George Zimmerman Charged

[Pathfinder]

That would depend upon how the encounter moved to grappling distance.    If Zimmerman was the one to cause that after following the kid around for awhile, he escalated the situation to a confrontation....then shot the kid when the kid reacted.  It is likely Zimmerman made some comment or even an action to restrain or direct the kid to get out of the neighborhood.  If it was verbal, I'd call it taunting and look for manslaughter.  If it was physical, or if he drew on the kid, I'd be looking for Murder 2.

I have no legal experience and this is only what I see "likely" from what has been reported.  No way to I say what I know is the end of the story...just what seems likely to have happened.  If that was all the evidence presented at the trial and I was on the jury, I'd vote Not Guilty because there is nothing presented so far to indicate Zimmerman escalated the situation...and without such evidence, he is Not Guilty....which is not necessarily Innocent.

Maybe. Maybe not. Note though that even Alan Dershowitz (who is a tool IMHO but seems to get the law pretty straight, or has in the past) noted that the affidavit with the charges was lame and amateurish. Not a good sign for the prosecution.

[Solus]

Maybe. Maybe not. Note though that even Alan Dershowitz (who is a tool IMHO but seems to get the law pretty straight, or has in the past) noted that the affidavit with the charges was lame and amateurish. Not a good sign for the prosecution.

In no way did I intend what I posted to be how I thought the prosecutor should handle the case.

At best, it is Saturday Afternoon Quarterbacking.   Guesses about what might happen.

[jnevis]

..., I'd vote Not Guilty because there is nothing presented so far to indicate Zimmerman escalated the situation...and without such evidence, he is Not Guilty....which is not necessarily Innocent.

If found not guilty that leaves the door open for the civil suit.  Innocent closes that door.

If I was Zimmerman's Defender, I'd force a trial.  I think a plea bargain should be off the table, since in a trial there is enough doubt to get an acquital, at least from what we've seen so far.

[Solus]

If found not guilty that leaves the door open for the civil suit.  Innocent closes that door.

If I was Zimmerman's Defender, I'd force a trial.  I think a plea bargain should be off the table, since in a trial there is enough doubt to get an acquital, at least from what we've seen so far.

A jury doesn't have an Innocent option.  Guilty, Not Guilty or throw it out.

[tombogan03884]

As I understand it this was a "gated" community and the Martin kid did not belong there.
So how did he get in ?
Why was he trespassing ?
If he had no ill intent, why did he react violently when confronted with these questions by some one the community had authorized to ask them ?

[Sponsor]

[GASPASSERDELUXE]

He was visiting his father who was either living their or at his girl friend who lived their.  Martin had walked over to a nearby ice house and was on his way back to the home.

[MikeBjerum]

Solus,

You are missing the fact that Zimmerman is a part of Neighborhood Watch.  A group that is instructed and advised by area law enforcement.  What instructions does law enforcement give to members in this gated community?  We also keep falling into the trap of the edited tapes of the conversation between Zimmerman and the operator.  this is not cut and dried instigated by Mr. Zimmerman following Mr. Martin.  This could actually end up being a case where there is a serious flaw in Neighborhood Watch that gets exposed.

As far as the civil suit - I would like to get some feedback from Haz or TW on the implications of Stand Your Ground here.  My understanding is that Stand Your Ground is not about what happens early on.  It is used during the trial as a part of the defense.  And if it is like many other states, if found not guilty Stand Your Ground eliminates the possibility of a civil case being filed.

[tombogan03884]

He was visiting his father who was either living their or at his girl friend who lived their.  Martin had walked over to a nearby ice house and was on his way back to the home.

So why did he kick Zimmerman's ass instead of simply telling him that ?

[Solus]

So why did he kick Zimmerman's ass instead of simply telling him that ?

That's the point.  We don't know what happened to bring on the confrontation....and may never know unless an eye witness turns up.  Without any other eyewitness, Zimmerman's statement will be all that is entered into evidence.

It may be that Zimmerman went up to the kid, grabbed the kid by the neck put the gun to his had and tole him he was gonna be escorted out of the complex....the kid didn't like bing manhandled, grabed the gun and wailed on Zimmerman.

I am not saying that happened at all...but it is a possibility and it would put Zimmerman in the wrong...but there will need to be a witness.

The kid had every right to be there.  He accompanied his dad to visit his girlfriend and went to the store and was drinking an Ice Tea and eating some kind of candy on the walk back when the confrontation occurred.

Zimmerman said the kid was acting suspiciously by walking in the rain...probably slowly because his dad told h im to get lost for a half an hour.  

For some reason, they got close enough for the confrontation.  Unless Zimmerman saw the kid in the commission of a crime, he had no business closing to where they could grapple...particularly when he was armed.

As far as police instructions, the police specifically told Zimmerman on the 911 call NOT to follow the kid.  Friankly I would not have obeyed those instructions either, if I had spotted someone acting suspicious.....BUT, as a citizen, I have no right to confront someone unless they are in the process of commuting a crime.

From what the kid's girlfriend said of her conversation with the kid while Zimmerman was following him, he noticed Zimmerman and was trying to get away from him.  If what she said is true.

To me with that being known, it appears the kid was trying to avoid the confrontation while Zimmerman seemed to be aggressively interested in what the kid was doing.

Now if I have to pick one of the two as the most likely instigator of the confrontation, would it be a kid visiting the neighborhood with his dad while walking down the street drinking ice tea and eating candy while talking to  his girlfriend on his cell phone or a member of the neighborhood watch who felt suspicious enough of the kid to call 911, report him as looking suspicious and following the kid against the recommendations of the police?

From all of that, I  put the odds on Zimmerman being more likely to have initiated the confrontation.

All that could change if we know what happened to cause the confrontation.  Without that, there is no proof Zimmerman was the one to initiate and not the kid.  So Zimmerman would be found not guilty.

The kid might have a list of offenses from robbery to knocking up girls on welfare, but he wasn't doing a single one of them in Zimmerman's neighborhood (as far as the facts we have show).

Is it possible the kid was the aggressor?  Absolutely, but we have been given no information to lead to that conclusion.  It might exist, probably in Zimmerman's statement, but that statement hasn't been made public..rightfully so.

As I said before, not much of what has been publicized matters..it all boils down to how the confrontation developed.   Unless there is another eye witness, Zimerman's statement will be facts in that matter.

[Solus]

I found a video at Front Sight that speaks to the consistency of Zimmerman's statement with the evidence found.  

It also speaks to the whole Racist Circus, which should never be any but a very minor issue in any criminal trial.

As Piazza says, you don't see this video made widely available by the MSM.

The speaker does state that Zimmerman's statement is the only evidence  of the confrontation and it is consistent with forensic findings.

http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2012/04/16/front-sights-monday-blog-zimmerman-versus-martin/