Trayvon Martin shooter makes first court appearance

[geriatrickid]

but surely this kind of " dialogue " doesn't help them or any quest for meaningful peace and harmony

No, of course not, that is extremist garbage. However, President Obama's comments WERE helpful.

Poignant, sincere and heartfelt.

Very Presidential and spoken as a father. The only recent Presidents that could have also pulled it off were Reagan and Clinton who had some humanity.

[Colin Yai]

Erik Holder Chuck? excuse my Ignorance, but could please elaborate as I'm English .

Erik Holder is Obama's Attorney General, head of the Department of Justice. The DOJ sent down a task force immediately to determine if Zimmerman might have committed any federal offenses.

Thanks for your speedy reply Chuck , the "muddy waters" have now cleared somewhat

[Colin Yai]

but surely this kind of " dialogue " doesn't help them or any quest for meaningful peace and harmony

No, of course not, that is extremist garbage. However, President Obama's comments WERE helpful.

Jingthing are you saying for a micro second that Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan are not Black extremists too? ,with respect I suggest you listen to some of their speeches ,cos they are right in the thick of this total fiasco. Edited April 17, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Neurath]

Is there anyone in this thread who thinks that killing another human being ought to be dismissed without judicial examination? Because that's what happened before all those 'political' folks stuck their necks in. I really cannot believe that there are people who post on TV who believe that the loss of a life doesn't bear examination.

How do you know there was no "judicial examination" the night of the incident?

You don't know, I don't know and those "political" folks didn't know...and probably wouldn't have cared anyway.

Zimmerman was taken to the police station in handcuffs after the EMTs cleaned up his head and face wounds. I would imagine he was interrogated as to the happenings that night, witnesses (if any) were interviewed and statements was taken from all concerned. The police, possibly in consultation with the local District Attorney, decided he was not a threat to the community nor a flight risk so they released him with further investigations to follow.

Every loss of life bears examination and I don't know anybody on this forum that has claimed otherwise. However, jumping the gun on the investigative process does little to urge it along.

Don't worry. Erik Holder's Justice Department is on the scene and I am certain Zimmerman will be found guilty of something.

In handcuffs? Was he arrested on that night?

Judicial examination/review means a review of all available evidence before a judge.

Was the District Attorney consulted? If so there will be a record of the District Attorney making the recommendation that no charges be laid and that Mr. Zimmerman be released. Did the police say that the DA recommended this? It will all come out in a Judicial Review/Examination as will the witness statements that were not collected on the night of the incident.

I reckon that under the 'Stand your Ground' law Mr. Zimmerman will be found not guilty of all charges.

edit: whether the EMT did clean up his face and head wounds is material to the man's defense. Has this statement been made by the EMT? Dunno, but it will be interesting to find out.

Thank you for the lesson on judicial review, however wrong it is. Following is the short legal description of Judicial Review with a link to a broader explanation of it's principles.

Judicial review is defined as..The power of courts of law to review the actions of the executive and legislative branches is called judicial review.

In short, Judicial Review takes place AFTER trials or acts of Congress take place in order to determine their constitutionality. NOT before.

Now on to your other points.

1. He was led in handcuffs from the police car into police headquarters.

http://www.foxnews.c...-show-injuries/

2. ..."State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met with the Sanford police chief within hours of the teen's death and that together they overruled a detective's recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter."

http://www.foxnews.c...-show-injuries/

3. How do you know there were no witness statements taken the night of the incident? Where did you gain this knowledge?

Any further questions, please write.

Thanks Chuckd, will do. No questions tonight. But tomorrow certainly.

[Koratpat]

Jingthing are you saying for a micro second that Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan are not Black extremists too?

He is easily blinded - he thinks that Trayvon is a "beautiful young black boy" just because he saw the media pic of him and other obvious reasons. I guess he missed the pics of Trayvon with his grill in place and also the reports of his involvement in gang related activity.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Koratpat

[Jingthing]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

[Koratpat]

This "beautiful young black boy" that some people seem to be mesmerized by was a man in size and also had an extremely violent nature that is documented.

[Koratpat]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

What about happily skipping home without consequences? Would that be more acceptable? You will swallow crow when either the case is dismissed or Zim is acquitted!

Edited April 18, 2012 by Koratpat

[Colin Yai]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

Jingthing I asked you a quite legimate question in my post #149 , you appear to suggest that Zimmerman was NOT arrested ,which IMHO according to the video is plainly not the case ,so with respect is there any chance of a straight answer to a straight question, was Zimmerman Arrested yes or no?? Edited April 18, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Scott]

Posters are not obliged to answer anyone's questions, if they chose not to. Goading posters is not generally acceptable.

If a possible crime has been committed, then suspects can be detained and questioned. The police have the right to hold someone for a set length of time. During that time, the District Attorney, or other jurisdictional authority, will determine if there is enough evidence to charge the person. If there isn't, the person will be released.

People being placed in handcuffs for a ride to the police station is a pretty routine matter and has little to do with guilt or innocence. People can get pretty out of hand once they are tucked away in a police car.

[chuckd]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

Jingthing I asked you a quite legimate question in my post #149 , you appear to suggest that Zimmerman was NOT arrested ,which IMHO according to the video is plainly not the case ,so with respect is there any chance of a straight answer to a straight question, was Zimmerman Arrested yes or no??

Following is the legal definition of "arrest":

"An arrest may occur (1) by the touching or putting hands on the arrestee; (2) by any act that indicates an intention to take the arrestee into custody and that subjects the arrestee to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest; or (3) by the consent of the person to be arrested. There is no arrest where there is no restraint, and the restraint must be under real or pretended legal authority. However, the detention of a person need not be accompanied by formal words of arrest or a station house booking to constitute an arrest."

http://legal-diction...nary.com/arrest

The use of handcuffs would seem to qualify this incident as an arrest of Zimmerman.

[Colin Yai]

No Problem Scott, but if a poster makes a statement with which I disagree with, I think it not unreasonable to question it, of course I am well aware he or she is not obligated to answer .

[Colin Yai]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

Jingthing I asked you a quite legimate question in my post #149 , you appear to suggest that Zimmerman was NOT arrested ,which IMHO according to the video is plainly not the case ,so with respect is there any chance of a straight answer to a straight question, was Zimmerman Arrested yes or no??

Following is the legal definition of "arrest":

"An arrest may occur (1) by the touching or putting hands on the arrestee; (2) by any act that indicates an intention to take the arrestee into custody and that subjects the arrestee to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest; or (3) by the consent of the person to be arrested. There is no arrest where there is no restraint, and the restraint must be under real or pretended legal authority. However, the detention of a person need not be accompanied by formal words of arrest or a station house booking to constitute an arrest."

http://legal-diction...nary.com/arrest

The use of handcuffs would seem to qualify this incident as an arrest of Zimmerman.

Thanks for the legal definition of Arrest Chuck ,your post leaves me quite satisfied that an Arrest did actually take place .

[Steely Dan]

I do find the sh1tstorm surrounding this case complete with allegations of racism flying about so easily as somewhat bizarre. If you juxtoposition one death, regrettable though it was, with the deaths of 200 Nigerian Christians blown up on Christmas eve, yet scarcely anyone cared to pass comment. Is a Hispanic redneck with a kosher sounding surname so much more odious than the Islamic terrorists of Boko Haram? I say this as the victims seem to share the same colour.

No - you're saying it to drag Islam into another thread that has nothing to do with Islam at all. Your post is completely off topic

Is that as seemingly off topic as the left wing agenda to conjoin the Trayvon Martin case with the Shaima Alawadi murder, so a catchy protest banner such as 'hoodies and hijabs' can be used to conjure up a right wing racist Islamophobe opponent to vilify? The latter case was dropped when it became clear the evidence did not fit the agenda, I expect the same with the former, however the OWS crowd have some synthetic cause to mobilize round which is anything to do with human rights. The dishonesty of some sections of the press and certain political activists is as cynical as it is nauseating and a reality check by way of reference to an external event was evidently needed.

[Steely Dan]

Jingthing are you saying for a micro second that Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan are not Black extremists too? ,with respect I suggest you listen to some of their speeches ,cos they are right in the thick of this total fiasco.

Thanks for the heads up Colin, Al Sharpton, now who does he have known connections to?

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/03/30/trayvon-martin-sharptons-latest-racist-lying-game/

[Colin Yai]

Jingthing are you saying for a micro second that Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan are not Black extremists too? ,with respect I suggest you listen to some of their speeches ,cos they are right in the thick of this total fiasco.

