Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:18 PM Mar 2012

HUGE Revelation on Al Sharpton's Show

There was an attorney on that insists since GZ was handcuffed he was technically arrested.

They may not have proceeded with booking him or any of the other procedures
but he was arrested.

According to FL State law, if a suspect is not charged within 175 days of being

arrested, he is forever free and cannot be charged in that crime.

This would certainly explain the stalling taking place in charging GZ if

there was a cover-up.


Will provide the video when it becomes available.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45755884/#46910352

88 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
HUGE Revelation on Al Sharpton's Show (Original Post) EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 OP
I heard that too. MoonRiver Mar 2012 #1
Heard it ... they are trying to run the clock out! Raine Mar 2012 #2
not to worry. It has only been 30 days. He will be. robinlynne Mar 2012 #17
I bet THAT'S IT! dirty scum... Whisp Mar 2012 #20
MURDERESS? aquart Mar 2012 #31
I meant murderous. Whisp Mar 2012 #32
You can edit your posts any time now. lunatica Mar 2012 #36
Good thing the Federal Government can take a big bite out of his ass, er, that apple. MADem Mar 2012 #3
That's what I was thinking. backscatter712 Mar 2012 #4
I thought they were detaining him for questioning. Life Long Dem Mar 2012 #5
Detained for questioning, handcuffed????? SamG Mar 2012 #14
Yes you can detain someone with cuffs pschoeb Mar 2012 #33
Wouldn't anyone taken into police custody will be handcuffed simply as a mater of procedure... (nt) reACTIONary Mar 2012 #59
It was always my understanding that murder had no statue of limitation. FarPoint Mar 2012 #6
Apparently he never saw a doctor and doesn't have any medical record of his ails. n/t vaberella Mar 2012 #11
Zimmerman was treated at the scene by Sanford Fire Department csziggy Mar 2012 #12
True ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #19
As someone who HAS had her head "bashed against concrete" I doubt csziggy Mar 2012 #30
Thanks...I hope they kept the EMT records. FarPoint Mar 2012 #21
I also have to wonder Horse with no Name Mar 2012 #72
i don't understand that law -- 175 after arrest but no charge.... unblock Mar 2012 #7
As hard that is to believe... EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #9
i understand if you're arrested for, say, drunk driving, unblock Mar 2012 #16
But, was Zimmerman every charged with anything? JDPriestly Mar 2012 #74
Not according to anything I've read and watched EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #77
Good point. Wait Wut Mar 2012 #13
Here is what the Sammis Law Firm says about this. JDPriestly Mar 2012 #73
I heard that too and some things make more sense... Spazito Mar 2012 #8
An Attorney went on TV and said something - it must be true!... PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #10
175 days? Shankapotomus Mar 2012 #15
And letting Casey Anthony walk rbrnmw Apr 2012 #87
Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure - Speedy Trial PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #18
So, it's about a speedy trial... FarPoint Mar 2012 #24
While true Aerows Mar 2012 #75
Here is the Florida law. JDPriestly Mar 2012 #76
it states "charged with a crime" barbtries Mar 2012 #25
thanks for posting. so, under subdivision (j), they can get an extension. unblock Mar 2012 #29
The law ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #37
Just so we're clear... EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #41
I believe that ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #45
Handcuffed does not necessarily equal arrested. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #22
The attorney said it was very unlikely that he was handcuffed EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #27
No ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #38
I consider handcuffs can belong to the jewelry category. FarPoint Mar 2012 #28
Note that in the copy of the police report released... PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #46
How does this not create a possible Miranda case? Spazito Mar 2012 #52
I was wondering at what point if any he was read his Miranda rights... PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #54
Yes, it could be a key question, imo... Spazito Mar 2012 #56
You Know ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2012 #84
Here is the only way I think it can work re statements... Spazito Apr 2012 #85
if you get a chance... EmeraldCityGrl Apr 2012 #88
kick Agony Mar 2012 #23
That lawyer is an idiot pschoeb Mar 2012 #26
I don't see how there could be a statute of limitations on murder charges in any state. pacalo Mar 2012 #34
It's not about a SOL (no pun intended) ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #39
I understand now. I have to believe that the federal prosecutor is well aware of that pacalo Mar 2012 #62
Federal hate crime would then be an option rustydog Mar 2012 #35
I doubt that this gets ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2012 #40
Here is the key subsection of 775.15 from Florida statutes.. Spazito Mar 2012 #42
The discussed issue isn't about the 'statute of limitations' it's the law concerning speedy trials.. PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #43
It was both in the interview... Spazito Mar 2012 #48
There are three cases that went before the Supreme court EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #60
Yes, the most famous was Miranda v Arizona which addressed four different cases and Spazito Mar 2012 #63
But he wasn't charged. sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #79
Here is the video... EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #44
Don't get carried away. That attorney isn't speaking for anyone...it's one opinion. It could be a Honeycombe8 Mar 2012 #47
I Wouk ask he was Mirandized Gman Mar 2012 #49
There was a cover up ProfessionalLeftist Mar 2012 #50
Obviously I agree and EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #58
murder marshall gaines Mar 2012 #51
Cuffing a person while s/he is detained for COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #53
There were no charges, so what what he "arrested" for? MNBrewer Mar 2012 #55
I'd like more of a difinitive EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #57
Because if in fact hasn't been arrested already once he is the 175 day clock starts. PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #67
He was charged and arrested based upon that charge. MD20 Mar 2012 #81
If the charge is changed so something other than negligent homicide, does that reset the clock? MNBrewer Mar 2012 #82
I would think that GZ could be charged with NH again. MD20 Mar 2012 #83
Sharpton is full of shit again backwoodsbob Mar 2012 #61
Sharpton didn't state that... EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #64
Sharpton did not make the claim nt NoGOPZone Mar 2012 #65
Wow. Nice smear job there. BumRushDaShow Mar 2012 #66
lol got root Mar 2012 #71
There's a difference between being "detained" and "arrested" Canuckistanian Mar 2012 #68
That info came from Ken Padowitz, former Homicide Prosecuto, Broward County State Attorneys Office Catherina Mar 2012 #69
Thank you for posting this... EmeraldCityGrl Mar 2012 #70
I posted the link to the law earlier in this thread... PoliticAverse Mar 2012 #80
I don't know about that. Is there a statute of limitations on murder, or even manslaughter? sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #78
Can't see handcuffing being equal to arresting. crazy talk. nt Laura PourMeADrink Apr 2012 #86
 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
20. I bet THAT'S IT! dirty scum...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:47 PM
Mar 2012

