MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Thursday, July 10, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 73.0° F  Mostly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Sandi » Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:36 pm

Bludgeon wrote:Um, how is it anything but? Ask Al Sharpton and Barack Obama.


Or ask the DOJ that provided security for anti-Zimmerman protests in Florida.

The Community Relations Service (CRS), a unit of DOJ, reported expenses related to its deployment in Sanford to help manage protests between March and April 2012, according to documents obtained by the watchdog group Judicial Watch.

CRS spent $674.14 between March 25-27 related to having been “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.” CRS spent another $1,142.84 for the same purpose between March 25-28.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Huckleby » Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:38 pm

When I heard last week that Florida law allows the jury to convict on manslaughter even though the prosecution charged 2nd degree murder, I was pleased. A manslaughter conviction seems like the most just outcome.

But after thinking about it, the idea of sliding-down charges when the prosecution offers a weak case is bogus. Real bogus. Psychologically, I think a jury is likely to return a conviction on a reduced charge just because it feels like a fair middle ground in a confusing case. But also, the defense is geared towards defending the primary charge; re-rigging the game at the 11th hour seems unjust.

Guess this is the sort of law you get in right-leaning, tough-on-crime state. Which uncoincidentally has a large population of minorities.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby HawkHead » Thu Jul 11, 2013 7:58 pm

Oh no!!! the DOJ spent$1,800 on helping make sure the protest were peaceful.

That seems like money well spent to me rather than have a riot break out and cause 10s of thousands of dollars of damage and be a black eye on the US of A.
HawkHead
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 717
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Sandi » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:14 pm

HawkHead wrote:Oh no!!! the DOJ spent$1,800 on helping make sure the protest were peaceful.

That seems like money well spent to me rather than have a riot break out and cause 10s of thousands of dollars of damage and be a black eye on the US of A.


If the DOJ went there for the purpose of insuring peaceful protests, I would agree with you. However it seems they played an active part in promoting prosecution of Zimmerman.

Set up under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the DOJ’s CRS, the employees of which are required by law to “conduct their activities in confidence,” reportedly has greatly expanded its role under President Barack Obama. Though the agency claims to use “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution procedures,” press reports along with the documents obtained by Judicial Watch suggest that the unit deployed to Sanford, FL, took an active role in working with those demanding the prosecution of Zimmerman.


Emphasis added.
Sandi
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 11:31 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby HawkHead » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:36 pm

Some how you missed this from the same article:

From a Florida Sunshine Law request filed on April 23, 2012, JW received thousands of pages of emails on April 27, 2012, in which was found an email by Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board Program Officer Amy Carswell from April 16, 2012: “Congratulations to our partners, Thomas Battles, Regional Director, and Mildred De Robles, Miami-Dade Coordinator and their co-workers at the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service for their outstanding and ongoing efforts to reduce tensions and build bridges of understanding and respect in Sanford, Florida” following a news article in the Orlando Sentinel about the secretive “peacekeepers.”
HawkHead
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 717
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby HawkHead » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:42 pm

Also, nice website you are quoting. Didn't know anything about until I looked at their top news articles than I wikied them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch

Founded by conservative attorney Larry Klayman in 1994,[3] Judicial Watch came to public attention after filing 18 lawsuits against the administration of Democratic U.S. President Bill Clinton and figures in the Clinton administration. The organization received considerable financial support from prominent Clinton critics, including $7.74 million from conservative billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife.[4] This led Clinton administration officials to accuse Judicial Watch of "abusing the judicial system for partisan ends."[5] According to Judicial Watch, Clinton and top Congressional Democrats encouraged the IRS to audit them and say that an IRS agent asked them, "What do you expect when you sue the President?"[6]
HawkHead
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 717
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 1:29 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Ninja » Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:44 pm

Huckleby wrote:When I heard last week that Florida law allows the jury to convict on manslaughter even though the prosecution charged 2nd degree murder, I was pleased. A manslaughter conviction seems like the most just outcome.

But after thinking about it, the idea of sliding-down charges when the prosecution offers a weak case is bogus. Real bogus. Psychologically, I think a jury is likely to return a conviction on a reduced charge just because it feels like a fair middle ground in a confusing case. But also, the defense is geared towards defending the primary charge; re-rigging the game at the 11th hour seems unjust.

Guess this is the sort of law you get in right-leaning, tough-on-crime state. Which uncoincidentally has a large population of minorities.


Manslaughter is usually a lesser included offense of murder so it has to be an option for the jury in every jurisdiction where it fits because of a Supreme Court decision. And that makes sense, because it's just murder minus the intent element. The Supreme Court's reasoning was basically that it was better to allow a jury a chance to punish a life taker than let the person walk just because there might be some small amount of reasonable doubt about the intent to kill.

I don't see why it's a problem normally, but I don't think it's appropriate in this case. Zimmerman didn't do something stupid or reckless that resulted in a death. He didn't fire into the air and end up hitting Martin. He didn't pull out his gun and wave it around to scare Martin and then accidentally have it discharge. He intentionally shot at Martin, and that's very likely to cause a death, which we all know. That makes it murder.

If he has a self-defense defense, then so be it. But in this case manslaughter would be a jury cop out.

