Trayvon Martin case to go to grand jury, Fla. state attorney announces

[JonInMiddleGA]

And the guy could be anything here from a creep to a hero as far as I can tell.

The phone stuff (which I mentioned pretty consistently elsewhere yesterday long before I ever opened this thread) really just boggles my mind though, bewilderment influenced no doubt by the wide range of time frames I've seen quoted for the 48 calls.

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, I had my car broken into and stereo stolen as well. My roommate left the passenger door unlocked. Obviously a crime, but just as obviously, not an emergency, since it happened hours earlier in the middle of the night. I called the regular police line.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And the guy could be anything here from a creep to a hero as far as I can tell.

That's fair, and I'm still *open* to the possibility of "hero."

But my spidey sense here says "loser."

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

bewilderment influenced no doubt by the wide range of time frames I've seen quoted for the 48 calls.

Eh, 48 calls to 911 is a lot, even for a lifetime. I think it's more to do with why you call. We've all laughed at the drunk guy who calls 911 because mcDonald's won't serve him after they are closed. But calling 911 on a routine basis for what might be nothing more than warning signs of what could lead to attracting criminal behavior, without anything else, seems a bit extreme and abusive of the situation. I'm honestly curious whether these were just "open window of a house down the street, I think you ought to check it out" type calls, or if there was something else - "I just saw a guy running away from a house and noticed a window open when I went over to check."

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The overall report on this guy seems to be that people whose property he helped protect from a real criminal thought he was helpful, but people who saw his overzealousness thought he was just creepy. Sure, if you're out there acting like the Dirty Harry of your neighborhood, you *are* likely to stop/deter some criminals, but if you cross that line into creepy/overzealous/OCD/pest/whatever too frequently, the negatives can outweigh the positives.

Looks like that's that case.


One African American resident, Ibrahim Rashada, told the Herald that Zimmerman seemed friendly and helpful, but Zimmerman also circulated a description of a suspect that pulled Rashada up short. "I fit the stereotype he emailed around," Rashada said. That realization led Rashada to drive downtown whenever he wants to take a walk and stretch his legs. "I don’t want anyone chasing me," he said.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Right. I agree with you there. "You got to let some shit just sliiiiiiiiide."--Chris Rock. JIMGA is correct to a degree--there are dozens of activities daily, even in a nice neighborhood, that *could* be reported to local law enforcement, and in many cases an arrest or citation *could* be issued. But for the same reason it'd be problematic to have a cop with OCD out there trying to enforce every single minor violation of every single law or statute he sees, it's problematic when a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain wannabe cop is out there evidently acting OCD about everything he sees. The overall report on this guy seems to be that people whose property he helped protect from a real criminal thought he was helpful, but people who saw his overzealousness thought he was just creepy. Sure, if you're out there acting like the Dirty Harry of your neighborhood, you *are* likely to stop/deter some criminals, but if you cross that line into creepy/overzealous/OCD/pest/whatever too frequently, the negatives can outweigh the positives.

I don't necessarily disagree 100% with Jon. It's a 'pick your battles' kind of thing with me. Nothing I can add to what you just said, that's a pretty good summation of how I feel about it.

What's the line from Dirty Harry? "Inspector, your methods are unconventional to say the least. Oh, you get results. But often your successes are more costly to this department in terms of expenses and physical destruction than most other men's failures."

[Ksyrup]

Zimmerman also circulated a description of a suspect that pulled Rashada up short. "I fit the stereotype he emailed around," Rashada said.



SHIT.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Trayvon Shooter's 911 Calls: Potholes, Piles of Trash—and Black Men | Mother Jones

I just skimmed through most of their documented "9-1-1 calls" they provide. Not surprisingly most of the calls they provide were not made by dialing 9-1-1, but rather by dialing the non-emergency number. Had he been calling 9-1-1 consistently to report non-emergencies, he would've been charged with whatever Florida's code for misusing 9-1-1.

Here as long as you dial the non-emergency number, you can report just about anything you want to, and even better they'll dispatch someone to it if a supervisor isn't paying attention.

