Just a word of warning.

[nadinbrzezinski]

While I am disgusted at what Mr. Zimmerman did...there is this matter of innocent until...

The order of things now should be...

1.- Investigation by a Federal Jury. Somehow the State has proven itself a tad biased here.

2.- Arrest after indictment

3- Trial by a jury of his peers.

If convicted, then serving time in the big house.

As much as he violated Trayvon's rights, we should be careful to actually give Mr. Zimmerman every right to a capable defense.

And lastly, these laws, regardless of state, must be targeted for scrubbing from books.

I know, this is the rational path, and I hope that this prevails. After all, that is justice.

[peacebird]

1. I would add one thing: investigation into the actions of the Sanford PD in this case

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Oh that goes without saying

A civil rights investigation, and this possibly fits hate crime, includes the cops. Meyer the chips fall where they may.

[Solomon]

52. and i would add there needs to br an arrest.

FIRST

I'd like the system try to wait on an indictment before arresting anyone for anything. The idea is absurd.

There was and remains probable cause for an arrest. I'm getting sick of the bullshit

[teddy51]

3. It would be nice to know the facts and hear from any witness's in this case.

Is Zimmerman guilty of murder? I don't know, and do not have enough information to make that case. Using this outrageous law as a defence (IMO) is pure bullshit though.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Why step number one is an investigation

[JDPriestly]

62. Yes. I'm wondering whether the police could subpoena more information

on the cell phone conversation between Trayvon and the girl with whom he was talking at the time he was being followed by Zimmerman.

I wonder whether there is some recording of that call? Does the phone company automatically record calls?

And where is Trayvon's phone? Where is his earpiece or headset?

In the past, self-defense was a defense not a home free card. It used to be the burden of the defendant to prove that defense including that the threat was truly imminent.

So, legally, you are right, an investigation and a trial are needed. But the facts here look pretty bad for Zimmerman in my view. He could have a legitimate defense -- if Florida law requires one.

The new Florida law is an absolute disaster. That law could make it unsafe to walk anywhere at any time.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Our sleuths had the actual cell phone

They didn't even do a last number call back, which is kind of basic. Your cell records your called numbers.

They botched this from word go.

[MadHound]

5. That is indeed the order of how things should be,

But in many cases that was not how things went down, and it isn't certain that is how things will go down in this case.

So, where does that leave us?

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Alas why murder 1 ain't in the books

Too much evidence has been lost.

[spin]

7. While our jury system has its faults, its better than ...

trial by the news media.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Trial by news hosts is an old tradition.

It's not new.

Cops white washing cases is also not new. This s why we need to step back and let the system work as best as it can.

[spin]

21. I agree and with all the attention this incident has recieved ...

I would bet that Zimmerman will face a jury who will decide his fate. From the information that I have gleaned from the news, that would be fair.

[RZM]

8. If I were a betting man

And I am . . . I would bet that there will be no federal charges.

Stranger things have happened, but I don't think the justice department will take that risk.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I am not sure at this point

Mississipi burning comes to mind.

[RZM]

17. Federal charges make it a political thing

Like it or not, that's how it will be perceived.

And this is an election year. And Florida will be a vital swing state. Without Florida the Republicans can't win this year. And while Obama could win without it, he really wants it and will work hard to get it. Having it means automatic game over for the Mittster.

This is why I suspect there won't be federal charges. The best plan for team Obama would be to plant the story that the feds are 'looking into' the case, but not actually charge him. 'Looking into' throws a bone to the black vote in Florida, but doesn't unduly antagonize the white or Hispanic vote. Going all the way against him will bring only marginal additional gains with the black vote than 'looking into' does, but it could have greater ramifications for the other groups.

It's a cynical interpretation, but I think it's plausible.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. And tat is one of the reasons they might file

But a minor one. This has become a major legal headache and pressure will come from minorities to well, do justice.

[Hippo_Tron]

45. Actually I see a huge political upside in this, if the Justice Department has a case

The only reason this would cost Obama Florida is if the DOJ really just doesn't really have the evidence to convict the guy and they bring it to trial anyway and lose, it will look bad for the administration.

