FBI considering hate crime charges against Zimmerman #1

[suzihawk]

A former prosecutor said the state can build a argument for profiling against George Zimmerman.

Former prosecutor Jeff Deen said the state can build a three-pronged argument based on profiling using Zimmerman's own statements and the statements Trayvon Martin made to a girlfriend he was talking to on the phone.

Based on profiling, Deen said, Zimmerman got out of his car and in essence took the fight to Martin.

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/31093645/detail.html#ixzz1vZKHaSRj

 

[flourish]

I haven't had 8 burglaries over ALL of the neighborhoods I've ever lived in in my ENTIRE LIFE. If there were 8 burglaries in my tiny gated community in 14 months, I would be moving...pronto. That's a riduculous number of crimes in a small area over a very short period of time by any reasonable law-abiding person's standards, imo.

And the article says that the dozens of attempted break-ins (as opposed to completed burglaries) were reported by residents, not just by George. I'm sayin' it doesn't sound even slightly unlikely that George got his bike stolen off the patio under the circumstances. In fact, it sounds mighty likely. It really makes me sick that there were that many crimes and attempted crimes in a single small neighborhood over a short period of time and the attitude is, oh, no big...go get yerself an alarm system and hope they hit your neighbors instead of you.

I'm a reasonable law-abiding person with standards. However, I don't have the financial ability to move and still wouldn't suddenly have more money no matter how many burglaries have occurred in my neighborhood. For many, the real, actual ability to move residence is not just a luxury, but financially impossible.

In any case, some gated communities are actual secure, patrolled-by-actual-watchman secure, and others are just a little neighborhood surrounded by chain-link and an un-manned gate. I don't know the various details of this particular gated community, nor do I know the financial abilities of its residents and how that might have influenced their ability to move.

And I'm certain I've never indicated anyone should buy an alarm system etc.

 

[jjenny]

Based on profiling, Deen said, Zimmerman got out of his car and in essence took the fight to Martin.

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/31093645/detail.html#ixzz1vZKHaSRj

First of all, I have no clue why prosecution applied the term "profiling" to an ordinary citizen. Second of all, is "profiling" now an illegal activity? FBI has profilers, should they all be arrested now?

 

[AJ Noiter]

<snip for relevance>
I don't know the various details of this particular gated community, nor do I know the financial abilities of its residents and how that might have influenced their ability to move.

As of January's StreetView images via Google, the entire west side was little more than chickenwire. In other places where there was an actual fence, it was less than 4" high. Still in other areas (street corners) it's more around 8". I wouldn't call it a secure community at all, regardless of the 3-6 video cameras at the gates alone.

 

[AJ Noiter]

A former prosecutor said the state can build a argument for profiling against George Zimmerman.

Former prosecutor Jeff Deen said the state can build a three-pronged argument based on profiling using Zimmerman's own statements and the statements Trayvon Martin made to a girlfriend he was talking to on the phone.

Based on profiling, Deen said, Zimmerman got out of his car and in essence took the fight to Martin.

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/31093645/detail.html#ixzz1vZKHaSRj

I read that, and from what they posted I think the title is wrong for at least two reasons. A former prosecutor for the state is not "the state" (title being "State says ..."). Further, from the final comment:

"If I'm the state I say, 'Look he was getting pummeled and out of anger or in the heat of the moment he fired that fatal shot,'" said Deen. "That's second-degree murder."

It's not a case for profiling and he doesn't say it is, period.

 

[Karmady]

I'm a reasonable law-abiding person with standards. However, I don't have the financial ability to move and still wouldn't suddenly have more money no matter how many burglaries have occurred in my neighborhood. For many, the real, actual ability to move residence is not just a luxury, but financially impossible.

In any case, some gated communities are actual secure, patrolled-by-actual-watchman secure, and others are just a little neighborhood surrounded by chain-link and an un-manned gate. I don't know the various details of this particular gated community, nor do I know the financial abilities of its residents and how that might have influenced their ability to move.