[molson]

So if he's always watching everything, calling 911, and following people around, then something made this occasion different. It was either something internal (like a mental breakdown), or something external (like the kid responding physically somehow to being followed). Zimmerman's probably really used to feeling like he's in control, in charge of everything. If someone doesn't go along with that and either physically resists, or just yells and pleads for someone to help him, it's easy to see things escalating. And there's just no way to know the details of events through that escalation. No matter what happens, there's going to be a lot of people who feel like there's a huge injustice, and that sucks.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by molson

So if he's always watching everything, calling 911, and following people around, then something made this occasion different. It was either something internal (like a mental breakdown), or something external (like the kid responding physically somehow to being followed). Zimmerman's probably really used to feeling like he's in control, in charge of everything. If someone doesn't go along with that and either physically resists, or just yells and pleads for someone to help him, it's easy to see things escalating. And there's just no way to know the details of events through that escalation. No matter what happens, there's going to be a lot of people who feel like there's a huge injustice, and that sucks.

If his lawyers work half as hard as you have in this thread to defend him, he's gonna be just fine.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

I've been in Florida at all different parts of the year. My grandma, would leave the windows open unless it was too hot. I've lived in Panama City and when it wasn't too hot, we'd have a window or two open.

The panhandle doesn't count, it's too far north and gets an actual winter sometimes. In Tampa and Orlando, there are maybe 4 weeks all year we could leave the windows open...

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

What's the line from Dirty Harry? "Inspector, your methods are unconventional to say the least. Oh, you get results. But often your successes are more costly to this department in terms of expenses and physical destruction than most other men's failures."

Of course that line was delivered by one of the villains of the piece, which kind of seems relevant here somehow

[Rizon]

I've called 911 three times in my life:

1) When the bushes outside our house caught on fire in the middle of the night (junipers, went up like gasoline, thought the house was on fire)

2) An obviously drugged up woman threw a shoe at my neighbors kids. Woman ended up being on drugs.

3) A suspicious person was in my neighbors car. Thought it was my neighbor crying, but it ended up being a tweaker on a tweak binge and his shit got tased.

[mckerney]

My God this "Stand Your Ground," law needs to be changed. A judge ruled it applies to a man who stabbed an unarmed burgler after chasing him more than a block.

Miami judge decides fatal stabbing was self-defense - 03/21/2012 | MiamiHerald.com

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by mckerney

My God this "Stand Your Ground," law needs to be changed. A judge ruled it applies to a man who stabbed an unarmed burgler after chasing him more than a block.

Miami judge decides fatal stabbing was self-defense - 03/21/2012 | MiamiHerald.com

To me, a case with facts like that drifts over from "stand your ground" to "using deadly force to defend property," which is not allowed. You can use deadly force if you are confronted and in danger; you can't use deadly force to essentially track down the guy who stole your property and kill him. I bet that ruling will not stand.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

The panhandle doesn't count, it's too far north and gets an actual winter sometimes. In Tampa and Orlando, there are maybe 4 weeks all year we could leave the windows open...

Well, my family on my dad's side is all from that area, so I'm familiar with the weather there too. Plus, I was born in Lakeland. Not that that means much.

Originally Posted by Jon

Of course that line was delivered by one of the villains of the piece, which kind of seems relevant here somehow

Hehe, that is a very good point.

[Ksyrup]

Really? I went to Florida Southern.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by mckerney

My God this "Stand Your Ground," law needs to be changed. A judge ruled it applies to a man who stabbed an unarmed burgler after chasing him more than a block.

Given that brief description, the most obvious change would be the name, to the "Stop Stealing My Shit" law.

The outcome is one I heartily applaud however, Garcia did the world a favor.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

If his lawyers work half as hard as you have in this thread to defend him, he's gonna be just fine.

There it is!

I don't know what to say, I don't feel that I've defended him. I find it the situation interesting (and sad), I have worked a lot in this field, I have a lot of sensitivity to the issues involved. I do look at cases for their weaknesses, provability, whether they fit the elements of a crime, and also for civil liability issues and issues prosecutors will face proving the case down the road. I think a lot of my posts were about what the prosecutors need to do to prove the case against him. If a prosecutor came to me and said they had a slam dunk case my instinct would be to try to find the holes/challenges in it.

