Man kills 17 year old Trayvon Martin, claims self defense

[Sub-stance1]

Well back on subject the protest still going around here in FL. Apparently the Gov has appointed a DA to look into case to see if enough to press charges. Don't want to press charges to early with not enough evidence so people can see there is cause for doubt(much like the last big profile case FL had). Proving beyond a reasonable doubt harder than it seems.

They have enough to at least charge him with manslaughter right now. If they can prove that it wasn't him screaming for help they may go for a murder charge. My guess is if they do proceed, it will be manslaughter.

[Yuuichi]

They have enough to at least charge him with manslaughter right now. If they can prove that it wasn't him screaming for help they may go for a murder charge. My guess is if they do proceed, it will be manslaughter.

My guess is manslaughter is what they holding out for before charging.

[plustheharm]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1054067

Was gonna post it earlier, along with the video of the funeral director but I see the tab is still up. >_>

Wasn't the ME, which makes sense considering who can / can't comment, but actually the funeral home director.

[Sub-stance1]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1054067

Yea, i thought they would probably use some sort of voice biometrics to determine whose voice that was. It sounds like a younger persons voice to me. The good thing about this case is that they only needed Zimmermans voice to determine that. His 911 call gave them the sample that they needed.

[F34R]

They have enough to at least charge him with manslaughter right now. If they can prove that it wasn't him screaming for help they may go for a murder charge. My guess is if they do proceed, it will be manslaughter.

I don't think they do.

My guess is manslaughter is what they holding out for before charging.

I think they are holding out for some actual EVIDENCE that disproves Zimmermans statement. So far, I haven't seen anything beyond circumstantial and speculative.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1054067

Was gonna post it earlier, along with the video of the funeral director but I see the tab is still up. >_>

Wasn't the ME, which makes sense considering who can / can't comment, but actually the funeral home director.

Yeah, I doubt that'll be much help. He's hardly going to be qualified as an expert witness lol.

Yea, i thought they would probably use some sort of voice biometrics to determine whose voice that was. It sounds like a younger persons voice to me. The good thing about this case is that they only needed Zimmermans voice to determine that. His 911 call gave them the sample that they needed.

Stress does a lot of things to a voice. We don't know what they compared it to. Listening to myself recorded on a normal traffic stop, and hearing a 911 tape of me screaming for help; I didn't even recognize me own voice. Just one example.

[plustheharm]

They'll bring him in, and if you don't think there will be enough cause for SOME charge (some expect an indictment) ... , and the GJI will proceed and the 'process' will start. That's all most people want, what many are calling for.

The forensic analysis isn't being done some by some asshole in a basement, either. And isn't being suggested as admissable evidence. Like that wouldn't get done?

Sent from my EVO 4G using Tapatalk 2 Beta-5

[Sub-stance1]

I don't think they do.

Sure they do and he will be charged. I doubt he will walk away without facing charges.

Stress does a lot of things to a voice. We don't know what they compared it to. Listening to myself recorded on a normal traffic stop, and hearing a 911 tape of me screaming for help; I didn't even recognize me own voice. Just one example.

The software takes all those things into account. All they need is a sample of that persons voice in which they have because of his 911 call. The test can't say that its Martin's but it can sure as hell exclude zimmerman. This is coming from not one, but two different forensic experts. This guy will be charged just like he should of been that night. Let him have his day in court.

The forensic analysis isn't being done some by some asshole in a basement, either. And isn't being suggested as admissable evidence. Like that wouldn't get done?

Correct. The 911 call was also done to determine if he used a racial slur. So far at least one expert says he did use it. There is no law against that though. Freedom of speech on that one.

[F34R]

They'll bring him in, and if you don't think there will be enough cause for SOME charge (some expect an indictment) ... , and the GJI will proceed and the 'process' will start. That's all most people want, what many are calling for.

The forensic analysis isn't being done some by some asshole in a basement, either. And isn't being suggested as admissable evidence. Like that wouldn't get done?

Sent from my EVO 4G using Tapatalk 2 Beta-5

If there is a forensic analysis done, more than likely, we won't know about it until a decision is made. They probably already have Zimmermans medical records, witness statements, ballistics report, and ME report. They'll go through all of it several times.

They need to find some irrefutable evidence that rebuts all the things that we know already.

Sure they do and he will be charged. I doubt he will walk away without facing charges.



The software takes all those things into account. All they need is a sample of that persons voice in which they have because of his 911 call. The test can't say that its Martin's but it can sure as hell exclude zimmerman. This is coming from not one, but two different forensic experts. This guy will be charged just like he should of been that night. Let him have his day in court.

Oh, I understand that all too well. That comment was directly towards the statements people made about "it sounded like a young person", etc. I'm sorry, but you don't charge someone without proper evidence. Fuck, that's what people get all over the cops for in the first place; and yet a lot of people are saying do it in this case. smh

[plustheharm]

If there is a forensic analysis done, more than likely, we won't know about it until a decision is made. They probably already have Zimmermans medical records, witness statements, ballistics report, and ME report. They'll go through all of it several times.

They need to find some irrefutable evidence that rebuts all the things that we know already.