And I'm certain I've never indicated anyone should buy an alarm system etc.

So do agree that that's a ridiculous amount of crime in a short period of time, and especially troubling if you can't afford to just move?

 

[Karmady]

As of January's StreetView images via Google, the entire west side was little more than chickenwire. In other places where there was an actual fence, it was less than 4" high. Still in other areas (street corners) it's more around 8". I wouldn't call it a secure community at all, regardless of the 3-6 video cameras at the gates alone.

Doesn't matter, really. I was focused more on the tiny, than the gated. I certainly haven't lived in gated communities my entire life. Just a tiny fraction of it. And I STILL find that level of crime intolerable. No one should have to put up with that. I know you probably agree, just explaining my OP. I shouldn't have even referrred to the community as gated, as it's almost irrelevant to my point, but not entirely.

 

[Karmady]

First of all, I have no clue why prosecution applied the term "profiling" to an ordinary citizen. Second of all, is "profiling" now an illegal activity? FBI has profilers, should they all be arrested now?

Check Deen's twitter, etc. I think he's just stating the case that the State, however misguidedly, is trying to make. I can "make a case" that the moon is made out of cheese. Doesn't mean I'm right or even lucid. jmo

eta: he appeared with Hornsby early on and BOTH of them agreed that the charges should never had been brought.

 

[katydid23]

A former prosecutor said the state can build a argument for profiling against George Zimmerman.

Former prosecutor Jeff Deen said the state can build a three-pronged argument based on profiling using Zimmerman's own statements and the statements Trayvon Martin made to a girlfriend he was talking to on the phone.

Based on profiling, Deen said, Zimmerman got out of his car and in essence took the fight to Martin.

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/31093645/detail.html#ixzz1vZKHaSRj

Then the jury would have to accept everything that she said as gospel. And I am not sure they are going to do that. The defense is going to bring up some doubt about her ability to be totally accurate after all of that time, and the way a few new things were sprinkled in. Also, if it is true she knew Trayvon since kindergarten, then I think some jurors are going to wonder why she never contacted his mom after this call ended. In other words, if she describes it in a way that makes it ' obvious' that Trayvon was jumped by a scary mad man, then why didn't she ask her mom to find out how to contact his parents. If they knew each other since kindergarten, I would think it was possible.

 

[flourish]

So do agree that that's a ridiculous amount of crime in a short period of time, and especially troubling if you can't afford to just move?

I suppose I would have to look up some statistics and compare them to get a better idea of how much crime is ridiculous before I could answer that.

That still leaves GZ with a definite propensity to react in a way that is, imo, consistently overly reactive than appropriate for the situation. And I think that's where the profiling issue comes in. I don't know that "profiling" is going to be the final "word" as far as charges go, b/c, as has been discussed upthread, but the basic issue of making unreasonable assumptions about someone to the point of acting due to those assumptions, and those actions causing a crime.

 

[deelytful1]

First of all, I have no clue why prosecution applied the term "profiling" to an ordinary citizen. Second of all, is "profiling" now an illegal activity? FBI has profilers, should they all be arrested now?

They profile serial killers. they don't "racially profile" Although I think the FBI DOES their own racial profiling... just in different directions than this case...

 

[Karmady]

I suppose I would have to look up some statistics and compare them to get a better idea of how much crime is ridiculous before I could answer that.

That still leaves GZ with a definite propensity to react in a way that is, imo, consistently overly appropriate for the situation. And I think that's where the profiling issue comes in. I don't know that "profiling" is going to be the final "word" as far as charges go, b/c, as has been discussed upthread, but the basic issue of making unreasonable assumptions about someone to the point of acting due to those assumptions, and those actions causing a crime.

