WTF is going on here?
The OP and I were talking about one thing and then he pulls out this red herring and I was simply trying to pull him/her back on task.
Oh god, you’re one of those who actually support the UK’s [del]mugger’s charter[/del] self defence laws aren’t you?
She did not assist a murderer because there was no murder (as murder requires a malicious state of mind in the killer)*, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with moving his truck, as it wasn’t evidence.
*That, by the way, is not some abstruse technical legal point, or Florida oddity, it’s a basic part of the definition of murder in both common and legal parlance.
:dubious:
This is the shit I am talking about.
If that was the sum total of the police investigation, no. As I’m sure you’re aware, they questioned Zimmerman for several hours that night, before deciding not to arrest him.
Zimmerman claimed self defence. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, they could not arrest him. It would not surprise me if he sues for wrongful arrest and malicious prosecution (I don’t think that’s the correct term, but you get the point) after he’s found not guilty. Unless he’s found to have immunity at the SYG hearing, in which case I doubt he’d even have to threaten to sue before they’re begging to settle with him.
It definitely puts to question anything else he says. Well, unless you’re ywtf who would believe anything, no matter how unreliable, if it fit his agenda.
I’ve not heard you talk about how anyone threatened Zimmerman, and forced him out of his job. Perhaps you could link to that post, so I can see your no doubt clearly reasoned position on it.
You are aware, I take it, of the threats to Zimmerman’s family and others close to him?
How can you say it wasn’t of evidential value knowing where the vehicle was parked? If it was noted anywhere other than where he said it was, you could try and pass it off as Z’s memory problems kicking in, but a jury isn’t going to believe he forgot where he parked, when he was supposed to be stone-cold sober.
If Z had parked in a place where he could cut in front of TM and ShelLIE came and moved his vehicle before the cops had noted where it was, she has helped in the covering up of a targeted killing.
If you believed this, then you wouldn’t be defending Zimmerman.
It was probably more than enough time for Cutcher considering she didn’t actually see anything that led up to the shooting. There were still other witnesses to interview.
The PD had her name and address and could interview her later as did the State investigation and the SA office. Cutcher still maintains that she didn’t see what had happened. Would you “feel” better if all of the police interviewers had spent 1 hour listening to Cutcher say she hadn’t seen anything? 2 hours? More?
He should have thought of that before he started chasing down a young man harmlesly heading home from the shops. As you sew, so shall you reap.
What’s going on is that you’re participating in a group conversation occuring over a public forum. If you wish to have a private conversation, you could always send that person a personal letter. Don’t forget to use a stamp.
How about 3 minutes each for the only person who actually saw them on the ground from a close enough distance to be semi-useful, and the guy who was outside with a flashlight within a minute or so of the gunshot?
Does that sound like the makings of an extensive enquiry?
No, you’ve been talking about a whole bunch of other shit. You haven’t addressed this shit. :smack:
Ok, I’ll play along to.
Since you mentioned stamps, let’s then shift this discussion to talk about stamp collecting or some other irrelevant bullshit.
You forgot to answer my question first.
Well, if he’s just had his head repeatedly bashed against the ground I could forgive him a few memory problems… But no, where he parked is irrelevant, really.
Except that we know that this wasn’t a targeted killing. Zimmerman, as you know, called the police, and shortly after that, was attacked by the guy he thought he’d lost. These two things make it utterly absurd to suggest the killing was in any way planned.
Can you cite, by the way, where the police have said there was anything wrong with moving the vehicle? It is, after all, their investigation, not yours, and they are the ones who know how to investigate, not you.
Three things wrong with this.
Firstly, and most importantly, whatever he did, no-one has the right to go after his family, and that it was done by professional race-baiters like Sharpton makes it all the worse.
Secondly, there was no chasing, and, as you well know, if Martin had actually been heading home he’d have got there before encountering Zimmerman - even if Zimmerman had been chasing him.
Thirdly, sow. A minor detail, but illiteracy won’t help you build your case. And yes, I’ve just had to delete more typos from this post than probably any other I’ve ever made :smack:
lynch mob?
Why do these people keep using this imagery–for someone who stalked and killed someone?
If you could prove (aka had evidence) that is what happened, you would have a pretty good case. As things exist today - you don’t.
I’d be happy if, after establishing that she hadn’t seen anything, they took into account what she might of heard, and I’d expect it to take more than 4 minutes. If it took a hour, so be it, but it should have been done efficiently and with no bias.
If they judge they have sufficient information from them to make the necessary decision at that time, it’s fine. One assumes that, during those 3 minutes, they took names and addresses so as to ask any necessary follow up questions.
Why do you see any urgency here? Zimmerman was neither a flight risk nor a threat to anyone else, it didn’t matter if they took an hour or a year about their investigation. If they let Zimmerman go, they can arrest him at any later date, they don’t waive that right. But if they do arrest him, they limit the time they have to investigate, as well as opening themselves up to action if he turns out to have been acting in self defence.
Unless it was a clear-cut case against him on the spot, which it obviously wasn’t, there was no value in arresting him on the spot. This, by the way, is not a judgement where his likely guilt is relevant, as an early arrest would have worked in his favour. Not least by getting him adequate legal advice early on.