@lilo

don't waste your time with degenerates that PRETEND to think Zimmerman was just

they're just sick and demented mothafuckas


@getthesenets

George Zimmerman ain't nowhere near savvy enough to place bluff signs

thats been pretty clear from the start. you prance around here and try to frame people who you disagree with as biased, "parrots", or whatever else you can muster, meanwhile you have no basis for your own opinion, besides the opinion itself. heh.

How enlightened.

only interested in the outcome of the trial

media outlets pimping me for ratings and manipulating me? nah...

@fathersson

racial and cultural composition of this country is changing

Things that you may take for granted today, like not having to think of your race/ethnicity as you navigate life.....that may change in the future.

"race card" will have a different meaning then.

Zimmerman looks a little like the guy who played young Clemenza in GF II.

Kly/DT: what do you think of the state trying to get the bench's approval for additional included charges at this late date. I've never heard of such. How can the defense have had any chance to respond to a charge that is added only after testimony?

IMHO it is reversable error if he is convicted of the lesser charge. The state should have included the lesser included offenses from the beginning, and I think there are serious due process and fundamental fairness issues if the jury comes back with manslaughter.

For those of us who live in Tampa Bay or Orlando or Miami, the greatest horror on earth is to be forced to go to someplace like Sanford because of the idiots on the bench and their idiot local lawyers, as we all can see in this case.

Obviously they don't understand the basic rules of evidence, let alone trial procedure. There is also not a sciintilla of decent judicial temperament.

You're right. Stormfront in full effect.

Usually I wouldn't bother asking this because it would be immaterial but somebody told me you're black, cookcounty. Is that true? Because if you are, it would certainly explain why you're having a hard time looking at this case objectively.



Ah, you libs really do love playing the race card, don't you? Not surprising. You're the guy who thinks racists make up "the base" of the Republican party. You really do live in your own little world and probably think you see KKK guys under your bed at night.

Bottom line, yes, Zimmerman was overzealous. He should have just waited for the real cops to show up. But it was Treyvon who acted like a thug by turning it physical and violent. Zimmerman posed no immediate, physical threat to him. Most people agree that the evidence supports Zimmerman. Most have come to believe that the 2nd degree murder charge was unwarranted and came largely because of political pressure. But, being the liberal hack you are, your sympathies are with Treyvon alone and you can't see past your own delusional preconceived notions. And, like a liberal hack, you think anyone who disagrees with your BS must be a racist who posts on Stormfront.

Ex-Sanford police chief: Zimmerman probe 'taken away from us'
By Eliott C. McLaughlin, CNN
July 11, 2013


(CNN) - The George Zimmerman investigation was hijacked "in a number of ways" by outside forces, said the former police chief of Sanford, Florida.

Bill Lee, who testified Monday in Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial, told CNN's George Howell in an exclusive interview that he felt pressure from city officials to arrest Zimmerman to placate the public rather than as a matter of justice.

"It was (relayed) to me that they just wanted an arrest. They didn't care if it got dismissed later," he said. "You don't do that."

When Sanford police arrived on the scene on February 26, 2012, after Zimmerman fatally shot unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, they conducted a "sound" investigation, and the evidence provided no probable cause to arrest Zimmerman at the scene, he said.

It had nothing to do with Florida's controversial "Stand Your Ground" law, he said; from an investigative standpoint, it was purely a matter of self-defense.

Zimmerman told police he killed Martin after the teen attacked him. While the evidence at the time corroborated that claim, the ex-chief said, Lee's lead investigator made a recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter.

It was a matter of protocol, Lee said. Arresting Zimmerman based on the evidence at hand would have been a violation of Zimmerman's Fourth Amendment rights, he said. Thus, the Sanford police presented a "capias request" to the state's attorney, asking that the prosecutor determine whether it was a "justifiable homicide," issue a warrant for arrest or present the case to a grand jury.

"The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence -- outside influence and inside influence -- that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process," Lee said. "With all the influence and the protests and petitions for an arrest, you still have to uphold you oath."

"That investigation was taken away from us. We weren't able to complete it," he said.

One example involved the 911 tapes, in which neighbors implored dispatchers to send police as a voice in the background screamed for help.

The Sanford police intended to release the tapes once the probe was over, Lee said, because you can't publicize evidence amid an investigation.

Instead, the mayor told him on March 16 the tapes had been released to Martin's family and the public. The family was asked to help identify voices, Lee said, but if police were in charge of the investigation, they wouldn't have presented evidence to a group.

"It should be done individually so there's no influence on the other people in the room," he said. "Then, there's no questions that can be brought up about how (an identification) was obtained or whether it was influenced."

Releasing the evidence to the public was problematic, as well, because it created the potential for someone to concoct a "story about what they observed when they really didn't observe it," he said.

Martin family attorney Jasmine Rand said that she doesn't believe that playing the tapes to a room full of people "makes any difference to the outcome of the case."

"We have to remember that that was played for the family in a private room because they were hearing the last moments of their son's life as he cried for help," Rand told CNN's Erin Burnett on Wednesday night. "And I think Sybrina Fulton (Martin's mother) got up and walked out of that room. She didn't sit in there and talk to everybody, because she had a visceral reaction when she heard her son yell for help and she couldn't help him because she knew he was dead."

Lee was placed on paid leave March 22, 2012, after the Sanford City Commission expressed a lack of confidence in him. The same commission rejected his resignation in a 3-2 vote a month later, with dissenting commissioners questioning the fairness of Lee's losing his job.

Two months later, Lee was sacked. City Manager Norton Bonaparte said in a news release, "The police chief needs to have the trust and respect of the elected officials and the confidence of the entire community."

Lee believes lack of confidence did play a role in his dismissal, he told CNN, but he also believes Bonaparte faced political pressure and terminated him "without cause," which was permitted under his employment contract.

