HomeTrayvon MartinZimmerman to be charged with 2nd-Degree Murder Zimmerman to be charged with 2nd-Degree Murder David Robertson April 11, 2012 Trayvon Martin 109 Comments Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey announced that George Zimmerman will be charged with murder in the 2nd degree. The Science Is Not Settled Uh Oh! Mike Huckabee Opens First Radio Show With Planted, Shill Caller Share this:FacebookTwitterRedditEmailMoreLinkedInPinterestPrintTumblrPocketGoogle Related Posts The thug culture comes alive on Twitter and threatens George Zimmerman’s life “I wonder if justice is even possible for George Zimmerman” “Widespread system failure here — and a deplorable absence of truth” About The Author David Robertson A refugee from Planet Melmac masquerading as a human. In fair condition. A fixer-upper. Warranty still good. Not necessarily sane. Publisher and editor of the Melmacian Times @ http://melmacian.tumblr.com/ PBunyan And so it begins. We are in the final days of our republic. Jay You mean the conservative court that decided the 4th Amendment doesn’t apply in jail while the 9th Amendment says you can’t take away those rights isn’t a leading indication? jim_m Um. The 4th amendment historically has not applied in jail. Your rights are limited in jail. As an ignorant lefty you may not have noticed that you also lose your right to vote when convicted of a felony. 914 “But as an ignorant lefty,” Ignorance is bliss for Baraks minions.. David Robertson Uh, President Obama is not relevant to the news that I posted. Jay You might want to read up on the 9th Amendment as well as for profit prisons Jimbo. You seem to be losing touch with reality more and more each day. But keep up the leftist bullshit. Always good to know where you go to roost the ignorance campaign you’re spewing. jim_m I spoke to the 4th. Your disagreement with what I said is? jim_m And my argument that for convicted criminals serving time, normal rights of the citizen are not retained is still in play here. The idea that rights not enumerated were still retained by the people has not been understood to apply completely to people in prison. Rodney G. Graves “Rights” may only be deprived to those convicted of a felony by a jury of their peers, or for very limited and special circumstances including incarceration before trial (which was the issue before the Supreme Court). Jay The entire point of the SCOTUS case is that the man had paid his ticket and was wrongfully arrested. It’s also one of the very few times that the DoJ and conservative court acted against the 4th. jim_m We are talking about different things. You are talking about people arrested and not convicted. I am talking about people convicted. Rodney G. Graves Um, no. The case was not about misprisonment nor false arrest based on the faulty warrant. The case was about whether an incarcerated person retains Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure. The Court held that incarceraton posed a special case in which warrant-less searches are indeed reasonable. PBunyan No, what I mean is what I said a couple weeks ago. I would have linked to my comment, but mysteriously all the comments on that post have disappeared. Here’s what’s happening: Step 1. Obama issues <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness" Directive 10-289 Step 2. The press creates the false narrative. Step 3. Zimmerman is put on trial. Step 4. Zimmer is aquitted. Step 5. Race Riots/War. Step 6. Obama declares an emergency and puts Directive 10-289 into effect. We are at step 3. The republic ends at step 6. Brucehenry And when your nightmare scenario doesn’t happen you’ll be sure of some other nefarious plot by eevil mooslim HUSSEIN Obama. Race riots. Pppfffttt. Not gonna happen. Not on the scale you fearfully, sweatily imagine. You remind me of the doomsday cult folks who must go back to their lives, broke and disillusioned, on the day after the Rapture doesn’t arrive. PBunyan Steps 1, 2, & 3 have already happened. The timing and way they happened fits the scenario perfectly. Now today we know that 4 and 5 are definitely going to happen since the charge is 2nd degree murder. So we’ll see. I hope I’m wrong. jim_m Average murder trial will take over a year to come to trial. Best hope is to get President for life obama unelected in Nov. PBunyan I don’ think this will be an “average” murder trial. Rodney G. Graves We held the regularly scheduled elections during the Civil War, we’ll do so should your scenario come to pass. PBunyan I don’t think BS’n Barry and the people who are running things today are of the same caliber as Honest Abe. I watched “The Sound of Music” on TV last Sunday. The scene at the end where the Von Trapps are escaping across the mountains made me reflect on how things like that can and do happen, and can happen quickly. Rodney G. Graves While I agree 0bama is not in the same league as Lincoln, I’ll point out that a suspension of elections would be a violation of the Constitution on it’s face, and that I doubt the Armed Forces would go along with it. JLawson Except for one minor problem – they don’t have anything to do with elections. (At least, in this