April 9th, 2012, 05:30 PM #1
No Grand Jury in Treyvon Martin SlayingThe special prosecutor appointed to investigate the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin said Monday that she had decided not to convene a grand jury in the case, which incited protests nationwide after the local authorities in Sanford, Fla., decided not to pursue charges against the crime watch volunteer who shot the unarmed teenager.
The prosecutor, State Attorney Angela Corey, who was appointed last month by Florida Gov. Rick Scott to investigate the shooting, said in a statement that her decision “should not be considered a factor in the final determination of the case.”
An investigation by the Justice Department is continuing, a spokesman said Monday.
Doesn't mean Florida still won't prosecute. It could mean they believe they have enough evidence to take it straight to trial.Good job, friend-of-friends!
April 9th, 2012, 05:56 PM #2
April 9th, 2012, 08:11 PM #3
"Everyone else"? That's not the case at all.
"The decision should not be considered a factor in the final determination of the case," Corey's office said in a statement Monday. "At this time, the investigation continues and there will be no further comment from this office."
Corey has had three options: to file charges against Mr. Zimmerman, drop the case, or send it before the grand jury. And despite expectations that the jury might convene this week, Corey had indicated earlier that she might not use that option, saying that she has never before used a grand jury to decide on filing charges in a possible homicide case.
I think it's an interesting development.Good job, friend-of-friends!
April 9th, 2012, 11:37 PM #4
Covering up the coverup.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOtab0BKOGY
The Nation which forgets it's defenders will itself be forgotten
You cannot make peace with dictators. You have to destroy them–wipe them out!
April 10th, 2012, 03:13 AM #5
There is no such thing as a special prosecutor not charging someone. It's a political plum given to a rising star who is well connected.
It is the fork in the road where politics and law intertwine."The world burns while Obama Tweets."
April 10th, 2012, 09:55 AM #6
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
I can't help wondering, how long it's going to take Jesse and Al to start squawking about this?"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
April 10th, 2012, 10:13 AM #7
April 10th, 2012, 05:03 PM #8
1st degree murder is off the table:
Once the evidence is in hand, Ms. Corey will have to determine not just whether to file charges but if so, which ones. By stating that she will not be using the grand jury, she has signaled that charges of first-degree murder are not on the table. In Florida, those charges can be issued only by a grand jury, and require a finding that the act was premeditated. A more likely charge under Florida law is manslaughter, but lesser charges like aggravated battery with a firearm are also a possibility, Mr. Friedman said.
EDIT: Zimmerman's lawyer's have withdrawn and Zimmerman has supposedly been in contact with the special prosecutor (Ms. Corey).
Last edited by tony_j15; April 10th, 2012 at 05:18 PM. Reason: more infoGood job, friend-of-friends!
April 10th, 2012, 07:33 PM #9
Sounds like a bit of grand standing here. From NYDailyNews
"Compared to her predecessor, she is much more aggressive in terms of filing criminal charges, much less likely to dismiss charges... She prosecutes every potential charge to the hilt," Hallett added.
Zimmerman may have nailed himself to the wall. According to his lawyers he met with her without them present. Who knows how that went
Last edited by RicheemxX; April 10th, 2012 at 10:29 PM.
April 10th, 2012, 10:22 PM #10
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
April 11th, 2012, 06:44 PM #11
April 11th, 2012, 06:49 PM #12
uhh well everyone would be the people that were initially in the position to charge him, but hell its all a moot point now that he's been charged. We can move past all the rumors speculation and BS and get to the brass tax of it.
April 11th, 2012, 06:53 PM #13
The rumors and speculation as I saw it were that he chased and killed an unarmed kid and should have been charged with murder. That was the brass tacks of it. IMO.
April 12th, 2012, 07:40 AM #14
The essence of criminal law and what differentiates it from civil law is intent.
Can it be proved that Zimmerman left his position to chase down Treyvon Martin with the intent of killing him and without any reasonable belief that his own life was in immediate jeopardy if he failed to do so?
Zimmerman may have sealed his fate when he left his safe position to chase down TM which he was not under any duty to do so and thereby gave up his position of Self Defense.
Self Defense it would appear to me then passed to Martin who may have reasonably believed he was in immediate jeopardy by a strange man in the dark who was following him and we don't know if he had turned on his putative assailant and jumped him believing it to be his safest recourse in the circumstances.
I don't know how it would shake out if in the resultant struggle Zimmerman exercised his advantage of a handgun and killed Martin believing it to have confirmed his belief that Martin was dangerous and anyway at this point was his own (Zimmerman's) self-defense.
Legally, could he have abandoned his position of Self-defense by leaving his safe post to track down Martin and then regained it (position of Self-defense) if Martin--himself acting in self-defense--turned on him? You see the complications and how they turn on belief and intent.
But belief has to be a reasonable belief and intent has to be based the circumstances that gave rise to that belief.
I don't believe Zimmerman's defense which I suppose will be that he ultimately acted in self-defense will survive his having left a safe position to track down a supposed assailant. That is why there is a sharp deviding line between shooting a burgler in your living room and one in your yard. That act of abandoning a safe position may be fatal to his defense.
What if, arguendo, Martin had wrested the gun from Zimmerman and killed him? His position would doubtlessly be that he had acted out of self-defense as he believed he was in immediate jeopardy by a strange man stalking/chasing as he first approached then sought to leave the housing community. Then what he reasonably believed and the objective circumstances that gave rise to that belief would be at issue.
Can both be not guilty?
PS. In NYC about two decades ago there was a famous case where a police officer shot and killed an eleven year old boy who was unarmed but was running away from a crime scene where something was stolen. The resulting furor resulted in rules that have been adopted around the United States that a perpetrator cannot be shot by the police solely for attempting to escape a crime scene but must be chased down and caught. Shooting a "perp" otherwise can result in criminal prosecution of the police officer.FIRST TEN YEARS ANNIVERSARY HONOR ROLLthis April 18th, 2014 and will be Officially Celebrated That Day! SEE http://www.techimo.com/forum/imo-com...ml#post1070600
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By Dude111 in forum General Tech DiscussionReplies: 11Last Post: April 22nd, 2010, 11:22 PM
By Theophylact in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 9Last Post: May 12th, 2008, 11:24 AM
By pickel in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 15Last Post: September 27th, 2007, 11:18 PM
By Warthog in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 2Last Post: December 1st, 2004, 10:04 PM
By MDdan in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 16Last Post: August 1st, 2002, 11:24 AM