My understanding is that it is an automatic hearing before the judge if one claims the stand you ground law defense. It is supposed to occur before a trial ever starts.
I think George's father say something he wish he did not say. The Sentinel said that Ed Primeau, a Michigan-based audio engineer and forensics expert, came to the same conclusion. "I believe that's Trayvon Martin in the background, without a doubt," Primeau says, stressing that the tone of the voice is a giveaway. "That's a young man screaming." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_...--------------------------------------------- "The most dramatic moment came when Zimmermanâs father, Robert, took the stand and said the screaming voice on a 911 tape was âabsolutely Georgeâs.â Zimmerman noted that he had heard his son scream in a similar manner as a teenager, though not using the same words" http://www.alaskadispatch.com/artic...rney-says-martin-killed-because-his-own-doing
Be interesting to see the stats on black murder suspects with no priors and their bonds. At this point, there appears to be some serious miscarriage of justice. Either the cops were bad when they originally wanted to let Zimmerman go, or the judge and prosecuter are over the top. For these two sides to be so strong, one has to be crimminally wrong (IMO). My bet (but I wait for the trial to confirm) is that the cops were right and the political system caved to pressure. So my question for "the other side" is, supposed this turns out to be correct? Not saying it is, but think Duke Lacrosse. Suppose the evidence is open and shut and this case shiould never have gone to trial? Would you support sanctions against the prosecutor and the judge? And for the record, if this is a slam dunk conviction, I would support action against all involved detectives and police officers that let Zimmerman walk.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/05/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 There doesn't seem to be any information on the donations collected for the Martin family during their road show. Why either of these two have any supporters, especially supporters willing to give them money, is beyond me.
I think it goes a lot higher. I blame the governor of florida. He was the one who intervened and sent in that idiot woman state's attorney woith orders to lynch this guy. They are a bunch of unethical weasels who were intimidated by a thug like Al sharpton. Of course, you can say the same thing about Chief Justice John Roberts, only he was cowed by the Washington media/poltical/legal elites.
Dunno about your initial question there, but in this case the bond was set in the context of assets he had because of the donations and what appears, on its face, to be actions tending towards a plan to vamoos. (Which for him would be doubly hard since as soon as he presented that new passport of his with his name and photo on it he'd be detained at the airport, but obviously he didn't think that one through.) Not a typical case at all, to put it mildly.
Similar sentiments here. Zimmerman has an additional $100k in his defense fund and that is apparently growing fast. I'll likely contribute a small amount again to express my appreciation for ridding the world of a thug.
The man has a bounty on his head from a bunch of violent thugs, yet the govenrment does nothing, except to try to put his wife in jail. This entire case is a frightening example of why libertarians say the main risk to freedom is the government. This case is clearly a political prosecution, designed to shut up a bunch of racist blacks who no doubt will riot anyway if he is somehow acquitted.
Hopefully that'll simplify it for you. Suppose that post trial we see that the prosecutions evidence was terrible (as in Duke Lacrosse). I do not mean questionable, I do not mean maybe, I mean "Holy #@*& only a retard would bring this case!" Would you (trefoil) support charges against the various prosecutors in this hypothetical situation?