country.) “… I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” The “All enemies, foriegn and domestic’ thing in our oath isn’t infinitely elastic. Being ordered to fire on our population? Not gonna happen. Ordered to shut down polling places? Won’t happen. Ordered to bomb our cities? No way. Ordered to stop elections? Most likely not – since all elections are handled on a local level anyway. That’ll be for the courts to decide. The ‘all enemies, foreign and domestic’ clause isn’t infinitely elastic – we still have to obey the LAWFUL orders of those above us in the chain of command. But you’re pretty much right, I think – that if Obama started trying to use the military to enforce a cult of personality style dictatorship, he’d find very little support for the idea. jim_m Most dictators purge the military as one of their first acts. JLawson So watch for a lot of folks suddenly ‘retiring’? Haven’t seen that yet – plus you’ve got to spend a lot of time getting the officer corps infiltrated with the ‘right’ people before you can pull of a coup. Rodney G. Graves Officer and Senior NCO Corps. PBunyan It’s never happened here yet. But it has happened many times around the world in the past and it can happen here. “Just following orders” –you know, that kind of stuff. JLawson Sorry – that may work with a conscript army and a massively top-down authoritarian structure with very rigid doctrines on what’s to be done and when regarding movement, positioning, and tactics – but that ain’t the way our military is run. We’ve got an all-volunteer force, urged to think for themselves regarding what they’re doing. They’re not Soviet conscripts of the ’80s. “Just following orders” isn’t an excuse for doing something blatantly wrong or illegal. If a superior gives you an order that’s illegal, you can take it up with HIS boss, or the IG – because it’ll be both your ass and his if you do the illegal act. Not saying it couldn’t happen here, but I’d say the odds are 25-1 against, if not higher. Because basically you’d be asking each and every officer and NCO to just dump all their training over the years out, to support a dictator wannabe. I just don’t see it happening. jim_m Barry is ignorant of history and the American left has always discounted the effectiveness of the military. It would not surprise me that they do not take resistance from the military into their plans. jim_m Plus I do not see the military intervening if obama merely suspended elections. I am sure he would do so with sufficient spin to suppress any military intervention. PBunyan You obviously know a lot more about this than I (as I’ve never served) so I’ll trust that you’re right. Still nothing will surprise me at this point. And this could all play out in a way that we can’t even conceive at this point. Remember this was established and funded in Obamacare, but you don’t hear much about it. PBunyan Plus, the Soviet Union had elections, Iraq (pre invasion) had elections, Venezuela has elections, Cuba has elections, Natzi Germany had elections. David Robertson Jay, you are off topic. Please adress the topic of my post. David Robertson What on Earth are you talking about? Did it ever occur to you that the special prosecutor may have sufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman? Thus far, every legal analyst who has spoken about this case on FOX News – including one of Zimmerman’s former defense attorneys – has said that the special prosecutor has forensic evidence that is not available to the public. Since we do not know what that evidence is, we can’t judge it. No matter how the expected trial ends, it will give some clarity as to what happened when Martin was killed. As I said in an earlier post, I expect that Zimmerman will be exonerated, however, it may take a trial in order for that to happen. PBunyan “Did it ever occur to you that the special prosecutor may have sufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman? Not 2nd degree murder. No way that’s gonna happen. If it’d been something less, then maybe, but not now. (edited to clarify that my response was to that question.) Brucehenry There will probably be a plea bargain to manslaughter or negligent homicide or something. And maybe some rioting. There will be no race war and no coup d’etat. PBunyan We’ll see. As I said above, I hope I’m wrong. Rodney G. Graves Zimmerman would be a fool to make a plea bargain. PBunyan Agreed, but I didn’t want to say that and open that can of worms. I’ll stick to the wacked out conspiracy theories on this one. Commander_Chico Hmmmm, two years on the table at a minimum security, or take your chances with a jury and face life in max. Chico predicts a plea with a short sentence, maybe a long “suspended sentence” if Florida has that. jim_m I would not be surprised by a manslaughter plea with no jail time. Rodney G. Graves Nope. Any plea opens him to death by lawsuit where an acquittal removes the threat. Commander_Chico Why sue a broke man? He’s not O.J., and unless he gets money out of his current fame, he’s shown no promise of getting rich. Rodney G. Graves Ask the folks who sued Berhard Goetz. Brucehenry Are we on speaking terms again? Bygones? I’m willing if you