Were his assumptions unreasonable? I think that's the key, morally, not legally. Personally, I don't think they were unreasonable. Legally, however, he was entitled to "profile," which, imo, means that he was entitled to use experience-based common sense. The entitlement to profile may have ended when George decided to use force, but unless that decision was specifically based on Trayvon's status in some protected class (which is a whole 'nother issue for another debate), he is not guilty of any crime, much less a hate crime. And going back to the start of these discussions, George has, notably, not been charged with a hate crime under Florida law (even though there is one), nor is any racial motivation alleged in the PCA. jmo

 

[flourish]

Were his assumptions unreasonable? I think that's the key, morally, not legally. Personally, I don't think they were unreasonable. Legally, however, he was entitled to "profile," which, imo, means that he was entitled to use experience-based common sense. The entitlement to profile may have ended when George decided to use force, but unless that decision was specifically based on Trayvon's status in some protected class (which is a whole 'nother issue for another debate), he is not guilty of any crime, much less a hate crime. And going back to the start of these discussions, George has, notably, not been charged with a hate crime under Florida law (even though there is one), nor is any racial motivation alleged in the PCA. jmo

And this is the point at which we can agree to disagree.

I don't believe GZ was reasonable in his assumptions or (imo) overzealous "observations" of TM that evening. I believe GZ was a generally overzealous person, with some sort of insecurity that left him with the need to feel powerful and respected, and that he ensured that sooner or later, he'd have a situation where he could get that need fulfilled. And I feel TM was the chosen target of that evening based on the fact that TM fit the profile of those he had been expecting all along.

I believe it was a self-fulfilling prophecy kind of situation created by George Zimmerman in order to meet his need of being viewed as worthy enough (by his own definition).

 

[HiHater]

First of all, I have no clue why prosecution applied the term "profiling" to an ordinary citizen. Second of all, is "profiling" now an illegal activity? FBI has profilers, should they all be arrested now?

We are now comparing FBI highly educated and trained profilers to a street-level wanna be cop who barely had an associate's degree?

(descriptions are MOO)

 

[ynotdivein]

So. Given the current status of Florida's laws, do we see hate crime charges being leveled against GZ, or no?

 

[Karmady]

So. Given the current status of Florida's laws, do we see hate crime charges being leveled against GZ, or no?

There were no charges brought under Florida law yet afaik, and the supposed slur that got people fired is not alleged. So I would say no based on the charges actually brought and the APC.

 

[liedetector]

[/QUOTE]

Check Deen's twitter, etc. I think he's just stating the case that the State, however misguidedly, is trying to make. I can "make a case" that the moon is made out of cheese. Doesn't mean I'm right or even lucid. jmo

eta: he appeared with Hornsby early on and BOTH of them agreed that the charges should never had been brought.

And how could they possibly make such a judgment when they are so uninformed, having seen less than half of the prosecution's evidence? ...At this juncture, no one has been able to view all that Mark O'Mara was given, and even he has not seen the other half. Due to this fact, Mark O'Mara has advised that people quit jumping to premature conclusions!

ADDENDUM ...because for some reason I was disallowed to respond in proper order to Karmady's reply (below) to me...unsure if thread is closed?:

Karmady:

I said it before wrt to Dershowitz's comments, and I'll say it again, all you need to know is the standard for murder2 and the allegations of the PCA to know whether the charges should have been brought. Doesn't matter what other evidence the SP supposedly has. The charging document must be sufficient. I agree with Dershowitz and many others, that the PCA is a and the charges were brought entirely for political reasons.

BBM. Regardless of the charging document, I beg to differ, and again, so does Mark O'Mara - it does indeed matter that more than half of the prosecution's evidence has yet to reviewed. According to today's Orlando Sentinel, in regards to criminal-defense lawyers who've reviewed the evidence and been critical of Corey, accusing her of filing a second-degree murder charge without enough evidence to support it (ahem, Dershowitz) -Mark O'Mara stated that such criticism "[I]would be premature.[/I]"

I also politely disagree with you and the guy who helped get O.J. and Claus Von Bulow off, that the charges were brought by the state "entirely for political reasons" -as I believe when the prosecution actually show's their hand, GZ will be shown to be a murderer. Actually, the following quote from Deen (in the article today that was previously referenced) very quickly sums up one of my theories (BBM and IBM):