"I upheld my oath," Lee said. "I'm happy that at the end of the day I can walk away with my integrity."

Rand, the Martin family attorney, told CNN that Lee lost his job because he "failed to conduct a fair and impartial investigation."

"I personally thank God that he doesn't have the ability to fulfill his vision to uphold an arcane practice that has no place in our legal system," Rand said.

Asked whether he would do things differently given the opportunity, Lee, a 30-year veteran of law enforcement, said there always are things he could change in hindsight, but he stands by the investigation.

At every turn in the 40-minute interview with CNN's Howell, Lee doggedly defended his investigators, saying race never played a role in any decision and that his officers "conducted an unbiased review."

Investigators knew letting Zimmerman walk free for 46 days was an unpopular decision -- and they took abuse for it -- "but they performed professionally. That's the mark of a strong police department."

Lee took issue with the media casting his department as apathetic or lackadaisical in the case.

"A lot of the information that was given out as fact was misinformation," he said. "It was reported in some media that we didn't conduct an investigation for two weeks, but yet in that same media they would show a photograph of a crime scene with crime scene tape, with patrol cars and blue lights and investigators on the scene."

Lee shrugged off the notion that he was hired to clean up racism and other problems in the department. His goal upon becoming chief was to improve professionalism and trust, and he set several goals, all of which were met during his 10-month tenure, he said.

One of his greatest regrets, he said, is that the Zimmerman investigation ultimately shattered his childhood dream to be police chief of the community where he was raised.

"It's a dream of a vision that is going to be unrealized," he said. "I'm at peace with it on most days. I'm a man of faith. But it stings."

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/sanford-bill-lee-exclusive

I am sure Bull Connor felt the same way.

Absolutely ridiculous comment.

I have been watching the Zimmercase from the beginning. Anyone who's been on a jury, in particular a murder trial (I was on 4 or 5 juries but only ONE murder trial), knows what I mean when I say you take it very very seriously. It really is work listening, taking notes, etc. AND, no matter what you might feel, you know you must follow judge's instructions during deliberations.

I agree with many who posted here that the murder charge will most likely NOT be proven from what I've seen. IF I were on the jury, and felt it wasn't proven, I'd HAVE to go with a not guilty.

That being said, and the fact that I am NOT on the jury, I can and DO think Zimmerman IS guilty of killing Trayvon.

Question for DT, and/or Kly, I understand they can go with manslaughter. I can't recall what criteria needs to be met for manslaughter? I hope he at least gets that.

Another question tho, I HEARD yesterday, that in Florida manslaughter sentence can be as long as 30 years. Is that true? Likely?

Ok, I gotta say, I did miss first part of Defense closing arguments. Started at 5:30 my time, way too early. I'm watching part two of it though.

TIS

Btw, lawyers are sure long-winded aren't they?

In lieu of DT's or Kly's response, I'll give it a shot. What is absent from many of this Board's posts are the predicates for murder or manslaughter in Florida. While states have similar laws, there can be significant differences. Since I don't know the predicates in Florida, I'll state those for manslaughter here in Texas. Texas does not allow for voluntary and involuntary manslaughter; they combine them. The primary and, basically, only predicate is reckless behavior. Intent or knowledge is not required. The penalty is up to 20 years.

By the way TIS, in recognition of lawyer's long-windedness, Florida gives them up to 3 hours for summation.

The elements of the offense, as olivant points out, may differ among states, and I am surprised that Texas combines voluntary and involuntary under a single manslaughter.

But to prove voluntary manslaughter, the state generally has to prove that there was a killing that resulted from an intentional act in the heat of passion.

you shoulda figured that out with your adamant knowledge of black folks

you've been dissecting my post for a couple months and you aint figured it out yet

I thought u were so goddamn smart

I think he deserves manslaughter but not a murder charge.

How long does John Guy get on the rebuttal? Anyone know?





TIS

You're only saying that because, as a liberal, you value political correctness over the truth.



Well, that certainly explains a lot, including your inability to objectively view this case. You were probably all giddy when OJ got off, huh? Now I'm just wondering if you are the same guy that went by the name "cookcountyrowdy" at one time.

Kly/DT: what is the jurisprudential reasoning that supports a petit jury for a felony case, especially murder?

I was in 7th grade when OJ got acquitted

we watched the verdict on tv in class

I was one of only two people in a class of 30 that thought OJ did it

you don't come into contact with many blacks in Utah but you're still racist

HEY! The Juice never did that shit!

7th grade? Was that the week before you dropped out?

Let's cut out the name-calling, please.

I have still yet to read one even coherent account, citing the law and introduced evidence/witnesses, how someone could find zimmerman guilty beyond a reasonable doubt while rebutting beyond a reasonable doubt self defense.

Until then we just have guys accusing other guys of racism.

it's hard to convince people that u weren't the aggressor when u admitting stalking

Zimmerman ran up on trayvon, got his ass beat, and shot him cause he's a cowarod

This is quite a heated thread. In my opinion, Zimmerman should be charged with involuntary manslaughter. I'm viewing this from actions that was taken and not this black/white/hispanic controversy background. Not overlooking nor ignoring their ethnicity but these isn't acivil rights case. It's a situation that went down hill quickly and unfortunately a person was killed. This been said before, Zimmerman shold of listened and stayed put. If had done it then we wouldn't have this topic. Zimmerman was already in the wrong for ignoring the suggestion then it lead up to scene. He should get that manslaughter charge.

I agree with you BF. I doubt the evidence would justify 2ndDegree murder but I DO think manslaughter is possible. I won't hold my breath because you never really know. I DO have a feeling though that there will be a verdict sometime this weekend.

Btw, have you been watching the trial?


TIS