But if they really have a case it's a totally different picture. The people it will piss off are a bunch of tea-baggers who weren't voting for Obama anyway. Then once there's an indictment, the Mittster is going to be asked how he would handle the situation. And unlike Obama, he needs those Tea-baggers to win. But if he says he wouldn't have intervened, then he risks having said that he would let a murderer go free if the guy is convicted of murder.

The play is actually pretty simple for the Obama Administration here: just do what you would do if politics were not a factor. If you have a case take it to trial. If you don't have a case, don't take it to trial.

If the Justice Department does get involved I can't fucking wait to see the Mittster try and squirm his way out of explaining how he would deal with it, ESPECIALLY if Santorum and Newt are still in the race. I'd much rather be in the President's shoes and have to deal with this than be in the Republicans' shoes.

[RZM]

48. I can see that

You make good points and it's a plausible scenario.

[CreekDog]

50. Federal charges against Zimmerman will make white people antagonized?

because you're saying we all just side with our own kind?

quite a theme, my friend, quite a theme you've got going there.

[RZM]

64. Once again

You're all in a tizzy over dispassionate analysis.

And I'm not 'your friend.' Who are you, John McCain?

[CreekDog]

65. I'm asking you to provide evidence that white voters will be antagonized by federal charges here?

[RZM]

67. That would probably depend on the charges

Maybe nobody would care. It's just a hunch. But it's possible a federal prosecution could be perceived (or at least spun) as an unfair governmental intrusion and motivated by race (i.e. Holder and the president are looking for out for their own). Some people might see it that way. Most of those people probably would never vote for Obama in the first place. But some could be on the fence. You could make an argument that anybody who sees things that way is a racist or a bad person, but that's neither here nor there when we're talking votes in a presidential election year. Every vote will matter in Florida and the Republicans will spend a lot of time and money there. Obama can't afford to alienate any Floridians. And I'm guessing that's a calculation they are making here.

I could be wrong of course. It's just a guess.

Given how rude you are, you're lucky I answered you at all. Please be civil and polite if you reply and keep the cryptic insinuations to yourself.

[CreekDog]

68. you didn't say it depends on the charges, you SAID "alienate white voters"

you said that white voters will be alienated if Obama does a certain thing that black voters will like.

you phrased it to say that people will act or think a certain way because of their race.

and just a few days ago, you were saying it's not wrong to only want to live near people that look like you.

sheesh.

[RZM]

70. It's possible it could alienate some people

If they are perceived as being too harsh. And what charges they are would matter. Some mamby-pamby charges might not rate with anybody. But serious murder charges where the accused would be facing decades in prison? That might be perceived as too harsh. It doesn't matter whether or not they actually are too harsh or too lenient or whatever. It's about perception. And this is Florida and it's 2012. Every vote is going to count in November and neither side can risk giving any votes away. You might not like my theory, but why get so excited about it? It's just a theory.

But that being said, I'm done with you on this thread. You're rude, you bring very little to the table, and you annoy me.

[CreekDog]

72. Apart from race, what is the right thing to do

Don't tell us politically what helps with white people or black people or whatever.

Just tell us what YOU THINK IS RIGHT.

[RZM]

74. Didn't I just tell you I was done with you?

I don't answer to you. I would gladly answer this question if it came in the course of a discussion with somebody who was respectful and not constantly hounding me. But you ain't that.

Until next time

[CreekDog]

75. could it be that you're disguising that you don't want him to end up in jail for anything serious

because right now you're advocating going easy on Zimmerman --for political reasons.

so we say, okay, say it wasn't about politics, say it was just about right and wrong? you won't answer.

when you kept posting that the feds shouldn't act against Arizona's immigration bill, i asked what you thought of the bill. you said you had no opinion.

so what you're doing is advocating that the Feds not act in ways that stop discrimination. you say this consistently.

but then you want to believe that all you care about is the politics. you don't have an opinion on the matter --even though you post what you think should be done.

i'm not buying this. no way.

