It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Annee
Politics has nothing to do with the Judicial system and anyone who thinks otherwise should probably go back and learn how our government works - respectfully.
A person cannot be charged with a crime if the law in quesiton is not violated, regardless of loudly people scream and demand it. The law that allowed Mr. Zimmerman to go down this course of action is the same law that protects his actions.
Originally posted by Shoonra
Despite some early suspicions, it might be possible that race was not a major factor in this tragedy.
The Washington Post reports today (Fri., March 23rd) that the shooter, Zimmerman, has a very mixed background: A former altar boy at the Catholic Church, a white father, Latino mother, and somehow has cousins who are decidedly Afro-American. So maybe this wasn't racial profiling.
The remarkable thing is that Zimmerman was not immediately charged or taken into custody because he was supposedly protected by the "Stand Your Ground Law" -- except he wasn't standing his ground, he was gratuitously following Trayvon Martin around -- even after the Police dispatcher told him not to. Considering that Martin was carrying only candy and an iced tea, it's a bit tough to see how the Stand Your Ground Law applies.
8. Zimmerman “was charged in July 2005 with resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer. The charges appear to have been dropped.” [Huffington Post]
9. Zimmerman called the police 46 times since Jan. 1, 2011. [Miami Herald]
10. According to neighbors, Zimmerman was “fixated on crime and focused on young, black males.” [Miami Herald]
11. Zimmerman “had been the subject of complaints by neighbors in his gated community for aggressive tactics” [Huffington Post]
Use of force in defense of person.
Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.
Use of force in defense of others.
Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.
Use of force by aggressor.
Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.
Use of force in resisting arrest or making an arrest or in the execution of a legal duty; prohibition.
Use of force to prevent escape.
Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
Originally posted by popsmayhem
UPDATE NO CHARGES ARE GOING TO BE FILED..
I told you so.
Feds Doubt They Can Charge Trayvon's Killer
Zimmerman is innocent.
The feds know zimmerman acted
in self defense. Treyvon attacked
him first this is why they have no case.
Treyvon bullied the wrong guy this time..
This is just a MSM political race war.
Obama has made sure to stick his
nose into it.. Dont let a good crisis go to waste.
Originally posted by KillerQueen
I'm sorry but:
Originally posted by popsmayhem
Originally posted by rebellender
reply to post by popsmayhem
OBAMA "if I had a son he would look like Treyvon"
This is wrong wrong wrong coming from our President
At least 10 people were killed, including a 6-year-old girl, in shootings over the weekend in Chicago.
The slain were among at least 49 people wounded in shootings from 5 p.m. Friday to 6 a.m. Monday, according to information compiled by the Chicago Tribune.
Even if Martin made the first move, there's still the fact that Zimmerman was armed with a handgun, and that the person most likely to be on the defensive in this case would be Martin. Martin was still significantly younger, weighed significantly less, was completely unarmed and was traveling on foot.
Originally posted by Jakes51
I have been watching this story gather steam for quite awhile without responding. With all due respect to the victim and their family. I think the media is wagging the dog on this one. Just more of the usual divisive rhetoric and cultivating an environment of fear and paranoia between all of us.