That Gun Totting Evil White Man that shot that poor black teen.

[Peach]

Was a police department = PD

The decision to not arrest has been turned over to Feds.

Will take weeks for review of PD/SA actions.

April 10 to be exact for grand jury.

Yes, it will take until 4/10 or longer. State Attorney, then the feds. Has any agency been over the facts yet?

Enough to pass detainment / arrest test.

Absent forensic and voice analysis which is forthcoming.

The "arrest" test of a couple officers in the Seminole County Sheriff's Department. Not a good measure particularly if the firearm wasn't taken, and Zimmerman was not required to take BAC & drug tests either.

 

[OODA_Loop]

The "arrest" test of a couple officers in the Seminole County Sheriff's Department.

Your assertion that it was investigator level decision abscent counsel is faulty.

Im sorry.

It is.

 

[bodecea]

yet still you confused the 4th and 5th amendments earlier in the thread. How is that?

I'm not confused you're confused...

nope, still you who is confused...



you claim here that not showing you an arrest warrant is a 5th amendment violation.

Here is a link to the 5th amendment text on wiki...
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

none of that applies to your not seeing an arrest warrant.

Now, the 4th amendment might at least have been more relevant to your comment...
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

...but it still does not say that you are required to be SHOWN an arrest warrant upon arrest.

You confused the 5th and 4th amendments.

Oh my! Is Mr. Nick playing Constitutional Expert again? He fails everytime when he does that.

 

[Ariux]

Zimmerman's story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You'd have to suspend belief to go with it.

What makes absolutely no sense is accusing Zimmerman of coon hunting without a dog. Who ever heard of anyone hunting coons without a dog?

 

[Sallow]

What evidence?

At some point they got into a fight. Zimmerman, who was armed with a 9mm gun and weighing 250 lbs was chasing this kid around the neighborhood. The 911 tapes confirm that. They also confirm Zimmerman used a racial epithet and was concerned he "got away". Martin's girlfriend confirms that Zimmerman confronted him and asked what he was doing in the neighborhood. He did this without first identifying himself. Which, in this case, would have been sort of silly, since he wasn't part of any registered neighborhood watch. Zimmerman's story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You'd have to suspend belief to go with it.

Where do the racist cops and states attorneys covering it up enter the scene ?

What?

What are you talking about?

By the way..the cops screwed up royally. They never gave Zimmerman an alcohol or drug test. They also kept Murphy's body for 3 days without calling the family.

 

[Sallow]

Zimmerman's story makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You'd have to suspend belief to go with it.

What makes absolutely no sense is accusing Zimmerman of coon hunting without a dog. Who ever heard of anyone hunting coons without a dog?

Enjoy your time here while it lasts..

 

[Mr.Nick]

yet still you confused the 4th and 5th amendments earlier in the thread. How is that?

I'm not confused you're confused...

nope, still you who is confused...



you claim here that not showing you an arrest warrant is a 5th amendment violation.

Here is a link to the 5th amendment text on wiki...
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

none of that applies to your not seeing an arrest warrant.

Now, the 4th amendment might at least have been more relevant to your comment...
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

...but it still does not say that you are required to be SHOWN an arrest warrant upon arrest.

You confused the 5th and 4th amendments.

This wasn't a search warrant it was an arrest warrant dummy..

This is a Fifth Amendment issue because it violates due process procedure.

 

[OODA_Loop]

By the way..the cops screwed up royally. They never gave Zimmerman an alcohol or drug test. They also kept Murphy's body for 3 days without calling the family.

Zimmerman did not give rise to any indication of intoxication, nor was he placed under arrest where one could be demanded.

Tell me more about Murphy's body.

 

[Ariux]

Where do the racist cops and states attorneys covering it up enter the scene ?

Liberals are racist bigots. Their reasoning is based on racism and they think this is how everyone else reasons, through bigotry. So, they are always quick to accuse others of racism.

Look at how those racist retards reason. They actually think Zimmerman's obesity is evidence of his guilt: "At some point they got into a fight. Zimmerman, who was armed with a 9mm gun and weighing 250 lbs was chasing this kid around the neighborhood." And, why would a man with a gun get start a fight with a man without one? Why the total idiocy? Because the only function of their argument is to support their already accepted racist conclusion.

 

[Rozman]

Is actually hispanic.

suchttp://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-zimmerman-letter-20120315,0,5792590,full.storyk it race baiters.

You just gotta believe a few here are so disappointed that it
wasn't a white guy that did this.I'm sure they moved onto
something else by now.

What gets lost is that a young man had his life taken from him
by someone who needs to be locked up for a very long time.
This need to make sure that white people get fingered for
being racist before all the facts are in is bullshit.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Where do the racist cops and states attorneys covering it up enter the scene ?

Liberals are racist bigots. Their reasoning is based on racism and they think this is how everyone else reasons, through bigotry. So, they are always quick to accuse others of racism.