are. Rodney G. Graves I humbly apologize for addressing you directly and would delete the offending comment of mine if it had not already been replied to. Brucehenry Aw, c’mon, Rodney. I promise to be nice and not so easily irritated. I’ve been very respectful of Rick Rice lately, ask him. Rodney G. Graves I note with amusement and no surprise that the bygones were not bygones after all, and that the promise of being “nice” had a shorter life than many of 0bama’s promises. mikegiles “Not 2nd degree murder. No way that’s gonna happen. If it’d been something less, then maybe, but not now.” Why not? Something about Zimmerman’s story has bothered me since the video of him entering the police station. According to his version of events, Martin hit him, knocking him down, and then proceeded to bang his head on the sidewalk. Martin then reach down and tried to take his gun, they wrestled for possession and he managed to shot Martin, killing him. Now supposedly Martin was on top of him at the time he was killed, and he shot Martin at close range. But when he entered the police station a saw no blood on the front of his clothes. He shot someone who was above him at close range, but got no blood on himself? Not to mention that Martin was found laying face down, since he was supposedly right on top of Zimmerman when he was shot, he should have collapsed on top of Zimmerman, Had he collapse to the left or right he would have been found on his side or back. So again, why wasn’t Zimmerman covered in blood? If Zimmerman has none of Martin’s blood on his clothing, then he must have been a good distance away when he shot him. Which brings his self defence version under scrutiny. Rodney G. Graves Entry side GSW do not always massively bleed externally. EricSteel You are assuming things as being impossible that aren’t impossible. In this case the cliche opening, “It was a cold and rainy night”, just happens to be true. Trayvon was wearing a hoodie, presumably over another shirt. It is possible for those clothes to trap and absorb the blood. I don’t know that to be the case, but you can’t rule out the possibility. Also, you assume that Trayvon was killed instantly by the gunshot and collapsed like a ragdoll. That isn’t necessarily true. A person can live for several minutes after getting shot n the chest. mikegiles In this case the cliche opening, “It was a cold and rainy night”, just happens to be true. Trayvon was wearing a hoodie, presumably over another shirt. It is possible for those clothes to trap and absorb the blood. I don’t know that to be the case, but you can’t rule out the possibility. No, I can’t rule it out. But Martin was found lying face down, so there was no opportunity for the rain to “wash” his garments clean. But we shall see. EricSteel I didn’t say anything about the rain washing anyone’s clothes. I said that because of the cold and rain, Trayvon was likely wearing layers of clothes that could trap and absorb blood, keeping it from leaking onto Zimmerman. Rodney G. Graves It’s also entirely possible that the evidence the “special prosecutor” has is to evidence as the Special Olympics is to the Olympics. Where, by the way, will they find an un-tainted jury pool? iwogisdead “We do not prosecute by public pressure or by petition.” Ah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!! Ah, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!!!!!!! David Robertson iwog, I wouldn’t want you to die laughing. Jay Link I’m sure people will be watching this case very closely… 914 I see fathead Sharpton returned quickly for more race pimping.. Zimmerman has about as much chance of a fair jury as Barak does at re-selection.. David Robertson Sharpton never met a TV camera that he didn’t want to be in front of . . . or is that Jesse Jackson? I get those two confused. Anyway, Zimmerman’s new defense attorney is going to request a change of venue. Rodney G. Graves On what planet do you think they will find an untainted jury pool? LiberalNightmare Wheres Johnny Cochrane when we need him? jim_m Dead 914 Johnny couldn’t make it but is voting absentee ballot for Barry this fall. LiberalNightmare At least he”ll get a trail. Thats more than Spike Lee, Roseanne Bar or the Black Panthers were willing to give him. Guest Justice delayed is justice denied, for both Martin’s family and for Zimmerman. Glad we can move forward and stop throwing stones at each other. Let the court decide. Sheik Yur Bouty What makes you think that will stop the stone throwing??? jim_m Yeah. Expect obama to make some kind of pronouncement as to Zimmerman’s guilt before any jury renders a verdict. as far as he is concerned the courts exist to do his bidding. Guest But once the verdict is in the reaction to the verdict is over we can all get on with or lives. I’m sick of hearing about race. jim_m until Sharpton and Jackson pass from the scene you will keep hearing about it. iwogisdead Second-degree murder seems an odd charge under the circumstances. The statute does not require an intent to kill: (2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree . . . Either Zimmerman went after the kid (intended to kill him) or he didn’t. Second-degree murder is more