that is the ONLY thing that makes any kind of sense to all this mess.

the rotten fuckers thought - meh, just another black kid dead, no one's going to do much.

rotten murderess freaks. gawd how I have so much rage in my heart against them right now.

holy cow.

whew. wow.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
3. Good thing the Federal Government can take a big bite out of his ass, er, that apple.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:23 PM
Mar 2012

Denying a person their civil rights? You can wait decades before you charge someone with that crime, and the Feds have done just that before.

He ain't getting away with this shit. I have to believe that there will be justice.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
4. That's what I was thinking.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:25 PM
Mar 2012

The feds are going to have to get involved, and they're already looking, IIRC.

He very well may get charged with violating the civil rights of Trayvon Martin.

 

Life Long Dem

(8,582 posts)
5. I thought they were detaining him for questioning.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:26 PM
Mar 2012

I think you can be detained for so many hours before they either need to release you or arrest and charge you.

 

SamG

(535 posts)
14. Detained for questioning, handcuffed?????
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:42 PM
Mar 2012

Let's talk about the legal procedures and regulations of Florida law enforcement.

Can one be "detained" for questioning while being handcuffed?

I need to know where to find documentation of basic criminal procedures for law enforcement in the state of Florida. It MUST be universal statewide.

ALL police departments must follow the law. ALL, not just big city ones, not just everyone but Sanford.