And I always do get uncomfortable and probably defensive when there's so much emotion thrown into a criminal law situation. Constitutional rights don't mix with emotion. And I do sometimes get annoyed when people have confident assumptions about the law or criminal procedure that are just 100% incorrect. But I don't think I've said anything remotely out of line, or untrue, so I think your comment is unfair, and cheap. But not unexpected. Well, the fact that it's you is actually kind of unexpected.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

Really? I went to Florida Southern.

Born in Lakeland, grew up in California (with a brief 3 year stint in Wyoming), then moved to Panama City after high school, then joined the Air Force. Most of my Florida 'experience' is in the Plant City/Lakeland area though.

[Ksyrup]

Yeah, like molson, I find this whole story interesting from a legal perspective (and sad from the human side), even though the sum total of my criminal law experience is in 2 law school classes 18 or 19 years ago and studying for 2 Bar exams. I don't know enough about the law or the facts to have figured out whether to defend him or shit on him.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

I love fresh air.

When I lived in Florida (Melbourne) I would open the windows as soon as I got home. It was during autumn, but I didn't move to Florida to sit in my apartment blasting AC.

I now live in Detroit and have 3 windows open right now, while at work. They are the 3rd & 4th stories of the building, in a gated condo complex. If someone wants to get a big ass ladder, they will be met by a 90 lb dog who may not be very friendly...

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by mckerney

My God this "Stand Your Ground," law needs to be changed. A judge ruled it applies to a man who stabbed an unarmed burgler after chasing him more than a block.

Miami judge decides fatal stabbing was self-defense - 03/21/2012 | MiamiHerald.com

I like the law, I don't know why it would apply in this case though. Would be interested in hearing more details on this particular case. In any event, if there is confusion, I tend to side with the person who was initially the victim. If you don't want to get stabbed, don't break into someone's home. Pretty simple solution to the problem.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

That's fair, and I'm still *open* to the possibility of "hero."

But my spidey sense here says "loser."

+1

[judicial clerk]

I have experience with criminal investigations. I am a police detective and while my agency does not have straight homicide detectives, I have been the lead detective or assisting detective in 12 to 15 homicides.

Like most of you, my spidey senses tell me that this guy Zimmerman is creepy and that he is criminally responsible for the death of this young man. The caveat to this is that I only know what news outlets are telling me (dont forget they are in the business of selling advertising. Also, sometimes my spidey senses are wrong (but not usually).

To defend Molson a tiny bit, he reads like a person who has had to try to prove a case in court before. Where some of you see a person who is trying to explain away Zimmerman's behavior I see a person who refuses to go off half-cocked and act on knee-jerk reactions. Skydog and ksyrup are the same way and I think I agree with everything the three wrote.

To NOT defend the investigating police agency, The statement given by the Chief regarding running a colorblind investigation and not being believed because he is white seems like a stupid thing to say. Its like this guy has never been criticized in the press before. Generally, If I was running the investigation, my only comment would be that this is an ongoing investigation and we have no further comment at this time. Regarding the evidenciary issues the press has reported about phonecalls and cell phones and witness statements, the press gets that stuff wrong so often that you shouldnt make any judgments based on it.

I will also comment to the people who wanted Zimmerman arrested the day of the occurance. Generally, the last thing you want to do is arrest the suspect. I don't mean you don't want to arrest the person, I mean in a perfect world it would be the last step in the initial investigation. In my jurisdiction, once a person is arrested on a homicide we have 7 days to get the case in front of a grandjury. Any evidence that you dig up eight days after the arrest the initial grand jury is not going to hear. Also, probably the last time you get to speak with the suspect is initially after the arrest. As the interviewer you would like to have as much information as possible and if the interview takes place immediately the interview wont be as successful. Finally, within a day of being arrested the suspect will be represented by an attorney who in an attempt to vigorously defend his/her client will put up as many roadblocks as possible to us developing evidence against the suspect. Now, all cases are different and some are manhunts from the start but in this case I don't think I would make an immediate arrest. It might feel good to the media to arrest a suspect and put him in county jail but justice is better served co convict a suspect and put him in state prison.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by judicial clerk

I have experience with criminal investigations. I am a police detective and while my agency does not have straight homicide detectives, I have been the lead detective or assisting detective in 12 to 15 homicides.

Like most of you, my spidey senses tell me that this guy Zimmerman is creepy and that he is criminally responsible for the death of this young man. The caveat to this is that I only know what news outlets are telling me (dont forget they are in the business of selling advertising. Also, sometimes my spidey senses are wrong (but not usually).

