Alan Dershowitz says Zimmerman charge a no-go.

[Ron]

Thankfully, however, we have an adversarial system (as imperfect as it is) that gives justice a fighting chance and all sides will soon see all the evidence there is.

[geronimotwo]

^^^

My honest gut reaction over it all is this:

1. All the prosecutors who've looked at the Zimmerman case have felt the shooting and the totality of it's circumstances are such that "beyond a reasonable doubt" for manslaughter 1-2-3 or murder 1-2-3 is impossible.

2. Yet they desperately want a trial to avoid unrest.

3. A trial buys them time, maybe even years, for things to calm down.

4. If it's not the opening gambit for a plea deal, they may purposely be overreaching on the charges so the prosecutors can wash their hands of the case, and lay blame on the court and the jury. Or they actually see it as a roundabout way to give Zimmerman justice, seeing as they think it's likely he'd be found not guilty of Murder 2, or of any charges that would placate the segments of the public up in arms about this, and yet create enough of a dog-n-pony show to placate them.

hopefully zimmerman can figure this out.

[roo_ster]

Having read the doc, I am somewhat put aback by its lack of substance. 

Not having a legal education or such experience, I wonder if all or most such docs are so lacking in data and rely mostly assertion?  Do judges let prosecutors get away with what is the legal jargon equivalent of, "Because I say so?"

I suspect that the process will be the punishment for Zimmerman: lacking in data, the speshul prosecutor is trying to beat him about the head with the charge in hopes of breaking him.

[RevDisk]

Having read the doc, I am somewhat put aback by its lack of substance. 

Not having a legal education or such experience, I wonder if all or most such docs are so lacking in data and rely mostly assertion?  Do judges let prosecutors get away with what is the legal jargon equivalent of, "Because I say so?"

I suspect that the process will be the punishment for Zimmerman: lacking in data, the speshul prosecutor is trying to beat him about the head with the charge in hopes of breaking him.

The arrest warrant? It varies. Some are light, some are heavy on specifics. Yes, it's mostly accusations. Trial is for the specifics. AFAIK, in a lot of places, you don't need an arrest warrant for a person suspected of a felony (just need PC). 

[AJ Dual]

AJ, no prosecutor in America charges someone with murder as part of a complex scheme to set them free.  That would be insane.

Two prosecutors have looked at this case, one of them agreed with the homicide investigator who recommended charges on the night of the shooting, and the other did not.

Edit:  national review has a very good debate on this going between two experienced lawyers:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/295942/three-legal-keys-trayvon-martin-affidavit-david-french

Reply 1:  http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/295997/martin-case-affidavit-andrew-c-mccarthy#more

And 2: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/296014/re-martin-case-affidavit-david-french

Doesn't seem that far fetched considering all the cases of people prosecuted and convicted when the DA couldn't be bothered to take facts into consideration that either proved the person to be innocent, or at least legally "not guilty", but proceeded anyway for political reasons or their career.

Perhaps a "complex plot to set Zimmerman free" is a bit much, but I don't think over-charging for political reasons, despite it putting their case in jeopardy, and relieving themselves of responsibility in a "It's up to the system now" type of self-delusion/sophistry is eminently possible.

And in David French's own response that you cite, he admits:

"And one can’t rule out the possibility that she knows she has nothing like the evidence necessary to support her factual assertions, and she’s merely made a cynical political move. We’ll find out soon enough."

And he further goes on to state he fully acknowledges that probable cause is "...quite a low threshold".

Also, if you hold the prosecutors in such holy regard, that it's impossible to you they couldn't be over-zealous in their jobs for political or practical concerns (from their point of view at least), you then must hold a lot of contempt for the police department, which fumbled the case very badly, if not intentionally, if everything the prosecutors have asserted in their case for probable cause, and presumably the evidence they have to back the charge up in the actual trial is true...

[RevDisk]

AJ, no prosecutor in America charges someone with murder as part of a complex scheme to set them free.  That would be insane.

Wait, wut?

Uh, dude, prosecutors rig cases all the times. That is their job. To use their judgment in what cases to pursue, and which ones not to pursue. The strategy in how to do either. If you really think ANY self-respecting political prosecutor wouldn't tank a case in order to further his or her own goals, you need to hang up your law degree because you're missing a HUGE understanding of the law.  Self-interest, politics and backstabbing is a good 40% of our legal system. Corruption is ideally only 10% of the legal system, but often higher. Laws and case law are the remainder.