Put cuffs on a suspect, he's under arrest in FL. Is that the case? Can police let someone go without booking once the cops put the cuffs on someone? I simply do not know what the law and the procedures are in FL.

pschoeb

(1,066 posts)
33. Yes you can detain someone with cuffs
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:12 PM
Mar 2012

If the officer can justify that the cuffs are necessary for the officer or others safety, which would not be hard under the circumstances.

reACTIONary

(5,749 posts)
59. Wouldn't anyone taken into police custody will be handcuffed simply as a mater of procedure... (nt)
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:18 PM
Mar 2012

FarPoint

(12,209 posts)
6. It was always my understanding that murder had no statue of limitation.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:27 PM
Mar 2012

I was listening while driving home....also...I had a thought...

Did the medical staff, RN or booking medic ever check out Zimmerman when he came into the jail? They do have 24/7 medical staff. If he was even a fraction of the claims of being beaten and injured, medical must screen them.

Also; officers always take arrested clients to the hospital to be checked out...this crap about being seen in the back if a cruiser is not how thing roll...ever..... Just saying....

csziggy

(34,120 posts)
12. Zimmerman was treated at the scene by Sanford Fire Department
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:39 PM
Mar 2012

Not sure if they were EMTs but EMTs were at the scene and declared Trayvon dead, so I suspect the were.

In the initial report it just says treated by SFD.

If he had been seriously injured, competent EMTs would have recommended that Zimmerman be taken to the hospital. Of course, Zimmerman could have refused but he probably would have been required to sign a form saying that he refused to go for additional treatment.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
19. True ...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:47 PM
Mar 2012

If zimmerman had even mentioned having his head "bashed against concrete" along with a suspicion of a broken nose, he would have been taken to the hospital for a "head check" ... Unless zimmerman refused treatment/transport.

csziggy

(34,120 posts)
30. As someone who HAS had her head "bashed against concrete" I doubt
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:00 PM
Mar 2012

That Zimmerman had his head hit against anything solid.

I was knocked down by a horse and bashed my head against a concrete wall. I was stunned for several minutes and then dizzy and nauseous for several hours. My husband took me to doctor and I had a mild concussion which took me a couple of weeks to recover from.

There is no way I could have been as coordinated and steady as Zimmerman was on the video at the PD less than an hour after his supposed attack. And that was the mildest of my four concussions, each of which involved only a single strike or hit. I didn't even lose consciousness with that one but I was definitely not steady on my feet and capable of bantering with anyone.

Zimmerman's story is complete BS - especially since the versions keep changing. On another forum, they've counted at least six different version, none of which match the evidence.

FarPoint

(12,209 posts)
21. Thanks...I hope they kept the EMT records.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:48 PM
Mar 2012

It's more falsehoods being spewed by the guilty.... they are trying to re-write this tragedy.

Horse with no Name

(33,956 posts)
72. I also have to wonder
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 10:57 PM
Mar 2012

if he had injuries and was being taken into custody...it would be mandatory for law enforcement to make sure that none of his injuries were life threatening. The ONLY way to do this would be for him to have been taken to the hospital...SO I don't believe he was arrested. I also don't believe he was injured. The blood that was cleaned off of him at the scene was no doubt Trayvon's.

unblock

(51,974 posts)
7. i don't understand that law -- 175 after arrest but no charge....
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:28 PM
Mar 2012

if you're arrested and NOT CHARGED and you are released, if you're then not charged within 175 days, you can't be charged with -- WHAT crime? there were no charges, so what crime would you be "forever free" from? any and all crimes?

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
9. As hard that is to believe...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:34 PM
Mar 2012

that is the law. Remember you are dealing with FL.

The attorney that quoted and explained the law seemed

very well informed and credible.

unblock

(51,974 posts)
16. i understand if you're arrested for, say, drunk driving,
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:44 PM
Mar 2012

then they can't then come up with felony drunk driving charges 1 year later. i can see that as a legitimate speedy trial protection. but that wouldn't protect you if, say, they later find out that you murdered someone that same day you were drunk driving.

so how do they relate the arrest to the crime? without charges, the police could say they arrested you for one thing, then 176 days later charge you with something else.

in this case, if the arrest is a technicality, i'd think that would be especially easy.

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
77. Not according to anything I've read and watched
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 12:43 AM
Mar 2012

Isn't that what the entire world is waiting for? This OP addresses whether
he was ever arrested. He could have been arrested but not charged, then
later released. Once he passed by the cameras in the entry area of the PD
all we know is that Chief of Police Lee and State's Attorney Norman Wolfinger
were waiting to meet with him, highly unusual.