[RZM]

76. See post #74

BTW, I'm not advocating the administration do that. Just positing that it would be the safest course of action for them. But they don't need my advice anyway. There are people who do that kind of thing for a living.

I didn't answer your questions because you're disrespectful and I don't much care for you. Believe whatever you like about me. I really don't care what you think about anything at all, including me.

Ok, now I'm done. For real this time!

[CreekDog]

77. you're always done when we get around to asking what you really think

you are around to say what should be done (go easy on him for "political" reasons)

but what is the morally right thing to do? well, i guess you gotta go!

(ps-you're on a discussion board, in a thread, talking and advocating on an issue --don't act all surprised when someone asks you what you think about an issue that you have posted a dozens replies on)

[chieftain]

66. What do you mean "plant the story"

Leaving aside the fact that the DOJ has publicly announced an investigation, it seems that you are suggesting that Team Obama would be well served by surreptitiously hinting they were going to do something but not follow through for political reasons. Is that what you mean?

[RZM]

69. Yeah, pretty much

That is, if they are putting politics into the mix when deciding how to proceed. It's possible they aren't. I'm not an insider and I don't know what they say behind closed doors. It could be they are treating this the same as they would if it wasn't a swing state and this wasn't an election year. But with the general coming up and Florida such a key prize, I think it's entirely possible they are carefully considering the political ramifications here.

Let's assume for a second that they are. If so, probably the best course of action would be to appear to be taking action (and also commenting on the tragedy, which Obama did today), but not actually charging Zimmerman with anything. That's really the best of both worlds. You earn some goodwill with liberals and black voters, but don't turn off any conservatives or moderates by appearing too heavy-handed. An actual federal prosecution could give an issue to right about federal intrusion and Obama being biased in favor of African-Americans. That happened on a smaller scale with the Crowley/Gates fiasco. Obama waded in and defended his friend, turning off some people by spending time on a seemingly minor issue and with his 'the cops acted stupidly' comment. If he could go back in time, I doubt he would get involved.

Going through the motions but not actually doing anything gives the appearance of concern but doesn't actually change any outcomes. It could also be that the feds opt not to charge Zimmerman for the same reason that the local Florida prosecutors haven't - they may decide there's not enough evidence to get a conviction.

Or maybe the will charge him. I don't know what they'll find or what they'll do. But if November is their primary concern, I would think the safest course is the one I described above.

[chieftain]

78. So if I understand you,

the Department of Justice will decide whether to prosecute this case based on political considerations.That's a pretty damning opinion of Eric Holder and the President. Are you always this cynical or do you have instances of other decisions that were made by the DOJ to help the Obama campaign instead of the law and the facts?

[RZM]

82. It's just a theory

I have no idea if it's at all accurate. Isn't that what we do here? Toss around theories and then get called on it

I've gotta believe that politics is at least in the back of their minds. Right or wrong, just about everything the President and the DOJ do will have some sort of political consequence. They know this. How much that informs their behavior I don't know. Probably not much, but like I said earlier, this is Florida and it is an election year.

What brought this on was my prediction there won't be federal charges. I predict that because I think it's slightly more likely than the other outcome and here's why

Two possible results of the federal investigation. Because I'm not a lawyer and I don't have all of the facts in the case, I'm going to say that each is equally likely:

1) They decide they don't have enough evidence to charge
2) The decide they do have enough evidence to charge

If it's number one, there obviously won't be charges.

If you believe my cynical argument, charges still aren't a given if it's number two. They are perhaps very possible, but not a certainty.

So if both of the two investigation outcomes are equally likely, the chances of federal charges are below 50 percent, since the second option would still allow for no charges.

But hey, I'm just speculating. I very well may be wrong. Maybe my whole premise is flawed because it's possible they know that not enough people care whether or not he is charged, so neither outcome would have any effect on swing voters. They can order up polls and have staffers to examine every angle of this. I've just got my opinion and half-baked ideas.

[chieftain]

83. I understand now that you say this is just a "theory" but

you didn't respond to my question of whether you have any instances of the DOJ acting out of concern for the President's political future. Do you have any to offer?