Thanks for the heads up Colin, Al Sharpton, now who does he have known connections to?

http://frontpagemag....ist-lying-game/

Thanks for the link Dan an interesting read ,however I have been very well aware of Sharptons racist activity's for well nigh two decades , that,s why very early on in the thread post#13 I forecast that the "race card" would be played ,and of course he's forecasting a riot should the verdict not go "his way" pretty par the course for him , by now they will have heard about this case in Outer Mongolia so if it ever gets to trial the Jury selection is going to be almost as controversial as the case ,I just hope justice is served either way guilty or innocent but how Zimmerman can receive a fair trial with all the extreme pressure being brought to bear for a conviction is to be quite candid highly dubious . Edited April 18, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Neurath]

Now, he is DEAD and it is comforting that the man who shot him DEAD with a GUN is facing the justice system. Guilty or Not Guilty is acceptable. Walking home without consequences ... not acceptable.

Jingthing I asked you a quite legimate question in my post #149 , you appear to suggest that Zimmerman was NOT arrested ,which IMHO according to the video is plainly not the case ,so with respect is there any chance of a straight answer to a straight question, was Zimmerman Arrested yes or no??

Following is the legal definition of "arrest":

"An arrest may occur (1) by the touching or putting hands on the arrestee; (2) by any act that indicates an intention to take the arrestee into custody and that subjects the arrestee to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest; or (3) by the consent of the person to be arrested. There is no arrest where there is no restraint, and the restraint must be under real or pretended legal authority. However, the detention of a person need not be accompanied by formal words of arrest or a station house booking to constitute an arrest."

http://legal-diction...nary.com/arrest

The use of handcuffs would seem to qualify this incident as an arrest of Zimmerman.

Thanks for the legal definition of Arrest Chuck ,your post leaves me quite satisfied that an Arrest did actually take place .

I believe that in the United States Miranda Rights must be read upon arrest.

[Neurath]

Is there anyone in this thread who thinks that killing another human being ought to be dismissed without judicial examination? Because that's what happened before all those 'political' folks stuck their necks in. I really cannot believe that there are people who post on TV who believe that the loss of a life doesn't bear examination.

How do you know there was no "judicial examination" the night of the incident?

You don't know, I don't know and those "political" folks didn't know...and probably wouldn't have cared anyway.

Zimmerman was taken to the police station in handcuffs after the EMTs cleaned up his head and face wounds. I would imagine he was interrogated as to the happenings that night, witnesses (if any) were interviewed and statements was taken from all concerned. The police, possibly in consultation with the local District Attorney, decided he was not a threat to the community nor a flight risk so they released him with further investigations to follow.

Every loss of life bears examination and I don't know anybody on this forum that has claimed otherwise. However, jumping the gun on the investigative process does little to urge it along.

Don't worry. Erik Holder's Justice Department is on the scene and I am certain Zimmerman will be found guilty of something.

In handcuffs? Was he arrested on that night?

Judicial examination/review means a review of all available evidence before a judge.

Was the District Attorney consulted? If so there will be a record of the District Attorney making the recommendation that no charges be laid and that Mr. Zimmerman be released. Did the police say that the DA recommended this? It will all come out in a Judicial Review/Examination as will the witness statements that were not collected on the night of the incident.

I reckon that under the 'Stand your Ground' law Mr. Zimmerman will be found not guilty of all charges.

edit: whether the EMT did clean up his face and head wounds is material to the man's defense. Has this statement been made by the EMT? Dunno, but it will be interesting to find out.

Thank you for the lesson on judicial review, however wrong it is. Following is the short legal description of Judicial Review with a link to a broader explanation of it's principles.

Judicial review is defined as..The power of courts of law to review the actions of the executive and legislative branches is called judicial review.

In short, Judicial Review takes place AFTER trials or acts of Congress take place in order to determine their constitutionality. NOT before.

Now on to your other points.

