I saw this analysis of the arrest affidavit, which I thought was pretty good.
http://work949.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/george-zimmerman-arrest-affidavit-is-a-mendacious-mess/
http://work949.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/george-zimmerman-arrest-affidavit-is-a-mendacious-mess/
from your link,
"Where the actual confrontation happened is not included in the affidavit. Was it near Zimmerman’s parked car? Or was it down the street from his car, because he disregarded the dispatcher’s instructions? This is critical information. It’s a murder affidavit. If Martin is shot with Zimmerman’s car parked close-by, that makes Zimmerman’s claim that Martin followed him back to the vehicle more credible. If the body is some distance from the car, that makes Zimmerman look less credible and in defiance of the dispatcher’s request to break off the pursuit. Incredibly, the affiants neglected to include that piece of vital information in the affidavit."
Why is the heck would that information not be included in the affidavit? It is central to the whole case, where the rubber meets the road, so to speak.
Look if Zimmerman shot the kid in cold blood, he needs to be held accountable. But you have to be certain beyond a reasonable doubt and doubt is all over this case. I really don't think charges would have been filed had this not become the media firestorm and resulting lynch mob that it did.
Might need a new judge...
[A Florida judge in the George Zimmerman case said in a surprise hearing on Friday that her husband has ties to a CNN legal analyst and commentator.
The Orlando Sentinel reports that Judge Jessica Recksiedler disclosed that her husband works for the law firm of Mark NeJame, a prominent Orlando attorney, in the five-minute hearing Friday afternoon. NeJame has been hired to sound off on the Zimmerman case for CNN. It's unclear if either attorney will ask Recksiedler to step aside because of the connection.
NeJame said on CNN Friday that Recksiedler wants to avoid "the appearance of impropriety" with this disclosure. NeJame said he referred Zimmerman to his current lawyer.]
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...hldGlja2V0BHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0Aw--;_ylv=3
[A Florida judge in the George Zimmerman case said in a surprise hearing on Friday that her husband has ties to a CNN legal analyst and commentator.
The Orlando Sentinel reports that Judge Jessica Recksiedler disclosed that her husband works for the law firm of Mark NeJame, a prominent Orlando attorney, in the five-minute hearing Friday afternoon. NeJame has been hired to sound off on the Zimmerman case for CNN. It's unclear if either attorney will ask Recksiedler to step aside because of the connection.
NeJame said on CNN Friday that Recksiedler wants to avoid "the appearance of impropriety" with this disclosure. NeJame said he referred Zimmerman to his current lawyer.]
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...hldGlja2V0BHB0A3N0b3J5cGFnZQR0ZXN0Aw--;_ylv=3
I was talking with a police officer last night about this case. She said most of her fellow officers thought Zimmerman while having acted very foolishly... wasn't guilty of 2nd degree murder or Manslaughter. That one of her department's senior officers had been following this case pretty closely for them and apparently had some contacts down in Florida. He allowed that the Prosecutor may have done Zimmerman a back-door favor by charging him with 2nd degree murder instead of manslaughter.
If Zimmerman hadn't been charged... the Martin Family and all their supporters would have felt he had gotten away with murder and for the rest of his life he would have that stigma hanging over his head every where he went... not to mention the racial hatred people like the Panthers would keep stirring up.
But by charging him with 2nd degree murder, that not only could he claim protection under the Stand Your Ground law and possibly have the charge dropped out-right by the judge-- thus giving him a legal shield in the form of a judge's decision... that under Florida law, a jury could only consider the 2nd degree murder charge.... not any lesser charge. The general consensus among some police officers is that the Prosecutor deliberately went with a higher charge in order to appease the Martin family and their supporters because that was the least charge they would be satisfied with... and that the prosecution will put on a good show in order to quell the lynch mob hysteria... but knew that manslaughter would have been the better charge to go with.. having the best possibility of a conviction.
