lesser charges??? what?
 

Apparently it happens every day, but I don't see this as right.

If you charge someone with 2nd degree murder and you can't prove it, why can you THEN decide to put forth lesser charges (manslaughter, assault)?


Makes no sense to me!

I could not agree more

Just trying to get a conviction.. And it's usually easier to get the lesser conviction. Looks good on there scoreboard..

because, you can't charge them for same crime twice! once your found not guilty of a higher crime, the prosecution can charge for a lesser crime if they have the evidence to convict you. Even if someone comes up with convincing evidence of 2nd degree murder after the court finds someone not guilty the evidence no longer matters for that crime. In todays world losing a civil suit of wrongful death ruins someone's life a lot more then a man slaughter charge.
say for instance your rob someone, threaten them and kill them in any other state, you get charged for 1st degree murder, In LA you get charged for robbery, assault, and 1st degree murder. we have civil law here, where you get charged for the highest crime you committed and all lesser crimes you commited at the same time, other states you have common law, where you just get charged for the highest crime you commit and then they hope it sticks, if it doesn't you get charged with the lesser crimes after the trial ends.

I believe the legal term is "throwing $h!t at the wall and hope something sticks." With the way the liberal media outlets are talking, I'm surprised they didn't have a charge for disobeying a lawful order for not taking the DISPATCHERS ADVICE.

Disnt know dispatchers were cops

Exactly. But ol Al Sharpton swears he disobeyed a direct lawful order and illegally hunted down the poor baby Treyvon. His and others like Anderson Coopers stupidity is why I watch the news on Fox. It seems like everyone there is a freaking attorney and has meaningful
commentary. Even the ones who think GZ is guilty can better communicate their stance than the feel good rhetoric of all the other news channels.

Zimmerman is going to walk out of the courthouse like this.....
 

I would
 

Run down anyone in my neighborhood with my pistol on my side under suspicious circumstances! Especially if we had a rash of break-ins and there is no dispatcher gonna tell me different! Time for people to stop bowing down and take a stand for what's right!

What I don't agree with is that the lesser charge will carry the same sentence and the jury will not know that.

25 to life
 

I heard where Judge Alex says that manslaughter in Florida carries a 25 to life sentence. Hope the jurors are hung on a verdict or just aquit the guy instead of just picking a lesser charge thinking its better.

Maybe I can explain this.

Lesser charges inherently have the some, but not all, of the same elements of a superior, more aggregious crime. Elements of a crime are the requirements needed to prove that specific crime...it's kinda like following a recipe, you have to have all the ingredients or else you don't have the dish.

For instance, First Degree murder ususually requires an intentional killing plus premeditattin or a plan, to do it ahead of time. The reason it's the worst kind of murder is because you planned it, and even if you were mad, because you had time to plan it, you also had time to cool off. The plan is usually proven by showing that the guy went and purchased a rope to tie the victim up, some tape and a gun or things of this nature.

On the other hand, second degree murder is an intentional kiling without a previously thought out plan....such as killing the dude you find your wife in bed with.

Here is how a state might charge a guy for killing a dude sleeping with his wife with first degree murder. Lets say he suspected her of fooling around. He tells her that if he ever catches her with anyone he will kill the dude. He then goes out and buys a gun after he suspects her cheating. He repeatedly tells her he knows she is cheating and she is going to get her "new man" killed if she does not stop. He comes home to find them in the bedroom and kills the dude. Now, did he plan on killing the guy, or was it in the heat of passion.

The state could potentially (but probably woudn't) charge first degree murder. If they did decide to charge First degree murder because of the comments made and the potential for premeditatin, they will have to prove he had a plan and took some actions in furtherance of the plan. At trial the state has to prove the premeditation, if they fail to do so, we still have a murder, just without premeditatio and in that event the defendent would be guilty of the lesser offense of second degree murder be found guility of the lesser offense of second degree murder - intentionally killing someone, but without premeditation.

States cannot go back at a later date and try a person for a lesser charge. They have to charge their case at one trial. A judge can instruct a jury that they can find a person guilty of a lesser charge if they don't believe the charge brought by the state has been proven.