1. He was led in handcuffs from the police car into police headquarters.

http://www.foxnews.c...-show-injuries/

2. ..."State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met with the Sanford police chief within hours of the teen's death and that together they overruled a detective's recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter."

http://www.foxnews.c...-show-injuries/

3. How do you know there were no witness statements taken the night of the incident? Where did you gain this knowledge?

Any further questions, please write.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply Chuckd. I used the term Judicial Examination/Review. You are quite right that in the US Judicial Review used alone most often refers to the powers of courts of law to review the actions of the legislative and executive branches. Of course I didn't use it on its own but used "Judicial Examination/Review" and so muddied the waters. I was using in the following sense:

"At the time the Florida law was working its way through the Legislature, proponents argued that a homeowner should have the absolute right to defend himself and his home against an intruder and should not have to worry about the legal consequences if he killed someone. Proponents also maintained that there should be no judicial review of such a shooting" - Former Miami Police Chief John. F. Timoney.

Thanks for the correction, but it's pretty much beside the point for non pedants.

Now on to your other points:

1. I don't know if he was arrested. Seems likely given the hand cuffs. If he was arrested, he was read Miranda Rights and told what he was being arrested for.

2. This is something I didn't know. The "arresting" detective recommended that Mr. Zimmerman be charged with an offense (manslaughter) and was over-ruled by the police chief in consultation with the State Attorney. That doesn't look too good (but might be fine and benign). I can imagine the fuss this would cause had events been a little different. Fox would have a field day. "after questioning Zimmerman at the Sanford police station, homicide investigator Chris Serino filed an affidavit February 26th stating that he did not believe Zimmerman's account of the shooting. He recommended charging the 28-year-old with manslaughter". Though as I said, I expect that Mr. Zimmerman will walk due to 'Stand your Ground'. Certainly won't be convicted of Second Degree Murder. Thanks for heads-up on this info.

3. Careful Mr O'Reilly. I didn't say anywhere that no witness statements were taken on the night of the incident. I did say that all witness statements weren't taken. This is a very different statement. It's also a factual statement. There is also the issue of material evidence that may support or undermine Mr. Zimmerman's defense. For example, presumably a post-mortem forensic examination of Mr. Martin might provide material evidence for Mr. Zimmerman's defense as would the statements of those who have come forward subsequent to the event. I'd have no beef with Mr. Zimmerman being charged and let go on bail - as was recommended by the detective you mention (arresting or interviewing?). That is all.

[Jingthing]

This appears to clearly indicate that Mr. Zimmerman was NOT ARRESTED on the night he shot and killed Martin with his GUN:

Zimmerman was questioned and released by police, who said they lacked evidence to contradict his self-defense claim.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/30/trayvon-martin-case-george-zimmerman_n_1392591.html

[Credo]

Before there is an arrest, there is usually a crime. Someone would have had to determine that the death of the young man was a criminal act.

Part of the questioning would have been to determine if there was a crime committed. Had he been arrested, then the issue of bail would have come up and most likely a judge would have to set bail or have a bail hearing. I don't think any of this happened.

The death of the young man would certainly lead the police to seriously consider criminal activity. Apparently, the District Attorney didn't fully agree. There are still a lot of possible charges that he could face.

[Koratpat]

Nothing sleazier than a quote from the Bluff-ington Hoax!

I talked to some friends in the US and they all say this is ancient news and most people do no care or side with Zim. I am told only a few select groups have their frilly panties in an uproar about Tray.

Edited April 18, 2012 by Koratpat

[Neurath]

Nothing sleazier than a quote from the Bluff-ington Hoax!

I talked to some friends in the US and they all say this is ancient news and most people do no care or side with Zim. I am told only a few select groups have their frilly panties in an uproar about Tray.

You posted. So you with the frilly pants

[Jingthing]

It will be back at the top of the news when there is some new ... NEWS! Duh.

[Koratpat]

Click for full story

http://gma.yahoo.com/warning-graphic-photo-possible-evidence-shows-george-zimmermans-050145810--abc-news-topstories.html

A new photograph obtained exclusively by ABC News showing the bloodied back of George Zimmerman's head, which was taken three minutes after he shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, gives possible credence to his claim that Martin had bashed his head against the concrete as he fought for his life.

[flying]

Again..........Not known & will wait to hear what comes out at trial as too many variable exist.

That someone who shoots & kills has an injury is not an end all/slam dunk.

The whole scene will have to be reenacted & crime labs will look at whether it all lines up.

Before things like stand your ground or even castle laws it was known that folks need to show cause.

Folks knew to never shoot someone in the back. Folks spoke of taking a dead hand & scratching their own face with it

to show their skin was under the dead persons nails.

