There's way too much focus on Zimmerman

[TeamsterDem]

28. Calling for a criminal to be charged in court is not seeking a head on a stick

It's called seeking justice. I don't want Zimmerman to treated unfairly; I want him to have a trial, a fair one. And I wouldn't want his CCW yanked until and unless he's convicted of a crime. How you arrive at any of that wanting a head on a stick is absurd.

The compendium of facts in this case holds many curiosities, but none as damning as the fact that a civilian armed himself, pursued an individual in clear disregard of police instructions, and at some point - according to Zimmerman himself - voluntarily left his vehicle to pursue a citizen, and at some point shot an unarmed person. How that - the undisputed facts of the case - don't bring a criminal charge is simply inexplicable and wrong. Even assuming Zimmerman was an actual neighborhood watch block captain - something under a decent amount of doubt in terms of the watch's recognition as such - that didn't give him the authority to carry a weapon (on that "duty&quot or to pursue and confront another civilian. As he started the confrontation with his pursuit, he should need to defend that action in court; the presumption of justifiability doesn't even seem in-keeping with "stand your ground" considering that he caused the confrontation to happen, not Trayvon.

I'm not sure the "PD agreed" with making a charge, as the police chief made several statements in support of not charging him. The lead investigator seems to have wanted to charge him, but I'm not convinced he constitutes the entirety of the PD's thinking.

With respect to forensics, the mere fact that they didn't perform a toxicology assessment of Zimmerman at least suggests ineptitude - certainly at least in terms of ever knowing if Zimmerman was perfectly sober that night.

They did not arrest him, they interviewed him: An interview which, according to the police report, includes Zimmerman's inherent admission of pursuing Trayvon in his truck and on foot, doing so armed. It's for reasons such as that why they voted no-confidence in the police because they rather clearly bungled the case.

I don't know what the law is where you live, but where I live if you pursue an individual without being a commissioned law enforcement officer, you then don't get to claim self-defense because, of course, your mere pursuit of them appears menacing, thus giving them a very legitimate self-defense motive of their own. If that occurred here you'd be a defendant in court for at least some criminal charge, whether it was manslaughter or homicide would of course depend on the facts the police gathered. But your pursuit would be its own menace, not to mention that you didn't follow police instructions and as a "neighborhood watchman" had no legal authority to pursue anyone.