General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRepeat after me: Why aren't you sending the Trayvon Martin case
to a Grand Jury? We demand to know the reason behind your decision not to put the case before a Grand Jury.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/09/11100828-prosecutor-no-grand-jury-for-trayvon-martin-case?lite
I really don't give a shit who Angela Corey is or her pedigree. What was the basis for her fucking decision?????
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jschurchin
(1,456 posts)coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)jschurchin
(1,456 posts)Just offering a opinion.
Eveidently the prosecutor feels she doesn't have enough facts available to bring the case before a Grand jury for inditment.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)CAPHAVOC
(1,138 posts)
Maraya1969
(23,497 posts)
NoGOPZone
(2,971 posts)florida does not require grand jury indictment except for capital offenses.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,665 posts)
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)It is not necessary for 2nd degree. Which is what I am hopeful he is about to be charged with.
Kaleva
(40,365 posts)coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)petty tyrants. As such, prosecutors are accountable to the public. The public has a right to know why Corey decided not to send this case to a Grand Jury.
spanone
(141,617 posts)
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)She does not need a grand jury indictment to bring charges. It's a purely procedural question.
Perhaps she suspected the grand jury process would be full of selective leaks in this case. Perhaps there are areas of evidence not nailed down to her satisfaction as of the scheduled GJ start date.
Or maybe she doesn't want Zimmerman indicted. Or maybe she thinks a grand jury wouldn't indict and wants Zimmerman charged.
The prosecuter's office can charge people directly and often does, so there's no information one way or another in a decision to bypass the grand jury process.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)That's my guess.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 9, 2012, 03:19 PM - Edit history (1)
the case was deemed unfit for a Grand Jury. Prosecutors are not dictators, not even petty tyrants. They are subject to and must answer to the will of the people. The people have a right to know what the basis of her decision not to send the case to a Grand Jury was.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Prosecutors are not dictators, not even petty tyrants.
TRUE
They are subject to and must answer to the will of the people.
FALSE, at least in a civilized society. Prosecuters are sworn to operate dispassionately in terms of the law, not to respond to public passions. The fact that prosecuters are often, in practice, political hacks and persons of low character who answer to the will of the people and thereby dishonor their obligations does not mean it is right to be so.
The people have a right to know what the basis of her decision not to send the case to a Grand Jury was.
FALSE. There are all sorts of things related to an investigation or prosecution that the public does not have a right to know in real time.
______________
In general, I would recommend a study of lynching as an institution. A typical lynching was not a mob grabbing someone on the street. That happened, of course, but that's not what lynching was when it was epidemic. Lynching was typically a mob storming city hall and grabbing an accused person from police custody to hang the accused without benefit of trial.
The motive was invariably that the people felt the police and prosecuters and courts were not sufficiently responsive to what the public wanted.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 9, 2012, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)
LA City Attorney, Carmen Trutanich. will be running for Los Angeles County DA this November. This is the same City Attorney who took such pride in collaborating in the brutalization of Occupy Los Angeles during and after the raid of October 1 that broke up the camp. Are you telling me that City Attorney campaigning for County DA is not subject to the will of the people? If so, then I guess there's no point in my efforts to try to prevent his election in November.
You and I will have to agree to disagree as to whether the public has a right to know on what grounds the case was deemed unfit for a Grand Jury. Myself, I prefer transparency in government. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Shame on you for insinuating that I in any way am advocating lynching or arguing that Zimmerman be lynched. I am demanding he be held accountable for his actions before the law and that public servants entrusted with enforcing that same law be held accountable for their actions. If you've read my writings on the extra-judicial execution of Osama bin Laden, et. al., you will know that I am a staunch defender of such quaint and obsolete concepts as 'Due Process,' despite the continual blood lust on display in these pages.
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Therefore it is not a question of whether the case was deemed "unfit" for a grand jury. Her office stated that the investigation proceeds. Therefore it may be submitted to a grand jury later, or prosecution may proceed without indictment by a grand jury.
The public has no right to have the details of this type of decision laid out, and and judges can be kind of nasty if prosecutors talk too much publicly.
The first duty of the prosecutor is to serve the law. If the will of the people contradicts the rule of law, the prosecutor had damned well better be following the law rather than what public opinion wants at the time.
In a case like this, if the prosecuting authority decides not to press charges, the DA's office or whoever was in charge will disclose why. But before a prosecutor makes that decision, it is pretty well a requirement not to mess the future prosecution up before it even begins by blabbing to the media. You're not allowed to try a case in the media.
They haven't finished their investigation. They can't release a report.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)with any crime at alL? Put another way, at what point will you demand even the tiniest shred of accountability from Corey and the power elite down there?
Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)After which we'll all know a lot more than we do now, after which I might have an opinion.
I think Corey will file charges, because she's known as a pretty intense prosecutor.
If the state investigation doesn't find grounds, there's already a parallel federal investigation, so I don't think anyone need fear that anything will be hidden at this point.
Do I find Zimmerman's story likely? No. Probably I would feel differently if all this weren't being done. But it is being done, and if eventually the conclusions of the investigations are that there aren't grounds for prosecution, I will probably look at the explanations before flying off the handle.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)you don't have the right to know and blabber mouth prosecutors usually end up destroying their own case..chill a minute Francis..
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)not have a 'right' to know. However, any taxpayer in Florida has a right to know, since they pay Corey's salary. Corey is not a petty tyrant.
Igel
(37,535 posts)There are also things that they may have a right to know but concerning which it would be idiocy to exercise that right.
This falls into one of those two categories, at least for the present.
Justice sometimes requires secrecy. The right to know demands openness.
Sometimes the right to know would result in the denial of justice. What's left is to decide whether justice or our petty emotions are more important here.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)charge Zimmerman with anything and he walks free? Put another way, at what point will you demand accountability from Corey and the power elite down there?
pipoman
(16,038 posts)and I'm guessing the prosecutor has some plan. If no charges are brought there will be a news release explaining te decision. The Feds are investigating last I heard, this could mean a couple of things. There is a possible Federal violation which wouldn't rely on FL statutes to support, or sometimes the feds investigate. Then force an interview with the suspect in the presents of his lawyer. There are facts known by the Feds and they know the suspect knows those facts too. The interview is conducted around those facts, and if the suspect lies about any of them, they charge him with lying to a fed, even though the actual incident wasn't criminal or they can't prove it was criminal. Either scenario requires police, FBI, and prosecutorial silence...in fact it can violate federal law to tell about any privileged information.
Answers will come out when they should, if the prosecutors are smart, they will keep their mouths shut until then.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)question posted upthread: if Corey declines to prosecute Zimmerman, will you demand an explanation for her decision if none is forthcoming?
pipoman
(16,038 posts)to go through the drive through at McDonalds, or buy and watch a NetFlix. The Feds can be very persuasive when it comes to getting someone to be interviewed.. Marta Stewart might be an example many are familiar with.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)the accused/suspect has a right to a fair trial. If fairness is compromised by police or prosecution, the evidence can be dismissed. They'll know when it is time for them to know.
coalition_unwilling
(14,180 posts)infinite wisdom, deemed the case not suitable or necessary for a Grand Jury. I don't think an answer to that question would violate in the slightest Zimmerman's right to due process and a fair trial.
Maraya1969
(23,497 posts)
Bucky
(55,334 posts)Justice takes time.
hack89
(39,181 posts)slampoet
(5,032 posts)I'll be really pissed if there are charges ONLY against Zimmerman.