Gun Power
Sunday, July 8, 2012 at 7:29PM There’s been plenty of talk around the blogs and forums of late about working out a plea deal. You know, why not let George Zimmerman plead guilty to a reduced charge of manslaughter and get it over with? It would save the state of Florida a lot of money, and that’s what this was all about to begin with, right? Well, yes, it would save money but, no, it was not what the state had in mind at all. Well, maybe there’s one major detail, which I’ll explain later.
To begin with, I now agree with what former lead investigator Chris Serino said about the manslaughter charge. He actually knew what he was talking about, but before any of you throw racial darts my way, or missiles of any kind for any reason, you’d better keep an open mind and read the entire article or you’ll be spending some time left out in the cold during one of the most brutal summers on record.
Yeah, George, take the plea!
No, don’t!
Any way you look at it, if he is convicted of second-degree murder, it goes without saying that it would be a felony conviction. But what about manslaughter? Would it be a felony or a misdemeanor if he’s convicted of that instead? Murder is a piece of cake to explain. It means that malice aforethought must be present, whereas in manslaughter, it’s absent. Absence of malice. OK, that’s easy enough to grasp, but what makes it a misdemeanor or felony?
Involuntary manslaughter means causing the death of another person without intent. Generally speaking, it’s caused by an improper use of reasonable care while carrying out a lawful act, or while in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony. Let’s say drag racing with your car that results in a homicide. You took an unreasonable and high-degree of risk and that’s considered criminally negligent manslaughter. On the other hand, let’s say you’re chopping down a tree and accidentally hit someone with the ax — killing him — there’s nothing criminal about it. In many states, depending on the degree of involuntary manslaughter, it could be a misdemeanor or a felony.
In the case of voluntary manslaughter, we’re talking about an intentional killing that’s accompanied by added circumstances that mitigate the killing, not excuse it. In its most common form, it occurs when a person is provoked to commit the homicide. This is felony manslaughter, and it goes to the very heart of the Trayvon Martin shooting death, whether it’s considered manslaughter or second-degree murder. Either way, if George Zimmerman is convicted, it will be a felony conviction. Interestingly, the Orlando Sentinel reported that the paperwork originally sent to prosecutors stated that there was probable cause to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter. The Sentinel article went on to say that it “was signed by lead Investigator Chris Serino and his boss, then-Sgt. Randy Smith, but it was the department’s official position and had the support of [former Sanford police Chief Bill Lee Jr.] said Capt. Bob O’Connor, who oversees the department’s major-crimes division and also was part of the investigation.”
Well, what’s all this hubbub about manslaughter or murder? Why is the public split on it? I mean those in the Martin camp. You see, it really doesn’t matter and that’s why some attorneys believe the state overcharged. Of course, that major detail I said I’d explain later could be as simple as getting him to plead to something — PLEAD DOWN — but it’s not. It can’t be.
You see, back in the late 1990s, George Bush’s younger brother, Jeb, was governor of the great state of Florida. He pushed through a law, Florida Statutes, Section 775.087 (2)-(4), that became effective on July 1, 1999. What was it, you ask, that could have come from a conservative, gun-respecting, NRA-allied Republican; the same Jeb Bush who signed SB 436, better known as “Stand Your Ground” into law in 2005?
Why… the legislation enacted his initiative providing mandatory sentences for felony convictions of crimes in which a gun was used. Plain and simple.
For pulling a gun during a crime, a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years is imposed. For certain felony crimes or attempted felonies, the 10 year mandatory sentence is authorized if the criminal possessed a gun (or destructive device). For firing the gun during a crime the mandatory minimum sentence is 20 years. For injuring or killing a victim by firing the gun during a crime, a mandatory minimum sentence from 25 years to life in prison is authorized. (See: Mandatory Sentences Under the 10-20-Life Law and Experts: Florida’s ‘10-20-Life’ empowers prosecutors but handcuffs judges, juries, defense attorneys)
So you see, forget about whether it’s second-degree murder or felony manslaughter because, either way, they are both felonies and if you are in Trayvon’s camp, all you want is a conviction. Stop worrying about a plea. The least Zimmerman could get would be 25-years. That sort of changes the perspective on Mark O’Mara now, doesn’t it?