Wait Wut

(8,492 posts)
13. Good point.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:39 PM
Mar 2012

There would have to be at least a written "intent" of some sort in order to protect that person from being arrested for "that" particular crime in the future.

Also, is Florida different than everywhere else that you can be "arrested" just by being handcuffed and not read your Miranda Rights? I've been handcuffed and not arrested. Um...by cops. It's for their own safety (and yours) until they've completed prelim investigation (checking backgrounds, etc.).

I'm confused as hell.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
73. Here is what the Sammis Law Firm says about this.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 11:00 PM
Mar 2012

Florida Right to Speedy Trial

Two different types of speedy trial rights exist under for a criminal case in Florida.

First, a person charged with a criminal offense is Florida is entitled to the statutory speedy trial rights provided under the Florida Constitution and Florida Statutory provisions which provide for very specific time limits - 90 days for a misdemeanor and 175 days for a felony.
Second, a person charged with a criminal offense is entitled to the federal constitutional protections under the Sixth Amendment which provide for a speedy trial even when the statutory remedy has been waived.

http://www.criminaldefenseattorneytampa.com/FloridaDefenses/SpeedyTrial.aspx

I just Googled and came up with this. (I don't know anything about the law firm.)

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
8. I heard that too and some things make more sense...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:31 PM
Mar 2012

given the 'ticking clock' time limit. Everything points to them trying to run the clock out, that's the intent behind a lot of what happened and quite possibly is still happening.

The Grand Jury doesn't meet until April, how long will it take for them to complete their work? Could it take 6 months? If so, then the time limit would have already been reached given 33 days have already passed.

I hope the pressure to act ratchets up even more on the SA to act given what is already known and public instead of waiting for a Grand Jury presentment.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
10. An Attorney went on TV and said something - it must be true!...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:37 PM
Mar 2012

No need to even apply 'critical thinking 101'.

Shankapotomus

(4,840 posts)
15. 175 days?
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:42 PM
Mar 2012

How in hell do they solve murders in that state??!!

Hanging chads, handcuffing 5 year olds, tasering Grandma's and Alex Lifeson and now this?

What the hell's the matter with that state?

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
18. Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure - Speedy Trial
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:46 PM
Mar 2012
http://www.joffelaw.com/state-rules/3-191.html

(a) Speedy Trial without Demand. Except as otherwise provided by this rule, and subject to the limitations imposed under subdivisions (e) and (f), every person charged with a crime shall be brought to trial within 90 days of arrest if the crime charged is a misdemeanor, or within 175 days of arrest if the crime charged is a felony. If trial is not commenced within these time periods, the defendant shall be entitled to the appropriate remedy as set forth in subdivision (p). The time periods established by this subdivision shall commence when the person is taken into custody as defined under subdivision (d). A person charged with a crime is entitled to the benefits of this rule whether the person is in custody in a jail or correctional institution of this state or a political subdivision thereof or is at liberty on bail or recognizance or other pretrial release condition. This subdivision shall cease to apply whenever a person files a valid demand for speedy trial under subdivision (b).

Edited to add following link to .pdf of entire 'Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure (must copy and paste as DU munges the link when prefixed with http:// ):

www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBResources.nsf/0/BDFE1551AD291A3F85256B29004BF892/$FILE/Criminal.pdf

FarPoint

(12,209 posts)
24. So, it's about a speedy trial...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:51 PM
Mar 2012

no not a statue of making an arrest. As I know it...murder has no statue of limitations.

barbtries

(28,702 posts)
25. it states "charged with a crime"
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:52 PM
Mar 2012

which as i understand it has definitely not occurred in Trayvon's murder case.

unblock

(51,974 posts)
29. thanks for posting. so, under subdivision (j), they can get an extension.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:59 PM
Mar 2012

and there's a procedure under subdivision (p).

it's not like the 175 days quietly expires and then the state says "oops".

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
37. The law ...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:19 PM
Mar 2012

As stated here, does not support what the OP suggests:

According to FL State law, if a suspect is not charged within 175 days of being

arrested, he is forever free and cannot be charged in that crime.


