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

Page 285 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
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?

my guess is a prosecutor who wanted to keep his conviction rate up.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
The chief of police got voted agianst by city council and told to step down. Don't be ridiculous now.

I agree they obviously made mistakes during the investigation, its actually why it became a media issue to begin with.

It wasnt that Martin was shot, its how the police handled it the witness cohersion etc. that caused the uproar.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
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.

No, it's a claim made by Crump. Who is the attorney that is representing TM's family in this case. He is also the one to have sent to the media all the older photos of TM instead of more recent information.
 

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
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.

No. He was the guy IN CHARGE OF THE CASE. THE investigator. Who gathered all the reports from all the other cops.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
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

Bullshit.

No lead investigator would offer up a manslaughter charge just because he didn't believe him. You can't possibly think, lol, any detetcive is that foolish.
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
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.

Just when i think your one of the most reasonable people on here

"He's was all butt hurt" I am sure you have something factual to back that up seeing as how that appears to be all your interested in.

I mean hold yourself to your own standards
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
No. He was the guy IN CHARGE OF THE CASE. THE investigator. Who gathered all the reports from all the other cops.

No he wasn't. Not at all. He was NOT AT THE SCENE OF THE CRIME. It was a narcotics investigator originally who took Zimmerman's testimony. He's butt hurt over that.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
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

Do you mean to tell me feelings, opinions, thoughts, SWAGs and beliefs are not factual evidence that can be used to arrest or convict a person? No way!!!!
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
Just when i think your one of the most reasonable people on here

"He's was all butt hurt" I am sure you have something factual to back that up seeing as how that appears to be all your interested in.

I mean hold yourself to your own standards

Someone previously posted a link to another story about how that investigator didn't believe in GZ's story because a narcotics investigator did all the initial investigation for him which included taking down GZ's testimony. He said he didn't believe it because he didn't feel the original investigator asked all the "right" questions as he would have asked him. In other words, it's office politics.
 

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
No he wasn't. Not at all. He was NOT AT THE SCENE OF THE CRIME. It was a narcotics investigator originally who took Zimmerman's testimony. He's butt hurt over that.

god you are dense.

He is the guy in charge of it. He collects all of the reports from individual police officers, reads EVERYTHING related to the case. He recommended manslaughter.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
Someone previously posted a link to another story about how that investigator didn't believe in GZ's story because a narcotics investigator did all the initial investigation for him which included taking down GZ's testimony. He said he didn't believe it because he didn't feel the original investigator asked all the "right" questions as he would have asked him. In other words, it's office politics.

LOL

Thats ridiculous
 

lotus503

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2005
6,502
1
76
Someone previously posted a link to another story about how that investigator didn't believe in GZ's story because a narcotics investigator did all the initial investigation for him which included taking down GZ's testimony. He said he didn't believe it because he didn't feel the original investigator asked all the "right" questions as he would have asked him. In other words, it's office politics.

"it's office politics. "

Or he didnt feel the guy was qualified to be interrogating a suspect in a shooting? based on the questions he didnt ask.

So ready to dismiss it as office politics what it sounds like is he didnt think the the Narcotics officer asked the right questions.

This is further backed up by Witness accounts they were coerced.

It looks like yoru projecting your own bias on here just like the rest of the posters.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
LOL

Thats ridiculous

How so?

Chris Serino was suppose to head up the investigation of this. Instead the initial investigation was done by a narcotics investigator and the file got sent to him. He reads the investigation and says he thinks the guy should be charged and is then told that there isn't enough evidence to do so. It's pretty much basic CYA tactics. No fallout is going to occur if there isn't enough evidence, and if there is later found to be evidence to charge then convict GZ he looks the hero. Again, office politics as I've seen it many times.

But hey, this is again my opinion and we don't even have the full story about this either. Just the tidbits about it. But to me this smells of office drama more than anything else.
 

classy

Lifer
Oct 12, 1999
15,219
1
81
"it's office politics. "

Or he didnt feel the guy was qualified to be interrogating a suspect in a shooting? based on the questions he didnt ask.

So ready to dismiss it as office politics what it sounds like is he didnt think the the Narcotics officer asked the right questions.

This is further backed up by Witness accounts they were coerced.

It looks like yoru projecting your own bias on here just like the rest of the posters.

LOL
And amazingly they think this investigation was not botched.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Bullshit.

No lead investigator would offer up a manslaughter charge just because he didn't believe him. You can't possibly think, lol, any detetcive is that foolish.

The whole story looks like bullshit anyway.

See here:

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/ne...to-arrest-zimmerman-for-shooting-unarmed-teen

The City of Sanford later issued an alert to "clarify a statement made related to the police report."

In part, the alert read "A reporter stated that based on the description of the incident on the report, that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged with the 'Uniform Crime Code' listed on the report. That is not accurate. All police reports from all law enforcement agencies require a 'Uniform Crime Code' to qualify an incident and for statistical purposes for tracking types of incidents. This code does not indicate a formal charge that will be lodged against an alleged offender. It is used for internal processing and to type cases.

So the reporter confused internal tracking data and spun it to say the guy wanted to arrest Zimmerman.

Fern