Dave Knechel | tagged Capt. Bob O'Connor, Chris Serino, Governor Jeb Bush, Sgt. Randy Smith | in 10-20-Life, Angela Corey, Benjamin Crump, Bernie De la Rionda, Bill Lee, Dave Knechel, David B. Knechel, David Knechel, George Zimmerman, Judge Kenneth R. Lester, Jr., Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave Knechel, Marinade Dave’s Caylee Anthony Posts, Mark NeJame, Mark O'Mara, Natalie Jackson, Orlando Sentinel, Sanford Police Department, Seminole County, Seminole County Courthouse, Slimm v. Zimm, Stand Your Ground, The Retreat at Twin Lakes, Trayvon Martin, Zimm v. Slimm, marinadedave | Share Article 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (77)
So, what the prosecutors have to do is prove that GZ fired the gun while in the process of committing a crime? I think I missed something here which has never happened from one of your posts before! :-P
Hi, Sherry - No, the point of the post is that all George has to do is be convicted of a felony and he'll be spending the next 25 years in prison. Because he killed someone with a gun. It will be up to the jury to decide whether he's guilty of anything or not. If he's found not guilty, he walks. If he's found guilty of either one, he goes away for a quarter century.
I so hope its the latter, Dave. He had two opportunities to introduce himself and he didn't-that would do it for me to find him guilty if I were on the jury to find him guilty.
Yes, he did, Sherry. The prosecution will make that clear to the jury, too.
Hi, Dave,
I am drained from the heat, and having trouble taking in the information in your post. You are saying that whether GZ is convicted of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter, or pleads to manslaughter, he faces a minimum sentence of 25 years because he shot a gun and killed someone while committing a crime? For the purposes of the 1999 law, are you using "felony" and "crime" interchangeably? If he's convicted or pleads to involuntary manslaughter, then there are no mandatory sentences?
I take it GZ would gain nothing by pleading to manslaughter, unless they let him plead to involuntary and misdemeanor manslaughter?
Hi, Molly - I'm saying there won't be any kind of misdemeanor conviction. He will either be convicted of a felony or he will be set free. If convicted, he goes to prison for at least 25 years, so there's no point in anyone arguing over manslaughter and murder in this case because a conviction yields the same penalty.
I think this is good news-there won't be any convicting of a lesser charge. He either did it or he didn't. And then we just hope to God that the jury gets it!
[That's right, Whistlersmother, it's yes or no, with nothing in between - a felony conviction or bust.]
Thanks for spelling it out, Dave! That is good news. I had no idea about the mandatory sentencing.
[My pleasure, Molly. I became aware of this situation last week and it was something I had to alert everyone to. I hadn't thought much about it before then.]
Dave: This is a great post showing that you delved right in there and rooted around in the nuances of the law. I thought it highlighted how complicated and nitpicky the law can be, in that a person can do the same amount of time for a lesser charge. ఠ_ఠ
Thank you for all your hard work.
I’ve been hanging on this (very simplistic, lol) definition:
Source: here.
Quote:
Second degree murder means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die, knowing that it could cause someone to die, and someone does die. Manslaughter means that someone does something on purpose that could cause someone to die without thinking of that possibility and someone dies.
End of Quote.
Here is a link to the State of Florida VS. George Zimmerman Probable cause affidavit; and some quotes from it.
Quotes:
Quote 1) During the recorded call Zimmerman made reference to people he felt had committed and gotten away with break-ins in his neighborhood. Later while talking about Martin, Zimmerman stated “these assholes, they always get away” and also said “these f***ing” punks”.
Quote 2) When the police dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and that the responding officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home.
Quote 3) Officers recovered a gun from a holster inside Zimmerman’s waistband.
End of Quotes.
Imo, when you are walking around with a gun tucked in the waistband of your pants and you are pursuing a person who you have profiled after you have been informed that you are not required to do so—you are definitely aware and thinking that your actions can cause someone to die. Well, any reasonable person should be.
Needless to say—regardless of the sentence duration—I think they have him charged correctly. Also needless to say—I thought the state had the murderess charged correctly; and look how that turned out. So... {sigh}
I often wonder whether the reason the prosecutors were so hesitant in charging Zimmerman was because of the outcome of the baby Caylee case. I know there are a lot of people who don’t agree with me, but I felt the evidence for a conviction in that case was really strong and that the prosecutors presented it well. Also, that trial cost the state a huge amount of money--all just squandered.
I think the state is still reeling and did not want to take the risk again. Because the ‘evidence’ in this case is not so straight forward and clear; and, once again, the state might not get their conviction.
Had there not been such a powerful public outcry; I’m doubtful that we would have seen any charges.
JMO
[I’m not sure how this changes my perspective of Mr. O’Mara—I might need more coffee.] ; - )
[Thanks, nan11, and I'm glad you appreciate my work. I still have lots of law books leftover from the Anthony days and they come in handy.
That's an interesting link to describe manslaughter, but there are different types, not all of which are a felony of the second degree. There's voluntary and involuntary, for instance, but in Zimmerman's case, the killing was without lawful justification. He's the last idiot who should have ever been allowed outside with a gun. Look what he did.
