Martin/Zimmerman: humble opinions and speculation thread

[you with the face]

Originally Posted by Bricker

I must have missed it. Would you mind reposting it?

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/

The SDMB is not the only message board that is discussing this case, btw. If you really think there is a consensus among lawyers that the State's case against GZ is insufficient based on available info, you really need to get out more.

[emeraldia]

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress...-self-defense/

This was his very first post on the Zimmerman case. After a series of hastily established, and specious premises, he concludes:

"Therefore, Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense should be rejected and he should be charged with intentional murder."

Note that this was written before Zimmerman was even charged, much less any discovery to speak of. He is a nut. (Edit: There is definitely a consensus among attorneys that the State's case is currently weak. Go find another one besides the nutty professor.)

[Lochdale]

Originally Posted by you with the face

I find your recall fascinating. My position on that case is that we didn't have enough information to say whether the lacrosse players were guilty or innocent. Or to put it another way, my stance is that we didn't have enough information to pronounce the accuser a lying whore.

My stance in this thread is that we do have enough evidence to disbelieve Zimmerman's claim of self-defense. Thanks to Florida's sunshine laws, we know a lot more about the evidence involved than we ever did about the Duke case.

See that? Two completely different positions.

In fairness, you were more aggressive than that and seemed fairly convinced of the guilt of the students despite the lack of evidence.

In this instance I agree with you as there is a lot more evidence here. My real point or observation, however, is that you might get too close to issues with a racial element. Just something to consider as it can colour your arguments and makes you a less effective advocate for your position.

[you with the face]

Originally Posted by Lochdale

My real point or observation, however, is that you might get too close to issues with a racial element. Just something to consider as it can colour your arguments and makes you a less effective advocate for your position.

Unless you can point to a specific argument or position to criticize me about, all your opinion amounts to is a batch of unsolicited unpersuasiveness. With a touch of irony mixed in, since the only one bringing race into this discussion right now is you.

[monstro]

Originally Posted by Lochdale

In fairness, you were more aggressive than that and seemed fairly convinced of the guilt of the students despite the lack of evidence.

It's amazing that you are not only accusing you with the face of taking a position she did not take, but that you are saying she did so aggressively. No matter that she was 100% correct and her opponents were crudely ad homineming her to Kingdom Come. In your mind, she was the aggressive one. Gotcha.

If you're going to bring up irrevelant details, the very least you could do is get them right.

[enomaj]

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/0...uth-squad.html

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

There is definitely a consensus among attorneys that the State's case is currently weak.

Without examples, I can only conclude this is your unsupported personal opinion.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by enomaj

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/0...uth-squad.html

Interesting article

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

Without examples, I can only conclude this is your unsupported personal opinion.

Alan Deshowitz, Jeralyn Merritt, Richard Hornsby. There's 3 off the top of my head. Bricker, there's four. Now come up with one on the other side that is not a crackpot.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

Now come up with one on the other side that is not a crackpot.

I have no doubt any one I named, you would label a crackpot.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

I have no doubt any one I named, you would label a crackpot.

I don't doubt that either, but you should at least give me the chance to label them such. We already eliminated professor Leatherman. Are there any others?

[Blank Slate]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

Alan Deshowitz, Jeralyn Merritt, Richard Hornsby. There's 3 off the top of my head...

That's like a scumbag-defending all-star team. Zimmerman fits in perfectly.

[JoelUpchurch]

Originally Posted by Bricker

Text messages have not been released, due to an exception in Florida's Sunshine laws.

As far as I know, the text messages haven't been released because O'Mara asked for 30 days to review them before they are released. There is no blanket exception to the sunshine law.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_...prot_order.pdf

Page 4

We should be seeing the text messages, although they might redact the telephone numbers.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by JoelUpchurch

We should be seeing the text messages, although they might redact the telephone numbers.

I'm only hoping he didn't text anything really stupid. (Like I probably would have done in his situation.)

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Blank Slate

That's like a scumbag-defending all-star team. Zimmerman fits in perfectly.

All defense attorneys have to represent some scumbags. Every once and a while they have the opportunity to defend an innocent man against pitch-fork carrying mobs, whose been maligned by the media, and who has been prosecuted by a system corrupted by political pressure. Someone has to stand up and advocate for this man, Captain George Zimmerman. This is what defense attorneys are for.

