Why is Fox New Defending George Zimmerman?

[cybrsage]

The shooter and shooting victim have differing stories of what happened. How surprising...

What matters is which one the system found to be both credible and believable. You claim the one the system found to be both credible and believable is wrong and use it as if everyone should believe that you have the truth of the matter and everyone else is wrong.

That is why we laugh at you.

 

[nonlnear]

“As a matter of policy, I don’t think most criminal defense lawyers think it’s a very wise statute,” said Robert Batey, a professor at the Stetson University College of Law in St. Peterburg, Florida, speaking about the state’s Castle Doctrine law. “But I’m sure they’re happy to have another argument to make.”

It's because SYG makes claiming self-defense after a shooting so easy if there are no other witnesses other than.

Are you sure it isn't because criminal defense attorneys like to get paid? Occam's razor is good for so many things.

 

[blankslate]

What matters is which one the system found to be both credible and believable. You claim the one the system found to be both credible and believable is wrong and use it as if everyone should believe that you have the truth of the matter and everyone else is wrong.

What you're not getting is that the SYG law makes it too easy for a shooter to claim self defense and even if the lead investigator believes that charges should be filed.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-ma...n-manslaughter/story?id=16011674#.T3nYIfBYvkC

The lead homicide investigator in the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin recommended that neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter the night of the shooting, multiple sources told ABC News.

But Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney's office headed by Norman Wolfinger determined there wasn't enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the sources told ABC News.

If you watch the video. The legal analyst states that he "...convinced that if the Florida Stand Your Ground law didn't exist, Zimmerman already would have been charged."

Are you sure it isn't because criminal defense attorneys like to get paid? Occam's razor is good for so many things.

Robert Bately the law professor who is quoted says as much. He said “As a matter of policy, I don’t think most criminal defense lawyers think it’s a very wise statute," “But I’m sure they’re happy to have another argument to make.”

Oddly enough I remember bolding both parts of his statement but whatever.

 

[ky54]

Let's see - NBC news doctors the 911 tape to make it sound like Zimmerman is a racist (NBC is launching an "internal investigation"... well, there, that's settled) and FNC refuses to join the lamp and pitchfork witch hunt and FNC is wrong and un-American. And people question why I refuse to listen to any American news sources as anything other than biased circus monkeys?

 

[cybrsage]

People can want charges to be filed as strongly as they like...but what matters is if a crime was committed or not. No crime, no charges.

I prefer people to be charged for committing crimes, not based on the personal feelings of someone.

 

[blankslate]

People can want charges to be filed as strongly as they like...but what matters is if a crime was committed or not. No crime, no charges.

I prefer people to be charged for committing crimes, not based on the personal feelings of someone.

Missing the point again. SYG law makes it too easy to claim self-defense even in cases where it might not only have been self-defense.

Additionally we don't know what in Mr. Serino's interactions with Mr. Zimmerman happened that led him to believe that Mr. Zimmerman should be charged with manslaughter. Unless Mr. Serino's judgement is as lacking as Mr. Zimmerman's was then it almoster certainly is more than just "personal feelings."

 

[nonlnear]

If you watch the video. The legal analyst states that he "...convinced that if the Florida Stand Your Ground law didn't exist, Zimmerman already would have been charged."

I can't get video right now. Did the analyst say anythign about how SYG affects the likelihood of conviction once charges are filed, because that to me is the only relevant question. If all SYG does in cases like this is keep weak prosecutorial cases out of the courtroom then it's a winner in my books.

Robert Bately the law professor who is quoted says as much. He said “As a matter of policy, I don’t think most criminal defense lawyers think it’s a very wise statute," “But I’m sure they’re happy to have another argument to make.”

Oddly enough I remember bolding both parts of his statement but whatever.

Sorry, I misunderstood what the second part of the quote meant. I wasn't trying to twist your meaning by not bolding the second part. I took the second part as making a statement about the state of affairs given that SYG is the law of the land in FL. i.e. "Defense lawyers don't like SYG, but now that it is in place they are happy to argue about it."

 

[blankslate]

Did the analyst say anythign about how SYG affects the likelihood of conviction once charges are filed, because that to me is the only relevant question. If all SYG does in cases like this is keep weak prosecutorial cases out of the courtroom then it's a winner in my books.

The convictions rates weren't addressed. They were discussing the applicability of the SYG law in the case.

The analyst said basically that...