like a “shooting into a crowd” type of crime. I think the prosecutor didn’t want to take it to the grand jury for fear that an indictment would not be returned. So, she was stuck with bringing the highest charge she could without a grand jury just to keep public order. So, we end up with a screwy 2nd Degree Murder charge. The jury certainly could find him guilty, of course. Jay I think the prosecutor didn’t want to take it to the grand jury for fear that an indictment would not be returned. I doubt that. She has a history of being tough and hasn’t used a Grand Jury if she doesn’t have to. Oysteria I don’t know where they plan on changing the venue to. But I’m only a couple hours away from Sanford and it would be just my luck to get a jury duty card in the mail about now. I seem to get called up for jury duty way too often. 4 times in eight years seems excessive. Brucehenry Tell them you’ve been commenting on the topic on blogs. You’ll be excused. jim_m Heck, just tell them you read. That will be enough to disqualify you from most juries. Rodney G. Graves Try telling them that you’ve sat as a Summary Court (Court Martial). Vagabond661 It is hoped and prayed that people are a thermostat and not a thermometer. Hugh_G I said on another link that it’s all about the statute and how the facts fit into the statute. If you go and read the entire statute it’s very clear that there is an exception to the justifiable use of force statute. Here it is: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.041.html It’s also very clear that if it is found that Zimmerman was the original aggressor he cannot claim the defense of justifiable use of force. We know maybe 10% of the facts. We know nothing about the forensic evidence which may be very telling. We know little or nothing about statements witnesses have given to investigators. We don’t know what Zimmerman himself may have said in a statement which could be incriminating. Quite to the contrary of the sky is falling crowd, the jury system generally works and works well (yes there are exceptions). But for cripes sake to take either side about the question of guilt or innocence (absent family members) is completely absurd. 914 “It’s also very clear that if it is found that Zimmerman was the original aggressor he cannot claim the defense of justifiable use of force.” Well it is very clear there was a struggle or fight between the two. If Zimmerman were the aggressor he had a gun and would not need to get into a hand to hand fight if his intention was to just shoot the man. If he approached Trayvon and was asking questions like “What are you doing here?” or “Where are you going?” and then was jumped/ attacked? I would say is hardly worthy of being shot.. Most likely however Zimmerman panicked during the struggle and used the gun.. With all the media and other shennanigans sure to follow this spectacle, a mistrial and acquittal is highly likely. Hugh_G Your version of the facts may turn out to be true. As I’ve said before we don’t know anything about the forensic evidence, statements given to the police by witnessed and/or Zimmerman. If he had started out with the intention to “just to shoot the man” the charge probably would have been 1st degree. JLawson “We know maybe 10% of the facts.” I’d agree with you on that. Much of the story’s been twisted in the media – to a point where trying to judge actual guilt or innocence on the available evidence is futile. Time will tell. alohasteve Thanks for posting this! I’m glad i found your site!!Steve Common Cents http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com GarandFan Wonder where the trial will be held. Any 1/2 year law student would 1st make a motion to have the trial moved to another location – and they’ll have plenty of ammunition in the form of “news” broadcasts and print media. Commander_Chico I guess I was right, he did say “fucking coons.” jim_m based on what evidence? Commander_Chico Just a very strong hunch based on the charge . Murder requires “malice aforethought.” Why charge murder without evidence of “malice?” The best evidence I’ve seen of “malice” is “fucking coons.” There are other possible theories based on Zim’s disproportionate and reckless use of deadly force, but I don’t think they’d charge murder without “fucking coons” to sell to a jury. jim_m A lot of times charges are filed, not for the purpose of prosecuting and convicting on that charge, but as an opening of negotiations for a plea. You cannot get a 1st degree charge with the circumstances. I don’t think that “coons” will stand up to the reasonable doubt threshold. Commander_Chico People believe what they hear with their own ears, and a jury trial is not like blogs or the media, where you can doctor up a tape to change “coons” to “punks” and spin all kinds of bullshit about “wave patterns” just to get attention. That BS does not get in unless there is a credible scientific foundation for its admission. Absent a strong showing that the sound was distorted and a defense theory about a credible alternative phrase, the jury will hear “fucking coons” on that 911 tape as Zim is chasing Martin. It’s common sense: if every other word Zim says on that 911 