[RZM]

86. No not really

At least nothing I can think of off of the top of my head.

I'm not trying to diss Obama and Holder here. I'm just saying that politics matters and it's an election year. I'd be surprised if the political ramifications of many things weren't at least mentioned in high-level discussions.

Maybe they aren't . . . but elected officials know that they are dependent on voters and their perceptions. You don't make it to the top without at least considering these things.

[chieftain]

87. You seem much more tentative about this as the evening has rolled on.

It certainly seemed like you were ascribing political motives to Obama and Holder for a cynical ploy of "planting a story" and then not following through. And yet you cannot cite any instances " off the top of your head" as to why you might think that.It does leave one to wonder whether cynicism is driving the comments or if it is hostility to Obama.

[RZM]

88. Jesus H.

You wannabe inquisitors are frigging exasperating.

It's a theory. I threw it out there on a whim. I don't know if it's true or not. It might be, it might not be. Personally, I think politics probably is in the mix here. But I think that's often the case for ANY president. How much I don't know. And neither do you.

It's odd you're going after me when there are plenty of posters here who actually are anti-Obama. Despite this being a Democratic forum, open hostility to the president is quite common.

Here's some advice. On the left side of your screen you'll see a folder icon labeled 'General Discussion.' Click on it. There's enough anti-Obama stuff there too keep you busy until your heart's content.

[chieftain]

89. Thanks for the tutorial on how to access the "General Discussion" folder.

It really wasn't necessary, but thanks anyway.
Since you used the plural of inquisitor, I guess your whimsical posts have attracted others trying to figure out exactly what your point is.

[RZM]

90. Very few

But there are a couple. I used the plural here because another one is on this thread.

You're wasting your time with me. If you're so concerned, why aren't you concentrating on actual anti-Obama posters?

[CreekDog]

92. If the poster won't tell you what they truly want, you have to judge by their posts

that poster wants (i'm listing these things, not defending them...some are indefensible anyway):

1) Zimmerman to not receive a penalty for his actions that is harsh and would alienate white and latino voters.

the poster won't say what his opinion is, but will say what he thinks should be done. one way or another, the poster is advocating for things without claiming to believe in them.

[lastlib]

38. This could easily rise to the level of a federal (criminal) civil-rights violation.

Whether the State of Florida acts or not, there is a possibility of federal intervention. If FL doesn't act, it's a near-certainty.

[HipChick]

10. He took it upon himself to a child's executioner..

He should endure prison justice..

[RZM]

12. What do you mean by 'prison justice?'

Meaning being beaten or killed by a black gang in a Florida prison?

I don't want that for him or anybody else. Awful human rights violations go on in our prisons. People should be able to serve their time without fear of being stabbed by other inmates for who they are or what they did.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. I am sorry if my idea of justice

Does not include murder by shank.

[krispos42]

11. If he's found guilty and placed in prison...

...then the laws you want to scrub did not, in fact, protect him. So then why should they be scrubbed?

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. To prevent another tragedy

But it is telling you need this explained. Stand your ground leads to a mentality.

[krispos42]

35. "Leads to a mentality".

Yeah, that's not a train of logic I'm real fond of.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. The statistics speak for themselves.

But hey, you and I will not see eye to eye on any of this.

[Uncle Joe]

18. Would Zimmer have taken his gun out in public and felt so at ease to use it without that law

to use as a crutch?

Perhaps changing the law wouldn't make any difference in the case of a future *Zimmer but it might make a difference in the case of a yet to be Martin.

*Of course that also depends on who's in power in the federal government, I honestly don't believe a Cheney/Bush administration would've cared.

[krispos42]

33. Dunno.

And we'll never know.

But by the same token, justifiable homicides have tripled in Florida the last few years, which means that dozens of people a year are saving themselves by killing their attackers.

The corollary to this is that for each person who kills in self-defense there are maybe 4 or 5 that wound their attackers, and dozens more that used a gun without causing injury (either they missed, or they didn't pull the trigger).



