Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

Page 284 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nobodyknows

Diamond Member
Sep 28, 2008
5,474
0
0
This guy is acting like Z should walk free and for the state to do otherwise would violate whatever he thinks the constitution is.

If the grand jury, or in this case the special task force don't have enough evidencew, there is no need for as trial. Innocent until proven guilty.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
SYG is not in the US constitution. It is in FL law.
Yes, and the amended US Constitution requires that the prosecutors follow that law in a manner consistent with Zimmerman's Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, even though I'm sure at this point they'd like nothing better than to charge Zimmerman and say "See, we're not racists!"
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Sorry can't change the law and then apply it. The current must be applied..period!

Yep, due process is coming up with enough evidence first to even charge him a crime. If evidence can't be found or used then there is no charges made. Simple as that. That's the law.

Concerns that the initial police investigation did not turn up enough evidence is certain a valid concern. As such as task force has been appointed to see if everything that could have been done was done. If evidence turns up that can allow the task force to charge George Zimmerman with a crime they will. Then it will go to court to decide if the evidence is enough to pin the crime on him or not. That's how the judicial system works. Starting riots or making baseless claims from an emotional standpoint don't change this.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Based on the fact he hasn't been arrested I think the police and state investigators/attorneys already know this answer and it backs up Zimmerman's testimony.

Seriously, as botched as this investigation was, you still are going to make a statement like that.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
Yes, you and many are doing that. Others such as karmypolitics and classy are not. There is a difference in posting level between you and them despite all three of you siding with TM and thinking GZ's account is false.

You expressed your opinion you think his claim is false. You expressed you have concerns that the laws could be worded a bit different to have prevented this incident, although I don't see how, and that you feel actions that may have been taken my GZ despite his recounting of his actions states he did no such actions were the whole cause of this mess.

Fine and dandy. I personally don't believe or disbelieve GZ's story. I am just trying to compare pieces of evidence thus far "leaked" with his story to see what matches and what doesn't. I am also seriously pissed at how the media as a whole is handling this case as it has led to widespread stupidity all around. I'm also a little amused at posts by karmypoltics and classy that are so much hyperbole often enough that I remember what makes P&N fun sometimes :) Meaning people making outrageous and ridiculous claims because it fits their arguments or emotional state of mind.


I really dont discounts GZs account it very well could have gone down just like he said, I do thik all things considered its not the only option as to what happened.

I think Karmy was defending GZ on say page 130, but as people learn more they change points of view.

When the case first hit I thought it was a clear case of homicide, as new info became available and links of existing law were shared I evolved my opinions.

I still think had he let the cops handle it were not here talking about it.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
This guy is acting like Z should walk free and for the state to do otherwise would violate whatever he thinks the constitution is.

Please think about it a moment.

Do you really believe it wouldn't be seen as a violation of a person's Constitutional rights if they were arrested, held and charged just 'because'?

There are rules and procedures that exist EXACTLY because of this type of situation. A situation where inflamed public opinion demands someone be arrested charged and put in jail. It may be the 'easy' thing to do, it may be popular the popular thing to do, but it needs to be the right thing to do no matter public opinion. That's what Constitutional rights are about.

Fern
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
Please think about it a moment.

Do you really believe it wouldn't be seen as a violation of a person's Constitutional rights if they were arrested, held and charged just 'because'?

There are rules and procedures that exist EXACTLY because of this type of situation. A situation where inflamed public opinion demands someone be arrested charged and put in jail. It may be the 'easy' thing to do, it may be popular the popular thing to do, but it needs to be the right thing to do no matter public opinion. That's what Constitutional rights are about.

Fern
Damned well said.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Seriously, as botched as this investigation was, you still are going to make a statement like that.

Botched huh? What facts do you have to substantiate that claim now? This better not be another link to a editorial opinion piece or at worse a blog.

Claims were made the investigation was "botched" so the original investigation team has stepped aside to let a "special task force" come in to try to find more evidence that they may have overlooked. That doesn't indicate anything was "botched" at all.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
36,764
28,977
136
I love how people are ignoring that the lead investegator wanted Z arrested for manslaughter. LI filed a sworn affidavit. Looks like he wanted to cya and let people know I want this guy locked up.

Q: Who overrulled him?
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
READ COLUMIST.... not toxicology report. Again so much dis information is being spread that I am ashamed of you for taking this OPINION piece from a sole source that is not authoritative in any way as fact.

Um most of if not all that has been debated here has been taken from opinion pieces. many have been spouting about all this concrete evidence that cleared Zimmerman, now we we hear the LEAD investigator wanted a charge of manslaughter. So a lot of this has been opinion and when only person is left alive, you have to use some speculation to arrive at the truth.
 

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
Yes, and the amended US Constitution requires that the prosecutors follow that law in a manner consistent with Zimmerman's Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights, even though I'm sure at this point they'd like nothing better than to charge Zimmerman and say "See, we're not racists!"

I am well aware that the hands of the authorities are tied by the law. The law is shitty. This isn't about some stupid noble principle in preventing even a trial.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Botched investigation is hearsay, nothing to back this up. In fact some of the claims have been refuted. I do believe Fern posted this several days ago.

The chief of police got voted against by city council and told to step down. Don't be ridiculous now.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
READ COLUMIST.... not toxicology report. Again so much dis information is being spread that I am ashamed of you for taking this OPINION piece from a sole source that is not authoritative in any way as fact.

Its nto fact but its not just that Opt Ed either, when you google it many many many versiosn of the same thing.

Doesnt make it fact anymore than Martins Twitter feed and facebook posts.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
I love how people are ignoring that the lead investegator wanted Z arrested for manslaughter. LI filed a sworn affidavit. Looks like he wanted to cya and let people know I want this guy locked up.

Q: Who overrulled him?

Dammit man, it's in the article.

The prosecutor overruled him.

The investigator wanted him charged, not because of evidence, but because he felt the story was "fishy".

Fern
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
I love how people are ignoring that the lead investegator wanted Z arrested for manslaughter. LI filed a sworn affidavit. Looks like he wanted to cya and let people know I want this guy locked up.

Q: Who overrulled him?


No one is ignoring anything.

First off, stop using the word THE. Like there is a sole investigator to this case. It's stupid. This isn't dragnet. Even the ABC article as A LEAD investigator. Meaning one investigator out of many.

The investigator in question was a homicide investigator that wasn't around to question Zimmerman at the time scene of the crime. Instead another investigator did it. He's was all butt hurt because he wasn't the one to do the investigation and someone had to do it for him instead. To cya, he put in an affidavit that he doesn't trust the testimony by Zimmerman because he wasn't the one who recorded his testimony.

That kind of office politics happens all the time.