tape is intelligible and has a consistent meaning, why is that one word “coons” the only one that’s “distorted” and “wrong?” jim_m So you are going to bank on 12 randomly selected people all hearing it your way. Frankly I think you hear “coons” because you want to hear it. Commander_Chico I have faith in my own senses, it has served me well over the years. What did you hear? EricSteel Chico, our senses can be fooled by our expectations. Seriously, go to look up the McGurk Effect. It is a real psychological phenomenon that is a little freaky to experience. There is a good video on Youtube that demonstrates it. Commander_Chico That was fun and interesting. Another take on “coons” – was it “cold?” jim_m CNN reported this weeks ago. I’m glad to see you are catching up. Sky__Captain Personally, I hear “Comrade_Chico’s a frickin’ racist.” PBunyan “bullshit about “wave patterns” “ Yeah you’re right, when computer technology advanced to the point where they could recognize human speech I knew it was magic and not that “science” bull shit. Jwb10001 You proclaim yourself “right” based on a very strong hunch? I proclaim you wrong about every thing based on a very strong hunch, and of course the nonsense you write here. EricSteel Well it turns out that the prosecution has settled the issue and they heard “fucking punks” From the prosecution’s affadavit of probable cause. http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf cirby On the other hand, Trayvon’s mother just said ” I believe it was an accident.” Meiji Man Goofy Question of the day. Does it matter if Zimmerman said “coons” or not? He was returning to his car when Trayvon initiated physical contact. This is supported on Zimmerman’s testimony with some supporting evidence based on the Initial 9-1-1 call (Zimmerman’s) and mapping. Pursuit had been stopped. whether it was because Zimmerman lost contact or was responding to the statement of the operator remains to be seen. regardless of the reason for Zimmerman’s pursuit. It had ended and he was returning to his car. It was Trayvon who decided to create a physical confrontation. jim_m Dershowitz presents a compelling argument that the prosecution case is “irresponsible” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/#47034974 He suggests that they can’t even establish probable cause and that the case may get dismissed. “A good judge will throw this out.” EricSteel That affadavit is some weak tea. I think Dershowitz may be right, this case might not make it past an evidentiary hearing. The prosecutor also quoted Zimmerman in the affdavit as saying “fucking punks”, which puts a shot across the bow of the Feds making a civil rights case and any civil case by the Martin family. It doesn’t stop the cases in their tracks, but Zimmerman can use that affadavit as evidence to say that the State of Florida determined that he said “fucking punks” in a document charging him with homicide. jim_m What Zimmerman needs is a finding of fact from the judge that he said “Punks”. That would scuttle any potential issues. EricSteel Procedurally, no it wouldn’t. A Florida judge’s finding of fact would have no bearing on whether or not the DOJ can charge Zimmerman with a Federal Civil Rights violation. Realistically, it puts a hurt on the Feds case. The Feds would have to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt, with everything riding on him saying “Fucking Coons”. However, the affadavit provides reasonable doubt because a prosecutor in the State of Florida in an official document predjudicial to Zimmerman has now declared that he said “Fucking Punks”. jim_m It would make it very difficult to succeed with a civil rights claim based on racial discrimination. That was my point. Hugh_G Hey numb nuts. Unless Zimmerman waives a jury, what the facts are is the function of the jury. And if anyone who thinks this case will rise or fall on “punk” or “coon” then you’re smoking something I’d like to have some of. jim_m Look it up. A judge may make a finding of fact and base rulings and jury instructions on that finding. Furthermore, a finding of fact will bind an appeals court to ruling based on that finding and it is difficult to have an appellate court throw out such a finding. Happens all the time in civil cases. Rodney G. Graves That is uncalled for, email@example.com Hugh_G Fortunately you weenie, that’s a throw away address. To say you’re pathetic is really an understatement. Rodney G. Graves For criminal or civil trials, Jim? jim_m I’ve seen it in civil trials. In a patent infringement case that was prosecuted against a company I worked for back in 1998, the judge made a finding of fact that my company had in fact infringed upon the patent and instructed the jury to return a guilty verdict. Hugh_G Look stick to what you know, whatever that is, because you don’t know anything about the law. In this case there isn’t going to be any “finding of fact” about a matter crucial to the defense and the prosecution. It is the exclusive province of the jury to determine questions of fact. Now go on and get into more vitriol, you’re really good at it. Hugh_G Jim, the “medical man” is now your criminal law expert? Says a lot about you.