I will say that the course of this case has absolutely nothing to do with the Anthony fiasco because each case is taken by and of itself. There's no note comparing because no two crimes are the same. While Casey's was certainly a first-degree murder case, this one is not. Plus, they occurred in separate circuits consisting of different investigators and prosecutors. Do I think that had there not been such a public outcry we may never have heard about it? I just don't know, but I sure am glad someone stood up to the plate.
By the way, you're doing a fantastic job of investigating and digging up excellent links, so thank you very much for your efforts. They are appreciated, for sure.]
I agree with nan11 - I don't see how this changes my perspective of MOM. Feeling really slow this morning!
The following is very interesting!!
Excerpts from the article....
This weekend's "Central Florida Spotlight" offered unusual perspectives on the George Zimmerman case. The opinion show allows WFTV-Channel 9 staffers to open up at length in ways they can't do on a newscast, and they certainly did this weekend. The show repeats at 4 p.m. Sunday on WRDQ-Channel 27.
The guests stressed that the Sanford Police Department had done a thorough investigation into Zimmerman's shooting of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman is charged with second-degree murder in the teen's death. Zimmerman says he was acting in self-defense
"The more information that comes out, the better this investigation looks," WFTV legal analyst Bill Sheaffer told moderator Greg Warmoth.
WFTV reporter Daralene Jones said that even though the public had been upset with Sanford police, investigator Chris Serino questioned every detail of Zimmerman's story.
"It looks like everyone was sitting on their hands at the Sanford Police Department and the State Attorney's Office," Jones said. "Sanford police did, from what we're seeing on paper, thoroughly investigate."
Jones said the police department needed someone to go on television and explain the process to the public, which was upset across the country.
How can Zimmerman argue that he was crying for help and that Martin's hand was over his mouth? The defense will likely argue that Zimmerman was moving his head around, Sheaffer said.
Read it all here...
George Zimmerman: His attorney is 'ultimate professional
Here is the video....Greg Warmoth with Bill Sheaffer and Daralene Jones
George Zimmerman's new bond request - Central Florida Spotlight
[That was a great video, Snoopy. It's always a pleasure to see Bill in such fine form, too. I skipped reading the article and went straight for the video.]
Snoopy: Nice to 'see' you. : - )
I found that to be a very good program, too. (Also the article.) This is such a serious case, but it is so nice to get a chance to listen to Mr. Sheaffer again.
I am also dropping in with a couple of links:
You Tube Video – Witness #9 (anonymous)
The Miami Herald - Trayvon Martin’s shooter had a domestic violence altercation in 2005
Snipped and Quoted:
He grew upset, snatching her cellphone away from her, pushing her, she said.
In their petitions, both included other allegations of violence.
End
Witness 9 is purported to be the girl the Herald is discussing. I found it very sobering to watch the video and then read the article.
If this is true, (and note I said if); it really shows that Mr. Zimmerman had a propensity for violence when he was just barely out of his teens.
There is suppose to be some new discovery coming out this week, but I doubt that we will hear any more about this that soon. Since Mr. O'Mara has filed a motion to keep it sealed--I think we will have to have a ruling from the judge first. (?)
Probably still some things worth looking over though.
[Thursday at 10 am, nan11. I can't wait! I especially want to see the CCP app.]
Nan11~~great to see you too!! I check out all your links. You are a darn fine sleuth.
Yes, this case seems to have taken many twists and turns since the beginning. How things will eventually turn out is anyone's guess. When we think that the state has a slam dunk case, a jury may see it otherwise.
I hope you are enjoying some of this gorgeous Maritime weather. I was out enjoying some of Old Sol's rays. Now time for an icecream bar.
Will check back later.
nan11, Thank you for posting the link to Witness 9's statement. I hadn't heard it before. She sounds terrified of GZ. Assuming that she is an ex-romantic partner, this brings up something I've wondered about. It's pure speculation so I have not posted anything before.
I'm wondering whether GZ is an abusive husband. From the jailhouse calls, it is clear that SZ does his bidding and he is in charge. But it does sound as if they have a loving relationship. so maybe all is well between them (apart from a little conspiracy...)
Nan11~~I see that this article says that Witness #9 used to be Zimmerman's girlfriend. Since she wishes to remain anonymous, I wonder how anyone found out she was a girlfriend. She said she knows Zimmerman's family and did sound rather emotional. I wonder if she is also the ex-fiancée.
What A Surprise! Zimmerman's Old Girlfriend Says He's Biased Against Black People (DETAILS)
Dave~~I am still working on trying to figure out that Gun Power. lol
[It's easy... it's like gun powder without the d.]