To defend Molson a tiny bit, he reads like a person who has had to try to prove a case in court before. Where some of you see a person who is trying to explain away Zimmerman's behavior I see a person who refuses to go off half-cocked and act on knee-jerk reactions. Skydog and ksyrup are the same way and I think I agree with everything the three wrote.

To NOT defend the investigating police agency, The statement given by the Chief regarding running a colorblind investigation and not being believed because he is white seems like a stupid thing to say. Its like this guy has never been criticized in the press before. Generally, If I was running the investigation, my only comment would be that this is an ongoing investigation and we have no further comment at this time. Regarding the evidenciary issues the press has reported about phonecalls and cell phones and witness statements, the press gets that stuff wrong so often that you shouldnt make any judgments based on it.

I will also comment to the people who wanted Zimmerman arrested the day of the occurance. Generally, the last thing you want to do is arrest the suspect. I don't mean you don't want to arrest the person, I mean in a perfect world it would be the last step in the initial investigation. In my jurisdiction, once a person is arrested on a homicide we have 7 days to get the case in front of a grandjury. Any evidence that you dig up eight days after the arrest the initial grand jury is not going to hear. Also, probably the last time you get to speak with the suspect is initially after the arrest. As the interviewer you would like to have as much information as possible and if the interview takes place immediately the interview wont be as successful. Finally, within a day of being arrested the suspect will be represented by an attorney who in an attempt to vigorously defend his/her client will put up as many roadblocks as possible to us developing evidence against the suspect. Now, all cases are different and some are manhunts from the start but in this case I don't think I would make an immediate arrest. It might feel good to the media to arrest a suspect and put him in county jail but justice is better served co convict a suspect and put him in state prison.

Thanks for injecting some real life perspective.

[Ksyrup]

Yes, thanks. Everything I know about criminal investigations I learned from Cops and The First 48.

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by judicial clerk

I have experience with criminal investigations. I am a police detective and while my agency does not have straight homicide detectives, I have been the lead detective or assisting detective in 12 to 15 homicides.

Like most of you, my spidey senses tell me that this guy Zimmerman is creepy and that he is criminally responsible for the death of this young man. The caveat to this is that I only know what news outlets are telling me (dont forget they are in the business of selling advertising. Also, sometimes my spidey senses are wrong (but not usually).

To defend Molson a tiny bit, he reads like a person who has had to try to prove a case in court before. Where some of you see a person who is trying to explain away Zimmerman's behavior I see a person who refuses to go off half-cocked and act on knee-jerk reactions. Skydog and ksyrup are the same way and I think I agree with everything the three wrote.

To NOT defend the investigating police agency, The statement given by the Chief regarding running a colorblind investigation and not being believed because he is white seems like a stupid thing to say. Its like this guy has never been criticized in the press before. Generally, If I was running the investigation, my only comment would be that this is an ongoing investigation and we have no further comment at this time. Regarding the evidenciary issues the press has reported about phonecalls and cell phones and witness statements, the press gets that stuff wrong so often that you shouldnt make any judgments based on it.

I will also comment to the people who wanted Zimmerman arrested the day of the occurance. Generally, the last thing you want to do is arrest the suspect. I don't mean you don't want to arrest the person, I mean in a perfect world it would be the last step in the initial investigation. In my jurisdiction, once a person is arrested on a homicide we have 7 days to get the case in front of a grandjury. Any evidence that you dig up eight days after the arrest the initial grand jury is not going to hear. Also, probably the last time you get to speak with the suspect is initially after the arrest. As the interviewer you would like to have as much information as possible and if the interview takes place immediately the interview wont be as successful. Finally, within a day of being arrested the suspect will be represented by an attorney who in an attempt to vigorously defend his/her client will put up as many roadblocks as possible to us developing evidence against the suspect. Now, all cases are different and some are manhunts from the start but in this case I don't think I would make an immediate arrest. It might feel good to the media to arrest a suspect and put him in county jail but justice is better served co convict a suspect and put him in state prison.

Excellent post, thank you for sharing your perspective.

[Glengoyne]

Great Post JC.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by judicial clerk

...and while my agency does not have straight homicide detectives...

That's a pretty progressive department you work for with them only hiring gay homicide detectives.



On a serious note: Excellent post.

[RedKingGold]

Thread closed.

[Ksyrup]

They have a strict Ask and Tell policy.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Great post JC.

Two things:

1. In your professional opinion, what do you make of the reports of the police "correcting" witnesses?

2. Does the "I use my spidey senses" argument ever hold up in a court of law? That would rock to see a cop on the stand say "My spidey senses told me so."

[stevew]

Miami Heat don hoodies in response to death of teen Trayvon Martin - ESPN

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by mckerney

My God this "Stand Your Ground," law needs to be changed. A judge ruled it applies to a man who stabbed an unarmed burgler after chasing him more than a block.

Miami judge decides fatal stabbing was self-defense - 03/21/2012 | MiamiHerald.com

I don't have a major issue with that one. Once a criminal crosses that line all bets are off.

[EagleFan]

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...m-to-zip-it-up


Holy Sh*t, Belichick is screwed!!!!

[Buccaneer]

I find it interesting those that have advocated (as all should) the strength of our judicial system is measured in how well we defend the accused are willing to throw the book at this apparent loser and then string him up. Our judicial system has to be applied to all citizens. Hypocrites.

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

I don't have a major issue with that one. Once a criminal crosses that line all bets are off.

So, what level of a crime has to be committed in "crossing the line" so you can chase them down and stab them to death?

Shoplifting? Running a red light and hitting your bumper? A vehicle is a deadly weapon after all.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

U.S. News - Geraldo Rivera blames hoodie for Trayvon's death; critics tell him to zip it up


Holy Sh*t, Belichick is screwed!!!!

“I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.”

He added: "You have to recognize that this whole stylizing yourself as a gangsta, you’re going to be a gangsta-wannabe, well people are going to perceive you as a menace."

[cmp]

Originally Posted by sabotai

“I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.”

He added: "You have to recognize that this whole stylizing yourself as a gangsta, you’re going to be a gangsta-wannabe, well people are going to perceive you as a menace."

Damn, I'm wearing a hoodie right now. I guess I better not go out in public.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Not a single Republican candidate cited Zimmerman's 2nd Amendment rights. Wimps.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by bronconick

So, what level of a crime has to be committed in "crossing the line" so you can chase them down and stab them to death?

Shoplifting? Running a red light and hitting your bumper? A vehicle is a deadly weapon after all.

Common sense.

Commit a crime against someone, you deserve what you get. You break into someone's house and that is going over the line... all bets are off.

Shoplifting is not a crime against someone, a traffic accident is not a crime.

[Autumn]

What if they egg your house? Can you stab them yet?

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I find it interesting those that have advocated (as all should) the strength of our judicial system is measured in how well we defend the accused are willing to throw the book at this apparent loser and then string him up. Our judicial system has to be applied to all citizens. Hypocrites.

Yay, I'm so glad you've come back to once again to teach us a lesson and call us all hypocrites. I mean, this is such a stupid post. I guess I'm not allowed to be upset that someone got murdered and the killer is being shielded by the police and a stupid law just because I support defendant rights? That makes absolutely no sense. No one is saying he shouldn't have all the rights of the accused. And this is yet another example of you calling out supposed hypocrites on one side of an issue, but not the other. Maybe one day you'll come to the realization that you're the biggest hypocrite here.

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Yay, I'm so glad you've come back to once again to teach us a lesson and call us all hypocrites. I mean, this is such a stupid post. I guess I'm not allowed to be upset that someone got murdered and the killer is being shielded by the police and a stupid law just because I support defendant rights? That makes absolutely no sense. No one is saying he shouldn't have all the rights of the accused. And this is yet another example of you calling out supposed hypocrites on one side of an issue, but not the other. Maybe one day you'll come to the realization that you're the biggest hypocrite here.

You and others making assumptions about the motives of police/prosecutors (here and in general) is the same as people making assumptions about your motives, or the motives of other people who have taken up this case as something of a cause (i.e., calling you a hypocrite, wondering how you would react if the races were swapped, etc.) It's unfair in both cases, and it can be really hurtful to be the subject of such assumptions when they're unwarranted.

Edit: Or on the other hand, if they're all fair questions to ask, then they should be fair questions to ask in all directions. Maybe we should all just assume everyone is motivated by race and power and politics all the time, and its everyone's burden to prove that every word or action or opinion, is not.