Later they could claim they were attacked & shot in self defense. But the crime labs would then piece together the evidence

as they can determine how close the shooter was when he shot & did it line up with the story of being attacked. If attack was close range

was shot also at close range...powder marks, angle of entry etc.

That someone has blood on the back of their head is not an end all as the wound could be self inflicted after the shooting to be used

in the same fashion as their skin being under the dead persons nails tactic/defense

I am not saying either one is guilty or innocent.....What I am saying is singular pieces of evidence are not enough. They will need to

be put together into a scenario that works in total.

If the evidence is what has been mentioned here so far then the scenario will have to be worked out.

If the dead person was on top of the shooter banging his head on the ground then the labs will want to see

how it went from that to the shooter getting out from under drawing his gun & shooting. Then does the trajectory

distance... determined by wound, powder marks etc coincide. If it is not as claimed then the evidence will easily show that

same goes for if it is as claimed by the shooter.

The prosecution will want to know how the shooter got into the physical scuffle. If the shooter was any kind of security person

legally packing a firearm, he would likely not get within arms reach of what he thought was an intruder. He would probably approach with his legal firearm drawn & ready...given the obvious excitement of his call to 911/police etc.

Again I have no idea but do know the story will have to be proven or dis-proven by physical evidence that lines up into a whole & not pieces that could be manufactured or claimed by the surviving party alone. But I do think these basic questions will be questions asked.

Edited April 20, 2012 by flying

[KhaoNiaw]

That's a very interesting post, Flying. Of course, it could be that injuries were inflicted by the other party 'standing their ground'. Whoever lives will be the hero! The ability of many western police forces to decipher what really happened is something sadly lacking in Thailand.

Seeing George Zimmerman in court and his overall demeanour is also interesting. I get the impression he's still quite shocked by what happened and feels that perhaps he made a terrible mistake. I wonder if he actually invoked this 'stand your ground' law or whether the idea came from someone else. I guess it would be unlikely that the real George Zimmerman will be allowed to appear from behind a legal team, although it would seem he would like to show his real feelings. I can't help feeling for the guy because it looks almost as if two sides have formed and he doesn't belong to either of them. I now suspect this a much more human tragedy than either of these sides will allow.

[Jingthing]

This sympathy for the shooter is nauseating. He pursued someone he had no business pursuing. Then he murdered him. The call to the police -- that was OK and that was where any normal person would have left it at. Well, not exactly, most normal people wouldn't be a pest to the police about someone just walking around, but that's another matter. Yes any normal "neighborhood watch" activists also. Period. He's going down.

Is he a racist? Of course he's a racist but not in the way a lot of people may think.

Zimmerman was taught by society that young black men are on drugs and criminals and that fallacy sits in his subconscious alongside how to ride a bike. If he didn’t live in a world where people are constantly acting on that fallacy then he wouldn’t have that in his subconscious.

Read more: http://ideas.time.co.../#ixzz1sgpXgdkt

Edited April 21, 2012 by Jingthing

[kerryk]

It will be back at the top of the news when there is some new ... NEWS! Duh.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: THE ZIMMERMAN PROSECUTION IS IMMORAL AND STUPID.  JT don't you normally like Dershowitz?

[Jingthing]

It will be back at the top of the news when there is some new ... NEWS! Duh.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ: THE ZIMMERMAN PROSECUTION IS IMMORAL AND STUPID. JT don't you normally like Dershowitz?

Quite often, yes. I think they may have overcharged here for the 2nd degree. Keep in mind, there is a good chance the prosecution hasn't revealed all it has yet. Wait for the trial. I admit he may get off on a technicality, but I think manslaughter should be the minimum considering his idiotic action of pursuing a young man on a walk. Yes, I couldn't be a juror because I don't care about the self defense part, in my view Zimmerman had no business pursuing Martin in the first place. Edited April 21, 2012 by Jingthing

[KhaoNiaw]

This sympathy for the shooter is nauseating. He pursued someone he had no business pursuing. Then he murdered him. The call to the police -- that was OK and that was where any normal person would have left it at. Well, not exactly, most normal people wouldn't be a pest to the police about someone just walking around, but that's another matter. Yes any normal "neighborhood watch" activists also. Period. He's going down.

From some of what's going on, I get the impression he knows he's made a mistake. That's no excuse, but it feels like the position that a lot of people are taking on his behalf, is not what he would say himself. Given the chance. Which I would assume he won't be...