The key words in the Speed Trial Statute are "if the crime charged".

While it is debatable (and IMHO, doubtful) whether zimmerman was "under arrest" ... just being handcuffed and transported to a police station does not suffice, it is certain that he has not been charged with a crime.

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
41. Just so we're clear...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:26 PM
Mar 2012

Rev Al specifically asked him if this would mean he could
no longer be charged with this crime and the attorney said, "No
he could not."

The video will be interesting to hear AGAIN.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
45. I believe that ...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:45 PM
Mar 2012

If someone is CHARGED with a crime; but not brought to trial within specified time-frames, they do have a Speedy Trial claim and will be freed - not to be charged again (Double Jeopardy).

That is both on the state and federal level, both of which are contained in the U.S. Constitution.

But being detained, even arrested by L/E is NOT the same as being CHARGED. Two different branches of government involved ... the detention/arrest is the executive branch, while the Charge is the judicial branch.

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
27. The attorney said it was very unlikely that he was handcuffed
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:53 PM
Mar 2012

and not arrested. That is the question that needs to be answered, because if the clock

IS ticking the charges must be filed very soon.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
38. No ...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:21 PM
Mar 2012

The clock is not ticking ... an arrest does not start the Speedy Trial clock, an indictment does.

FarPoint

(12,209 posts)
28. I consider handcuffs can belong to the jewelry category.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:53 PM
Mar 2012

Plus, no charges brought...thus the clock can tick all it wants regarding murder.

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
46. Note that in the copy of the police report released...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:49 PM
Mar 2012

(here: http://cnninsession.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/martinpolicreport.pdf )

the officers write "in custody" and "and was secured in handcuffs". Nothing mentioning 'arrest'.

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
52. How does this not create a possible Miranda case?
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 08:38 PM
Mar 2012

With Zimmerman handcuffed, transported to the station and then interviewed/interrogated, how does this not fail the "free to leave" test.

The police report states clearly he is in handcuffs and in custody which negates his freedom to leave.

Here is the USSC holding on this issue:

"The Court held that “there can be no doubt that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of criminal court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings in which their freedom of action is curtailed in any significant way from being compelled to incriminate themselves.” As such, “the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.”"

http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ClassroomActivities/FifthAmendment/mirandaVarizonaOverview.aspx

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
56. Yes, it could be a key question, imo...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:01 PM
Mar 2012

If one is read their Miranda rights it is clear one is under arrest with all the requisite legal safeguards but, if it did not happen, any questioning done while Zimmerman was still considered "in custody" his statement, for starters, would be an issue, imo, if this does go to court.

It is interesting nobody has raised the Miranda question yet given the handcuffs and the 'partial' police report.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
84. You Know ...
Sun Apr 1, 2012, 09:18 AM
Apr 2012

You bring up an interest anomaly is the Florida Law ...

The law states, specifically, that a person claiming SYG/Self-defense CANNOT be arrested unless there is probable cause that the shooting was unjustified. How can L/E develop probable cause AND preserve those non-Mirandized statements for trial?

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
85. Here is the only way I think it can work re statements...
Sun Apr 1, 2012, 10:38 AM
Apr 2012

keeping in mind this is speculation on my part. If after Zimmerman is escorted into the interview room, we do see him entering that room on the longer video, the cuffs are removed and Zimmerman is asked to volunteer his statement about the events with the police making it clear he is NOT under arrest and he is free to refuse and free to leave. In that case, the statement/s would not be in question as to their use in a trial.

During the Casey Anthony trial, her defense lawyers tried to get some of her statements thrown out because she had been handcuffed for approximately 45 minutes, the defense saying that due to the handcuffing she was under arrest at that time. The handcuffing was a misunderstanding by the officer and the cuffs were removed before she was questioned and before she voluntarily got into the police vehicle to show them where the non-existent nanny lived so the defense's attempt failed. The reason I mention this is because this, as we all know, occurred in Florida as well and the issue that being handcuffed indicates arrest was raised.