But at least it's not as stupid as the prosecution's attempt at third-degree felony murder based on felony child abuse. That's just ridiculous because that does require a whole seperate element (felony child abuse) which itself requires a whole bunch of other elements (ie: intentional infliction of physical or mental harm on a child, or something like that), none of which were even remotely argued at trial. It's like they let the interns run the last day of the trial. Such a silly thing to attempt, and it doesn't exactly make them look confident in their case.
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Huckleby » Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:57 pm

Ninja wrote: And that makes sense, because it's just murder minus the intent element.

I think it is more complicated that that.

I heard Anna Sigga Nicolazzi, a former prosecutor and bright lass, present a convincing case that Zimmerman committed manslaughter. I can't do justice to her argument. Her intuition was that the jury would declare Zimmerman innocent, but that that legal eagles would recognize this as a credible manslaughter body of evidence.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Huckleby » Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:00 pm

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictiona ... nslaughter

Manslaughter is a distinct crime and is not considered a lesser degree of murder. The essential distinction between the two offenses is that malice aforethought must be present for murder, whereas it must be absent for manslaughter.

At Common Law, as well as under current statutes, the offense can be either voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter. The main difference between the two is that voluntary manslaughter requires an intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm while involuntary manslaughter does not. Premeditation or deliberation, however, are elements of murder and not of manslaughter.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Huckleby » Thu Jul 11, 2013 10:10 pm

Ninja wrote: Manslaughter is usually a lesser included offense of murder so it has to be an option for the jury in every jurisdiction where it fits because of a Supreme Court decision.


Do you have a link that supports this? Everything I can find says it is a state-by-state issue, and even then it is done at the judge's discretion.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/07/11/the ... explainer/
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Rich Schultz » Thu Jul 11, 2013 11:32 pm

"The White House refused to answer questions regarding President Barack Obama’s stance on the George Zimmerman trial on Thursday in an unexpected move to distance itself from Obama’s previous comments.

“[Obama's] comments are what they were, but we’re not going to say anything from here,” press secretary Jay Carney said."
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/11/white-house-distances-itself-from-trayvon-martin-case-obamas-previous-comments/
Rich Schultz
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 727
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:27 am

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Huckleby » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:10 am

Rich Schultz wrote:in an unexpected move to distance itself from Obama’s previous comments

Leave it to fantatical right-wing web sites like www.dailycaller.com to report such a silly inference as fact.

Guess I shouldn't be jumping on you about www.dailycaller.com, at least they are run by more-or-less sane person, Tucker Carlson. That's a step up from the white supremicist you relied on for your crime scene timeline, http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/

You really need to expand your information horizons beyond the kooky. Dip your toe in the lamestream media now and then just to see what you are missing.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6085
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Ninja » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:11 am

Huckleby wrote:http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/manslaughter

Manslaughter is a distinct crime and is not considered a lesser degree of murder. The essential distinction between the two offenses is that malice aforethought must be present for murder, whereas it must be absent for manslaughter.

At Common Law, as well as under current statutes, the offense can be either voluntary or Involuntary Manslaughter. The main difference between the two is that voluntary manslaughter requires an intent to kill or cause serious bodily harm while involuntary manslaughter does not. Premeditation or deliberation, however, are elements of murder and not of manslaughter.


Seriously? Free legal dictionary dot com?

Whether you realize it or not, your internet lawyer agrees with me. Malice aforethought is the intent element that distinguishes murder from (voluntary) manslaughter.

And because murder is a capital crime, the jury must be allowed to consider lesser included offenses (even though those are distinct violations of law) that contain all the elements of the capital crime, but carry a lesser penalty.
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Ninja » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:14 am

Huckleby wrote:
Ninja wrote: Manslaughter is usually a lesser included offense of murder so it has to be an option for the jury in every jurisdiction where it fits because of a Supreme Court decision.


Do you have a link that supports this? Everything I can find says it is a state-by-state issue, and even then it is done at the judge's discretion.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/07/11/the ... explainer/


Beck v. Alabama, 447 U.S. 625 (1980).

The inquiry still has to take place, but its cursory in most cases because there isn't a whole lot of state-to-state variation in manslaughter statutes (or really any staute that's based on a common law crime).
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: The Trayvon Martin & George Zimmerman Story

Postby Ninja » Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:23 am

Rich Schultz wrote:"The White House refused to answer questions regarding President Barack Obama’s stance on the George Zimmerman trial on Thursday in an unexpected move to distance itself from Obama’s previous comments.

“[Obama's] comments are what they were, but we’re not going to say anything from here,” press secretary Jay Carney said."
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/11/white-house-distances-itself-from-trayvon-martin-case-obamas-previous-comments/


This is profoundly stupid. Is the president supposed to stay silent on this kind of national story? Should he not have acknowledge the Batman shooting? The Sikh temple shooting? Sandyhook?

Of course he acknowledged all of those things, but he's not going to voice an opinion on how James Holmes's trial in Colorado is going, or critique the security decisions that the Sikh's have made at their temple. Why would he have any follow-up comments about Zimmerman's trial?

I cannot believe how moronic this country has gotten. Such a shame.
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 741
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar