...   
      
   BK>>As to the outcome, the prosecution was so inept, so incompetent,   
   BK>>it appears the prosecutor didn't want to win that case. She felt   
   BK>>she had to take it to trial, but winning it might have been bad   
   BK>>for her politically. So she overcharged and conducted the worst   
   BK>>prosecution she could. Or so it appears.   
      
    LL> It was a weak case to begin with.  Especially for second   
    LL> degree murder.  Even for manslaughter was a stretch, given   
    LL> Florida's stand   
      
    No, it was actually a good case for manslaughter. Remember, you   
    have no right to detain someone without good evidence of a   
    serious crime. I don't know about Florida, but here you can't   
    make a citizen's arrest for a misdemeanor. He couldn't even make   
    that charge against Martin. Suspicion is not enough for the   
    police to hold you, certainly not for a community watch   
    volunteer.   
      
    Then he chased Martin. Just following he might justify, but   
    chasing is way out of line. That alone is enough to make the   
    case that Zimmerman was responsible. It's negligent homicide.   
      
    LL> your ground law.  On top of that, the jury was confused by   
    LL> the instructions given when going into deliberations.   
      
    One of the Jurors who did speak said some of them, at least,   
    were convinced he was guilty, but the judges instructions forced   
    them to vote not guilty. The judge's instructions were   
    incompetent. Since Stand Your Ground was not at issue, he never   
    should have instructed them that Zimmerman didn't have to   
    retreat.   
      
    LL> Rather than explain the instructions, the judge instructed   
    LL> the jurors to read them again.  Why?  Because the judge did   
    LL> not want to take the chance on the case being declared a   
    LL> mistrial by not fully explaining the instructions.  Best to   
    LL> let the jurors figure that out for themselves.   
      
    That's the exact opposite of what would cause a mistrial. The   
    jury cannot be expected to interpret legal instructions on their   
    own. Which makes it look like the judge wanted a not guilty   
    verdict. If they had convicted the defense would have had   
    grounds for an appeal for that alone.   
      
      
      
      
      
   BK>>That case stinks of politics from the beginning. The shooter is   
      
   BK>>the son of a retired judge. The original detective wanted to   
   BK>>charge him with manslaughter. A cop on the scene called it   
   BK>>negligent manslaughter in his report. Yet it wasn't even   
      
      
      
    LL> Although conspiracy theories abound, this case was no   
    LL> conspiracy. A certain ineptness by the prosecutor, to be   
    LL> sure.  But ineptness is not a conspiracy.  Nor is a weak   
    LL> case.   
      
      
      
    LL> either.  And it certainly does not mean it would have been   
    LL> a slam dunk had the prosecutor only charged Zimmerman with   
    LL> manslaughter.   
      
   BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn   
      
   ... The problem is jobs... the solution is jobs...   
   --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)