Snoops: In one of George's police interviews, they show him her name and ask him what is their relationship. And he confirms that she is a former girlfriend. (Or maybe he does say ex-fiancee.)
Now, that is not the exact context--but it's all my old noggin is coming up with right now. I'll see if I can find that link for everyone.
I'm a little confused over the girlfriend and ex-fiancee--but I do believe it is one and the same.
Sorry, I really should have had a clearer understanding before I posted that.
Molly: Thanks for bothering with it. LOL
I have seen another link containing the actual 'charge' record; so, I really do believe that it is not speculation. At least to the charges--maybe not to the girl. I'll try to find that one, too.
I will return.
Back to Snoops: I really don't think this one is a slam dunk--not by a long shot. All my sympathy lies with Trayvon and that side of justice, though. (If that makes any sense.)
Yes, we have had some beautiful weather that I have been enjoying. A little bit anyway.
I'm trying really hard not to get too involved in this case, but I'm not sure I'm winning that one. {sigh}
Okay, I've got a couple of things to do--but then I'll look that stuff up and return.
Snoops: Okay, it took me a while but here it is. : - )
Axiom Amnesia/Audio/George Zimmerman Statements
Quote at 16:36 minutes - Recording 4, Dated 2/29/12:
CS: .....Who is this female right here?
GZ: My ex-girl friend.
CS: Okay. What has she got against you?
GZ: Ahhhh, nothing.
CS: Nothing. Did you have an injunction on her—or she had an injunction on you?
GZ: (overtalking) .....long time ago.
Now, notice Zimmerman confirms here that the 'injunctions' did indeed happen, albeit a 'long time ago'--even though he refers to her as his ex-girlfriend.
Now, I've got another comment coming right behind this one. (I'll do it separate due to the links.)
Molly and Snoops:
Snoops Link
Quote:
The witness is the same woman who filed a domestic violence injunction against Zimmerman in 2005. He filed one against her the following day.
End of Quote
My Link
Quote:
In 2005, his ex-fiáncée, hair salon employee Veronica Zuazo, filed for a restraining order against Zimmerman — whom she called “Georgie.”
End of Quote.
So, for confirmation--I think we can take from the first quote that Witness 9 is the same woman who filed the domestic violence injunction against George in 2005; and take from the second quote in 2005 his ex-fiancee filed a restraining order in 2005; and take from Det. Serino question about the restraining order (linked in the above comment)--we can be pretty sure that it is one and the same girl. (It would have been nice if Det. Serino would have stated the year--but "Georgie' said it was 'a long time ago.'
Molly: I looked and looked; but I couldn't find that link I wanted to add for you. I'll keep on the look-out for it. I will likely stumble across it.
I think, though, if you take a look at Snoopy's link there is a paragraph there that is very interesting:
Quote:
In paperwork released Monday, Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda did not spell out what witness 9 told authorities, but he described it as information about his "bias against black persons," including an unspecified "act."
End of Quote.
My take on this is: it is anything but speculation--Mr. de la Rionda is trying to get it allowed at trial. (And Mr. O'Mara is trying to keep it out.)
So, I don't think anybody is making this up.
Hope that helps! シ
Thanks loads, Nan11. We have to keep in mind that some exes have axes to grind. hmmm
I am not trying to defend Zimmerman whatsoever. I hope that the ones who take the witness stand tell the truth and nothing but the truth. We don't need any more 'Cindys'. Roy Kronk's exes had axes and thank goodness they didn't get to testify.
I want to see a 'fair' trial carried out in a courtroom and justice take place. George and Shellie Zimmerman made a mockery of the court at the first bond hearing. Maybe Shellie felt because she was hooked up by phone at the bond hearing, she could fib a little. I wonder if she has found herself a lawyer as she is being arraigned on the 31th. It will be interesting to see if she will plead guilty and accept her just punishment or go for not guilty to get a delay.
So obviously GZ is going to take this to trial. At least he has some sort of a chance of walking. There is no incentive for him to take a plea. So - to trial we all go?
[Hi, nymima - Yes, to trial we will go. If GZ wants a SYG hearing, he will have to open up his entire defense strategy to the prosecution. Odds are, he'd lose anyway, so why risk it there? Save it for the trial.]
Wow- thank you, nan11,for all that work. It does sound as if W9 is the ex-fiance who filed an injunction in 2005 (and had one filed against her, in return). And it does sound as if she is claiming that GZ did something awful. We do have to keep in mind, as Snoopy said, that ex-romantic partners can make things up out of spite. But I thought that there was something recently to the effect that her charges were corroborated? I can't put my finger on it now.
That's my interpretation of Dave's post, nymima, that there is absolutely no reason for GZ to plead to manslaughter. At trial, he has a reasonable chance of going free. It only takes one juror.