[JoelUpchurch]

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...orge-zimmerman

About a month after the shooting, the federal filings show, Travelers issued an insurance policy to the homeowners association, effective March 30. "After the inception of the claims-made policy, Fulton made a claim for monetary damages..." Travelers says "...as a result of the fatal shooting of Martin."

How could the insurance company be liable for actions on February 26th when the policy was issued on March 30th, unless the policy was retroactive?

[Larry Mudd]

Originally Posted by JoelUpchurch

How could the insurance company be liable for actions on February 26th when the policy was issued on March 30th, unless the policy was retroactive?

It's a "claims made" policy, not an "occurrence" policy - it may (and likely does, since it's not disputed) include an endorsement for prior acts.

It still seems like a very dubious claim with little chance of success, though. The only exception is for "wrongful employment practices." If it's anything like the coverage I've dealt with for strata/condo associations in my last job, this is only meant to cover situations where employees have been wrongly treated; ie; your caretaker is suing you for wrongful termination, or filing a human rights complaint because they claim they are paid less than is typical because of their ethnicity, etc.

It looks like they are hoping to claim that the HOA failed in their due diligence by employing Zimmerman as a volunteer, but the chances of the policy being interpreted that way approach zero - coverage for these types of situations would be under professional liability or errors and omissions, if they had it at all - and this is ruled out by the quoted clause.

[doorhinge]

Originally Posted by Larry Mudd

.....It looks like they are hoping to claim that the HOA failed in their due diligence by employing Zimmerman as a volunteer, but the chances of the policy being interpreted that way approach zero - coverage for these types of situations would be under professional liability or errors and omissions, if they had it at all - and this is ruled out by the quoted clause.

.....provided that this exclusion shall not apply" to allegations "made as part of a Claim for Wrongful Employment Practices."

Legally-speaking, how are "volunteers" viewed as "employees" in this case?

Fulton has filed a claim for monetary damages against an insurance company and the company is asking a judge for a legal ruling on whether it's truely liable. "Asking for" is not the same as actually receiving a payout.

Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the teen's family, said that the Martins are investigating possible claims with "ALL the insurance companies that might be applicable" and was seeking to determine "whatever the insurance limits were."

Fulton appears to be "shopping" her claim to many insurance companies.

[Blank Slate]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

All defense attorneys have to represent some scumbags. Every once and a while they have the opportunity to defend an innocent man against pitch-fork carrying mobs, whose been maligned by the media, and who has been prosecuted by a system corrupted by political pressure. Someone has to stand up and advocate for this man, Captain George Zimmerman. This is what defense attorneys are for.

That brought a tear to my eye, lol.

[JoelUpchurch]

Originally Posted by doorhinge

.....provided that this exclusion shall not apply" to allegations "made as part of a Claim for Wrongful Employment Practices."

Legally-speaking, how are "volunteers" viewed as "employees" in this case?

Fulton has filed a claim for monetary damages against an insurance company and the company is asking a judge for a legal ruling on whether it's truely liable. "Asking for" is not the same as actually receiving a payout.

Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the teen's family, said that the Martins are investigating possible claims with "ALL the insurance companies that might be applicable" and was seeking to determine "whatever the insurance limits were."

Fulton appears to be "shopping" her claim to many insurance companies.

Interesting. I looked at the plat map and it appears to me that Trayvon Martin's head could have been on been on 1211 Twin Trees and his feet were on 1221 Twin Trees. Could both home owners be sued?

[doorhinge]

Originally Posted by JoelUpchurch

Interesting. I looked at the plat map and it appears to me that Trayvon Martin's head could have been on been on 1211 Twin Trees and his feet were on 1221 Twin Trees. Could both home owners be sued?

I think it's only a matter of "when" Fulton will sue them.

And if better lighting had been available at the clubhouse, Zimmerman could have plainly seen that Martin was only picking his butt and not doing anything "suspicious". It's obviously the fault of the clubhouse's designer and it's current owner.

[emeraldia]

If the political motivations of the prosecution of George Zimmerman were not obvious enough before, they should be now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJgIV...ayer_embedded#!
6:04-6:38 Pam Bondi: “Hey Sybrina, Tracy, are you there. Hi. I am so very, very, sorry. As attorney general, I have absolutely no legal authority to take the case, and I looked, I tried.”

