# DOJ may indict Zimmerman on civil-rights charges **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 14, 2013, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509 "2013-07-14T22:06:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/1 "2013-07-14T22:06:52Z")
[_Washington Post_ reports:](http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justice-dept-says-it-will-consider-whether-to-file-civil-rights-charges-in-zimmerman-case/2013/07/14/ad73c76c-ecc0-11e2-b46e-f15eec37b46c_story.html) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON — The Justice Department said Sunday it is looking into the shooting death of Trayvon Martin to determine whether federal prosecutors will file criminal civil rights charges now that George Zimmerman has been acquitted in the state case. > > The department opened an investigation into Martin’s death last year but stepped aside to allow the state prosecution to proceed. > > In a statement, the Justice Department said the criminal section of its civil rights division, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Middle District of Florida are continuing to evaluate the evidence generated during the federal probe, in addition to the evidence and testimony from the state trial. Boy, does that take you back! Like, to [_Mississippi Burning._](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_Burning) Is this a good or bad idea, do you think? ---
**Author:** ![PastTense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pasttense/32/14550_2.png) [@PastTense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PastTense)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/2 "2013-07-14T22:11:09Z")
A bad idea. The criteria for a criminal conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. It just doesn’t look like the evidence is there to meet this criteria. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/3 "2013-07-14T23:44:36Z")
Yup. Bad idea. And one whose mere consideration is motivated by poiitical posturing rather than any rationality. Move on. ---
**Author:** ![Caffeine.addict](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f475e1/32.png) [@Caffeine.addict](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caffeine.addict)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/4 "2013-07-14T23:50:27Z")
I think that it’s an overreach by the DOJ. This isn’t a federal matter, but rather a state court one. While people may not like what the jury did, I don’t think that this is a good idea. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/5 "2013-07-14T23:59:42Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Boy, does that take you back! Like, to [_Mississippi Burning._](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_Burning) No, it really doesn’t. That’s probably the stupidest analogy that’s ever been posted on this board. > [@](#): > > Is this a good or bad idea, do you think? Horrible idea, and it’s not going anywhere. DOJ is not going to come out and say they won’t prosecute this soon after the verdict, but they are not going to prosecute, and anybody with half a brain knows they are not going to prosecute. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/6 "2013-07-15T00:01:43Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **PastTense** : > > A bad idea. > > The criteria for a criminal conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. It just doesn’t look like the evidence is there to meet this criteria. All the evidence necessary was right there in the defendant’s statements. That said, this is still a bad idea. There’s really no Federal angle, here, and to invent one as vague as “violation of civil rights” is to reject the whole notion behind the protection against double jeopardy. A better response would be to pursue some sort of charges against the prosecution of this case for their gross negligence to present a case using the indisputable evidence they had. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/7 "2013-07-15T00:07:06Z")
> [@PastTense](#): > > A bad idea. > > The criteria for a criminal conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. It just doesn’t look like the evidence is there to meet this criteria. From what I’ve heard onTV, the civil case would have a lower burden of proof, i.e., “a preponderance of evidence”. To answer the question, bad idea. It’s just going to to keep the pot stirring. Which is exactly what professional racists like Sharpton want. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/8 "2013-07-15T00:11:27Z")
I think in this case the Obama admin will overcome its worst tendencies and realize nothing productive could come of pursuing a federal case v Zimmerman. The part of the federal code that’s usually used in recent decades (like against the Rodney King cops 18 USC 242) only covers people acting under ‘color of law’ but OTOH allows a prosecution of any such person would violates ‘any rights’. The part of the code used against KKK terrorism 50 years ago (18 USC 249) applies to anyone but the govt would have to prove essentially that Zimmerman unjustifiably shot Martin because Martin was black, not just that it was part of the motivation or an ancillary factor but pretty much _the_ reason. If the FL prosecutors couldn’t prove Zimmerman acted illegally without any requirement to also prove that relatively narrow motive, how is a federal prosecutor going to do it with that additional requirement? And the DoJ already released a report in July 2012 (compiled by the FBI), a matter of public record, saying they’d found no evidence it was a racially motivated crime. So yeah, the DoJ is going to say they are ‘still investigating’ and when things cool down and there’s a busy news day otherwise they’ll quietly release a statement that the investigation is over and no civil rights charges will be brought. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/9 "2013-07-15T00:16:55Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > From what I’ve heard onTV, the civil case would have a lower burden of proof, i.e., “a preponderance of evidence”. > > To answer the question, bad idea. It’s just going to to keep the pot stirring. Which is exactly what professional racists like Sharpton want. But what will a civil case accomplish? Make Zimmerman declare bankuptcy? If he is fool enough to try to exploit this episode with some kind of ghost-written book dealthen go after whatever he makes. Barring that it is a fair amount of squeeze for hardly any juice. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/10 "2013-07-15T00:19:08Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > No, it really doesn’t. That’s probably the stupidest analogy that’s ever been posted on this board. It was a case where there was a racially motivated set of killings, a white local jury acquitted the defendants, so the Feds filed a civil-rights charge. I don’t think they’ve resorted to that in decades, but they did it several times in the 1960s. Hence, “takes you back.” And don’t try to tell me “racially motivated” does not apply here. ---
**Author:** ![Tollhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e99b99/32.png) [@Tollhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tollhouse)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/11 "2013-07-15T01:09:25Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > From what I’ve heard onTV, the civil case would have a lower burden of proof, i.e., “a preponderance of evidence”. > > To answer the question, bad idea. It’s just going to to keep the pot stirring. Which is exactly what professional racists like Sharpton want. More like..its what civil rights leaders need ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/12 "2013-07-15T02:33:15Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > But what will a civil case accomplish? Make Zimmerman declare bankuptcy? If he is fool enough to try to exploit this episode with some kind of ghost-written book dealthen go after whatever he makes. Barring that it is a fair amount of squeeze for hardly any juice. I think you’re agreeing with me. But your opening line sounds like you’re not. Hmmm. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/13 "2013-07-15T02:35:45Z")
I don’t think they’ll end up filing charges. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/14 "2013-07-15T02:36:48Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > But what will a civil case accomplish? I suppose winning it would make Martin’s parents feel better even if they get no money out of it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/15 "2013-07-15T02:55:32Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t think they’ll end up filing charges. Of course not. Obama doesn’t want to be saddled with a failure. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/16 "2013-07-15T02:56:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Of course not. Obama doesn’t want to be saddled with a failure. Nor will he want to deal with the accusations of racism. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/17 "2013-07-15T03:16:37Z")
It’s a terrible idea and will be quietly dropped in a week or two. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/18 "2013-07-15T03:18:59Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Nor will he want to deal with the accusations of racism. If there’s any stupidity he’s used to by now it’s that. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/19 "2013-07-15T03:26:50Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > No, it really doesn’t. That’s probably the stupidest analogy that’s ever been posted on this board. I’ve seen stupider. It somewhat surprised me, though, that a civil-rights case could be made, even hypothetically, against a private citizen. If Zimmerman had been a law-enforcement officer (and I’m pretty sure neighborhood watch doesn’t count), okay, since he’d be abusing some kind of governmental authority… ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509/20 "2013-07-15T03:32:17Z")
The Civil Rights Act made it a crime to prevent a citizen from exercising his civil rights by threat of force, even by private citizens (Congress can legislate broadly in such matters under the 14th Amendment.) Any prosecution would have to tie the killing with a protected activity (like voting or using a public facility) which seems unlikely. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/doj-may-indict-zimmerman-on-civil-rights-charges/663509.md?page=2)