New evidence coming on Thursday:
Orlando Sentinel - New evidence Thursday in Trayvon Martin shooting
Quote:
It will be released to the media 10 a.m. Thursday.
End of Quote
Snoops & Molly: I agree. It sounds pretty serious, though. I'll be surprised if they allow it in.
Nope, no Mr. O'Mara on Piers Morgan tonight. Oh, well.
Dave: Sorry to repeat when the new discovery will come out. After I posted my comment, I scrolled back up and read your comment. Thanks! : - )
"Involuntary manslaughter means causing the death of another person without intent. Generally speaking, it’s caused by an improper use of reasonable care while carrying out a lawful act, or while in the commission of an unlawful act not amounting to a felony"..........
I imagine this is what GZ thinks happened at it's absolute worst. I have a feeling he thought there was nothing wrong with following TM across the complex. He thought he was after a criminal, not a kid.
"In the case of voluntary manslaughter, we’re talking about an intentional killing that’s accompanied by added circumstances that mitigate the killing, not excuse it. In its most common form, it occurs when a person is provoked to commit the homicide.".......
This is what I hope the court will include with the second degree verdict. Give them an option so we don't have another fiasco like Casey Anthony.
"For pulling a gun during a crime, a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years is imposed. For certain felony crimes or attempted felonies, the 10 year mandatory sentence is authorized if the criminal possessed a gun (or destructive device). For firing the gun during a crime the mandatory minimum sentence is 20 years. For injuring or killing a victim by firing the gun during a crime, a mandatory minimum sentence from 25 years to life in prison is authorized.".....
This goes back to paragraph 1, Since it was GZ pulling the gun. Where does the crime come in? I think following TM across the complex amounted to stalking, but minor stalking. (a crime? no) Was the assault the crime? In that case GZ was the one getting knocked around, so was it his crime still? I can see where the defense would take this one.
Second degree murder includes Murder with a Depraved Mind
Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.
I agree with the state that this best describes this situation.
A conviction is a conviction in my mind. I don't care what he gets as long as TM gets justice.
O'Mara & Piers Morgan-Video clip
Snoopy: Thank you so much for that link. I guess I didn't wait long enough. (I didn't hear Mr. Morgan mention it in his 'prelude' to his show.)
Mark O’Mara is walking a tight rope and he is doing it with dignity and aplomb. Piers Morgan’s questions were, in my opinion, on the ‘crude’ side.
I haven’t been to any other places yet this morning to see what is being said—but before I allow my thinking to become ‘tainted’—I just want to say that I am a Mark O’Mara fan. Even though we are on different sides of the Trayvon case, I respect Mark O’Mara.
George Zimmerman (being the stand-up guy that he is--not), started that fund business himself. What should Mark O'Mara do--leave it there so George and Shellie will have their pockets well lined when (and if) he walks free?
I realize he (Mark O'Mara), 'asked' for more, but why should he work for nothing if people are willing to throw money at George hand over fist.
imho (I guess this will be my moring rant.) lol
At 47 seconds in from Snoopy's link:
Piers Morgan: Right. But it is, as you say, a unique situation for a defense attorney to effectively say: “Look, you may believe he killed somebody—and he clearly did—but if you think that he acted in self defense, think it was justified: give us your money. There is something, as critics would say-- and there is some merit to their argument--it is slightly crude, isn’t it? I mean, it’s a sort of; it’s a very weird thing to be doing, isn’t it?
Mark O’Mara: It is. As I said, I was; I am somewhat conflicted with it only because it is so very unique. This whole case has shown a lot of unique facets to it. One of which is the fact that there is a criminal defense fund at all. Secondly, that it has gotten such amazing controversy and support throughout the nation and internationally. So it was a decision that we were sort of put in the position of having to do, because of the bond amount. If you remember, Piers, we had talked in the past that I had never really asked for money on George’s behalf, and though we had the defense fund active—we never really pushed it. The reality is, however, that with a $1,000,000.00 bond and a $100,000.00 fee to get that bond done—we cannot do it without support from George’s supporters.
Piers Morgan: How do you know, though, that there are no racists groups getting involved in this fund raising? I mean, are you vetting each doner? Do you know who they are? Because, clearly the way this is being framed is an open invitation to any of the racists who raise their ugly heads at the time to say: “Hay, this guy shot a black guy—I’m going to give him some money.” How do you know that is not happening?
Mark O’Mara: Well, my true opinion is that I have reviewed thousands of the supporter’s comments that have come to us; and they have all been positive and I would say appropriate. There have been a very few that have been negative—those monies have been returned. So, at least those people who are commenting are doing it from the heart, and from the right place. After all, there could be racist people on both sides of this fence. We have an enormous amount of hate mail that comes to us as well from the racists on the other side of it. Any racist from the white side, if you will, who do something like that —will go into, ah, rebuff them and not accept their money.
