Ah, the baiting continues - but in this case for no reason, as I've already commeneted that murder two seemed a stretch. See previous locked threads where I quoted both statutes and said as much.
Dershowitz appears not to realise that the charge
already got through a judge on a probable cause standard.. The question now is whether the evidence supports the allegations, which he wrote three days ago is certainly possible for manslaughter, although he thinks we need to wait for the facts at trial.
Dershowitz's comment is here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/alan-dershowitz/the-rorschach-facts-in-th_b_1418441.html. I will quote his statements, which, unlike his prediction that the charges wont get past a judge (they already did), make some sense:
Second, On the basis of the evidence currently in the public record, one likely outcome of the case against George Zimmerman is a mixed one: There may be sufficient evidence for a reasonable prosecutor to indict him for manslaughter, but there may also be doubt sufficient for a reasonable jury to acquit him.
Any such predictions should be accepted with an abundance of caution, however, because the evidence known to the special prosecutor, but not to the public, may paint a different picture. It may be stronger or weaker.
Funny how hard we can scream "not enough facts!" when facing an argument we disagree with, and simultaneously declare "innocent!".