Look at how those racist retards reason. They actually think Zimmerman's obesity is evidence of his guilt: "At some point they got into a fight. Zimmerman, who was armed with a 9mm gun and weighing 250 lbs was chasing this kid around the neighborhood." And, why would a man with a gun get start a fight with a man without one? Why the total idiocy? Because the only function of their argument is to support their already accepted racist conclusion.

Good points but Zimmerman is still a nut.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Would anyone here attack some random kid eating Skittles having a drink while he is talking on his phone?

That is anything BUT suspicious given our youth of today...

 

[OODA_Loop]

Would anyone here attack some random kid eating Skittles having a drink while he is talking on his phone?

That is anything BUT suspicious given our youth of today...

Do you think there is any other reasonable and plausible set of circumstances ?

 

[Conservative]

I'm not confused you're confused...

nope, still you who is confused...



you claim here that not showing you an arrest warrant is a 5th amendment violation.

Here is a link to the 5th amendment text on wiki...
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[1]

none of that applies to your not seeing an arrest warrant.

Now, the 4th amendment might at least have been more relevant to your comment...
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

...but it still does not say that you are required to be SHOWN an arrest warrant upon arrest.

You confused the 5th and 4th amendments.

This wasn't a search warrant it was an arrest warrant dummy..

This is a Fifth Amendment issue because it violates due process procedure.

which is why I never CALLED it a search warrant, dipshit.

The 5th amendment you cited DOES NOT APPLY in regards to an ARREST warrant not being shown to someone when they are arrested.

God.. you even FAIL at FAILing

 

[Ariux]

Would anyone here attack some random kid eating Skittles having a drink while he is talking on his phone?

The black looked like he was casing the neighborhood, hence the 911 call.

The skittle-eater wasn't attacked. He did the attacking.

 

[Mr.Nick]

nope, still you who is confused...



you claim here that not showing you an arrest warrant is a 5th amendment violation.

Here is a link to the 5th amendment text on wiki...
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


none of that applies to your not seeing an arrest warrant.

Now, the 4th amendment might at least have been more relevant to your comment...
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...but it still does not say that you are required to be SHOWN an arrest warrant upon arrest.

You confused the 5th and 4th amendments.

This wasn't a search warrant it was an arrest warrant dummy..

This is a Fifth Amendment issue because it violates due process procedure.

which is why I never CALLED it a search warrant, dipshit.

The 5th amendment you cited DOES NOT APPLY in regards to an ARREST warrant not being shown to someone when they are arrested.

God.. you even FAIL at FAILing

You're just interpreting ideas through your own logic...

NOT PROVIDING A WARRANT IS A FIFTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION.

Never mind anything else that happened - the fact the cop said "we don't have the warrant - it's in the computer" then that idiot should have gone and got a copy...

End of story...

Everything after that is defunct..

 

[IHBF]

Is actually hispanic.

suchttp://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-zimmerman-letter-20120315,0,5792590,full.storyk it race baiters.

Classic example of Irony In Politics (IIP).

Liberal heads are spinning.

 

[Conservative]

You're just interpreting ideas through your own logic...

NOT PROVIDING A WARRANT IS A FIFTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION.

Never mind anything else that happened - the fact the cop said "we don't have the warrant - it's in the computer" then that idiot should have gone and got a copy...

End of story...

Everything after that is defunct..

I am reading the text of the 5th amendment, and NONE of it applies.

If not providing an arrest warrant at the moment of arrest is a 5th amendment violation, then almost every arrest in the US...EVER... is unconstitutional. Even YOU can't be mind bogglingly stupid enough to believe that. Can you?

 

[Peach]

Would anyone here attack some random kid eating Skittles having a drink while he is talking on his phone?

The black looked like he was casing the neighborhood, hence the 911 call.

The skittle-eater wasn't attacked. He did the attacking.

The victim was on his cell phone while attacking? The killer had called 911; told not to follow the kid while he cursed "these a**holes" . No mention of any threat from the victim, just the killer's rage. Who is delusional enough to believe the teenager was the attacker?

 

[Mr.Nick]

nope, still you who is confused...



you claim here that not showing you an arrest warrant is a 5th amendment violation.

Here is a link to the 5th amendment text on wiki...
Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


none of that applies to your not seeing an arrest warrant.

Now, the 4th amendment might at least have been more relevant to your comment...
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...but it still does not say that you are required to be SHOWN an arrest warrant upon arrest.

You confused the 5th and 4th amendments.

This wasn't a search warrant it was an arrest warrant dummy..

This is a Fifth Amendment issue because it violates due process procedure.

which is why I never CALLED it a search warrant, dipshit.

The 5th amendment you cited DOES NOT APPLY in regards to an ARREST warrant not being shown to someone when they are arrested.

God.. you even FAIL at FAILing

Not to mention, in what universe are legal documents housed in a computer??

Now these days the cops are like "trust me take my word for it you have a warrant."

Only a dumb republican would accept such bullshit...