying a gun doesn't give you the right to stalk and terrorize other people and then shoot them when they turn on you.

just what is wrong with this disgusting coverup. Just how much more "irrelevant crap" will it take before the facts can come out?

To discuss the intricacies of this case in terms of putting that racist prick behind bars.

But it's fucking crucial to discuss all of the details of these events for the purposes of societal improvement and perhaps a little introspective study of our own levels of prejudice.

Some backlash is that people are adding to your points, calling the nation an epidemic of racists whites attacking blacks without consequence.
That simply is not true.

all of this other stuff being discussed right now is just noise

As I read this I realized the parallel. Like the bottom of justice just dropped out. And here we are all standing with our mouths open. Wondering how one person can be treated differently than another, despite what might seem like logical differences.