I do know that despite record sales of guns and ammunition since Obama was elected, despite guns being more reliable than ever, despite ammunition being more deadly than ever, despite magazine capacities going up, despite per-capita gun ownership at all-time highs... the homicide rate has been dipping steadily downwards after the big plunge from 1991-2002 (or so).

[Uncle Joe]

39. From police behaviour after the killing of Martin it seems to me the issue or defintion of

what constitutes "justifiable homicide" is greatly open to question.

As to the homicide rates, I believe much of that may be attributed to the aging baby boomer generation.

To some degree, lower crime rates are a demographic inevitably.

[rhett o rick]

43. Just because justice manages to work in spite of a bad law

doesnt make the law ok. It's a terrible law. Justice may prevail in this case because of all the publicity but it may not in the next dozen.

[Uncle Joe]

14. I agree.

Thanks for the thread, nadinbrzezinski.

[ZombieHorde]

20. Is there really no room for a pleasant game of Dungeons & Dragons in your "order of things?" nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. I will bring the Paladin of the Rose

[ZombieHorde]

28. Awesome. Your Paladin should help assure justice is served. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. On a serious note

We're both geeks. Oh and I haven't had a good DnD game in years.

[JFN1]

22. Sigh. Hate to repeat myself, but...

"Innocent until proven guilty" is the standard of our judicial system. The courts will (hopefully) do their best to give Zimmerman a fair trial.

This, however, is the court of public opinion, where such a standard, no matter how we might pine away for it, is not required, nor is it usually present.

Without a single scrap of evidence which clears him, and a whole bunch of evidence which implicates him, in the court of public opinion there is, at this point, little traction in suggesting Zimmerman's rights are being abused.

Let the judicial system do its job - and let the public vent it's pain over this, as it must...

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. You are free and clear to do that

Some of us can also hold to the standard of justice.

Mr. Zimmerman should be given the most capable defense team, to avoid any charges of a bad defense.

And we shoud demand these laws are taken off the books. That is where we can have a good influence.

But let me repeat myself, Mr Zimmerman must be afforded the most capable of defenses.

[JFN1]

32. So Zimmerman (or anyone accused of a crime)

is not receiving a capable defense because people exercise their opinions as to the event?

Sorry, but that does not follow.

We are in "the heat of the moment" - passions are running high.

The public's pain is on display, here - which in no way I can see affects the quality of Zimmerman's future defense - and how can it? He has not even been charged yet.

I appreciate your concern over justice, and I share it.

But right now my concern is justice for the murdered child and his family - not for the guy who pulled the trigger...if our judicial system works at all, he will have his justice, too.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Actually we do have a history with public defenders

and not necessarily a glowing one.

As I said, you are free to vent...I am free to demand that actual justice is made. As far as I can tell they are not mutually exclusive.

[JFN1]

40. Still does not connect for me.

So I'll just remind you the very outcry you are condemning, brought this terrible event into the public eye.

And without the public outrage spawned by this horrible act, that poor kid might still be sitting in the morgue with a "John Doe" tag on his toe...

[nadinbrzezinski]

53. Alas I am not condemning it

I understand it. Hell, as I wrote in the OP, as much as I dislike the man. This means that both you and me would not be qualified to serve in an eventual jury.

But we also must understand the process needs to be followed and this gentleman, I use the word loosely, must be afforded the best defense possible.

[unionworks]

23. Obama needs the black vote to survive.

How the justice department under his presidency handles this case may make or break Obama. There. I said it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. I agree

[unkachuck]

24. hanging z-man....

....and scrubbing laws from the books is not the answer in 21st century America....we need a uniquely American solution....

....we need to LOWER the age a person can carry to sixteen and mandate everyone carry (especially African Americans and other minorities) when out and about....

....and if need be, we'll have government subsidies for those who can not afford a gun to purchase a gun....this way, future Trayvons will be able to defend themselves against future z-men....problem solved....

[unionworks]

30. I will put down and cap my bottle...

...when you do.

[spin]

34. Can you point out a link to any post on DU ...

or on another forum where gun owners post and where some fool said anything like that?

