Prosecutor Will Not Use Grand Jury in George Zimmerman Case: Smart or Sketchy?

There are racists in every single culture & ethnic group... every single one.

From all I have seen, the witnesses, Zimmermans' broken nose, split head, the beating, Trayvon being in a gated community and attacking Zimmerman, etc., she is NOT here to do us any favors -- I'd trust the findings of twelve members of the grand jury, with no political affiliations or under pressure, MUCH MORE THAN HERS!

I think she probably realizes that no 12 honest people in the USA would attempt to Zimmerman though more than he has already been though ... it must have been a traumatic experience having to put down a vicious animal like Trayvon which suffering the physical damage and fear of death he faced ... this is an attack on all decent Americans' right to protect themselves!

I'm not sure about Florida, but usually grand juries have many more than 12 members.

Just looked it up. It's 15 to 21 members.

THAT IS EVEN BETTER ... if they ever call a grand jury for me, I want 21 on it!

They don't require unanimous verdicts to indict. I don't recall what is typical.

More like 3 dozen... and they get to ask questions.

The numbers vary from state to state. I just looked up Florida and it is 15 to 21. I've testified before a Grand Jury in a different state and was asked quite a few questions.

May your very own hatred and intolerance consume you and reduce you to less than a grain of sand so it will be easier for you to fall down into the bowels of hell.

You sound like the one truly full of hatred. Winston simply disagrees with the charges based on the REAL evidence which CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and ABC had to admit to.

Not hateful at all just intolerant of intolerance; now go away please thank you goodbye"

Wow. I believe you might be a racist which totally clouds your vision. Your hearing too. The 991 call is clearly him saying f**^k^n' coons. It is as plain as day, I have the recording where they took out all other background noise on CNN. It is crystal clear.

I also heard "coons" rather clearly. However CNN has now backed off of that interpretation since they have now used an additional filter and are now saying the word is "cold." I listened to it a bunch of times and I'm not sure it is "cold" (but it's possible) but the "n" sound has disappeared and it no longer sounds like "coons".

That's not right. I listened to it a lot, I saved it & I would swear it says coons.

I'm talking about the last version, not the next to last. "Coons" is gone, even the reporter who heard it so well the time before concedes it.

Have you heard this? http://ironicsurrealism.com/2...

I don't know what it is but it doesn't sound like "coons". The "oo" seems to be gone and is replaced by "o". I don't really hear the "n" either.

CNN has backed off of that one. Listen to the latest: http://ironicsurrealism.com/2... I see I just sent that to you twice, sorry about that.

I'm confused.
Why didn't Zimmerman have any blood on him? None. Not one drop.
Why is that?

What makes you call Martin a "vicious animal?" I mean, how do you arrive to that conclusion?

That is his hatred and intolerance consuming him right now.
He's on his way turning into that grain of sand; and soon he will fall into the bowels of hell. Some people are so hateful; their own body has a disdain for the spirit inhabiting its shell; that it make them sick, with unexplained illnesses that consume them away from this world. Karma has a way of working itself out for him or her (winston court)

eh.
I just think he's ignorant.
A good dose of education would sever him well.

Obviously Zimmerman has a case to answer. Does the Republican Murder Legalisation act allow him to kill people at will? I hope not, but he should still face court and the police department's decision to pre-judge the case and declare him innocent was inappropriate and probably obstruction of justice.

But I think other people also have a case to answer, legal or moral. The police, of course. They're had a constant negative impact on this case- making up lies, leaking private information about the victim and so on.

And the conservative movement- they have a lot to answer for as well. Showing their permanent disdain for law and order, their utter hatred of ethnic minorities and the poor, they launched a deliberately dishonest campaign to justify the unprovoked murder of an unarmed child. In a real sense, the conservative smear campaign against this innocent victim of racist crime was actually worse than the crime itself. The conservatives must be made first to seriously apologise, admit wrong, then to never ever do it again.

In fact, their racist, lying campaign proves that the conservative movement as it currently exists does not even deserve to exist.