"If I'm the state I say, 'Look he was getting pummeled and out of anger or in the heat of the moment he fired that fatal shot,'" said Deen. "That's second-degree murder."[/I]

...Though I still question the pummeling part, I'm pretty confident that anger, not fear caused GZ to pull that trigger..

http://www.wesh.com/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/31093645/detail.html#ixzz1vZLCD3lR

 

[Karmady]

And how could they possibly make such a judgment when they have seen less than half of the prosecution's evidence? At this juncture, no one has been able to view all that Mark O'Mara was given, and even he has not seen the other half. Due to this fact, Mark O'Mara has advised that people quit jumping to premature conclusions.

I said it before wrt to Dershowitz's comments, and I'll say it again, all you need to know is the standard for murder2 and the allegations of the PCA to know whether the charges should have been brought. Doesn't matter what other evidence the SP supposedly has. The charging document must be sufficient. I agree with Dershowitz and many others, that the PCA is a <modsnip> and the charges were brought entirely for political reasons.

 

[vlpate]

We are now comparing FBI highly educated and trained profilers to a street-level wanna be cop
<snipped for emphasis>

I think you made her point.

 

[stmarysmead]

Have you ever had a debate with friends on opposite sides of a hot button issue and find that when you are all reasonable, there is often a solid middle ground. I think that would be possible in this case.

I see no problem with GZ getting out of the car, but I have read good posts articulating the other point of view. I don't believe GZ initiated physical contact but there are no witnesses, so we all are free to enjoy our own speculation. It is the Race infusion in this case that IMO pushes people into hard angry corners.

If the crime stats show a problem with young Black teens or even just teens...there is an explanation other than race for watching GZ. So all this talk of profiling and "hate crimes" seems grossly unfair and as if politicans and Crump are "using" this tragedy for other purposes.

Because those of us who are not a minority have a right to ask how broad our government intends to make "criminalizing" offending someone? Because the "profiling" charge PRECEDES the death here. Take the profiling/race card out of this and we are left with that tragic death, two minorities who somehow clashed, and questions that must be answered.

The Martins are imminently entitled to all that and to the most fair and honest examination of the evidence. I'll have to see all of it before I say there should be a trial. It may be that laws need to be changed in order to prevent NO CHARGES but you cannot go back and punish GZ if those laws were in his favor that night.

It seems that the way that Crump is trying to circumvent the Law as it existed that night...is by using RACE. He is manipulating the real concept of "profiling" and using a word that infuriates to get the conviction EVEN if the Law, as it existed that night, does not justify it.

That is what offends MANY people. Using Race...to divide us MORE so that HE can win a conviction...and some believe head into civil suits of Big $$$ potential. Using RACE where the use of it is thin becuase the Law might not win him the case but angry jurors might ignore the Law.

That is not Justice. That is not the way we should want cases won.

That is wrong because it shoves us into far away corners. There is nothing racial about this case. I believe that GZ would have followed a "white/Hispanic" teen that he did not recognize in that area that night. There's no proof he would not. In fact, the Defense might make a good case that age was the compelling factor in GZ's mind. What were the ages of the majority of these criminals?

In fact, GZ and TM both have a look of mixed racial heritage. TM could have been a Black/Hispanic for all GZ knew. It was dark. Nobody wears labels that define their heritage. The factors were that he was a teenager and he was not one of the neighborhood teens. NOT that he was Black.

Or is it "profiling" now in some legal sense to watch teenagers of any and all skin hues that you do not know...when teenagers are targeting your neighborhood with crime?

Really?

Edited to add that Crump's strategy may backfire. If any juror is offended and feel he has overplayed the racial aspect, they may refuse to listen to anything else he says. We have seen this before as in the jury reaction to what they felt was overkill on Casey Anthony. And if he keeps pushing the racial aspect , he diminishes the ability to bring people together to discuss the STG laws. That would surely NOT be Justice for Trayvon.