That's not the point. All anybody has been really advocating in this thread, publicly, everywhere, is that justice run its course. Bring him in. It has appeared increasingly more and more likely that what was said to have happened that night didn't. Whether or what has come out "confirms" anything, it seems to do nothing but contradict that with which we've been led to believe. I bet this guy gets brought in this week.

Oh, I understand that all too well. That comment was directly towards the statements people made about "it sounded like a young person", etc. I'm sorry, but you don't charge someone without proper evidence. Fuck, that's what people get all over the cops for in the first place; and yet a lot of people are saying do it in this case. smh

You don't need absolute proof to have a formal charge be issued. And "proper" evidence is objectionable, apparently. People have been charged for less.

[F34R]

That's not the point. All anybody has been really advocating in this thread, publicly, everywhere, is that justice run its course. Bring him in. It has appeared increasingly more and more likely that what was said to have happened that night didn't. Whether or what has come out "confirms" anything, it seems to do nothing but contradict that with which we've been led to believe. I bet this guy gets brought in this week.


You don't need absolute proof to have a formal charge be issued. And "proper" evidence is objectionable, apparently. People have been charged for less.

Meh, if this was tried in the court of public information ~ you'd be right. Let me ask you this, how is it increasingly more and more likely that what was said to have happened didn't? Nothing has really refuted Zimmermans story.

[Sub-stance1]

You don't need absolute proof to have a formal charge be issued. And "proper" evidence is objectionable, apparently. People have been charged for less.

That's true. And in this case ,they had enough evidence to hold him that night. I'm betting that the ballistics results will help to determine what went down.

[F34R]

That's true. And in this case ,they had enough evidence to hold him that night. I'm betting that the ballistics results will help to determine what went down.

Of course it will lol. Unless the bullet is mangled, they'll be able to tell; the make of the gun, caliber, roughly how far the gun was from the subject, angle of entry.

[Sub-stance1]

Of course it will lol. Unless the bullet is mangled, they'll be able to tell; the make of the gun, caliber, roughly how far the gun was from the subject, angle of entry.

Exactly. And until all that matches up to his story, that gives them probable cause to hold him. Remember, no one actually witnessed the shooting.

[plustheharm]

The recent eyewitness would appear to refute his story, at least to the severity of the beating. Which then calls into question his entire account. Charges have been issued on less. And that's all the people want.

[F34R]

Exactly. And until all that matches up to his story, that gives them probable cause to hold him. Remember, no one actually witnessed the shooting.

So, you're saying, hold him, without evidence of a crime, until they get evidence that clears him?

The recent eyewitness would appear to refute his story, at least to the severity of the beating. Which then calls into question his entire account. Charges have been issued on less. And that's all the people want.

You mean the recent eye witness that wasn't anywhere around a month ago? What the people want is apparently what the people have been complaining about Law Enforcement for a long time.

[plustheharm]

Yeah, that'd be the one I'm referring to. Remains to be seen how credible their claims are, and if they had a good reason for not coming forward sooner. There could be a good reason. Maybe they feared for their safety. Maybe they thought they weren't going to be needed. Who knows, and apparently this isn't the first time a witness has come forward after the fact. I'm not saying this entirely disproves his claim. And it wasn't but 2 weeks ago that some of the information has come out, so maybe this individual thinks their 'account' might be necessary, or helpful. But when you have a 'witness' that comes forward and casts doubt on something being said, you have to listen.

As for the last sentence, I have no personal vendetta against police officers, or anyone in the law enforcement field. Of course there are people out there calling for different things. IF Zimmerman is brought in, goes through the process, and is found to have been in the 'right,' I'll have nothing to really 'complain' about.

[MATRIX 2]

Hmm

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/04/0...-after-murder/

[F34R]

Hmmm indeed:

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/04/zi...rtin-shooting/

Doesn't sound much like a racially biased person....

[Sufi]

I don't think there was enough evidence to conclude that either way. Though I suspect they were both aggravated at one another before the fight even started.

[Vulgotha]

This is hilarious and pathetic:

http://content.bitsontherun.com/prev...NjJha-svqBtzyp


^State of 'professional journalism' on the topic of racism in America. What a clown.

"Durr you can't talk about this stuff or attack my horribly pathetic position cuz you're an english white guy from Britain and not a black American!"

Well played.

[F34R]

That guy is a freakin idiot lol.

[Vulgotha]

Yea, seriously.

[plustheharm]

If we're going to be fair about it, they were both acting like clowns. Like I said before, it seemed like the real point was lost and it became some bitch-fest about who was the more legitimate "journalist." Something I'm not sure I could label either with a straight face.

Also, Grand Jury will not hear the case.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...0,704801.story

Sent from my EVO 4G using Tapatalk 2 Beta-6

[F34R]

Yeah, was just reading a news feed about it:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8380JS20120409

[Vulgotha]

If we're going to be fair about it, they were both acting like clowns. Like I said before, it seemed like the real point was lost and it became some bitch-fest about who was the more legitimate "journalist." Something I'm not sure I could label either with a straight face.

Also, Grand Jury will not hear the case.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/...0,704801.story

Sent from my EVO 4G using Tapatalk 2 Beta-6

I think the British guy was totally fine. The other guy was acting like a total tool.