To me, it rests with the "free to leave" test as to the admissibility of any statements taken. For them to be admissible either they are given voluntarily or they are given once advised of their rights per Miranda.



EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
88. if you get a chance...
Sun Apr 1, 2012, 01:13 PM
Apr 2012

there is a woman named Holly Hughs, that speaks about this with Don Lemon on CNN.
She appeared yesterday. Hughs makes some good points and really seems to know
what she's talking about. She's been commenting on this case for the past week.

Sorry, don't have time to search for link right now.

pschoeb

(1,066 posts)
26. That lawyer is an idiot
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 06:52 PM
Mar 2012

Police can detain you without arresting you, and they can cuff you when they detain you, and they can hold you for questioning for a reasonable amount of time.

pacalo

(24,721 posts)
34. I don't see how there could be a statute of limitations on murder charges in any state.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:15 PM
Mar 2012

But these days with Republican-run states & ALEC calling the shots, one never knows.

I found this information, but is it up to date?

775.15 Fla. Stat. Ann Felonies

Capital felony, life felony, or felony that results in a death: No statute of limitations

1st degree felony: 4 years

Any other felony: 3 years

http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/criminal-case-statute-of-limitations/FL-felonies-misdemeanors.htm

pacalo

(24,721 posts)
62. I understand now. I have to believe that the federal prosecutor is well aware of that
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:26 PM
Mar 2012

& will file the charges well within that 175-day period.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
40. I doubt that this gets ...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:26 PM
Mar 2012

charged as a hate crime. That would be a very high hurdle to clear ... unless the disputed part of the 911 tape, i.e., coon/goon statement, is plainly established.

Now a violation of civil rights charge ... absolutely.

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
42. Here is the key subsection of 775.15 from Florida statutes..
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:35 PM
Mar 2012

"775.15 Time limitations; general time limitations; exceptions.—

(1) A prosecution for a capital felony, a life felony, or a felony that resulted in a death may be commenced at any time. If the death penalty is held to be unconstitutional by the Florida Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court, all crimes designated as capital felonies shall be considered life felonies for the purposes of this section, and prosecution for such crimes may be commenced at any time."

It seems there is no statute of limitations for charges of a felony that resulted in a death.

Here is the link I found the info on:

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/filestores/web/statutes/fs07/CH0775/Section_0775.15.HTM

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
43. The discussed issue isn't about the 'statute of limitations' it's the law concerning speedy trials..
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:43 PM
Mar 2012

Please see my prior post in this thread referencing the 175 day issue: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=496624

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
48. It was both in the interview...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:56 PM
Mar 2012

I understand the "speedy trial" aspect which occurs AFTER charges are laid, the discussion was re a time limitation to lay charges after an arrest, the former prosecutor on the show was very clear that because Zimmerman was handcuffed, he had been "technically" arrested but, as we know, has not been charged.

The question that still seems unanswered was Zimmerman, under law, considered to have been arrested because he was handcuffed and interrogated at the station? If he was arrested but not charged, is there a time limitation under those circumstances.

If one is handcuffed, without the freedom to leave, are they considered by law to be in custody? If so, would that not be, at the very least, "technically" under arrest? If not, why not?

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
60. There are three cases that went before the Supreme court
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:19 PM
Mar 2012

concerning the distinction between "custody" and "arrest."

apparently there are some grey areas. I will try and find it
and post here if I do.

Here it is...not sure how reliable the site is.

http://www.ehow.com/about_6137055_difference-between-formal-arrest-custody_.html

Spazito

(49,761 posts)
63. Yes, the most famous was Miranda v Arizona which addressed four different cases and
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:29 PM
Mar 2012

set the "free to leave" test as the determinant and is used by the courts currently. Here is their holding in that case as well as the facts, in summary:

"Facts

The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona addressed four different cases involving custodial interrogations. In each of these cases, the defendant was questioned by police officers, detectives, or a prosecuting attorney in a room in which he was cut off from the outside world. In none of these cases was the defendant given a full and effective warning of his rights at the outset of the interrogation process. In all the cases, the questioning elicited oral admissions and, in three of them, signed statements that were admitted at trial.

