George Zimmerman To Be Charged In Trayvon Martin Shooting
85 replies, posted
Source: [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-in-trayvon-martin-shooting-law-enforcement-official-says/2012/04/11/gIQAHJ5oAT_story.html?tid=sm_twitter_washingtonpost[/url]
[quote]
Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey plans to announce as early as Wednesday afternoon that she is charging neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, according to a law enforcement official close to the investigation.
It was not immediately clear what charge Zimmerman will face.
Attorney General Eric Holder addresses the Justice Department's investigation into the Trayvon Martin shooting at the National Action Network conference.
Attorney General Eric Holder addresses the Justice Department's investigation into the Trayvon Martin shooting at the National Action Network conference.
Martin, 17 and unarmed, was shot and killed Feb. 26 by Zimmerman, who said he was acting in self-defense. Police in Sanford, Fla., where the shooting took place, did not charge Zimmerman, citing the state’s “stand your ground” law.
Corey told reporters Tuesday night that she would hold a news conference about the case within 72 hours. A news release from her office said the event will be held in Sanford or Jacksonville, Fla.
Benjamin Crump, who is representing the Martin family, said this week that Corey’s office had asked where Trayvon’s parents would be each day this week. They arrived Wednesday in Washington for a civil rights conference organized by the Rev. Al Sharpton, where they are scheduled to speak.
The announcement of a charge against Zimmerman would come a day after Zimmerman’s attorneys withdrew from the case, citing their inability to contact Zimmerman.
Lawyers Craig Sonner and Hal Uhrig on Tuesday expressed concern about Zimmerman’s emotional and physical well-being, saying he has taken actions without consulting them. They also said they do not know where Zimmerman is.
“You can stop looking in Florida,” Uhrig told reporters. “Look much further away than that.”
Corey said Monday that she would not bring the case before a grand jury, which was expected to convene this week. She said her decision to forgo the grand jury should not be viewed as a factor in determining whether charges will be filed.
Corey has indicated in recent weeks that she might not need a grand jury to bring charges against Zimmerman.
The lawyers said they stand by their assertions that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he killed the 17-year-old, who was unarmed, but they acknowledged that they formed their impressions without meeting Zimmerman.
[/quote]
Saw this one coming.
Ok. Is there any way that Zimmerman could take this to a higher court? I seem to recall a lot of people being found guilty of things and then taking their case to another court for another try.
[quote]It was not immediately clear what charge Zimmerman will face.[/quote]
They can charge him for murder, what else is possible? Manslaughter sounds a bit iffy.
[QUOTE=Bootlord;35528021]Ok. Is there any way that Zimmerman could take this to a higher court? I seem to recall a lot of people being found guilty of things and then taking their case to another court for another try.[/QUOTE]
I think you are referring to the Court of Appeals. In the US, you can only take something to them once a lower court judge has made a ruling. So you can't say, bump this straight up to the higher courts without having the lower courts hear it and decide on it first. Also, there are similar procedures for federal cases, but this case may not get to that level.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35528044]They can charge him for murder, what else is possible? Manslaughter sounds a bit iffy.[/QUOTE]
I don't know how Florida law works on murder, but in my state a murder charge requires premeditation. As in the prosecutor would have to prove in court that Zimmerman PLANNED to kill Martin before the encounter and incident. That would probably be incredibly difficult to do. Much more likely is a manslaughter charge or possibly something along the lines of "assault with intent to _____". "with intent" being the key phrase. I'm not sure what kind of intent they would ascribe to Zimmerman though. But once again, proving intent in court is incredibly difficult. Unless there is hard evidence of Zimmerman's intent before confronting Martin, there is little to go on.
In short, some level of Manslaughter is the most likely charge to be brought against Zimmerman.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;35528044]They can charge him for murder, what else is possible? Manslaughter sounds a bit iffy.[/QUOTE]
Manslaughter usually applies when you didn't plan on killing someone, ie: self defence. So if the court has any sense they'll charge him for that.
Voluntary manslaughter is the least he can be charged with, that is if it's proven that no premeditation ever took place.
At least the guy is now in front of a judge so everyone can stop throwing their opinions around.
I'm not having an proper opinion until a trial starts, but it was obvious that there was enough evidence for Zimmerman to be charged and the case to be brought to court. He may not be racist but the police force certainly is. They tested Martin for drink and drugs in his system rather than Zimmerman after the shooting for Christ's sake!
This should have happened a long time ago.
[QUOTE=Frost 31;35528059]I think you are referring to the Court of Appeals. In the US, you can only take something to them once a lower court judge has made a ruling. So you can't say, bump this straight up to the higher courts without having the lower courts hear it and decide on it first. Also, there are similar procedures for federal cases, but this case may not get to that level.
I don't know how Florida law works on murder, but in my state a murder charge requires premeditation. As in the prosecutor would have to prove in court that Zimmerman PLANNED to kill Martin before the encounter and incident. That would probably be incredibly difficult to do. Much more likely is a manslaughter charge or possibly something along the lines of "assault with intent to _____". "with intent" being the key phrase. I'm not sure what kind of intent they would ascribe to Zimmerman though. But once again, proving intent in court is incredibly difficult. Unless there is hard evidence of Zimmerman's intent before confronting Martin, there is little to go on.
In short, some level of Manslaughter is the most likely charge to be brought against Zimmerman.[/QUOTE]
It might depend on what state you live in, here State Supreme court does/can hear these kinds of cases and bypass local court if they choose to hear it.
[QUOTE=Clavus;35528320]At least the guy is now in front of a judge so everyone can stop throwing their opinions around.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, because once O.J. Simpson went to trial the debate really died down.