A big Thank You for clarifying this issue, Dave! This has been what's been driving me crazy about this case- I kept waiting for a presumed deal to develop and there was MOM all over the place, coddling (imoo) GZ, and NO DEAL! And anywhere else, as I'm sure you know, there would be a deal, plain as day.
This also explains the atrocious case there of the woman who got the mando for shooting one shot in her home, trying to warn off her abusive husband. She deliberately aimed for the wall, but still got a huge, ridiculous sentence. That one has just made me nuts- I guess she was supposed to let herself get beaten again. No SYG for you, Dearie!
Mando sentencing is an unethical, easy way out for the cretins you have down there in your legislature to look like Big, Tough, Hard-On-Crime types. I love seeing them on TV after-the-fact, waving their arms around - "Well, we didn't mean for THAT to happen". These mandos just set up situations that everyone agrees are unfair and the exact opposite of justice.
In Massachusetts they have a no-transport-in-car law for (I think) handguns, with a mando year in the clink for a guilty. This is for residents and basically is meant to save lives, given the rageaholic nature of your average Boston Driver. It has undoubtedly achieved that particular goal, but in fact winds up being very discretionary on the part of LE as to enforcement (not exactly a surprise there! So carry big bills!) and has added to the basic contempt for legal authority so much a part of the culture of the state- every cop is assumed to be bribe-able. Non-residents (transporting a gun from, say, NH to CT), having to travel through MA, may not stop except for gas- no overnights at the Cape! It has helped LE with charging Known Bad Guys with at least one year if other charges (like drug dealing) might not stick too well. The non-resident clause is only there to be compliant with federal law which over-rides local. They do NOT want guns in MA, and virtually all guns found there are traceable right to New Hampshire.
My question today is, since the NRA claims to be so strong on education, how is it these folks in Florida don't seem to know about these mandatory laws?
A prediction- given this info, he'll almost certainly walk.
[Much obliged, Karen. I'm only happy to clarify the issue. This would partially explain why there will be no deal, but even if there were to be something, which cannot happen, O'Mara would never take it anyway. Besides, he works for his client and his client is delusional. He refers to the victim as his suspect. That's very telling.
The 10-20-25-life law is pretty doggone strict, and I'll bet you that George, as smart as he thinks he is, never gave that a thought. He ruled by the gun and now the gun should rule his life; at least 25-years of it. I hope!
The NRA is strong on education, but there's still that old saying that applies... You can lead a horse to water...
Even in the law enforcement profession, where they are legitimately licensed to carry firearms, and are expected to, there are bad eggs, and they have educations far superior to what the NRA has to offer. I have no use for guns in my life, but there are people who absolutely know how to handle them, and I am not against gun ownership or guns in general. In the hands of idiots, though, that's a different story. George Zimmerman was an accident waiting to happen. Unfortunately, no one has real control over people like him until after the fact. A state issues a drivers' license to alcoholics without knowing it until something happens. Hopefully, they're caught before an accident resulting in death or injury. As serious as guns are, I wish the state of Florida took ownership more seriously. Zimmerman was a walking time bomb, speaking of which, you're right, he may walk. If he does, at least he'll never really be free again. He is a social pariah and his life is a train wreck. Sadly, he will blame everyone he can but himself.]
Dave and everyone: I don't have a date for when this came out; but I just came across it this morning. All the phone calls - (and there details) - Mr. Zimmerman made to the police in the months leading up to the shooting are here.
LOL - I might have been the only one who missed its release--so pardon me, if so.
George Zimmerman's Police Call History
Quote:
A new 47-page document, quietly dumped online by the city of Sanford, details some of the phone calls George Zimmerman made to emergency dispatchers in Seminole County, Florida. Zimmerman, a self-styled neighborhood watch captain in his Orlando suburb, shot 17-year-old African American Trayvon Martin dead last month after reporting him to police as a suspicious person prowling the area. The newly released police calls paint Zimmerman as a man obsessed with law and order, with the minutiae of suburban life, and with black males.
End of Quote.
[From Dave -
I had seen this document or something similar to it earlier on, but I must say it looks a lot more interesting now than it did then. This Zimmerman dude was calling the cops for every little thing.
"9-1-1, what's your emergency?"
"My neighbor? He's in his late 50s? He has a pimple on the end of his nose?"
"Yes?"
"He's too old to get pimples. What's up with that? It might not really be him? It could be a perpetrator in disguise, lookin' to scope out the place?"
Typical Georgism.]
Nan11- Wait, that wasn't from The Onion?
[That was my response - Dave.]
