Zimmerman Prosecutor Angela Corey Indicted By Citizens' Grand Jury For A Falsifying Arrest Warra

Originally posted by lovebeck
What about the 911 operator CLEARLY telling Zimmerman to not go after the "suspect" and that the cops were on their way? He did so anyway, with a loaded gun. Even if he was a cop, had no probable cause to stop and question the kid, he was walking home from the store, not casing houses or lugging a bag of criminal tools and stolen goods on his back.

This point has been gone over so many times its boarderline stupid now.
An operator is not a cop and you are in no way obligated to do what they say. Zimmerman is not a cop either so he does not need probably cause to talk to people. Im not defending zimmerman but im just sick of this retarded point being brought up over and over. I do think zimmerman killed that kid unlawfully but what he did was not 2nd degree murder, it was manslaughter.

Is he guilty of Murder 2? That is for the jury to figure out. From what I have watched of the trial, seems to me the prosecution is doing a pretty good job of proving their case.

Then you are not really watching the trial, you are probably watching highlights that are spun according to what ever media outlet wants to show. The trial is a mess, the star witness caught up in lies, witnesses giving conflicting testimony. Some say Z was on top of M and other have it the other way around. Its not going well for the prosecution at all, every day they just show more reasonable doubt.

Zimmerman told the police that Martin was trying to take his gun away, but yet there was NO DNA to back up his claim.

Another stupid thing repeated without thinking. DNA does not normally appear on objects you attempt to grab combines with the that fact that the gun was fired and it was raining. You wouldn't really be getting DNA off something you were trying to grab. So yes, there is no DNA evidence that Treybon tried to grab the gun, there is also "no DNA evidence" that zimerman committed 2nd degree murder- see how silly that sounds? Don't try to argue with me, just thank me and move on.

reply to post by Superhans


The dna also disproves that George was in a violent struggle with Trayvon, where he was already bleeding when he dived onto the dying teen's back to restrain him, otherwise some of that dna would have landed on the person below..

an interesting read for anyone interested...

The Zimmerman Effect

I do agree with it, but I also believe because of what could happen if Zimmerman is found not guilty, he will be found guilty, regardless of what evidence they do or do not have. The only problem is as much as poor ghetto black communities will rejoice, will it really enrich their lives? Will it get them out of the slums? Get their kids in to good schools? Dissolve gangs? Stop drugs? Reverse their racism towards whites? Its easy to focus on a target, a lot more difficult to focus on ourselves.

reply to post by becomingaware


they can't free Zimmerman sorry but their would be massive rioting nationwide and they know this. people on street are still coming up to me and saying how terrible that white man beat that poor kid then shot him in the back. you can sit them down with all the evidence right in front of them and they still will only believe what comes out on facebook and twitter from joe blow. yes this prosecutor should be charged.

reply to post by hellobruce

It is out - he was elected POTUS twice by the people, and even the court has stated he is a natural born citizen!

i do not think a single president under the two party system has EVER been elected by the people. true free elections do not limit the people to two candidate choices that are identical.

and now you're making a gross logical fallacy regarding courts. so because a court has made a ruling, it is a true, infallible fact? we would have no innocents in jail if this were true, nor would we have tried criminals free.

you are using shady debating tactics which tells me you simply don't care about what is true, you're here to convince people that your agenda is correct.

In the United States, a citizen grand jury is a non-actionable, non-governmental organization that assumes a responsibility upon itself to accuse an individual or groups of individuals of having committed actionable crimes, in a similar aim as that of official grand juries. Such organizations have been organized by those who espouse conspiracy theories regarding certain events or the individuals who are accused by the citizen grand jury, and most citizen grand jury applications to official judiciary systems at the federal, state, or local and municipal level tend to be thrown out for lack of evidence.

en.wikipedia.org...

______________

Curious though this is not a authoritative grand jury it does include this guy.

Larry Klayman, a former U.S. Justice Department prosecutor, a Florida lawyer since 1977, and now the "citizens' prosecutor" who presided over the Ocala grand jury

reply to post by proteus33


You think the jury would lock a guy they thought was innocent up to avoid the rioting?

If that were true, then a conspiracy to manipulate the story to create riots is just as likely (meaning he would go free so it would see fruition).

If he is convicted of anything, he will be set free on appeal. Maybe that would be the only way to avoid blowback? I think there will be some no matter what happens, but not to the extent that if the people threatening violence see Zimmerman set free at the end of the trial. The appeal wouldn't be so promoted.

Anyway I am just entertaining your idea, I personally think he will go free, or possible get manslaughter and be set free on appeal.

reply to post by Miracula


Yeah, we've already talked about that. I was wrong about it being actionable, though I really meant the information could be brought forward and bring a case (not that the citizens grand jury could themselves drag someone into court).

reply to post by IvanAstikov


No.. the DNA does not disprove that.
That's ridiculous.

Originally posted by lovebeck
What about the 911 operator CLEARLY telling Zimmerman to not go after the "suspect" and that the cops were on their way? He did so anyway, with a loaded gun. Even if he was a cop, had no probable cause to stop and question the kid, he was walking home from the store, not casing houses or lugging a bag of criminal tools and stolen goods on his back.