:eek:

SlidellKid you, think he's going to be convicted?

I know the question was not directed towards me, but with this circus now, I think the judge will allow the 3rd degree and he will be convicted. She is doing everything within her power to appease the masses.

That's what it seams like, pretty much a circus now. I only watched a couple days but from Zimmermans Lawyer just said with the time frame and all that tied into FL laws i just don't know..... its all on the jury and what they thinking.

I have not been watching - it would only pizz me off and I have enough stuff on my plate to worry about. I have been following the news though. Here is what I think - if there are any black females on the jury they will probably vote guilty, but I doubt all the others will join in. I am sure the judge wants some sort of conviction so her house does not get burned down; however, it is real hard to get 12 women to agree on anything and I think there will be a hung jury.

I may be mistaken, but I think it's only a jury of 6. 5 whites and 1 hispanic. 5 of which are mothers and there are gun owners included. This will be interesting to say the least.

That may be, some states have smaller juries. I have not been watching and don't know what the jury looks like. I hope he goes free regardless of the rioting. I am tired of walking on egg shells for thugs.

It's such BS that they can switch to a lesser charge all of a sudden because they feel they going to lose .. They charged him with murder .. Now they want to crawfish out cause they losing .. I could see pursuing a lesser charge before trial starts but not after the trial starts and especially after the defense has rested it's case

Yeah, that's kinda like changing your bet when you team is down by 21 in the 4th quarter...It shouldn't work like that!

Saying it is BS, is BS. What if this was Charles Manson or someone like him that all of us thought should be off the street? How would we feel then? Especially since he can't be recharged for the same crime.

Not saying Zimmerman should be convicted.

Are you comparing this to Manson??

Lesser charges are always part of the trial, not just sometimes or when they feel like it.

It does not really matter anyway because if the jury believes the self defenses argument he will be acquitted of everything. You can't commit manslaughter if you acted in true self defense. Self defense will absolve him of manslaughter as well as second degree - assuming the jury believes the self defense evidence. If it doesn't he will have solid grounds for appeal.

LOL

No, just using the first thing that popped in my head as a reference.

This DOES NOT MATTER from a CRIMINAL perspective

At the end of the day, there are confirmed witnesses stating TM was ON TOP of GZ straddling him hitting him MMA style. GZ's injuries are consistent with getting the back of his head slammed against the concrete.

At that point any reasonable person in that scenario would defend his LIFE.

This is a CRIMINAL trial not a CIVIL one.

:work:

Think of lesser charges like this: If your wife was murdered and they charged the guy with first degree murder and the state can't prove first degree do you think the guy should walk? A murder still happened, just not in the first degree. Basically, a jury finds you guilty of what you did, not what was charged but they can't find you guilty for something greater than what you were originally charged with - only lesser.

Thanks, better than I was trying to put it.

If my understanding is correct, this is the reason that most murder cases in Louisiana are tried in the 2nd degree...Because it's much harder to prove premeditation. Also, I was told that w/1st comes the potential for the death sentence which clogs the judicial system with appeals and, is very costly...Apparently more expensive then 2nd degree, even though it's an automatic life sentence.

Is there any truth to this?

Thats a pretty good point!! but we all are supposed to have the same rights as USA citizens ... I feel like if you feel someone committed a crime, you build your case against him and if you arent ready then you delay the court date ... thats how it happens all the time

I just dont think its right for the prosecution to suddendly want to push for lesser charges now that they think they are going to lose, if they didnt think they had a strong enough case to convict him then they shouldnt have went to trial in the first place

Im ok with pushing for lesser charges before trial because theres not enough evidence to convict, but not after the trial is damn near over with

I would agree.

Seems if the prosecutor knew that he didn't have evidence for the crime, he should have went with the lesser charge or not prosecuted at all.

I haven't been following this much, but I think there's a good chance they convict him of something. Aside from what TM allegedly said ("you gonna die tonight"), doesnt this boil down to a man getting his butt whipped and then pulling out a gun and shooting the guy who kicked his butt?