Double Edit: Also too though, I could see an argument that if someone has some position of official power, even if that's as low as a patrol officer or low-level government official of some type, they SHOULD be subject to more potentially unfair assumptions than a private citizen, as kind of a check on government, and at the individual level, they just have to suck it up. I buy that (though maybe they should get some small hazard pay or something to cover that, maybe you'd get more qualified people willing to be a villain for such otherwise low pay ) Still, I think in a civilized society, there should be some reasonable check on THAT as well, because emotions can just take things to a terrible place if that goes too far, and one of the roles of government, and the constitution, and law itself, is to provide a check on that kind of emotion. Because the people do have a lot of power. "The people" are capable of bad things when fueled by emotion, especially when it's racially charged emotion. (And I don't think we're anything close to that kind of "bad" here in this case, just thinking out loud about this phenomenon).

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

No one is saying he shouldn't have all the rights of the accused.

Yes they are. Molson understands the point which apparently escaped you in your emotions. Any one of us can be pissed off at what happened (I can't stand the likes of Zimmerman) but that's irrelevant in the charges and prosecution that might apply and the defense of such. John Adams defended the redcoats after the Boston Massacre for a very good reason, while his cousin and other revengers were calling for their heads.

[RendeR]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

Common sense.

Commit a crime against someone, you deserve what you get. You break into someone's house and that is going over the line... all bets are off.

Shoplifting is not a crime against someone, a traffic accident is not a crime.

neither common nor generally sensible.

Killing someone is also a crime, if you chase someone down and kill them you should go to jail. What happened 5 minutes before that is irrelevant. you murdered someone who was RUNNING AWAY. If you commit this crime you're a bigger failure than the guy who broke into your house.

Shoplifting is a crime against many, including everyone who works for the store. Obviously under your code of conduct this crime is far greater than breaking into a home, you're harming far more people.

[Havok]

Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman


I don't know what to think about this case, but after reading this article, all i can think of is the Duke lacrosse scandal all over again. Maybe this story is all bullshit, who knows. I just get irate when everyone and their mom are jumping to conclusions in this case without all the facts. (Miami Heat and their stupid hoodie thing, and Obama chiming in for no apparent reason, like he did with the Harvard professor.)

I wonder if this would have made top headlines if the shooters name had been Jose Martinez? doubtful....

[molson]

And one other thing about assumptions - I know when I talk about this and raise the potential challenges of the case, and the weak point of the case, and why the police MAY have done what they did (and they could all be dirty racists, I don't know them, I have no idea), I can feel the assumption that, I wouldn't be nearly this cautious in a prosecution-sense if it was another type of case. That's absolutely not true. I am very prosecution-cautious in any type of cause. Which is one of the reasons I feel SO strongly that foreign terrorists/war criminals should be tried in military tribunals. Because in U.S. civilian courts, the guilty can and do go free, and are often never charged, for all kinds of reasons, by design, and that's just not something I feel we need to extend to foreign terrorists. If we had tried OBL or KSM in a civilian court, and a careless prosecutor forgets to disclose some piece of evidence (out of thousands of pieces of evidence), or if a confession was illegally coerced through torture, then all criminal charges should probably be dismissed and they should be free (oversimplification there to make a point). Of course, guys like that can never be freed, so I think it makes a mockery of the U.S. civilian criminal system to apply it to them (unless you're willing to free them, I guess)

[M GO BLUE!!!]

If Martin "attacked" Zimmerman, what provoked him? Zimmerman was twice his size. Lethal force was required?

All we know is one man made a habit of calling police whenever he saw suspicious (example: black) persons. He was told to not follow Martin. His response: "These assholes are always getting away." Apparently they fought (the catalyst of which is unknown) and the skinny kid ended up shot dead.

If someone confronts & accuses me of wrongdoing, won't leave it alone, then puts his hands on me, I will defend myself.

It does a great disservice to label Zimmerman a victim or hero. He went out looking for trouble. He found it.

I highly doubt that Zimmerman asked politely how his evening was going, then was attacked by a combination of Bruce Lee & Roberto Duran.

I hope Zimmerman is proud of the way he kept his community safe from a kid with a soda & a bag of skittles.