Plus with all the negative national news media of the Panthers having issued a $10,000 dead or alive bounty on Zimmerman and all their rhetoric about blood running in the streets if Zimmerman isn't found guilty, his attorney can now easily argue that it would be virtually impossible to seat a jury any where in the country [much less Florida] because potential jurors would all be fearful of retaliation from the Panthers if the jury found him not guilty. That might put the decision into a Judge's hands who would decide Zimmerman's guilt or innocence based strictly upon the letter of the law & not put the decision into the hands of a emotionally prejudiced jury of 12, worried about their own personal safety and that of their families...... who probably wouldn't be clear thinking enough to properly evaluate the evidence.
No matter how this turns out, if there is a trial... it should be very interesting!
If Zimmerman hadn't been charged... the Martin Family and all their supporters would have felt he had gotten away with murder and for the rest of his life he would have that stigma hanging over his head every where he went... not to mention the racial hatred people like the Panthers would keep stirring up.
But by charging him with 2nd degree murder, that not only could he claim protection under the Stand Your Ground law and possibly have the charge dropped out-right by the judge-- thus giving him a legal shield in the form of a judge's decision... that under Florida law, a jury could only consider the 2nd degree murder charge.... not any lesser charge. The general consensus among some police officers is that the Prosecutor deliberately went with a higher charge in order to appease the Martin family and their supporters because that was the least charge they would be satisfied with... and that the prosecution will put on a good show in order to quell the lynch mob hysteria... but knew that manslaughter would have been the better charge to go with.. having the best possibility of a conviction.
Plus with all the negative national news media of the Panthers having issued a $10,000 dead or alive bounty on Zimmerman and all their rhetoric about blood running in the streets if Zimmerman isn't found guilty, his attorney can now easily argue that it would be virtually impossible to seat a jury any where in the country [much less Florida] because potential jurors would all be fearful of retaliation from the Panthers if the jury found him not guilty. That might put the decision into a Judge's hands who would decide Zimmerman's guilt or innocence based strictly upon the letter of the law & not put the decision into the hands of a emotionally prejudiced jury of 12, worried about their own personal safety and that of their families...... who probably wouldn't be clear thinking enough to properly evaluate the evidence.
No matter how this turns out, if there is a trial... it should be very interesting!
From what I understand, in affirmitive defense cases, even though the state has the burden of proof, it does not have to be beyond a reasonable doubt as in negating defense cases.
Is this correct law experts?
Listening to Greta on Fox News the other night.. she said Zimerman's affirmative defense standard under 'Stand Your Ground' would only have to be a 51 / 49 split.. on a 50 / 50 scale. A very low standard.
I feel that IF Zimmerman was fleeing and IF Martin attacked him, SYG does not apply. His defense is stronger without it IF that is what happened.
Prior to SYG, one's first obligation when threatened with assualt was to retreat. SYG allows one to not be burdened with an obligation to retreat and to literally 'stand his or her ground and meet force with force when attacked'.
So unless Zimmerman lied about fleeing and "stood his ground" when he shot Martin, SYG doesnt apply IMHO.
I do not like misconception about what the law means, the media is fusing SYG with an idiotic notion that is allows people to use deadly force without a threat to sever bodily harm or death.
Prior to SYG, one's first obligation when threatened with assualt was to retreat. SYG allows one to not be burdened with an obligation to retreat and to literally 'stand his or her ground and meet force with force when attacked'.
So unless Zimmerman lied about fleeing and "stood his ground" when he shot Martin, SYG doesnt apply IMHO.
I do not like misconception about what the law means, the media is fusing SYG with an idiotic notion that is allows people to use deadly force without a threat to sever bodily harm or death.
I disagree but I'm not a lawyer or any type of legal expert for that matter. The way I understand "stand your ground" laws is that the obligation to retreat is removed. To me this doesn't take the option of retreating off the table, it simply states that you aren't obligated to do so.
After Zimmerman arrest, questions about ‘stand your ground’
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trendin...QDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trendin...QDBHBzdGNhdAMEcHQDc2VjdGlvbnMEdGVzdAM-;_ylv=3