[QUOTE=Stockers678;35528549]They tested Martin for drink and drugs in his system rather than Zimmerman after the shooting for Christ's sake!
[/QUOTE]
That usually happens
Instead of focusing on charging him why don't they focus on that stupid fucking law.
At most I think they might charge him with some kind of weapons violation, firing in a residential neighborhood or something.
As far as I can tell, there is no evidence contradicting self defense and there is no evidence supporting any kind of hate crime.
He's in fucking mexico by now.
[QUOTE=Scot;35528914]Instead of focusing on charging him why don't they focus on that stupid fucking law.[/QUOTE]
Because prosecutors can't charge laws with crimes?
[QUOTE=Saxon;35528636]It might depend on what state you live in, here State Supreme court does/can hear these kinds of cases and bypass local court if they choose to hear it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it varies state to state. Most of the time the state's higher courts can't hear cases without the lower courts first hearing it, but that isn't true in all states. Some states, like the one you live in, can skip over the lower courts and go straight to the state's higher courts under certain circumstances and when hearing some types of cases (the types vary from state to state as well, and are usually spelled out in that state's constitution).
I'm not from Florida and not familiar with that state's laws on who hears what, but I am assuming that this particular case must first be heard by the lower courts. If you know more about Florida law and judicial system than I do then please correct me.
[QUOTE=RichardCQ;35528988]Because prosecutors can't charge laws with crimes?[/QUOTE]
Oh how i miss bad reading. He wasn't saying to charge the law with a crime, he was saying that they need to get rid of that law.
[QUOTE=Stockers678;35528549]I'm not having an proper opinion until a trial starts, but it was obvious that there was enough evidence for Zimmerman to be charged and the case to be brought to court. He may not be racist but the police force certainly is. They tested Martin for drink and drugs in his system rather than Zimmerman after the shooting for Christ's sake!
This should have happened a long time ago.[/QUOTE]
This looks like a comment I would see someone post on Facebook. The police arrested him and originally wanted to charge him. Claiming the police are racist is stupid and baseless.
Good luck charging him when he bailed ship and left the US, at least likely did. Because nobody knows where he is anymore.
[QUOTE=Coffee;35528089]Manslaughter usually applies when you didn't plan on killing someone, ie: self defence. So if the court has any sense they'll charge him for that.[/QUOTE]
If it is determined to be self defense then it wouldn't be manslaughter. But I have a feeling they are going to go with the manslaughter charge as well. But I think proving manslaughter is going to be hard as hell.
[editline]11th April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=KorJax;35529327]Good luck charging him when he bailed ship and left the US, at least likely did. Because nobody knows where he is anymore.[/QUOTE]
Thats not true. He stopped communicating with his attorneys. There is nothing to suggest he is on the run.
the blame has gone back and forth so much lately
I'm eager to see who this is finally pinned on
Initially being against Zimmerman, I am interested in seeing where this goes, as I actually am not so sure that he is guilty of murder. The way the media portrayed this story was so negligible and a lot of facts got misconstrued.
[QUOTE=Funcoot;35529600]Initially being against Zimmerman, I am interested in seeing where this goes, as I actually am not so sure that he is guilty of murder. The way the media portrayed this story was so negligible and a lot of facts got misconstrued.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I have friends that get legitimately pissed off at me for thinking he's innocent. :v:
[QUOTE=faze;35529658]Yeah I have friends that get legitimately pissed off at me for thinking he's innocent. :v:[/QUOTE]
yeah i'm pretty sure you didn't just say "he's innocent", especially if you go about it the way you go about Apple.
[QUOTE=thisispain;35529695]yeah i'm pretty sure you didn't just say "he's innocent", especially if you go about it the way you go about Apple.[/QUOTE]
I phrased that wrong...I'm not on any side right now and I have made that known. I also said that I will choose a side when facts come out. These "justice for Trayvon" people are saying "HE'S GUILTY, FUCK YOU!!!" and so on.
[QUOTE=faze;35529658]Yeah I have friends that get legitimately pissed off at me for thinking he's innocent. :v:[/QUOTE]
I have friends who get pissed off at me every time I remind them he doesn't have to be innocent, the state has to prove he's guilty.
They think "well, you KNOW he's guilty" counts as proof, haha.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;35529770]I have friends who get pissed off at me every time I remind them he doesn't have to be innocent, the state has to prove he's guilty.
They think "well, you KNOW he's guilty" counts as proof, haha.[/QUOTE]
Yep. I said "I think he's innocent" because facts proving his guilt have yet to come out. But realistically I'm not on any side.
[QUOTE=faze;35529720]I phrased that wrong...I'm not on any side right now and I have made that known. I also said that I will choose a side when facts come out. These "justice for Trayvon" people are saying "HE'S GUILTY, FUCK YOU!!!" and so on.[/QUOTE]
He's certainly guilty of killing Trayvon, seeing as he's dead. But it's debatable whether or not he is guilty of murder or manslaughter. Or if he will get away with it due to it being self defence.
My state let Casey Anthony go, nothing to say they won't let this guy go either.
The difference being Casey Anthony tried to cover it up with lies and slander while this guy makes some sense.
[quote=BusterBluth;35529348]If it is determined to be self defense then it wouldn't be manslaughter. But I have a feeling they are going to go with the manslaughter charge as well. But I think proving manslaughter is going to be hard as hell.
[editline]11th April 2012[/editline]
Thats not true. He stopped communicating with his attorneys. There is nothing to suggest he is on the run.[/QUOTE]
Read the article. He stopped communicating with attorrnies AND nobody knows where he is. There's a big difference between "stop communicating, still at home" and "stop communicating, not at home, nobody's seen him"
He's the latter. He's either on a badly timed vacation, in media/poltiical/legal hiding, or on the run.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.