That last is not a given, sadly. 
You should have picked something like NAMBLA, just to mess with him! 
All right, I don’t know about this whole second degree murder thing, but the asshole with a Batman complex who uses a gun on an unarmed kid AFTER the police told him not to engage IS GUILTY OF SOMETHING!
I hope they add a lesser charge (if possible) for Man 1. I’m not sure the fact that he engaged Treyvon and started his own mess will bring a guilty verdict on second degree.
Either way, it’s about time. Florida sucks ass.
I think outrage was critical in getting a thorough investigation in this case, so hooray for outrage. Without public outrage and media pressure this case would have been swept under a rug. What happened today wasn’t a political move to keep “the blacks” from rioting. What happened today was a correction. The political move would have been to dump the case on a grand jury. But if Corey believed there was sufficient evidence for a charge of 2nd degree murder, why leave that decision to a panel of lay people? George Zimmerman will receive a fair trial and his fate will be determined by a jury of his peers. It was a courageous move by Corey and she should be applauded for her professionalism and obvious competence. She is doing what SA Norm Wolfinger should have done in the first place. Sanford has some obvious problems and Wolfinger appears to be part of it. Its not the first time Detective Serino has been shut down by Wolfinger in an instance where bringing charges seemed to be the logical move. And his comments about the Collison case were at best clueless and at worst just plain callous. (Details about both cases in the link below)
I think y’all are reading too much into the 2nd degree murder charge. The way i see it, all the prosecutor has to do is convince a jury that it was Martins voice on that tape screaming for help, and from there it wont be hard to convince them it would only take a depraved mind to do what Zimmy did. Especially if she makes him look like a shameless liar by destroying his claims that he was injured.
It wasn’t “the police” and they didn’t “tell him not to engage”.
And I agree completely.
All along, my point has been that I couldn’t reach an informed decision becuase I didn’t know what all the evidence was. And I still don’t.
However, now we have an experienced --if somewhat zealous – prosecutor who has looked at all the evidence, and determined that she should charge second degree murder. And she reached this decision because she has access to all the evidence and understands what she needs to prove. It might be a bit of overcharging, but frankly that’s a tactic of many prosecutors. Or it might be the perfect charge for the conduct that she believes happened that night.
I have no idea.
But this is the way the system works. She’s charging him by information. That means she’s laid out a statement of the charges against him. He’s evidently been arrested and will be arraigned, a formal procedure where he’s informed of the charges. He will have the right to move to dismiss those charges based on a lack of probable cause, at which time the prosecutor must produce enough evidence for the judge to agree that there is probable cause to support second degree murder.
She knows (or thinks, anyway) that she can do this because she’s looked at all her evidence. I haven’t seen enough evidence to justify that, but since I haven’t seen all her evidence, that statement means nothing.
In short: I say let’s wait and see what the prosecutor’s findings are before issuing any verdicts.
You aren’t properly reading my post along with the statute. I never mentioned an intent to kill, only an intent element, specifically referring to:
Essentially they have to show “malice” or “ill intent”, basically that Zimmerman intended to do “wrong.” With manslaughter you can be convicted for an unlawful killing even if you didn’t actually intend to do anything wrong. With second degree murder you don’t have to prove that Zimmerman intended to kill, but you have to prove ill intent.
Jury instructions for 2nd Degree Murder:
Manslaughter:
The difference that I see that is relevant to this cause is it is easy to say Zimmerman intentionally committed an act that caused death (he pulled the trigger and it’s doubtful anyone would believe that was accidental.) But with second degree murder you have to show he pulled the trigger and that he did so with some malicious state of mind.
In Florida the jury will be told three specific elements that the prosecution must prove for second degree murder:
-
A reasonable person would know the action would cause death or had a high likelihood of causing death or serious bodily injury.
-
Is done from an ill will, hatred, spite, or an evil intent.
-
Is of such a nature that the act itself indicates an indifference to human life.
With manslaughter you essentially only have to prove #1 and #3, not #2.
Yep. All she has to do is contradict direct witness testimony and physical evidence. Totally possible.
I can’t agree with this because you’re essentially arguing things that are beyond empirical testing. We don’t know what would have happened without outrage, outrage can cause both justice and injustice. It’s possible in this case it may cause injustice in that someone has now been improperly charged–however I suspect many prosecutors fudge the charging due to tactical reasons (i.e., they may know they can’t win on capital murder but by charging it they are more powerful in the plea negotiation and may be able to get the person to more easily plea to a life sentence.)
I will note that there have been several self defense homicides in Florida that were very controversial, many of them were charged with a lot less fan fare than this case. So I can’t take it as a “given” Zimmerman never would have been charged. I’ll also note that some more egregious stories than this one were charged and later thrown out by a judge–so we go back to a very early point, a decision not to charge isn’t so much inappropriate as it is probably reflecting Florida’s state of things.
There’s another self defense case going through the Florida courts right now where it looks like the defendant is probably a cold blooded murderer and will probably get off–I hope if anything this outrage might make a judge less likely to throw that case out.
And all the prosecutor needs to do to show Casey Anthony killed her daughter is provide evidence of a car that smells like human remains, Caylee’s body recovered near her home, and a mother who lies to police when trying to explain why her daughter has been missing for over a month.
Guess you better hole up in your bunker for a few weeks.
It does look like it healed well.
I have seen a shot of the gates to that community and there’s a warning about surveillance cameras being used. Doesn’t mean that they actually have the cameras or that the cameras caught anything. But it IS a possibility.
It was someone who answered the phone at the PD. So, in some sense it was an agent of the PD. Drawing the distinction between “the police” and an agent of the PD doesn’t seem to make much difference afaict.
911 dispatchers are not police officers.
“Help, I’m being robbed! Call the police!”
“Hmm, are you sure you want me to call the police? I think it might be better if I call the 911 dispatchers. They can contact the police, and they generally answer the phone faster. Oh well, if it’s the police you want, I’ll call the police.”
Your pedantic distinction is well noted in this thread and others. Also noted are the fact that civilians aren’t under any obligation to follow the orders of a police over over the phone, so it wouldn’t matter even if it was the police.
Also thoroughly noted is the pedantic distinction that “We don’t need you to do that” is technically different from “don’t do that.”
In the real world, where words have colloquial meanings that are generally accepted and agreed upon, he called the cops and they told him not to follow. Can we drop this now?
Not if you want to be accurate. But apparently that’s not a concern of yours.
What is the legal significance of this fact?