• If Mr. Zimmerman started the fight then the law shouldn't apply to the shooting but...
• if Trayvon Martin started the fight then it would apply.

It was also noted that right now Mr. Zimmerman is the only person alive who knows/knew how the fight started. He then said that he thinks if SYG wasn't on the books then Mr. Zimmerman probably would have been charged.

The reporter interviewing the analyst noted that Mr. Zimmerman's attorney at first stated SYG wouldn't be part of a defense if charges were brought then later said it would be used for as part of the defense argument if charges are brought.

Sorry, I misunderstood what the second part of the quote meant.

It's ok I actually had to read that part of the article a couple of times and then actually cut and paste the two parts together to be certain I was reading it right myself.

 

[Infohawk]

Let's see - NBC news doctors the 911 tape to make it sound like Zimmerman is a racist (NBC is launching an "internal investigation"... well, there, that's settled) and FNC refuses to join the lamp and pitchfork witch hunt and FNC is wrong and un-American. And people question why I refuse to listen to any American news sources as anything other than biased circus monkeys?

This is really the only relevant thing to this thread. I'm not a particularly big Fox News fan, but it doesn't get any more ridiculous than someone claiming that Fox News is defending Zimmerman (without evidence) and then having MSNBC get caught doctoring tapes.

 

[blankslate]

This is really the only relevant thing to this thread. I'm not a particularly big Fox News fan, but it doesn't get any more ridiculous than someone claiming that Fox News is defending Zimmerman (without evidence) and then having MSNBC get caught doctoring tapes.

It could be something as nefarious as making Mr. Zimmerman looking like a racist for ratings or as dumb and idiotic as someone editing the tape for brevity then changing the context, in the process.

Either way it was wrong and if it's worth airing then the hosts can edit their words instead of editing the evidence.

 

[cubby1223]

Me thinks Zimmerman would find more a comfortable life detained in Gitmo than what the news media and social media has done to this situation.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I think Zimmerman will change his name in the near future and no one will ever know who he is/was.

 

[Infohawk]

I think Zimmerman will change his name in the near future and no one will ever know who he is/was.

Usually you have to put out a notice that you're doing that. I don't know if they make exceptions or not. This guy's best bet is that some huge new evidence comes out that exonerates him and people realize it's like the Duke case. That's not looking very likely though. But stories like MSNBC editing tapes and the family having put out younger-than-accurate pictures help him.

 

[cybrsage]

Missing the point again. SYG law makes it too easy to claim self-defense even in cases where it might not only have been self-defense.

So what. You still cannot file charges against someone for not breaking the law. Seriously, are you are saying that since there is a law that says a person did not break the law, that person should be charged anyway? Does that make any sense?

 

[cybrsage]

Usually you have to put out a notice that you're doing that. I don't know if they make exceptions or not. This guy's best bet is that some huge new evidence comes out that exonerates him and people realize it's like the Duke case. That's not looking very likely though. But stories like MSNBC editing tapes and the family having put out younger-than-accurate pictures help him.

If it is for your protection you can keep it secret. Like the witness protection program and such.

 

[cybrsage]

Me thinks Zimmerman would find more a comfortable life detained in Gitmo than what the news media and social media has done to this situation.

Didn't Obama close that down like he promised to do if he was elected?

 

[cubby1223]

Didn't Obama close that down like he promised to do if he was elected?

He must have. I haven't seen a thread on Gitmo in a long time.

 

[blankslate]

So what. You still cannot file charges against someone for not breaking the law. Seriously, are you are saying that since there is a law that says a person did not break the law, that person should be charged anyway? Does that make any sense?

I'm saying the law has allowed claims of self-defense in circumstances that prior to 2005, when the law was passed, would not have been considered self-defense.

Given that. Even if Mr. Zimmerman isn't charged with anything despite the fact that an investigator believed manslaughter charges were warranted, then hopefully the SYG law is re-examined and either repealed or rewritten to tighten up obviously lax standards for claiming self defense.

Is that too hard for you to understand? Or is your desire to twist words getting the better of you?

 

[cybrsage]

I'm saying the law has allowed claims of self-defense in circumstances that prior to 2005, when the law was passed, would not have been considered self-defense.

Given that. Even if Mr. Zimmerman isn't charged with anything despite the fact that an investigator believed manslaughter charges were warranted, then hopefully the SYG law is re-examined and either repealed or rewritten to tighten up obviously lax standards for claiming self defense.

