Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (87229)	4/14/2012 3:42:19 PM
From: Cautious_Optimist	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Speculation. So much for the complaints of trying this outside of court, now that Zimmerman is in jail. Hypocrisy?? Readers, be the judge.

To: longnshort who wrote (87229)	4/15/2012 9:02:42 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

a this point no one knows what happened. Concur.. It's all based on Zimmerman's testimony. And so far as I have heard, there are no witnesses to what transpired prior to the yelling for help. Personally speaking, I can see that Zimmerman was obviously frustrated and angry about the alleged previous incidences of crime in the area. The fact that a neighborhood watch was required and he was willing to volunteer to spend his free time performing security is indicative that the local police were doing very little to handle the situation in the community. Only Zimmerman knows what happened, and based upon the evidence that I'm seeing, I see no reason for the Feds to step in and arrest him. Even if he had used a racial ephitet, I don't see the probable cause to arrest him. They'd better have some substantial evidence to back up a charge of second degree murder, IMO. That said, had Zimmerman properly identified himself to Martin, while in voice recorded range of the Dispatcher, Martin may have hesitated in being so aggressive (assuming Zimmerman's testimony is credible). I personally think Zimmerman had a responsibility to identify himself and why he was following Martin. It's just the "smart" thing to do in such a situation so that if Zimmerman is put in a position of having to defend himself, he can clearly point to the fact that he attempted to announce his authority for following Martin. But unless there is some substantiated evidence that suggests other than what Zimmerman has testified, this case should never reach a jury trial. That's my opinion. Even if Martin had been a "gangbanger", any undercover law enforcement officer would have been obligated to announce who they were and why they were watching/following Martin. What I see happening is the potential for exoneration of Zimmerman on the "stand your ground" defense because of a lack of "beyond a reasonable doubt". But it sets up the situation where Zimmerman will be sued by Martin's parents for Wrongful Death, which carries a much lower threshold of evidence. Hawk