Baliff, BALIFF!!! Whack Mr. Zimmermans' pee-pee! The verdict is, he held the gun wrong while sending the vicious animal to hell!

Your mother is a vicious animal!

It has nothing to do with his mother; he is just a dot of an example of pure evil, and karma has a way of letting that evil consume itself and devour its own like the maggots it is.

You are racist scum. Go to hell.

I agree with you on each of your points.

Oh, to be young and to know absolutely everything !!

I may not know everything, but I do know that innocent victims of crime should not be slandered.

Hrmmm... I take issue with the term "Conservative."
The Republican Party in its current form (getting involved in all social issues, etc.) is actually Neo-Conservative & really has little to nothing that resembles actual Conservatism whatsoever.

I loathe the Republican Party. It's hypocritical to the extreme. Neoconservativism pays very close attention to race, creed, color, religion, socioeconomic background, etc. & so forth. Its very basis is in making & expanding laws in the name of creating/protecting law & order.
However, actual Conservative thinking is very different & doesn't usually consider race as playing a part in government or social issues. Race is, after all, nothing anyone can control & does not determine anything. It is a perception of the eye, not of anything else, so it really has no bearing on anything.

I really wish we had a Conservative Party in America so that people would not have to walk around being confused all the time... including those who incorrectly identify themselves as well as incorrectly identify others.

i think they should go for the charge they think they can prove! not the one the public want's.

Murder would be pretty easy to prove.

this case is so tainted i would be surprised if they got a conviction on anything. there is no way zimmerman can get a fair trial. and his lawyers will use this. don't be too shocked if in the end the charge is manslaughter or less.

Nonsense. The prosecution's case is essentially proven, the defendant has to prove self defence (and he won't be able to, IMO).

Maybe it's going to be tricky to find a fair jury- that's always a problem in high profile cases- but they'll be able to.

I don't think so.
There are a great many questions to this case.
I think it's going to be tough, regardless of the end result.

Well, the burden of proof falls on the defendant since he needs to prove self-defence. He has admitted to killing the child, so murder is in fact proven. I don't see the defendant being able to prove self-defence.

"Child."
Funny. Seems he was old enough to sign up for the military, to be tried as an adult were he convicted of some wrong doing, but when he's dead, he's a child. Interesting how our language/perception changes as needed. No one would normally consider a 17 year old a child.

I think it is about even in this case. Because it's received so much attention already, I would estimate that both sides will, indeed have a battle on their hands.

The legal age of majority is 18. Legally speaking, he was a child.

How do you think the defendant will prove self-defence? I would say he'd find it a difficult job.

Were Martin the one who'd killed someone, you can lay money down on a sure bet he'd be tried as an adult (as the 13 year old is being tried in Florida by this same prosecutor). Legally speaking, he was a minor, not a child.
However, regardless of his age, he was his parents' child.

Well, though there was no blood on his clothing, there is a doctor claiming he had a broken nose & there was grass, etc. on his back. This is usable to his defense.
I'm sure that he was afraid... but I'd guess more afraid of being beaten up & more afraid of the real cops showing up finding him unable to control even such a regular, ordinary confrontation/situation.
I don't have access to the evidence that was collected. I do believe that the police were negligent in their job regarding collecting evidence... which could be to Zimmerman's detriment as much as it could be to his benefit.
I am no attorney (obviously).
However, I would think that the prosecution will have an easier time than the defense, though I would guess neither side will have an easy road.

{Were Martin the one who'd killed someone, you can lay money down on a sure bet he'd be tried as an adult (as the 13 year old is being tried in Florida by this same prosecutor).}

Would you say that a 13 year old is an adult? Exactly.

{Well, though there was no blood on his clothing, there is a doctor claiming he had a broken nose & there was grass, etc. on his back. This is usable to his defense.}

Who attacked first? Prove that. That's Zimmerman's trouble; he definitely stalked a person who posed no threat to him, and ultimately shot him. He's going to have real trouble proving that his use of force was reactionary and that it was proportionate.