It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will Trayvon-Zimmerman "RACE" Case Stir up Protests, Riots, Racially Motivated Retaliation, Lootin

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Zimmerman hasn't even been ARRESTED.

Because the investigation hasn't finished AND because there isn't enough evidence to take a case to the grand jury. Mob rule isn't supposed to decide when a person is arrested. It's supposed to be FACTS that are discovered during an official investigation.




posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Originally posted by FlyersFan
Because the investigation hasn't finished AND because there isn't enough evidence to take a case to the grand jury.



So, any arrest requires an investigation to be completed BEFORE the arrest? Is that your position?
A dead kid and an armed pursuer isn't enough evidence?

The officer on the scene wanted to arrest Zimmerman, but the State Attorney overruled it. Don't tell me there wasn't enough evidence for an arrest. :shk:



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So, any arrest requires an investigation to be completed BEFORE the arrest? Is that your position?

It's not MY position. It's rule of law. I already posted these ... you should have read them.

When people can be arrested ...

Legal Rights

You can be arrested without a warrant if the police have reason to believe that you have committed or are about to commit: (1) a felony whether or not in their presence; (2) a misdemeanor in their presence; (3) a misdemeanor not in their presence if they have reason to believe you may escape, cause injury to persons or property, or destroy evidence unless immediately arrested. Without your consent or special circumstances, you cannot be arrested in your home without a warrant.

You can also be arrested without a warrant for traffic violations, including: driving or attempting to drive while intoxicated or under the influence of alcohol or drugs; failing to stop or give information in the event of an accident causing death, bodily injury or property damage; driving or attempting to drive on a suspended or revoked license; fleeing or attempting to elude police officers; or when the police reasonably believe you will disregard a traffic citation


World Law Direct

1. You may be arrested by a police officer who personally saw you violate any statute, city ordinance, or federal law. The law may be a serious crime (a felony) or a lesser offense (a misdemeanor). The important thing is that the officer sees the violation.

If the charge is a minor traffic offense, the law requires the officer to just ticket you (that is, give you a citation which orders you to appear in court later), rather than arrest you. However, if you refuse to sign the citation, or refuse to identify yourself, or if it appears to the officer that you are in need of medical attention, then he can arrest you on this minor traffic offense.

2. You may be arrested for a felony, even if the police officer did not personally see you commit the felony, so long as the officer had "probable cause" to believe that the crime was committed by you. Later, the court system (not the police) will determine if the officer was reasonable in that belief and if you are guilty or innocent



A dead kid and an armed pursuer isn't enough evidence?

You assume too much. 'a dead kid and an armed pursuer'?
OR ... a dead thief and an armed neighborhood watchman.
OR ... a dead thief who tried to kill an armed neighborhood watchman.
OR .. __________. there are LOTS of things that could fill in those blanks.
That's why it's best to let the police DO THEIR JOB and investigate. WE DO NOT KNOW.


Don't tell me there wasn't enough evidence for an arrest. :shk:

There wasn't enough evidence for an arrest. :shk: right backatchya.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I have to agree with FlyersFan on this. If there isn't enough supporting evidence at the scene to make an arrest, then by doing so, they may not be able to support their case. By taking time and building a solid case before an arrest or charges are filed, they have a better chance at prevailing at trial.

(I'm a big fan of crime shows.)


It's true, though.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
IBy taking time and building a solid case before an arrest or charges are filed, they have a better chance at prevailing at trial.

There ya go! There is a reason that there has to be enough evidence gathered to make it to a grand jury. Otherwise, they would just be tossing around arrests at the whim of the mob. They have to have a good solid case before they can proceed. Heck .. they don't even know what to charge him with. Murder? Manslaughter? Involuntary Manslaughter? Stupidity? Nothing? Let them do their job and investigate. Otherwise ... an innocent man could end up in jail OR a guilty man could go free.



posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by FlyersFan


So, any arrest requires an investigation to be completed BEFORE the arrest? Is that your position?
A dead kid and an armed pursuer isn't enough evidence?

The officer on the scene wanted to arrest Zimmerman, but the State Attorney overruled it. Don't tell me there wasn't enough evidence for an arrest. :shk:


I think there is a little more to it than that. Florida has a law that states an individual has no obligation to retreat if they fear they are in imminent danger. Upon police arriving at the scene, they conducted a preliminary investigation. The officers and their superiors took Zimmerman to the police station for further questioning, then presented their case to the State Attorney, who deemed they did not have enough evidence for a conviction.

Before you can arrest someone, you must have sufficient evidence to go forward with prosecution and and get a conviction. Zimmerman stated he feared for his life, so the "stand your ground" defense became applicable. This does not mean he will not be arrested after further investigation, just the State did not have enough evidence at that time to arrest, charge, and get a conviction.

I personally feel at some point Zimmerman will be arrested and charged with something. Unfortunately, it may be in an attempt to appease the gathering crowds, in an attempt to avoid civil unrest, riots, and possibly more loss of life. Will you be satisfied if Zimmerman is tried and acquitted? Or, will you only see "justice served" if he is convicted? That is the bigger question.
edit on 30-3-2012 by retiredTxn because: Formatting



posted on Mar, 31 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Your flashy new Avatar speaks volumes! Perhaps you can team up with Sharpton. This case is still being investigated and yet everyone is already to convict and execute Zimmerman. I'll save my judgement until the man has his day in court.




top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join