Zimmerman to be charged with murder -

plaidvillain wrote: Personally, just glad to see justice has a chance. If Zimmerman's guilty, he'll be held responsible. If he's innocent, he'll be exhonnerated. I will accept the jury's conclusion.

Would you also be willing to accept a judge's determination, before a jury is even seated to hear a single piece of evidence, that Zimmerman has shown by a preponderance of evidence that he is immune from prosecution because he reasonably believed that he was in immediate danger of serious bodily harm or death? Zimmerman gets two bites at this apple under Florida law - one of which is before a judge before any trial commences to argue that he is immune from any prosecution under Florida Law 776.012:

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/ind ... /0776.html

Here's the part about immunity from prosecution from the same source:

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

And here is the definition of "forcible felony":

776.08 Forcible felony.
"Forcible felony" means treason; murder; manslaughter; sexual battery; carjacking; home-invasion robbery; robbery; burglary; arson; kidnapping; aggravated assault; aggravated battery; aggravated stalking; aircraft piracy; unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb; and any other felony which involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual.

Even if Zimmerman was the aggressor he has not surrendered his ability to resort to the use of deadly force:

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

It will be interesting to see what develops from this point forward, but from what we have heard and seen thus far it might be an uphill battle for the prosecutor to prevent a judge from determining by a preponderance of evidence that Zimmerman is immune from prosecution before any trial starts.

The link below is the affidavit for probable cause for the arrest of Zimmerman.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/image ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Based on the investigation of the actual evidence by two experienced investigators, the evidence clearly points to the facts that Zimmerman was the aggressor, initiated the struggle, that Trayvon was trying to defend himself, and Zimmerman murdered Trayvon.

residenttroll wrote: Zimmerman is guilty....because the racist liberals and haters in media say he is.

or....Zimmerman is innocent because the racist conservatives and haters on FOX news and talk radio say he is. Gee RT.... what have we accomplished with that little exercise?

If you were Zimmerman, would you try for a plea bargain? Have to think the prosecuter has a pretty good case if she is willing to take on the case.
Or maybe she is a Republican mole who will botch the case like the attorney Obama chose to defend his healthcare bill.

While I would tend to believe the probable cause evidence to be compelling, the WILD CARD here is the law "Stand your ground"........
and THAT will be a major factor in this case.......the ratio of guilty to NOT guilty cases in that state (based on this law) leans HEAVILY
towards the NOT guilty verdict.......THIS case will be the watershed case, JMO

Well, we have a glimpse of the prosecution case, has anyone seen the defense's case?

Or is that even necessary?

homeagain wrote: AHEM......let me just cut thru all the bull sh-- and post what a TRULY wonderful human being Travon's mother is.......quote from
Sabrina Fulton in a press conf. "I want to thank God. We SIMPLY wanted an arrest,we wanted nothing more and nothing less,and we
got it.......and I say THANK YOU." "SECONDLY, I just want to speak fromMY HEART TO YOUR HEART,because a heart has NO color,it's not black, it's not white, it's RED and I want to say thank you, from my heart to your heart." She ALSO stated, in the same press conf. that she believed it was an ACCIDENT OR MISTAKE and there was no turning the clock back........THAT is a gracious,giving human
being,we should ALL be so introspective....JMO

I too was impressed with the words from the Martin family at the press conference yesterday.

However, Fulton has since retracted her "accident" comment and now says "George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood."

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/12/11159111-update-trayvon-martins-mom-retracts-accident-characterization-says-zimmerman-killed-him-in-cold-blood?lite

Something the Dog Said wrote: The link below is the affidavit for probable cause for the arrest of Zimmerman.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/image ... ?hpt=hp_t1

Based on the investigation of the actual evidence by two experienced investigators, the evidence clearly points to the facts that Zimmerman was the aggressor, initiated the struggle, that Trayvon was trying to defend himself, and Zimmerman murdered Trayvon.

Then it's settled. Why bother with a trial?

You do realise that is a statement by the prosecution and it only contains prosecution points and zero defense points, don't you? And I see no new information there, just a lot of information left out.

I'll wait for the trial results. If Zimmerman is guilty, give him the sentence he deserves. If he's innocent, I just hope you aren't on his jury.

pineinthegrass wrote:

homeagain wrote: AHEM......let me just cut thru all the bull sh-- and post what a TRULY wonderful human being Travon's mother is.......quote from
Sabrina Fulton in a press conf. "I want to thank God. We SIMPLY wanted an arrest,we wanted nothing more and nothing less,and we
got it.......and I say THANK YOU." "SECONDLY, I just want to speak fromMY HEART TO YOUR HEART,because a heart has NO color,it's not black, it's not white, it's RED and I want to say thank you, from my heart to your heart." She ALSO stated, in the same press conf. that she believed it was an ACCIDENT OR MISTAKE and there was no turning the clock back........THAT is a gracious,giving human
being,we should ALL be so introspective....JMO

I too was impressed with the words from the Martin family at the press conference yesterday.

However, Fulton has since retracted her "accident" comment and now says "George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood."

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/12/11159111-update-trayvon-martins-mom-retracts-accident-characterization-says-zimmerman-killed-him-in-cold-blood?lite

While I understand that INTENT can be misconstrued........I think there has been some "legal" counsel given to Sabrina Fulton,so that
their case will not be in impacted (JMO).....she also stated that she believed apologizes were necessary when someone had been wronged, and from what I am reading, Z. lawyer is OPEN TO THAT,(not thru him, the atty.,but RATHER,thru Z PERSONALLY.) I believe, the two factors are attempting to be "human" towards each other and IF the legalities and egos of the media/counsel/organizations can be mitigated........perhaps this CAN BE a watershed moment. (from my POV,IF the law is repealed and brought forward in ANOTHER/BETTER WRITTEN version.....perhaps the "reason" for the accidental crossing of these two individuals was,in fact, pre-ordained.....JMO) (unclear,if her previous statement was BEFORE the probable cause statement was released?) IF that is
the case, THEN the evidence (charges being brought) does in fact show STALKING......so many facets of this fiasco to take into
consideration........ONLY TIME will reveal the TRUTH......

How hard does anyone think it is going to be to prove by a preponderance of evidence that Zimmerman reasonably believed he was in danger of great bodily harm or death? We have a witness to the events immediately preceding the shot being fired who says that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him while Zimmerman was crying out for help. We have a recorded conversation between Zimmerman and a dispatcher that indicates Zimmerman lost sight of Martin. From that same recorded conversation we can hear that Zimmerman ceased running after Martin shortly after being instructed by the dispatcher not to chase him. Florida statutes provide for the use of deadly force even when one is the aggressor if the other person uses force that is "so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant". How many "reasonable means of escape" are available to one who is on their back being beaten by an assailant and wouldn't one who was in such a position "reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm" if they were not able to stop the assault?

Preponderance of evidence is a significantly lower burden than beyond a reasonable doubt is. Does anyone think Zimmerman is going to have a great deal of difficulty meeting that burden when his lawyer places these arguments in front of a judge and obtaining an immunity from prosecution ruling before a trial even takes place?