screw Double Jeopardy <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p><a class="hashtag" action="hash" title="#Breaking">#Breaking</a>: The Department of Justice says it will review the Travyon Martin-George Zimmerman case</p>— POLITICO (@politico) <a href="https://twitter.com/politico/status/356501952575717376" data-datetime="2013-07-14T19:54:23+00:00">July 14, 2013</a></blockquote> <script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Not sure why this is funny now since its been public knowledge since the jury was seated. It can be argued that the prosecution was trying to get a bunch of moms who would decide based on being sympathetic based on another mom losing her child. This jury spent a lot of time deliberating the evidence and came back with the correct verdict. That sucks for those of you expecting them to support speculative race baiting prosecution case that fact nuked before the defense even presented their case.
you don't know Eric Holder http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2013/07/12/whats-in-holders-wallet-his-real-race-card/
If the DOJ takes this case based on the same evidence they will lose. Obama and Holder put themselves in this mess by trying to bring this case to the forefront without knowing all the facts. Now those TM supporters that they rallied will not rest until the DOJ hands over Zimmerman.
I personally don't have a problem with anything Holder says there. No offense meant to you, but it seems like the PJ Media writer is lazily playing on white readers' distrust of black people who care about/acknowledge their identity as black people, as if that makes them unable to view anything objectively.
So, you can form an opinion on a case where you openly admit that you know very little. That is very impressive of you.
This isn't double jeopardy because the justice department, as I've read it, will review if there are any civil rights violations which would be a different charge. The family can also sue in civil court as well, without violating double jeopardy. Get your facts straight.
I think you could make the case that the government should have prosecuted Zimmerman originally for both charges and that this would qualify as double-jeopardy as the government is basically saying: "well, we lost the murder trial so we might as well go after him for a lesser offense." We will see if it ever makes it to court but I suspect not. (I do wish there was a potential way to punish him, but I don't think it will happen).
http://us.cnn.com/2012/05/11/justice/florida-stand-ground-sentencing/index.html?sr=sharebar_twitter Do you think this has any legs? FYI, I am not trying to make this a racial issue with the new article. It seems with this case to relate with TM and stand your ground. Obviously the two cases can't have any relevance, except topically, to each other. Is Florida the most f'd up state in the union? There are obviously much bigger socio-political issues occurring in that state that seemingly would take decades to correct. As for the TM-GZ case, jury did their jobs. No way could it be proved GZ didn't act in self defense. I think the people are upset because for GZ not being proved guilty, because of lack of reasonable doubt, TM was essentially found guilty w/o reasonable doubt. He also is unfortunately the one that is no longer alive.
No way in hell they get that creepy ass cracka on a civil rights charge..if DOJ even thinks about bringing that case it will be politically motivated. And Zimmerman's lawyers feel confident they will fend off a civil case: "If someone believes that it's appropriate to sue George Zimmerman, then we will seek and we will get immunity in a civil hearing," O'Mara said in a post-verdict press conference. A civil suit holds some risk for the Martin family, too, however. If Zimmerman were to win immunity in a "Stand Your Ground" hearing, they could be forced to pay his legal costs, Coffey said. http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/14/19467814-whats-next-for-george-zimmerman
Stand your ground wasn't an issue in the case, because Zimmerman had no opportunity to retreat when he perceived imminent death or great bodily harm.
"For a federal hate crime we have to prove the highest standard in the law. You know, something that was reckless, that was negligent does not meet that standard. We have to show that there was specific intent to do the crime with the requisite state of mind," Holder said then. No f'n way the DOJ can prove the highest standard.
http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2013/07/nba-players-react-to-the-george-zimmerman-verdict/#10 Damn they mad
Name one shred of evidence that there is a civil rights violation. Just a sliver. There is none. Not a trace. Nada! If fine with the DOJ stating they will look into it just to settle all the raging irrational black people, but if any of them thinks they might remotely have a case, they are a fool.
close relative of Zimmerman answering questions on Reddit http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/commen...relative_of_george_zimmerman_i_was/?limit=500