GZ was not in his home, so castle doctrine wouldn't apply (castle doctrine afaik means your house is considered a place you don't have to flee from), so in this case they could say that GZ could have fled the area. No weapons found on TM really hurts GZ case.

Of course it could turn out like Bernard Goetz, the guy on the subway who shot 4 thugs with an unlicensed pistol. wikipedia says Goetz was acquitted of murder, attempted murder but was convicted on a unlicensed firearm charge. One of the guys he shot was paralyzed and won a $43 million judgement against Goetz in civil court. No doubt there is a civil case being built against GZ already.

Bottom line is GZ life is probably screwed now either financially or criminally.

I agree with you that prosecutors should only charge what they believe the evidence will prove; however, often there is a huge gray area and they might be able to prove first degree, maybe not. So, they charge first degree hoping the guy will request to plead guilty to second degree (and also what the prosecutor really thinks he is guilty of) to avoid the expense and time of a trial. Not every case should be tried and it benefits everyone if defendants plead to an appropriate crime. That is not to say they should be allowed to plead to just anything, but if a prosecutor has a decent chance of proving a first degree charge, he will charge it and expect a plea to second degree.

Southern, yes you are correct. First degree is much more difficult to prove, but certainly not impossible. The defendant may have told someone what he was planning on doing, purchased items for the crime or even told the victim what was going to happen. It is proven all the time, but second degree is much easier to prove. I am no expert on capital cases, but I believe that just because you charge first degree it does not automatically become a capital case. It is my understanding that the state has to actively pursue capital punishment and there are a lot of hoops to jump through to have to do that - except in Texas, God bless 'em.

Florida does not have castle doctrine They have Stand your ground. WAY different.

Neither castle doctrine or stand your ground are relevant in this case as Zimmerman did not assert a stand your ground affirmative defense. He did claim self defense and that is hard to do without testifying, which he did not do. Time will tell.

the aggressor can't claim self defense, I think zimmerman doesn't want to testify because the truth is, he became the aggressor, and never tried to avoid the situation. He has a lawyer who is trying to keep him saying anything incriminating and if they are going to get a conviction on him its gonna be from the little evidence and witness statements that have to sway the beliefs of the jury. without them questioning him they won't be able to cross examine him.

I think he's as guilty as OJ and it might not catch up to him now, but it will come to him later!

You have to remember following someone does not make you the aggressor. The aggressor is the first person to commit an assault or say that he is about to.

yup..........he goin to jail

This is what I have gathered as well. He wasn't necessarily looking for trouble, but he found it and kept trying to push the issue. If he was looking for trouble, he surely found it and got his azz whipped by a skinny teenager. That should have been the end of it, other than an assault charge on Trayvon (had he lived). Zimmerman would have learned his lesson right then and there. I don't think Zimmerman did anything illegal but he is teetering on that line. The 'Stand Your Ground' law I am fine with, but I can not see where Zimmerman was protecting his life, he was just getting a serious azz whooping is all, not going to die. He was a wannabe tough guy carrying a gun around and he found out quick he wasn't as tough as he thought. However, I was not there and neither was anyone else so....

Bad situation all around

No dog in the fight here but, if I had someone mounted on me beating my head against the concrete, with no indication as to when they'd stop(beat to sleep or, beat to death), I would have done the same thing. Who's to say he would have stopped? Who's to say Zimmerman went too far? Who knows really?

To me, by following him and, being on the phone with police, he was being effective in the idea of being a neighborhood watch. Did he have to get out of the vehicle? No. Was he taunted by some mouthy azz punk? I don't know.

Regardless, even if acquitted, he'll be shredded in the civil court. He'll be broke. He'll live the rest of his life in hiding.

I think if he is found not guilty then there should be a separate trial for the new charges.

Yep, he may get free beers in a bar, but he is done with for life:redface:


I need to look it up but dude told me yesterday that Zimmerman had called 9-1-1 a ridiculous amount of times in previous years.

It is crazy what is going on with this case.. I'm not for one side or the other, but I think he will be charged with something.. Rodney King got the $#!+ beaten out of him and LA became a war zone.. how do you think things will play out if this clown walks?

we can limit out!!!! and have a reason :D