Interesting. Very interesting. And since she couldn't take the case, who did she (obviously) encourage the governor to appoint? Her friend and Attorney General 2010 campaign chair, Angela Corey.

http://theconservativetreehouse.file...ela-corey1.jpg

Angela Corey, of course, was the one who prayed with the parents of Trayvon Martin upon their first meeting, referred to Trayvon as a victim very early on, and who was quite friendly with the protesters calling for Zimmerman's arrest. At other times simulating impartiality.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/t...-fund-16939320
"In a March 29 letter, a claims analyst with the Attorney General's Office notified Fulton that she had been deemed eligible for the [victim] compensation benefits."

George Zimmerman was not arrested until April 11th. Attorney General Bondi had determined that Trayvon Martin was a victim two weeks before Zimmerman was charged with anything.

At this point, I am really hoping that this is investigated, and appropriate action taken. This is obviously not how our justice system is supposed to operate.

While I don't agree with all of their theories, etc., The Conservative Treehouse definitely seem to have a very compelling case as it relates to Pam Bondi, Corey, and the political decision to prosecute Zimmerman.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/...-expose-again/

[PatriotX]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

If the political motivations of the prosecution of George Zimmerman were not obvious enough before, they should be now.

Are you saying that GZ is being prosecuted solely for political reasons?

Or are you noting that a case which has drawn national attention has political implications for those involved?

[Jack Batty]

Of course there's nothing politically motivated in an article from Conservative Tree House with link mouse-over that includes: "traymom-financial-motives," that's just crazy talk.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by PatriotX

Are you saying that GZ is being prosecuted solely for political reasons?

Or are you noting that a case which has drawn national attention has political implications for those involved?

Yes, I'm saying that George Zimmerman is being prosecuted for political reasons, and that this decision was made long before Corey launched her "investigation".

And it gets much worse. I couldn't believe that Pam Bondi actually said that the attorneys for Trayvon Martin were "friends of mine". But yes, this user accurately quoted what she said in the video linked below. Anyway, here is a comment from one of the people on CT with (for Jack Batty) citations for everything.

diwataman says:
August 7, 2012 at 5:44 am
Just to add a little more context on Bondi

March
Kevin Cunningham petitions Florida Attorney General at Change.org
500,000 Signatures reached by March 20, 2012

http://www.change.org/petitions/pros...trayvon-martin
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...rtin-case?lite

March 20
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi said she was “devastated and deeply troubled” over the killing. “When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death,” she said in a statement.

She said she had spoken with FDLE Commissioner Gerald M. Bailey, “and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted.”She added that while it is up to the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office to decide whether to file charges, “I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered.”

http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-20/j...?_s=PM:JUSTICE

March 21
IN NEW YORK CITY LIMO (With Crump)
6:04-6:38 Pam Bondi: “Hey Sybrina, Tracy, are you there. Hi. I am so very, very, sorry. As attorney general, I have absolutely no legal authority to take the case, and I looked, I tried.”

March 22
Governor Rick Scott and Attorney General Pam Bondi worked together to appoint Angela B. Corey

http://myfloridalegal.com/__85256222...trayvon,martin

March 29
Democrats Ask Pam Bondi for Trayvon Martin updates

The Florida Democratic congressional delegation sent a letter to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi expressing concerns over the Trayvon Martin case.

The letter asks the attorney general’s office to keep the six Democrats — Alcee L. Hastings, Miramar, Frederica Wilson, Miami Gardens, Ted Deutch, Boca Raton, Kathy Castor, Tampa, Corrine Brown, Jacksonville, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Weston — updated on the state’s
investigation.

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/blo...ates-pam-bondi

March 29
Pam Bondi deemed Trayvon Martin was an innocent victim and that Sybrina Fulton was eligible for money from the State

http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation...c85_story.html

March 30
1:04 “What we care about is justice for Trayvon Martin’s family” [<pause, and as an afterthought>] “...and for both sides”
2:04“Shot, walking home”
“and his lawyers who are friends of mine”
2:28 I've spoken to Trayvon's parents, they are amazing people, and his lawyers, who are friends of mine.
http://johnkingusa.blogs.cnn.com/201...n-martin-case/

April 11
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi released a statement saying she had full confidence in the charges.“ When I worked with Governor Scott to appoint State Attorney Angela Corey to the case involving Trayvon Martin, I did so with the full confidence that a swift and thorough investigation would be conducted,”

Bondi said in her statement. “Today, State Attorney Corey’s decision to press charges against George Zimmerman for the shooting of Trayvon demonstrates Corey’s commitment to bringing justice to Trayvon’s family and allowing due process for Zimmerman.”