This goes back to a previous post. I found myself speaking GZ-style this morning, ending every sentence with an upward inflection. The situation? I was making an appointment for my younger son to see a cardiologist. At his checkup, the pediatrician noticed a mild heart murmur. It is probably nothing serious, but he recommended having it checked. What caused the unusual, for me, way of speaking? Anxiety and a desire not to be doing what I was doing. Maybe it was the same for GZ.
Not that I want to have anything in common with him.
[I think, with GZ, he does it to fool people into believing he's naive and filled with nothing but goodness and innocence. The thing that scares me the most now is that his slick willyness will convince the jury. He'll talk directly to them with the same inflections. What a poor, poor victim he'll be.]
Dave: Oh, oh. I don't think it was from 'The Onion'--but maybe it's them by a different name or something. Sorry, I really thought it was authentic.
It's here, Dave. I just clicked on the convert to PDF link.
(I did see one earlier today that about made me blow my top--but that one was truly from 'The Onion' and said so at the top.
Here: A Joke Only - From 'The Onion'
Sorry about this. (Please delete that if it's just a joke.)
[No problem, nan11. I think that the comment was confusing over ho wrote what. Where did your part end and mine begin? That's all. After you mentioned it, yeah, it kinda does look like something The Onion would write, and after seeing the 9-1-1 parody, you're right! No harm done.]
Yes, I suppose it was his way of appearing innocent. I am worried about what his former co-worker said, that GZ was so good at explaining away his behavior that the co-worker, who had been bullied by GZ, started to doubt himself. I'm glad Judge Lester sees through him. It's probably too much to hope that member of the jury do.
[I saw right through him and it's quite obvious Judge Lester did, too. I don't think Zimmerman will ever get it. He killed a kid, not a bad guy. He's delusional.]
That little comment in the jail calls about putting on a hoodie was so revealing of the contempt GZ and SZ feel toward Trayvon and his supporters.
[And they smirked while talking about it. It was disgusting.]
very intresting read
gives some good insight into the "self defense" mindset
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/self-defense.htm
sorry i meant this link
same site alot of good info too
http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/self-defenseexplained.htm
oh and there is a descriptive term the author uses to describe our innate responses that i think certainly applies to GZ
my guess is you all will figure it out
[Thank you very much for that link, John. The thing that stuck out like a sore thumb to me was this:
"What makes self-defense complicated is that most people are not actually defending their bodies. Usually they're trying to protect their emotions and pride. When you're scared, excited or angry, it's really hard to tell the difference. But there are differences ... BIG ones."
That explains a wimp like Zimmerman to a T.]
I thought this was cute:
GZ's safe house
Especially the comment (paraphrasing here) "who does he think he is, Jason Bourne?"
Dave~~I found this and it may be of interest. I think the screaming for help was too high pitched to be Zimmeman. Check this out..
Did George Zimmerman Cry for Help? – The Trayvon Martin Murder Trial
John: I found your link to be very informative. Here is something that I took from it:
The ‘square’ of self-defense:
Quote:
1. The danger to you is physical
2. It's not a maybe, could be, or 'he might...,' it's happening.
3. You participated in the creation and escalation of the situation.
4. You didn't stop after the threat to you was past.
End of Quote
So, if the above points make a 'square' of self-defense (that one should stay inside of); clearly Mr. Zimmerman stepped outside the square when it comes to point #3.
He most certainly participated in the creation of the situation by watching and profiling Trayvon, (who became aware that he was being watched); and in the escalation of the situation by leaving his truck and following him.
It sounds so simple, doesn't it. Then enter the 'Stand-Your Ground' law and all that entails. Not so simple any more.
Very interesting, though.
Dave~~this explains a bit more in depth of what we should expect to see in the doc dump. I notice Taaffee's is among the interviews by the FBI.
Special Prosecutor Angela Corey on Thursday releases another round of evidence in her second-degree murder case against George Zimmerman, including a first look at what FBI agents have turned up in their civil rights investigation.
Nearly a dozen FBI agents interviewed several Sanford police officers, including the case's lead investigator, Chris Serino. They also talked to Zimmerman's former girlfriend, who accused him in court paperwork of being violent; neighbor Frank Taffee; several unidentified civilian witnesses and several gun shop employees, including those who worked at the store where Zimmerman bought the gun he used to shoot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
Read more here...