I should note that as a gun owner with a Florida Concealed Weapons permit, I have no problem with any member of a minority that wishes to obtain a carry permit as long as they qualify.

[Dragonfli]

41. Finally a pragmatist! One that understands that mandating the purchase of a product that kills is

the best solution.

Buying a product that kills via a mandate will make Medical Insurance companies good and necessary even if they don't provide any actual care whatsoever, someone has to deny care and mark it up so that the care is valuable. Only denied care can kill and nothing makes a product more valuable than denying procedures and killing off bad investments.

Uniquely American and Heritage Foundation preferred! (forced purchases at a store near you)

It would work well with guns, after all guns don't kill people, not having everyone armed is what kills people, a mandate is the only way to go.

[lib_wit_it]

42. Don't be ridiculous. Sixteen is way too old. Elementary schools are woefully gun deficient.

[spanone]

31. exactly...

[MannyGoldstein]

44. Thank you for this

The rule of law is a good thing.

[ScreamingMeemie]

46. "After all, that is justice."

How unfortunate that that justice is only going to happen because of public outrage. Otherwise justice would have been "done" another way...and Mr. Zimmerman would be the carefree self defender that the police initially claimed him to be.

Zimmerman is a murderer, no matter what the jury finds. Thank you.

[dougolat]

47. so looking forward to the FBI analysis of those tapes.

That should clear things up a bit.
Mapping out the scene and paths of movement should help, too.
Careful, professional and thorough police work, yes, indeed.

[malaise]

49. True but people are just as pissed off with the lack of

process from authorities.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. Why the Feds need to come in.

[got root]

51. The first step is missing - Arrest

That is what most folks are upset about.

Apparently TPTB in that town don't believe a crime has been committed, where most others do.

I say arrest him, and go to court.

Of course he deserves due process, but apparently the process is busted.

t

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. I will wait for the Feds at this point.

If you arrest him, you have 72 hours to present evidence to a judge. Somehow I don't expect the Sanford PD, or the State of Florida not to botch this.

Murder has no statue of limitations though.

[Solomon]

71. fail. you dont have to prove your case before the

first judge. You just have show probable cause for the arrest. That's easily done.

There's simply no excuse whatsoever for not arresting him now.

[nadinbrzezinski]

79. The DA refused to

As you may remember...

Why I said the Feds need to get involved.

By the way we are not arguing whether he should be arrested. In fact that should have happened a while ago, but that the authorities have botched it.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

56. WOW! Too bad Trayvon wasn't afforded a "fair trial" before he was mercilessly gunned down!

This thread is VERY offensive!

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. Why? Because some of us get it

That two wrongs don't make a right.

How is asking for an actual investigation, which has not happened, and for this man to stand trial offensive to you?

I would rather prefer we were not having this conversation, that means Mr. Zimmerman, did not pull a gun and Trayvon got safely home.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

58. Most people are arrested first, an investigation is launched, charges brought forth

and a trial occurs.

There has been NO investigation! And that's the point.

Again, Trayvon didn't have a say in anything. Zimmerman behaved as his judge, trial, and jury.

Two wrongs? What wrong has been committed against Zimmerman? From my viewpoint, he has been able to live his life; his gun was returned to him, his word obviously accepted as truth, and no investigation.

This man has a criminal record and a history of calling into the police department on frivolous charges against young black men in the neighborhood.

You can't convince me that Zimmerman's actions didn't warrant a *preliminary* investigation?

I'm sorry but I vehemently disagree with you! At the very least, have the investigation if you're not going to arrest the man, but do something in the name of justice! Don't just accept this man's word as truth! That's what a lot of people are upset about.

And yes, this thread is highly offensive to me!

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. Why do you think the Feds need to get involved?

Is that offensive too?

If you cannot understand that some of us get it, but lynching Zimmerman is not the solution, oh well.

I want that investigation, at this point done by the FBI and the DOJ.

Is that offensive, oh well. I want Sanford PD under the Federal Magnifying glass. If that is offensive oh we'll

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

85. Where do I say I wand the Feds involved? Nowhere have I made that statement.

Look, we disagree on this issue. Let's leave it at that.