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/04/11...day-afternoon/

I added italics, highlights, and a few numbers and comments, but vast majority was put together by the user above.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Jack Batty

Of course there's nothing politically motivated in an article from Conservative Tree House with link mouse-over that includes: "traymom-financial-motives," that's just crazy talk.

As I said, I'm talking specifically about the connections with Pam Bondi, Corey, and their obvious inclination to charge Zimmerman long before there was an "impartial" investigation of any kind. It's all cited. The pictures are real. I'm simply giving credit to the CT and that user for putting the Pam Bondi stuff together.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

I couldn't believe that Pam Bondi actually said that the attorneys for Trayvon Martin were "friends of mine".

Why would you find this so shocking? Attorneys know each other. Strange but true.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

Why would you find this so shocking? Attorneys know each other. Strange but true.

That she "knew" some attorneys is not the least bit shocking. That she would describe the attorneys representing Trayvon's parents as her friends is. That she would do so publicly even more so.

[Airbeck]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

That she "knew" some attorneys is not the least bit shocking. That she would describe the attorneys representing Trayvon's parents as her friends is. That she would do so publicly even more so.

Ok, so your position is that lawyers should not be able to be friends with other lawyers? Is that right? You find it shocking that a lawyer has friends that are lawyers? Do you have any friends that do the same kind of work that you do?

Your ability to manufacture outrage is quite impressive.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

That she "knew" some attorneys is not the least bit shocking. That she would describe the attorneys representing Trayvon's parents as her friends is. That she would do so publicly even more so.

I don't understand. Lawyers work together. Lawyers have friends among the people they work with, even prosecutors and defense attorneys. They don't take these cases personally, you know. I don't find this suspicious in the least.

[emeraldia]

Apparently, I need to go a step further.

That she would describe the attorneys representing one of the two sides in this case as her friends is, at the very least an example of blatant kowtowing in their favor.

Could you imagine if she had said, "I've spoken to George Zimmerman and his parents- they are amazing people, and his lawyers, who are friends of mine..."?

Of course not. She would have never said such a thing, even if it were true.

Which it would not be true since neither she, nor Angela Corey, nor the governor ever bothered to even talk to George Zimmerman (or his parents), much less offer any assurances that there would be justice for them.

Not to mention that Zimmerman had not even hired a lawyer at that point for her to be friends with because he apparently had confidence in the fairness of the judicial system. (I bet he'll never make that mistake again.)

The bias that came from the governor on down in this case is staggering and blatant. You can *pretend* not to see it and keep framing little straw-men questions, but it speaks for itself to all but the willfully ignorant.

[Airbeck]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

Apparently, I need to go a step further.

That she would describe the attorneys representing one of the two sides in this case as her friends is, at the very least an example of blatant kowtowing in their favor.

Which side of the George Zimmerman murder trial are the lawyers for Trayvon Martin's family representing? Who will they be arguing in court on behalf of during the trial?

This case is the state of Florida against George Zimmerman. The lawyers for Trayvon Martin's family are not involved in this case any way. Italics or not.

Rather then taking any further steps, might I suggest that perhaps you may have already taken a step or three too far already?

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Airbeck

Which side of the George Zimmerman murder trial are the lawyers for Trayvon Martin's family representing?

At the time these statements were made? They were blatantly and aggressively advocating on behalf of Trayvon Martin's parents for the state to arrest and prosecute George Zimmerman.

This case is the state of Florida against George Zimmerman.

It sure is- and we know exactly how that came about.

Who will they be arguing in court on behalf of during the trial?

They will argue in court on behalf of Trayvon's parents of course, in future civil trials. Regarding the criminal case, they argue on behalf of the prosecution- outside of the court room.

The lawyers for Trayvon Martin's family are not involved in this case any way.

Really? Then that makes it all the more odd that Bondi would mention they were friends of hers.

And didn't I see them standing next to Mary Cutcher, her roommate, and other witnesses in the criminal case? Didn't they talk to the prosecution's "star witness" Dee Dee before Corey's "impartial investigator" did? Don't they speak out on every development in the case- and doesn't the media often quote them?

Hmm, seems to me that they are extremely involved in this case, particularly before its very inception.

