washington post - zimmerman will be charged this week

[Dennis S]

Is there any talk of going after the cops or prosecutors or his old man for obstruction of justice?

[rjmacs]

Dennis S wrote:
Is there any talk of going after the cops or prosecutors or his old man for obstruction of justice?

Not outside of blogs and internet forums.

[Bill in NC]

Unless he's changed his story recently Zimmerman's claim is that he was hit first.

IIRC, no 3rd party has yet said they saw the start of the fight.

Pam wrote:
No way did SYG mean you could instigate a confrontation and pull a weapon on an unarmed person.

[Lemon Drop]

Dennis S wrote:
Is there any talk of going after the cops or prosecutors or his old man for obstruction of justice?

Doubt there is anything against the Dad.

But as for Sanford police and their county SA, that's up to the feds, and they are investigating the case separately. They won't make anything public (in terms of civil rights charges against Zimmerman or the police dept, etc) until after this current criminal case plays out.

[$tevie]

Bill in NC wrote:
Unless he's changed his story recently Zimmerman's claim is that he was hit first.

IIRC, no 3rd party has yet said they saw the start of the fight.

[quote=Pam]
No way did SYG mean you could instigate a confrontation and pull a weapon on an unarmed person.

I believe Pam is referring to the fact that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and pursued Martin, thereby forcing (i.e. instigating) the confrontation.

[Pam]

$tevie wrote:
[quote=Bill in NC]
Unless he's changed his story recently Zimmerman's claim is that he was hit first.

IIRC, no 3rd party has yet said they saw the start of the fight.

[quote=Pam]
No way did SYG mean you could instigate a confrontation and pull a weapon on an unarmed person.

I believe Pam is referring to the fact that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and pursued Martin, thereby forcing (i.e. instigating) the confrontation.
Exactly. After being told by 911 not to pursue. I have no doubt that if Zimmerman was not carrying a gun that he would not have pursued Martin.

[Gutenberg]

When the state's attorney (or the DA, or whoever) charges a suspect that he wants to nail he "climbs the ladder." He charges everything from disorderly conduct to aggravated assault to the highest charge he thinks he can get away with, in this case aggravated murder. The resolution will be somewhere in the middle.

[Chakravartin]

Lemon Drop wrote:
This is a no nonsense prosecutor with a tough reputation, she's not going to court with weak evidence. Especially in a case receiving this much publicity and scrutiny.

She's using an "information" instead of a "indictment."

She has no credible evidence for conviction. This is no more than a show for the public.

An information filing is the rough equivalent of saying "duh" to a judge instead of presenting facts for scrutiny by a grand jury. Murder is a strong enough charge and this case is so incendiary that almost any prosecutor would have gone for the indictment if the evidence supported the charges because that's how you cover your ass.

[Grace62]

Chakravartin wrote:
[quote=Lemon Drop]
This is a no nonsense prosecutor with a tough reputation, she's not going to court with weak evidence. Especially in a case receiving this much publicity and scrutiny.

She's using an "information" instead of a "indictment."

She has no credible evidence for conviction. This is no more than a show for the public.

An information filing is the rough equivalent of saying "duh" to a judge instead of presenting facts for scrutiny by a grand jury. Murder is a strong enough charge and this case is so incendiary that almost any prosecutor would have gone for the indictment if the evidence supported the charges because that's how you cover your ass.
Bernie Madoff had an "information" instead of an indictment. All that means is that there was no grand jury involved. It means nothing in terms of the strength of her evidence. This SA frequently skips the GJ and she has an excellent record on getting convictions.

[Chakravartin]

Grace62 wrote:
[quote=Chakravartin]
[quote=Lemon Drop]
This is a no nonsense prosecutor with a tough reputation, she's not going to court with weak evidence. Especially in a case receiving this much publicity and scrutiny.

She's using an "information" instead of a "indictment."

She has no credible evidence for conviction. This is no more than a show for the public.

An information filing is the rough equivalent of saying "duh" to a judge instead of presenting facts for scrutiny by a grand jury. Murder is a strong enough charge and this case is so incendiary that almost any prosecutor would have gone for the indictment if the evidence supported the charges because that's how you cover your ass.
Bernie Madoff had an "information" instead of an indictment. All that means is that there was no grand jury involved. It means nothing in terms of the strength of her evidence. This SA frequently skips the GJ and she has an excellent record on getting convictions.
Madoff committed a nonviolent crime.

Murder is traditionally charged via indictment. Even in Florida.