Forum Post: Zimmerman Justice System
Posted 10 years ago on July 15, 2013, 2:07 p.m. EST by Toynbee
(656)
from Savannah, GA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Zimmerman's fate was predetermined by a dysfunctional justice system.
Read "The Collapse of American Criminal Justice" (Harvard) by the late Harvard Law Professor William J. Stuntz. (ISBN 9780674051751, Publication: September 2011)
Stuntz's book demonstrates why the justice system fails to work for poor folk, and particularly black Americans.
And when you disproportionately incarcerate black people -- who tend to vote for Democrats -- you rig the elections against poor folk and Democrats. Its a downward spiral.
Fix the justice system -- some 95% of people in prison don't even get a trial by jury, let alone a jury of their peers -- because the prosecutor holds nearly all the cards, and they can coerce the defendant to plead guilty. Prosecutor scores another notch on his score card, prosecutor avoids hassle of going to trial. Often innocent plead to lesser charge to avoid risk of longer sentences.
Fix Justice System
Fix Justice System
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/united-states-zimmerman
It needs a lot of repair.
It's already "fixed"..........................:)
Fixes crime by eliminating unemployment: http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-important-we-can-change-the-conversation-i/
With less crime, there is less suspicion or prejudice about people who are suspected of being more likely to commit crimes based on superficial factors. What's that statistic about German police bullet usage... they fired only 85 bullets at people in all of 2011. "49 warning shots, 36 shots on suspects. 15 persons were injured, 6 were killed."
They went for all the marbles, murder. There were plenty of lesser charges that probably would have resulted in a guilty verdict.
Impersonating a security officer.
Illegal pursuit.
Failure to identify oneself as a security officer.
If found guilty on any of those three counts, Zimmerman might have gotten the max sentence simply because those three actions led to a death that would have otherwise been prevented.
Now its up to the Civil Lawyer to challenge the prosecuting attorney to file those charges and to challenge the Martins regarding what is important to them, winning a civil judgement against Zimmerman.
Or having Zimmerman spend a few years in jail because of the three above chargeable offenses, in exchange for no civil trial.
No offense but none of the above appear in the penal code. One might attempt aggravated assault hoping a lesser charge to be more palpable but without evidence of an assault, that's not likely to fly, either.
The reality is that with all the media attention Zimmerman couldn't cop because jail would have become a dangerous place for him. The prosecution had to go for murder2, but a murder2 predicated on an assault that does not exist is a zero case for the prosecution. All evidence suggests that no assault occurred, that Zimmerman was not the assailant: Martin got out of the car, was therefore thereby perceived to be confrontational, and very likely was confrontational, and Zimmerman sustained all the injures which were all well documented.
Either way this was not going to end well for Martin because if he had lived he would have either caught a murder2 himself or an aggravated assault. And you and I would have never heard of the case.
It's just the way it is, the winners go to jail and the losers go to the hospital; society can respond no other way.
While I realize there are valid points on both sides, all of this protest, I view as but an obligatory dance.
Crime is rampant in America, more and more people are living in gated communities, employing security guards, watchmen, or policing their neighborhoods as an attempt to isolate from the dangers of the typical. More and more Americans are arming themselves for self-defense, and if one adopts the persona of "gangsta," which many do, to invite the attention of others, one should not be surprised if some object. Because that permit granted by the state empowers.
Stand Your Ground is not applicable here, no one questions the right of self-defense or that it applies equally. What is applicable is the force compendium.
You know, these youth are not the first to go gangsta in America, either. The 60s had its Bill Ayers, its Angela Davis, its C.L. Cox, etc. all of which contributed to this perception of the Long Hair as militant. And what did it get us? More distemper, more dystopia, and it effects to this day - society suffers the ill effects even now, in many forms.
Impersonating a security officer is an offense. Either Zimmerman follows the conduct and procedures of a security officer, or, he is impersonating one.
You rally need to go back to "law school" and learn about the things you propose to be knowledgeable about when in fact you are not.
You haven't a clue as to what the definition of "impersonating a security officer" is. You are as dumb as a rock - educate yourself will you?
The bottom line is Zimmerman is relying on the perks of being a pretend security officer while also relying on the perks of being a private citizen "standing his ground".
[Removed]
[Removed]
http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/indiana-makes-same-sex-felony
Stuff likes this makes the law feel like an absurdity.
Gotta keep those profiteered prisons filled to their contractual quotas.
Prisoners = Customers
For Profit Prisons = Collapse of Criminal Justice
As a side effect......notice the post above calling it "a good shoot."
If something could be called "evil"? That qualifies.
[Removed]
What justice?
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/criminalizing-free-speech
Plus of course, they're letting Skilling out early.
The criminal justice system is just a political score card; there is no justice in the criminal justice system either for the defendant or the victim..
It would stand to reason, though, that if those incarcerated are want to vote Democrat, that we should incarcerate more, right?
So it would seem your argument is rather counter-intuitive.
It is painfully clear to even the scholars who study our legal system and the criminal justice system that we need fundamental reform.
Read the late William J. Stuntz's masterful book "The Collapse of American Criminal Justice" (Harvard) -- ISBN 9780674051751; Publication: September 2011
Stuntz shows how the system has collapsed. He shows how the system discriminates against poor people and people of color.
That is the big problem.
Then there's the little problem concerning the incompetence of the Florida prosecutors.
I don't have time to read that but I am relatively familiar with the system; I agree and I don't like it.
We have to place the Florida prosecution within context: a Special Prosecutor was appointed at the behest of a Republican Governor and a Conservative Attorney General, in an attempt to appease the voting populace, to replace a standing DA that would not proffer charges; a police chief was dismissed who failed to make an arrest, lesser charges were introduced as the possible lesser but other avenue, and evidence of "gangsta" was dismissed as circumstantial and irrelevant. The Special Prosecutor was female; the jury was all female - we assume therefore more motherly care.
But the prosecution had no case. If one is licensed by the state and appears to act reasonably within the force compendium it's going to be ruled a good shoot.
"And when you disproportionately incarcerate black people -- who tend to vote for Democrats -- you rig the elections against poor folk and Democrats. Its a downward spiral."
Show me the Democrats who are making a push for felons to be able to participate in the democracy.
The ACLU is pushing but it gonna happen.
Although not officially referred to as Democrats, I do know those more liberal invite felons to the table in Liberia; they eat them. And that is the only bright spot in American criminal justice; I mean, we do have other options.
I have often wondered if Lincoln, as the master of metaphor, were not more brilliant than Twain, but either way we recognize his depth of thought. And you know how his logic concluded this question? Liberia. And not just Liberia but also Delaware and the entire state of Texas; that's right, he dreamed of sending all to Texas to create an all black colony, i.e., an all black country, named "Texas," as a hopefully friendly neighbor to all white America. Was he unreasonable? Well, it seems he was right about those he sent to Liberia, doesn't it? Because slavers and cannibals do not belong in this country, as we have more than twice proven at a cost of many lives.
So are you saying that the "jury" was "ignorant" to the facts and just plain "stupid". So if you think that's the case then I guess all those Jurors across the country who had similar verdicts fall in the same category - right?
So . . . you're saying we'd get the same verdict if it was a black shooter and a white victim?
[Removed]