Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
I hope that the Prosecution had a very good (and lawful) reason for that.

They were showing slides of Zimmerman's written account of the shooting and it appears they just plain forgot they were in open court on TV.

Wonder if the Jurors caught it lol

 Seaward wrote:
They were showing slides of Zimmerman's written account of the shooting and it appears they just plain forgot they were in open court on TV.

Well, it was such a low key event, with little national attention, that I'm sure it just slipped their minds....

Jesus. The amount of times the prosecution is having to impeach their own witnesses in this trial is incredible.

Whats going on?

The prosecution called the officer who interviewed Zimmerman at the police station. On defense cross-examination, she gave a pretty favorable impression of the credibility of Zimmerman's story. The prosecution got back up on redirect and had to maneuver her into saying that most of her testimony had been speculation. I think he meant for it to come off as just the favorable-to-the-defense stuff, but it didn't play that way.

She was starting to look pretty pissed with the prosecutor.

Z should start paying the prosecutor for how much he helped the defense

Is it just me, or does the Lead Detective look like he's extremely pissed off that he has to be there right now?

So is there any evidence or statements so far disputing Z's statement about being attacked by TM at this point?

 djones520 wrote:
Is it just me, or does the Lead Detective look like he's extremely pissed off that he has to be there right now?

Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

 Frazzled wrote:
So is there any evidence or statements so far disputing Z's statement about being attacked by TM at this point?

No... as far as I can tell, no. They seem to really be focusing on Zimmermans statements today, I'm not sure what angle their trying to work with that. Really wish I had sound.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Is it just me, or does the Lead Detective look like he's extremely pissed off that he has to be there right now?

Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

That would explain a lot. Couple that with how it seems the trial is now going no where... I could understand being pissed.

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Based on the evidence that the Prosecution has shown to date there is little to suggest that Zimmerman should have been charged.

It's the DA's job to worry about the prospect of conviction. It's the jury's job to be the finder of fact

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

There is a reason DA's have the power to choose to not press charges. It's to prevent frivolous proceedings like this, that end up being a huge expense to the tax payer for no reason.

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Really? You're effectively saying anyone who could potentially be charged with a crime should have to go through a trial. I don't think you understand the import of that.
Part of the duty of the state is to bring appropriate charges in the adminstration of justice, not "throw it all against the wall and see what sticks"

Just taking this down to traffic situations. Your statement shows suppport for no one ever getting warnings for potential traffic violations and always being charged with all possible crimes. Just send it to trial, after all thats justice.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Prosecutors and police kinda/sorta work together in building up the evidence necessary to form a case, y'know. When all involved conclude that evidence doesn't exist, it's not making a decision about a person's guilt or innocence, it's making a decision about whether or not there's enough evidence to try them.

No no no no... we've got it all wrong!



This is how life is supposed to be Citizen. Pick up that can!

 Frazzled wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Really? You're effectively saying anyone who could potentially be charged with a crime should have to go through a trial. I don't think you understand the import of that.
Part of the duty of the state is to bring appropriate charges in the adminstration of justice, not "throw it all against the wall and see what sticks"

Just taking this down to traffic situations. Your statement shows suppport for no one ever getting warnings for potential traffic violations and always being charged with all possible crimes. Just send it to trial, after all thats justice.

The DA decides, not the police.

And no, I wouldn't say the same thing about civil traffic law because it's not a criminal matter involving a death. Let's please not do this thing where every statement I make is assumed to be a blanket principle that applies to every kind of law ever.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Prosecutors and police kinda/sorta work together in building up the evidence necessary to form a case, y'know. When all involved conclude that evidence doesn't exist, it's not making a decision about a person's guilt or innocence, it's making a decision about whether or not there's enough evidence to try them.

And none of that process happened here. The cops on scene basically decided that there wasn't a case until everyone freaked out about it rightly. Based on the information the police had, he should have been charged that night. The DA might have dropped it later, but he should have been picked up and charged.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 djones520 wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Seaward wrote:
Serino got knocked from investigation to patrol after Corey took over the case as a result of his part in recommending that charges not be filed. He's probably very pissed about the whole thing, as his career's essentially come to an end.

I hope that he's talking to his union, or lawyer about this turn of events. Because it's looking more and more like he made the right call.

No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

There is a reason DA's have the power to choose to not press charges. It's to prevent frivolous proceedings like this, that end up being a huge expense to the tax payer for no reason.

The DA, not the police. This is not a decision that should be made on the street.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
No, he made the wrong call. Just because the end result of the trial is an acquittal does not mean the cop should have made that decision and just let someone go.

"Should I charge this person" and "will this person be convicted" are two ENTIRELY different questions which are by design supposed to be answered by different people.

He absolutely should have been charged. It's not police business to worry about conviction, that is supposed to be a jury's job.

Based on the evidence that the Prosecution has shown to date there is little to suggest that Zimmerman should have been charged.