George Zimmerman evidence, including FBI interviews, to be released Thursday
Dave there is a huge diffreence between a 25 year sentance and a life sentance with 25 minimum..With 25 year sentance you have a release date.Also a possability of parlole after half or two 3rds of your time served..A life sentance never ends an you can be recalled to prison after your release for J Walking getting drunk or assosiateing with known criminals,Your entire life is scrutinised by a parole officer untill the day you die piss them off an iits back to jail.I knew a lifer served 17 years for his part in a gang fight an death.Although he didnt deliver fatal blows he was acting in consert with others .He was twenty an released at 37 about 8 mnths after he admitted to his probation/parole officer to haveing depression an a hard time adjusting to outside .He told her he had smoked dope in order to deal with the stress.He had been introduced to dope whilst behind bars.She revoked his licance an he was returned to jail no criminal chardges were nessesery an ended up seveing another ten years being refused parole a further two times.On his third refuseall an being ajourned for a futher 5 years he commited suicide.
Snoop: Here is a direct link to the audio mentioned in your above linked article.
As a warning--it is very hard to listen to because they do repeat the 'scream' more than once as they alternate between George's voice test and the voice heard on the 911 call.
I don't see how anyone can believe the scream could have come from Mr. Zimmerman--but maybe that is just my emotions ruling. iykwim
2nd Audio Box: Axiom Amnesia - Side-By-Side Comparison Of Voice Exemplar
Quote from Site:
*Note: This is an exclusive side-by-side comparison that we created using audio from the voice exemplar above and the original 911 Call #2/Witness #11.
End of Quote
1st Audio Box: Witness #18 (aka 911 Caller #8)
This lady is so upset during her 911 call that it is heartbreaking to get through; however, if you can, I thought this part was interesting: טּ_טּ
Quote at about 3:17 minutes in
911 Operator: Listen, we don’t know if they have been killed. Okay. We know, probably, some...
Witness 18 (Caller 8): He just said he shot him dead.
End of Quote.
So, I’m assuming that it was George she heard saying that. It just bothers me that Mr. Zimmerman made so many statements about words Trayvon said (after the shot); and the story he told about turning him over and frisking him—ugh, it is just sickening.
Imho-Zimmerman knew Trayvon was dead within seconds of him pulling the trigger.
And a second link (which is a good site map showing the location of all the 911 callers/witnesses; as well as a few other interesting things.
imgur Trayvon Martin - Witness Map
ecossie: Very interesting--and sad story, too.
Nan11~~thanks for those links. I had listened to them a while back and then gave another listen a few minutes ago. That voice screaming does not sound anything like Zimmerman's reenactment. That sounds like a terrified youth with a gun being aimed at him. I think Zimmerman said it was him doing the screaming to cover his own butt. Z probably made sure the bullet went straight into his heart.
When Z said that he straddled T and stretched his arms out to the sides, he was actually tucking T's hands underneath him. He knew darn well Trayvon was dead. I do not beleive T said, "you got me" after he was shot. The only sound that would have come from T is a long gasp as the air left his lungs, his last breath.
Sorry for being graphic, I have been present when two different people breathed their last.
Nan11~~the dispatcher who was trying to calm down the elderly lady that was so upset deserves a commendation. He took his time with her to make sure she would be okay. Whoever he was, bless his heart.
Nan or Snoopy> In your opinion could the Murder 2 charge be linked to the videos from the Clubhouse? I think Nan left them at the last thingy Dave wrote. (not sure what it is called) In one of the videos it looked like Mr. Zimmerman (on foot) around the Clubhouse and another photo had Trayvon by the mail boxes, I think. The reason I ask is because Mr. Zimmerman said he was not patrolling the neighborhood. He had left home to go to Target, and noticed Trayvon walking "about" or something like that. Trying to figure out how to make this make sense...
I guess what I mean is If he was patrolling as a watchmen instead of going to Target could that be the reason for the charges? Watchmen do not carry guns, or they are not suppose to? I don't know how to ask what I am thinking, am I making any sense?
Michelle~~When Dave writes an article for us to discuss, we call it a 'post.' Thingie is fine too. lol
A neighborhood watchman should not carry a firearm if he is patrolling the neighborhood on foot. If the watchman finds it necessary to exit his vehicle to see where a suspect may have gone, he should leave the firearm secured in his locked vehicle.
A neighborhood watchman should not pursue a person who he feels might be up to no good. If he sees someone who looks suspicious, he is supposed to call the non-emerg 911 and describe the situation. The dispatcher will decide if a patrol car should be dipatched to the reported area.
As a neighborhood watchman, he could very well be on his way to a Target store and if he sees something suspicious to call 911 and report it. There is nothing illegal about that. I cannot see this having anything to do with the Murder 2 charge.
Regarding the Club House etc. I did not pay that much attention to it so maybe someone else can help you.
Isn't it interesting that GZ didn't mention about going aound the clubhouse in his reenactment? hmmm...I wonder why?
Sherry~ ~ I must have missed something. Where does it show GZ by the clubhouse?