I am seriously not being rude or fallacious. That is the reality of our legal system.


In this case, politically, the prosecutor MUST bring charges. And it has to be "real charges", not petty misdemeanor charges like disturbing the peace, discharge of a firearm, etc. The prosecutor's career is in a vise, and that certainly is a higher priority than justice for either Martin OR Zimmerman. The prosecutor has to play to the mob, and that means murder charges regardless of the circumstances. Winning the case is not as important as winning the politics. Try to kill SYG, and the gun nuts will be screaming at the politicians. Don't have an appropriate show trial, and the mob will be screaming at the politicians.

Honestly, would not want that prosecutor's job at the moment.

[De Selby]

Yeah, political charges happen (although rarely) - but they happen because the prosecutor is actually trying to jail someone.  That's my point.

You don't lay a charge of murder two secretly hoping the defendant will walk.   They are trying hard to throw Zimmerman in jail; murder two seems a stretch, but if they get it, Zimmerman misses out on life.  Manslaughter, which will be fairly easy to prove unless Zimmerman's statements have some new and shocking detail unknown to us, is a lesser included offence. 

[RevDisk]

Yeah, political charges happen (although rarely) - but they happen because the prosecutor is actually trying to jail someone.  That's my point.

Unless it is Podunk, Nowhere, nearly all charges are political. And no, again, the prosecutor is not trying to jail someone unless it's politically expedient to throw them to the wolves. Most charges are plead out, because prosecutors want to pad their case count and show an excellent win ratio. Tough jail sentences, unless high profile cases, can be a real pain in the neck. Folks might start appealing. Or looking into prosecutor misconduct.

Point of a prosecutor is to cut deals, not jail someone unless it serves their own best interests.

(I would like to point out, there are good prosecutors. But they're in Podunk Nowhere near exclusively. Cities have no room for anything other than a political prosecutor. Except the sacrificial lamb that gets tossed the worst cases, of course.)

You don't lay a charge of murder two secretly hoping the defendant will walk.   They are trying hard to throw Zimmerman in jail; murder two seems a stretch, but if they get it, Zimmerman misses out on life.  Manslaughter, which will be fairly easy to prove unless Zimmerman's statements have some new and shocking detail unknown to us, is a lesser included offence. 

No, dude. The prosecutor doesn't secretly hope the defendant walks. The prosecutor hopes the angry mob can be pointed at someone else. Just because Zimmerman may walk from this strategy doesn't mean that's the intention. Goal is to score points and vilify the defendant. The trial is incidental, unless it provides a good show.

If they wanted him in jail, as you'd said, they'd toss manslaughter at the guy.

[CNYCacher]

Manslaughter, which will be fairly easy to prove unless Zimmerman's statements have some new and shocking detail unknown to us, is a lesser included offence. 

Look who's running on details now.

[De Selby]

Rev, also true - the point is to get a plea.  In cases where you've charged depraved indifference murder, the plea means a decade instead of two.  Plea bargaining doesn't mean there's no jail time.

In this case, they did throw manslaughter at him - they also threw murder two which is basically extreme manslaughter.  The easily proven charge is there, and all that's required is a jury finding that his behaviour wasn't quite reckless enough to be murder 2 - that finding is a manslaughter finding.

[birdman]

Rev, also true - the point is to get a plea.  In cases where you've charged depraved indifference murder, the plea means a decade instead of two.  Plea bargaining doesn't mean there's no jail time.

In this case, they did throw manslaughter at him - they also threw murder two which is basically extreme manslaughter.  The easily proven charge is there, and all that's required is a jury finding that his behaviour wasn't quite reckless enough to be murder 2 - that finding is a manslaughter finding.

I thought he was charged with murder 2 (depraved indifference).  Were there two charges? 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

elected prosecutor has made her play for press.  now when it gets tossed she throws up her hands "i tried!"    slimy creature

[RocketMan]

Lots of folks saying Corey has overcharged against Zimmerman.  Some, including Dershowitz, allude to her having a history of overcharging in cases.  While there may be a train whistle sounding faintly in the distance, we'll still just have to see how it plays out.

[De Selby]

I thought he was charged with murder 2 (depraved indifference).  Were there two charges? 