[Blank Slate]

It truly is an outrage that the State of Florida didn't reach out to the murderers parents.

Conservative tree house = white-supremacist shithole.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Blank Slate

It truly is an outrage that the State of Florida didn't reach out to the murderers parents. Conservative tree house = white-supremacist shithole.

I'll interpret the specious counters as an indication that the Trayvengers can dispute neither the truth of the premises nor the validity of the conclusion drawn from them.

[PatriotX]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

Yes, I'm saying that George Zimmerman is being prosecuted for political reasons, and that this decision was made long before Corey launched her "investigation".

And it gets much worse. I couldn't believe that Pam Bondi actually said that the attorneys for Trayvon Martin were "friends of mine". But yes, this user accurately quoted what she said in the video linked below. Anyway, here is a comment from one of the people on CT with (for Jack Batty) citations for everything.

I added italics, highlights, and a few numbers and comments, but vast majority was put together by the user above.

Well we have several parts breathless speculation over quotes that suggest our criminal justice system is involved with scary politicizations like "justice" and "due process."
Not seeing the hard evidence that GZ wouldn't've been prosecuted outside of political concerns though.
Surely there's some ration of hard evidence which is called for in this recipe?

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by PatriotX

Well we have several parts breathless speculation over quotes that suggest our criminal justice system is involved with scary politicizations like "justice" and "due process."
Not seeing the hard evidence that GZ wouldn't've been prosecuted outside of political concerns though.
Surely there's some ration of hard evidence which is called for in this recipe?

First, they aren't going to charge him with anything. Then people protest and demand he be charged. A.G. takes over, obviously inclined to charge him before the investigation has even begun. It's pretty simple, pretty obvious.

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

A.G. takes over, obviously inclined to charge him before the investigation has even begun.

This is where your argument falls apart. Nothing is obvious just because you desperately want it to be so.

[Steophan]

Originally Posted by Blank Slate

It truly is an outrage that the State of Florida didn't reach out to the murderers parents.

It truly is an outrage that the State of Florida didn't reach out to the parent's of the victim of a serious, potentially life threatening, unprovoked attack, and instead reached out to the parents of the attacker.

Well, no it isn't, but it's more true than your statement.

[PatriotX]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

First, they aren't going to charge him with anything.

Iirc, it as because they had not finished their investigation.
This was patiently explained by GZ supporters at the time. They don't arrest someone and then gather evidence to support the arrest.

Originally Posted by emeraldia

A.G. takes over, obviously inclined to charge him before the investigation has even begun.

The AG "took over" on February 25th? Or earlier in the day on the 26th?
Didn't the investigation begin on the night of the shooting?

[hmarvin]

Originally Posted by JoelUpchurch

Interesting. I looked at the plat map and it appears to me that Trayvon Martin's head could have been on been on 1211 Twin Trees and his feet were on 1221 Twin Trees. Could both home owners be sued?

Since Trayvon's body was likely moved, by those applying first aid, by Zimmerman's tackling him, and perhaps the fact you don't die immediately, even from a bullet to the heart, and could conceivably take some steps, how would they know exactly whose place the fatal shot was fired? Just because the body ended up there, doesn't mean that's where the shooting occurred.

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by you with the face

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/

The SDMB is not the only message board that is discussing this case, btw. If you really think there is a consensus among lawyers that the State's case against GZ is insufficient based on available info, you really need to get out more.

Here is the "About" section from that blog:

I am an author, blogger, former law professor, and former felony criminal defense attorney in state and federal courts specializing in death penalty defense, forensics, and complex litigation. I believe in due process, equal justice under law, the rule of law, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights. I am not now, never have been, and never aspired to be a member of the 1%.

I created this blog to inform and be of service to we the people by demystifying and teaching the law as well as promoting and facilitating a well informed discussion about legal matters.

I believe our country is ruled by greed and our legal and political system has been corrupted and broken by the 1%. We need to fix it and we need to fix it now.

If you wish to follow me on twitter, my name there is Masoninblue.

If you are interested in my other website, which is about what we must do to change ourselves and create a peaceful and sustainable future in harmony with Gaia, our mother and the fabled Garden of Eden, please go to http://masonbennu.wordpress.com

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by Bricker

Here is the "About" section from that blog:

And I have found a declaration from Mr. Leatherman in which he acknowledges prejudging a specific client's guilt and therefore failing to investigate the client's claims of actual innocence, or even representing him in any effective way.