Is that too hard for you to understand? Or is your desire to twist words getting the better of you?

Your post was a complaint that the courts disagree with your view on a shooting and so they are wrong. This has nothing to do with what you just said in this post.

 

[blankslate]

Your post was a complaint that the courts disagree with your view on a shooting and so they are wrong. This has nothing to do with what you just said in this post.

My posts in this thread are mostly about my opinion that the SYG law with it's low standard of what can be considered self-defense is a pretty bad law. It forces prosecutors to accept self-defense even when investigators don't believe the claim.

 

[QueBert]

And you know this better than the investigators how?

Common sense, I've gotten my ass kicked over 100 times way worse than Z and never once felt my life was in danger. Z's a pussy who has no concept of an ass kicking if he believes his ass was kicked. Hell there were times I couldn't even get up and walk after getting hit because my equilibrium was so off. And even then I didn't feel like my life was in danger. When he beat up his Ex I wonder if she felt her life was in danger? It's crazy a dude who has a wide history of attacking people doesn't seem to understand danger and what it really is.

Did Z believe he was in danger? Probably.
Was he in danger? Absolutely not. And he's not some angelic person who was panicking because he's never been in an altercation and didn't know what to do. He's had plenty of violent encounters, this was clearly a case of him overreacting to save his ass.

 

[werepossum]

My posts in this thread are mostly about my opinion that the SYG law with it's low standard of what can be considered self-defense is a pretty bad law. It forces prosecutors to accept self-defense even when investigators don't believe the claim.

I find that an entirely reasonable position. I very much like SYG laws, but they HAVE to be subject to what a reasonable person would think. CCW laws should make permit holders more cautious, not less so, because they are licensed to carry (and use at need) deadly force. It's not like those silly hate crime statues where you have to go to court, this is people dead or crippled or severely wounded.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Common sense, I've gotten my ass kicked over 100 times way worse than Z and never once felt my life was in danger. Z's a pussy who has no concept of an ass kicking if he believes his ass was kicked. Hell there were times I couldn't even get up and walk after getting hit because my equilibrium was so off. And even then I didn't feel like my life was in danger. When he beat up his Ex I wonder if she felt her life was in danger? It's crazy a dude who has a wide history of attacking people doesn't seem to understand danger and what it really is.

Did Z believe he was in danger? Probably.
Was he in danger? Absolutely not. And he's not some angelic person who was panicking because he's never been in an altercation and didn't know what to do. He's had plenty of violent encounters, this was clearly a case of him overreacting to save his ass.

Maybe you should tell this victim's family that a simple little punch won't hurt anyone.

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/05/Hillsborough/A_deadly_punch_shatte.shtml

Minutes later, in a Steak n Shake parking lot, he landed a single punch to the temple of Christopher Fannan. Thompson went calmly back to work, prosecutors say, as Fannan lay on the ground with a fatal brain injury.

 

[JockoJohnson]

Common sense, I've gotten my ass kicked over 100 times way worse than Z and never once felt my life was in danger. Z's a pussy who has no concept of an ass kicking if he believes his ass was kicked. Hell there were times I couldn't even get up and walk after getting hit because my equilibrium was so off. And even then I didn't feel like my life was in danger. When he beat up his Ex I wonder if she felt her life was in danger? It's crazy a dude who has a wide history of attacking people doesn't seem to understand danger and what it really is.

Did Z believe he was in danger? Probably.
Was he in danger? Absolutely not. And he's not some angelic person who was panicking because he's never been in an altercation and didn't know what to do. He's had plenty of violent encounters, this was clearly a case of him overreacting to save his ass.

I know this won't come out right but here goes...you are an example of how things should be---a fight is a fight. There are no guns, just a beating and people walk away alive. Nowadays, everybody is a fucking pussy and needs to use guns to settle their disputes. It's a cultural thing and it will be hard to change.

 

[QueBert]

Maybe you should tell this victim's family that a simple little punch won't hurt anyone.

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/11/05/Hillsborough/A_deadly_punch_shatte.shtml

Ahhh yes, the exception to the rule! There are thousands of fights every day in the USA and there will a few people who do end up dying each year as a result. I would say with absolute certainty that since the odds are overwhelming that you walk away from a fight there should be no law here allowing a person to shoot someone. I bet my odds are better than I win the Lottery. But like dying from a fight that's not going to happen either.