It's a lesser included offence - it's inherent in the depraved indifference charge.  Standard jury instruction explains it well.http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter7/p2c7s7.4.rtf

[gunsmith]

elected prosecutor has made her play for press.  now when it gets tossed she throws up her hands "i tried!"    slimy creature

yup. she gets on TV telling us how sweet Tray's parents are but will be able to claim the system needs fixing etc-so reelect her or its a bigger mess or elect her to some other office so she can repeal SYG but that will need 20 yrs in office.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/16/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE83F19Y20120416

[Perd Hapley]

Florida's "Stand Your Ground" self-defense law, which allows the use of deadly force when someone has the reasonable belief he could face death or great bodily harm.

   That's not what the "stand your ground" law is about, is it? Isn't that just what most laws in the U.S. have always said about self-defense?

[birdman]

The difference being:
Non SYG, deadly force in SD if you have no capability of retreat and have reasonable belief you could face death or great bodily harm
SYG: deadly force in SD if you have no capability of retreat and have reasonable belief you could face death or great bodily harm

If the stories are true and M was on top of Z, as said earlier, there is no ability to retreat, so SYG doesn't matter.

[seeker_two]

I'm with Rev.....unless the prosecuter is paying for Zimmerman's defense team, she's throwing him under the bus for political gain.....

[T.O.M.]

The comments I am about to make are based upon having spent 12 years as a criminal prosecutor, not Alan Dershowitz or any of the other talking heads out to talk about a case where they admittedly don't have all of the facts.

First of all, in a probable cause affidavit, the goal is to meet probable cause.  Period.  You don't lay out your whole case in a probable cause statement.  Why?  Kind of like a coach laying his playbook on the table and saying "look, we can't lose."  This may get you a plea, or you've just dumped all of your evidence in the spotlight way too early in the trial process and are taking a chance that the defense/press/public opinion don't f&^k it up before it's on record.

Second, I worked in a jurisdiction that did not conduct probable cause hearings.  The elected prosecutor believed in the constitution as written, so all felony cases went to the grand jury for indictment or refusal.  I thought that was brilliant, as you get the weak cases tossed by the grand jury, and you can get most witnesses on record as to their testimony.  Keeps the chances of a witness changing testimony to a minimum.

As for overcharging....yep.  Anywhere there is plea bargaining, cases get overcharged.  That way the prosecutor has room to negotiate down to what should really have been charged in the first place.  I was blessed to work for a prosecutor that believed plea bargaining was bull *expletive deleted*it, so I have no personal experience with plea bargaining.  But I see it from this side of the bench all the time, and can say it truly is bull *expletive deleted*it.  Ignore the facts and do whatever.

As for this case, I truly believe that there are too many politically motivated people on both sides of the case muddying the waters to make any prediction as to what the truth is.  But, i'm afraid that the truth will be as much as victim as anyone in this case, because the "need the cities from burning.  My only advice...if you live in the cities that may burn, watch the news and stock up on ammo and water.

[gunsmith]

& if/when the burn baby burn crowd goes at it, fully expect the radlibs & poverty pimps to deny culpability.

[AJ Dual]

& if/when the burn baby burn crowd goes at it, fully expect the radlibs & poverty pimps to deny culpability.

No problem. It'll take some careful planning, but if we all work together, we can set it up so that most all of them are trapped in the middle of it when it lights up.

With "Bush/Cheney '04" bumperstickers we secretly slapped on their cars at the last minute. Bogie will print them up for us.

[Boomhauer]

if/when the burn baby burn crowd goes at it

I'm tellin ya, you start shooting rioters and that *expletive deleted*it stops pronto.

People need to figure that one out. Start flipping police cars and tossing molotovs? Bullet to the head, mother *expletive deleted*er. It's a universal language.

[roo_ster]

I'm tellin ya, you start shooting rioters and that *expletive deleted* stops pronto.

People need to figure that one out. Start flipping police cars and tossing molotovs? Bullet to the head, mother *expletive deleted*er. It's a universal language.

This.  I am not quite sure why we tolerate mass violent riots the way we do.

[De Selby]

I'm tellin ya, you start shooting rioters and that *expletive deleted* stops pronto.

People need to figure that one out. Start flipping police cars and tossing molotovs? Bullet to the head, mother *expletive deleted*er. It's a universal language.

Until some self-appointed "neighborhood riot stopper" shoots you in the head for "looking suspicious", that idea is just dandy.  You just might want to have a think about who will be speaking this "universal language" before you go endorsing it.