I have also read much of his commentary.

The post in which he called for the state to indict Zimmerman was made before the evidence was released. No matter what his skills, I don't see how you can advance this as an example of someone who believes the state has a string case, since his opinion was formed without an examination of all the available evidence.

[you with the face]

Originally Posted by Bricker

The post in which he called for the state to indict Zimmerman was made before the evidence was released. No matter what his skills, I don't see how you can advance this as an example of someone who believes the state has a string case, since his opinion was formed without an examination of all the available evidence.

You asked me for evidence that there are lawyers who disagree with your assessment about Zimmerman's case.

I provided such evidence.

The only thing you should say be saying right now is thanks. Not posting an amazingly transparent strawman.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

Nothing is obvious just because you desperately want it to be so.

I'm so very, very sorry to say that it doesn't get much more obvious. I've heard from Zimmerman (he is such an amazing person), and his lawyers (who are friends of mine), and they say the same thing.

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by PatriotX

Iirc, it as because they had not finished their investigation. The AG "took over" on February 25th? Or earlier in the day on the 26th?
Didn't the investigation begin on the night of the shooting?

From Wikipedia- check the citations yourself:

On March 13, 2012, Chris Serino sent a capias request to the state's attorney recommending charges of negligent manslaughter against Zimmerman, though Serino maintains he did not believe they had the evidence to support those charges and that manslaughter was only included in the capias in order for the prosecutor's office to continue with their own investigation [113] [114][115][116]

The State Attorney's office initially determined there was insufficient evidence to charge Zimmerman and did not file charges based on the capias request. [116][118][119]

On March 16, Serino told the Orlando Sentinel that his investigation had turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account, that he had acted in self-defense. "The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event, everything I have is adding up to what he says."[120]

On March 20, 2012, State attorney Norm Wolfinger announced that a Seminole County grand jury would be convened on April 10 to investigate the death of Martin.[121][122][123]

On March 21, 2012 IN NEW YORK CITY LIMO (With Crump)
6:04-6:38 Pam Bondi: “Hey Sybrina, Tracy, are you there. Hi. I am so very, very, sorry. As attorney general, I have absolutely no legal authority to take the case, and I looked, I tried.”

However, after State Attorney Angela Corey was assigned to the case by Florida Governor Rick Scott on March 22, she decided that her office would decide whether to press charges. "...I foresee us being able to make a decision, and move on it on our own."[54]

Oh, I'm sure she did indeed 'foresee' that. ;-)

[emeraldia]

Originally Posted by you with the face

You asked me for evidence that there are lawyers who disagree with your assessment about Zimmerman's case. I provided such evidence. The only thing you should say be saying right now is thanks. Not posting an amazingly transparent strawman.

Actually, you are the one creating the strawman. You didn't just say "there are lawyers that disagree with your assessment". You said that there was not a consensus among attorney's that the State's case is currently weak.

Originally Posted by you with the face

http://frederickleatherman.wordpress.com/If you really think there is a consensus among lawyers that the State's case against GZ is insufficient based on available info, you really need to get out more.

The evidence you provide in support of this claim amounts to a single attorney, who happens to be a crackpot, that obviously rushed to judgement. I listed four off the top of my head. And the nutty professor is all you are able to come up with?

[PatriotX]

Originally Posted by emeraldia

From Wikipedia- check the citations yourself:
Oh, I'm sure she did indeed 'foresee' that. ;-)

Seems like the investigation was underway starting February 26th and whatshernose took the case after the investigation started, not before it had begun.

You'll have to do some more work to convince me that she took the case before the investigation began on February 26th.

[doorhinge]

Originally Posted by hmarvin

Since Trayvon's body was likely moved, by those applying first aid, by Zimmerman's tackling him, and perhaps the fact you don't die immediately, even from a bullet to the heart, and could conceivably take some steps, how would they know exactly whose place the fatal shot was fired? Just because the body ended up there, doesn't mean that's where the shooting occurred.

It doesn't mean that "somebody" couldn't attempt to sue the homeowners either.

[Bricker]

Originally Posted by you with the face

You asked me for evidence that there are lawyers who disagree with your assessment about Zimmerman's case.

I provided such evidence.

The only thing you should say be saying right now is thanks. Not posting an amazingly transparent strawman.

Well, no. I asked for lawyers.

You have provided a lawyer.