It's the DA's job to worry about the prospect of conviction. It's the jury's job to be the finder of fact

Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

I would love to hear your reasons for this, because on the evidence available (and what has been shown) it's looking more and more like charging and prosecuting Zimmerman was a mistake. The Prosecution's evidence is doing more to acquit than convict him.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

I would love to hear your reasons for this, because on the evidence available (and what has been shown) it's looking more and more like charging and prosecuting Zimmerman was a mistake. The Prosecution's evidence is doing more to acquit than convict him.

Maybe the lawyer's flipped a coin and these are actually the defense witnesses, with prosecution witnesses coming later.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

I would love to hear your reasons for this, because on the evidence available (and what has been shown) it's looking more and more like charging and prosecuting Zimmerman was a mistake. The Prosecution's evidence is doing more to acquit than convict him.

What he said on the 911 call combined with what the officers found on the scene and what zimmerman told them is enough for probable cause right there. At that point, you collect all the evidence you can and let the DA decide to drop the charges or not.

Police should not be making prosecutorial decisions on their own. They are not trained to determine anything beyond probable cause and they shouldn't be. If you have probable cause for murder, you make the arrest and let people above your pay grade sort it out.

We allow all kinds of leeway for smaller crimes, but this is murder. You don't give cops the ability to just decide not to charge on murder. In most places, murder and domestic violence must be charged as soon as PC is achieved. We've specifically taken that out of the hands of the police for a good reason.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
What he said on the 911 call combined with what the officers found on the scene and what zimmerman told them is enough for probable cause right there. At that point, you collect all the evidence you can and let the DA decide to drop the charges or not.

Police should not be making prosecutorial decisions on their own. They are not trained to determine anything beyond probable cause and they shouldn't be. If you have probable cause for murder, you make the arrest and let people above your pay grade sort it out.

You mean that there was someone suspicious in his community? And that there had been a spate of break ins recently?
All the evidence like the witnesses who testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman assaulting him while the witness was on the phone to 911?
That Martin seemed to have a racial motive by describing Zimmerman as a "creepy ass cracker"?

The Police consult with the DA before there is a decision to charge based on the available evidence. The available evidence is so flimsy for a prosecution that it could be spat through.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
We allow all kinds of leeway for smaller crimes, but this is murder. You don't give cops the ability to just decide not to charge on murder. In most places, murder and domestic violence must be charged as soon as PC is achieved. We've specifically taken that out of the hands of the police for a good reason.

Wrong.
This was a homocide. There is a very big difference between a homocide (which may be justifiable etc.) and murder.
Police don't have the ability "to just decide not to charge on murder". They don't have this leeway with most crime. It has to be done on the basis of evidence. In this case that evidence is sorely lacking.

 Rented Tritium wrote:

Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

I'd really like to know what you base this on. It seems to me that the authorities actually put a fair bit of work into establishing the chain of events and creating a picture of what happened to lead up to the shooting. Watching the proceedings, I've never gotten the impression that Z was let go because he's got a german last name and the dude that got shot was black.

I think this trial is illustrating exactly how many professional people checked out this incident and ruled that there wasn't enough to go on.

DA had to go with it. That it became a race issue and the POTUS making a silly ass comment.

 Jihadin wrote:
DA had to go with it. That it became a race issue and the POTUS making a silly ass comment.

And certain elements of the media were stoking the racial relations fire because they it's a guaranteed way to get ratings and site traffic.

 Rented Tritium wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Rented Tritium wrote:
Based on what the police knew that night, he absolutely should have been charged.

I would love to hear your reasons for this, because on the evidence available (and what has been shown) it's looking more and more like charging and prosecuting Zimmerman was a mistake. The Prosecution's evidence is doing more to acquit than convict him.

What he said on the 911 call combined with what the officers found on the scene and what zimmerman told them is enough for probable cause right there. At that point, you collect all the evidence you can and let the DA decide to drop the charges or not.

Police should not be making prosecutorial decisions on their own. They are not trained to determine anything beyond probable cause and they shouldn't be. If you have probable cause for murder, you make the arrest and let people above your pay grade sort it out.

We allow all kinds of leeway for smaller crimes, but this is murder. You don't give cops the ability to just decide not to charge on murder. In most places, murder and domestic violence must be charged as soon as PC is achieved. We've specifically taken that out of the hands of the police for a good reason.

The DA was the one who didn't pursue it. What are you on about? The state had to bring in a whole new one.
And frankly you said these things have to go to trial, no to the DA earlier. Which is it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
DA had to go with it. That it became a race issue and the POTUS making a silly ass comment.

Correction NEW SPECIAL DA did. this is not the original DA.

This detective does not look happy lol and Fox commentators said he wanted to charge Z in the shooting it seems

 sourclams wrote:
Watching the proceedings, I've never gotten the impression that Z was let go because he's got a german last name and the dude that got shot was black.

As long as you're actively trying to paint me as a reactionary arguing about race, I have no reason to engage with you. I'm on the record on these forums as being HIGHLY pro-police, thanks.

I thought that the initial police report did recommend that Z be charged, so if that is the guy that would be right.