Supreme Court holding:

The Court held that “there can be no doubt that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of criminal court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings in which their freedom of action is curtailed in any significant way from being compelled to incriminate themselves.” As such, “the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way.”

The Court further held that “without proper safeguards the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual’s will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would otherwise do so freely.” Therefore, a defendant “must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.”

http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ClassroomActivities/FifthAmendment/mirandaVarizonaOverview.aspx

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
79. But he wasn't charged.
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 01:00 AM
Mar 2012
every person charged with a crime shall be brought to trial within 90 days of arrest if the crime charged is a misdemeanor, or within 175 days of arrest if the crime charged is a felony. If trial is not commenced within these time periods, the defendant shall be entitled to the appropriate remedy as set forth in subdivision


This is from your link.

Honeycombe8

(37,648 posts)
47. Don't get carried away. That attorney isn't speaking for anyone...it's one opinion. It could be a
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 07:51 PM
Mar 2012

matter of policy to cuff shooters after any incident to take them to hdqtrs for questioning, w/o it being an arrest. For protection of the officers, is one reason.

I don't know. But one thing I do know is...he'll be arrested and charged with a crime.

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
53. Cuffing a person while s/he is detained for
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 08:44 PM
Mar 2012

questioning is not the same as an arrest. So the charging statute doesn't come into play.

MNBrewer

(8,462 posts)
55. There were no charges, so what what he "arrested" for?
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 08:53 PM
Mar 2012

I doubt his short detention will count as an arrest in this case.

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
57. I'd like more of a difinitive
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:11 PM
Mar 2012

answer on that. Watching this get tied up in court in
the event that becomes an issue further complicates
the case.

Apparently there are three cases that went before the
Supreme Court just to determine the difference between
being held in custody and being arrested.

There's enough probable cause for him to be charged and
arrested so why the delay?

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
67. Because if in fact hasn't been arrested already once he is the 175 day clock starts.
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:38 PM
Mar 2012

Arrests are often delayed to give prosecutors time to fully investigate and build a case without
such a clock running.
 

MD20

(123 posts)
81. He was charged and arrested based upon that charge.
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 05:14 AM
Mar 2012

Last edited Sat Mar 31, 2012, 06:21 AM - Edit history (1)

In the initial police report, Zimmerman is charged with Negligent homicide. That is why he was handcuffed and transported to the station for processing. The lead investigator did not believe Zimmerman's story and wanted the charge to stick, however, the State attorney(Wolf-something or other) decided that under the SYG law there was not enough evidence to substantiate a charge.

He overrode the lead investigator. (Wolf-something or other) has since sidestepped the incident by appointing an associate to replace himself in the face of a Federal investigation, probably fearing that his "mistake" will come under scrutiny. At the very least, any further involvement on his part would constitute a conflict of interest.

The central issue, though, is whether the 175 day limit applies here or not? SInce the charges were dropped, it would seem that he does not have the right to a speedy trial until he is re-charged. That is just my opinion.

 

MD20

(123 posts)
83. I would think that GZ could be charged with NH again.
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 05:44 PM
Mar 2012

Since he has not been tried, there has been no violation of Double Jeopardy.
According to the links provided here by posters the prosecutors can take their time
( up to ten years) to bring GZ to trial for any kind of homicide.

While the world at large is demanding "justice now," they might have to wait a long time for the state to act. If the prosecutor proceeds too quickly and charges GZ too soon, the 175 day clock start to tick. But an even shorter dead line looms if GZ serves a 'Demand for Speedy Trial" upon the prosecutor. If that happens, a 60 day limit is imposed to get the subject to trial.

While the specter of "a cover up" has tainted the investigation, I think the prosecutors are probably fine tuning their case for a strategic loss. GZ is likely going to be represented by the best lawyers money can buy. With that sobering thought in mind, there must be a frantic scramble by the State to repair the damage already done to their case by the initial shoddy investigation. They at least have to have the appearance of trying to placate the public.

This is my take on things after reading the links provided by our resourceful friend here in this thread!

Canuckistanian

(42,290 posts)
68. There's a difference between being "detained" and "arrested"
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 09:38 PM
Mar 2012

And sometimes being detained involves handcuffs.