[just1voice]

60. In a rational world that is all true.

We don't live in one, we live in a massively propagandized society that rarely holds true criminals accountable.

[JDPriestly]

61. You are right nadin.

Still we have more facts in this case than we normally have, and it looks really bad for Zimmerman and the local police in my opinion. And even worse for the new Florida law.


Obviously, if neither of two individuals is committing a crime and they attack each other, each believing their attack against the other to be self-defense, the law does not work. Under those facts, the law justifies killing for no reason.

Very, very bad law. It cannot work. It isn't vigilante justice. It is armed paranoia set loose on our streets.

[LanternWaste]

63. Zimmerman's presumption of innocence is not denied by my personal opinion of the matter

Zimmerman's presumption of innocence is not denied by my personal opinion of the matter, or even by a collective opinion of the matter. Justice, and its turning wheels are not predicated nor denied on or by media hype.

Most likely, and regardless of who is calling for blood or who is a calling for doves, an indictment will be handed down, a trial will happen, and guilt or innocence will be announced-- regardless of how we may feel, what we may believe, the editorials being written, et. al.

And until or unless someone actually, factually, and without condition, denies Zimmerman his due process, we are in no way impeding Mr Zimmerman's capable defense, the laws protecting him, or justice.

[ecstatic]

73. If you were a direct eye witness to a murder,

would you suspend your opinion of what happened until after the trial? Would you consider the killer innocent until proven guilty?

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. This is a social norm

If you are a witness your duty is to testify in a court of law, properly assembled...

Now these are ideals in a society of laws.

We are far from an ideal society.

By the way I have had the duty to preserve evidence while treating a patient or two who were actually shot. For me this is a little less theory.

[Spider Jerusalem]

84. A word of warning...for whom?

Presumption of innocence is a legal precept. The public aren't bound by it. A jury would be. And "innocent until proven guilty" is again a legal precept. The facts in the case are not in dispute; he confronted Trayvon Martin while armed with a 9mm pistol. There was an altercation of some sort. Trayvon Martin was shot and is now dead. What remains for a jury to decide at trial is whether the shooting constituted manslaughter or "excusable homicide" or "justifiable homicide"; those are the possible outcomes under Florida law. It is up to a jury to decide what penalty if any is warranted by the evidence. Much of that evidence...in the form of recordings of emergency telephone calls, and of eyewitness accounts...has now emerged. It is only natural that many people will form an opinion based on this evidence and on the facts as known, which does not deny Zimmerman the presumption of innocence at trial.

[JDPriestly]

91. Actually, there is enough evidence now to arrest Zimmerman.

He has either actually or virtually admitted to shooting Trayvon.

Whether it was justifiable homicide or not is the issue.

The stand your ground law broadens the definition of "justifiable" homicide, but it does not nullify a homicide. I think that the police should have taken Zimmerman into custody right away. He killed someone. That makes him a flight risk in my opinion.

I don't know the case law on the Florida law, but as I understand what I have read of it, it merely makes it easier to prove self-defense. It does not do away with the need to prove self-defense.

Crimes
776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html

Some of the relevant law is posted at

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=461448

In addition:

Florida Statutes:

Crime

782.11?Unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act.—Whoever shall unnecessarily kill another, either while resisting an attempt by such other person to commit any felony, or to do any other unlawful act, or after such attempt shall have failed, shall be deemed guilty of manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
History.—s. 13, ch. 1637, 1868; RS 2388; GS 3213; RGS 5043; CGL 7145; s. 719, ch. 71-136.

781.04 lists different charges.


Title XLVI
CRIMES

Chapter 782
HOMICIDE

View Entire Chapter
782.03?Excusable homicide.—Homicide is excusable when committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution, and without any unlawful intent, or by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or upon a sudden combat, without any dangerous weapon being used and not done in a cruel or unusual manner.
History.—s. 6, ch. 1637, 1868; RS 2379; GS 3204; RGS 5034; CGL 7136; s. 1, ch. 75-13.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.03.html