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