Catherina

(35,568 posts)
69. That info came from Ken Padowitz, former Homicide Prosecuto, Broward County State Attorneys Office
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 10:32 PM
Mar 2012
A twenty- four year lawyer, Ken Padowitz was a former Homicide Prosecutor with the Broward County State Attorneys Office for 16 years. Ken is an “AV” rated lawyer, the highest rating given by Martindale-Hubbell (http://www.martindale.com/Kenneth-D-Padowitz/3730274-lawyer.htm ) and recognized as Florida's Legal Elite 2009. Ken has tried over 250 jury trials, including over 35 First Degree Murder trials. As a Homicide Prosecutor, Ken had one “Not Guilty” verdict out of the 35 murder trials he tried.

...

Ken is an Adjunct Professor at Nova Southeastern University Law Center for the past 17 years and has taught and lectured extensively in the areas of trial advocacy, scientific evidence and trial exhibits. He was a Faculty Instructor for the National Institute of Trial Advocacy, Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association, University of Florida Law School prosecutor/Public Defender course, Institute of Police Technology and Management and the National Student Leadership Conference at American University in Washington D.C. and Stanford University in California. Ken was the Director of the Pre-Law program at American Heritage High School where he taught students five days a week before going to court. Ken has previously sat as Chairman of a Grievance Committee for the Florida Bar, which handles matters of attorney misconduct and discipline.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/33301-fl-kenneth-padowitz-1267889/aboutme.html


There are several references to the 175 day requirement on the web. Here's just one

State Attorney’s spokeswoman Samantha Syoen said she couldn’t comment on the case — or why charges against only two were dropped — because it’s still under review.

The prosecution has 175 days from the May 4 arrest to formally file charges.

...

Padowitz now calls the case an abomination.

“They’re dropping charges after what, 120, 130 days, after he’s been on ice all this time?” he asked. “Something smells to high holy hell. I’m happy, but this is ridiculous.

“Nothing happens for months and I write the letter, and all of a sudden, boom, they’re questioning the witnesses?” he said. “It’s very coincidental. There’s no follow-up, no questioning of witnesses, no collection of evidence, no fingerprints. So the defendant’s family has to do the investigation?”

...

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/sep/06/charges-dropped-attorneys-allege-sheriffs-office-c/


Here's a detailed explanation from another attorney

> Florida Criminal Law > Filing Formal Charges

Filing Formal Charges

Just because you have been arrested does not mean that you will actually be charged with a crime. After being arrested, the State Attorney reviews the Law Enforcement Officer's charging affidavit that describes the incident that led to your arrest.

Many times the State Attorney's Office will find that the Law Enforcement Officer narrative does not rise to the level of a crime, or they find that the offenses charged by Law Enforcement are excessive and the State Attorney's Office files lesser charges.

This is a crucial time, because many times I can intervene with the State Attorney's Office and persuade them that not to file formal charges, or to file lesser charge that are more appropriate for your conduct. The worst thing that could happen would be if the State Attorney's Office filed the most severe charges possible for your facts. That puts us at a disadvantage in future negotiations.

...

The law of the State of Florida gives the State Attorney this type of discretion and they can subpoena these witnesses to come to court even if they should indicate that they do not want to. Nevertheless, the prosecutor must file formal charges within 90 days of your arrest if a misdemeanor offense, or 175 days of your arrest if a felony offense. Otherwise, the State Attorney is forbidden from pursuing charges against you after the expiration of that period. This rule is intertwined with your right to a speedy trial as guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

...

http://www.richardhornsby.com/criminal/guide/formal-charges.html

EmeraldCityGrl

(4,310 posts)
70. Thank you for posting this...
Fri Mar 30, 2012, 10:44 PM
Mar 2012

Very clearly answers many questions and should give us all

reason for concern that this case may never result in charges

or anything resembling justice for Trayvon.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
78. I don't know about that. Is there a statute of limitations on murder, or even manslaughter?
Sat Mar 31, 2012, 12:56 AM
Mar 2012

Even if someone was arrested in connection with a murder or manslaughter, then let go for lack of evidence, I think once there was enough evidence he could be arrested again.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»HUGE Revelation on Al Sh...