No you can't hear that. I should disregard your entire post based in this misinformation, but I will correct it for like that 100th time. The operator NEVER tells Zimmerman not to go after the subject. He tells Zimmerman "we don't need you to do that" which is pretty far from a command and Zimmerman seems to comply and is heading back to his car when he is jumped. Also, even if it were a command, the operator is not an authority figure.

Zimmerman reminds me of one of those types that always wanted to be a cop but fell short in his endeavors. Look how that failed dream turned out...

He reminds you of that because that's what the prosecution wants him to remind you of. How did the dream turn out?

Is he guilty of Murder 2? That is for the jury to figure out. From what I have watched of the trial, seems to me the prosecution is doing a pretty good job of proving their case. Zimmerman told the police that Martin was trying to take his gun away, but yet there was NO DNA to back up his claim. Overzealous neighborhood watch guy thought he finally nabbed a real criminal but instead killed a teenager carrying Skittles and AZ Ice Tea.

He isn't guilty of Murder 2. The Jury will find that for sure. You haven't been watching the same trial as everyone else because both of the prosecutions key witnesses have ruined their case. First Rachel Jeantel who was on the phone with Zimmerman admitted she lied during the first interview and deposition. Pretty big problem when her story was the only thing that countered Zimmermans. Then the prosecution called the police investigator Serrino who got on the stand and said he believe Zimmerman's version of the story.

You are wrong, Zimmerman said Martin tried for his gun. That does NOT mean he ever touched it, it just means he went for it. Also, even if he HAD touched it you have to understand how DNA works. You understand that usually DNA comes from a bodily fluid, skin flake, or hair right? If you can gather it from a finger print it's called trace DNA. It was raining so if he had touched the gun there might not be trace DNA, or it could have washed off. Likely though he just went for the gun and never got a hand on it.

Finally, it doesn't matter what the teen was carrying, I'm sure Jeffrey Dahmer washed down bits of people with iced tea at least once, but it is worth noting that those oh so innocent items he was carrying were 2 out of 3 ingredients for a watermelon lean. Basically a mixed drink for getting down cough syrup (something Martin did to get high and openly discussed on his facebook).

reply to post by proteus33

they can't free Zimmerman sorry but their would be massive rioting nationwide and they know this. people on street are still coming up to me and saying how terrible that white man beat that poor kid then shot him in the back. you can sit them down with all the evidence right in front of them and they still will only believe what comes out on facebook and twitter from joe blow. yes this prosecutor should be charged.

all evidence indicates that zimmerman did not murder martin. i do not think there will be riots nationwide if justice is served.

this case is clearing the air methinks. sure, ignorant people will claim that zimmerman was a racist even though racial slurs were used against him, but zimmerman isn't guilty of murder.

the evidence i've seen suggests that martin was the aggressor. if i saw a strange person in my neighborhood cutting through lawns and around houses at night, i'd be suspicious and i'd definitely go check it out; especially if there was a string of recent thefts.

i really dislike the fact that a black girl on piers morgan can drop the word n!&&3r (not an attempt to circumvent profanity filters, merely making a point), yet someone of another ethnicity using the SAME word in the SAME context would be decried as a racist. double standards and hypocrisy like that are the real source of our troubles with racism.

Haven't been able to watch a lot of the trial, but from what I have, IMHO, I think the prosecution isn't doing very well

reply to post by crappiekat

The prosecution is Zimmerman's best defense.
This is a joke and Zimmerman will walk.
Anyone who has seen the trial so far can tell Zimmerman is innocent.
I had a lot of MSM driven misconceptions about this case, but then I started watching the trial and knew it was 100% self-defense.

You haven't been watching the same trial as everyone else because both of the prosecutions key witnesses have ruined their case.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I agree with you, I don't think he seen any of the trial.
His information is more "media opinion", anyone who has been watching the trial can tell you that.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Interesting.... yet possibly hypocritical....

Is this "grand jury" going to go forward with "prosecution", and if so will she be tried in Abstentia?

If people read the way he worded his statement about the Grand Jury system belonging to the people, you will notice he steered clear of "prosecution", which IS spelled out as belonging to the Judiciary branch of government.

reply to post by Xcathdra


I'm not sure. I was more interested in it (and my hopes for it are) as a way to bring light to this fact. Whether Zimmerman gets charged with something lesser (no way he will get murder 2, and manslaughter would be a stretch, but could happen I guess), or he doesn't, but decides to go after this prosecutor there will be some buzz about it, investigative work already done, and support.

No matter how anyone feels about Zimmerman's case, what this prosecutor did is wrong, was politically motivated, and needs to be punished to dissuade others from doing it.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
No matter how anyone feels about Zimmerman's case, what this prosecutor did is wrong, was politically motivated, and needs to be punished to dissuade others from doing it.

edit on 5-7-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

Don't get me wrong, we are in complete agreement on this point.

The point is if the people of Florida are not happy with her decision to prosecute, then they should voice that by voting her out of office / demanding an ethics investigation be conducted by the appropriate authorities.

What I don't want to see is a vigilante type setup... That position has already been pushed by the liberal media and race baiters Al Sharpton / Jesse Jackson.

To take an action that requires the same response they are denouncing is dangerous.