Affidavit of Probable Cause destroys claim Zimmerman used racial epithet
One of hotest topics of argument has been whether George Zimmerman said “f-ing coons” under his breath on the 911 tape. The left-blogosphere has used the alleged racial epithet endlessly to paint this as a racially motivated hate crime.
CNN used three different audio experts to analyze the tape, but one of whom found “f-ing coons,” another “f-ing cold,” and another “f-ing punks.”
In the Affidavit of Probable Cause, which just was made available, State of Florida investigators swore under oath that that Zimmerman used the term “f-ing punks”:
For the investigators to make such a factual assertion under oath in such an important document certainly means the prosecution has conducted its own analysis and has concluded that the term “coons” was not used.
There is nothing else in the affidavit to indicate racial motivation, although there is a cryptic reference that Martin “was profiled by Zimmerman,” although what type of profiling is not specified.
Zimmerman Affidavit of Probable Cause (1)
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Note to Angela Corey:
Indite in haste … repent in leisure. 🙂
Angela Corey—Racist Exposed!!
1. Her racist ploy has been revealed.
You see, Corey is, ooga booga, supposedly Hispanic (Correia?), and she charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder knowing he’ll be found not guilty.
2. If you want to see craziness and racism, click around the Zimmerman stories in the site I linked.
3. For pity’s sake, let Corey do her job.
the problem is, they might actually be right…
2nd Degree is kind of an unbelievable overreach and the Affidavit presents a case which should probably be thrown out by the judge because of said overreach.
So while the people at the site might be loonies; this specific conspiracy theory very well could be correct – and it would fit with the idea this is merely a “for show prosecution to help get her reelected” too
I quite clearly see the “profiling” depicted as of “A Punk” like those responsible for recent break-ins who were “always get(ting) away” (Page 2, First paragraph)
All three aspects were in that same paragraph; the only paragraph to deal with motive what so ever.
The entire affidavit is kind of strange though. It separates everything into a anything Zimmerman did = must be bad, anything Martin did = must be innocent division.
It is also unbelievably weak on facts and amazingly reliant on questionable assumptions or leaps.
Yeah, he was profiled as being a suspicious person acting suspiciously in a neighborhood that has frequent break-in.
I was listening to Larry Elder a few hours ago and he stated that Martin was found in possession of stolen items including a stolen watch and had been arrested before for breaking and entering.
So he was accurately profiled as being a possible crook.
profiling usually has nothing to do with race/skin color and usually is about the present actions.
like with drunk driver, its not bad to profile the car wandering all over the road.
I don’t understand any of that special prosecutor stuff. Like how was she motivated to hug the parents? Is that DONE? And all this stuff about profiling?
Not into the law, but all this seems highly provocative.
Many of the assertions in the affidavit are based on questionable information, from what I’ve read and heard publicly; without more solid evidence (for example, records proving a phone call between Trayvon and his girlfriend), portions seem speculative at best, IMHO.
And – if they go to trial – and Zimmerman is found NOT guilty……
“No justice, no peace” keeps ringing in my ears.
I have seen a photo of a T-mobile bill purporting to be the record showing a call between Trayvon and DeeDee, his GF in Miami, lasting 8 minutes during the time period in question on ABC’s site.
As the professor also brought up in a prior post, the prosecutor mentions the Skittles and drink; they would have to provide a witness and/or evidence that Trayvon Martin went and bought/obtained Skittles and a drink at a store within walking distance.
Did anyone ever even find out if those items were found at the scene, or if that is just part of the Martins’ lawyers’ and/or MSM mythology?
Potential huge hole, if not.
Don’t question facts not actually documented anywhere anyone can find, or you’ll get us all mocked again:
Don’t mention evidence never documented anywhere anyone can actually verify, you’ll just get us all mocked again:
huh, I knew I posted that correctly the first time, but it wouldn’t show up in refreshes for some reason :/
Anyway, please delete this duplicate post, Professor. Thanks!
I have followed the evidence available in this case as closely as I can. So far, I have not seen or heard of any proof about skittles or anything else being purchased during Martin’s venture out on the last night of his life. That doesn’t mean there isn’t, but so far the only apparent source of that claim is Crump.
OK, where in the Florida Revised Statutes is the crime of “profiling” defined? Is it a misdemeanor or a felony? Are there “degrees” of profiling? (“We accuse the defendant of wanton and egregious profiling-in-the-second-degree, your Honor”.) What kind of punishment is considered appropriate for this heinous crime????
[So the prosecution is operating on two levels here, right? Pulling out all the stops, throwing in all but the kitchen sink, in order to let the race agitators know that “We’re really taking this seriously so for the love of Pete don’t riot”; and at the same time giving an appeals court (in case the railroading of poor George Zimmerman is somehow successful and he’s found guilty) plenty-plenty-PLENTY of reasons to overturn the conviction. Right?]
I don’t know about the state of Florida, but the feds have civil rights laws circumscribing PRIVATE citizens from profiling by race – in what activities I’m not sure about, but I’m sure they can shoe-horn neighborhood watch into it. That may be where this is headed and certain other claims in the affidavit seem to hint at a foundation for that.
“For the investigators to make such a factual assertion under oath in such an important document certainly means the prosecution has conducted its own analysis and has concluded that the term “coons” was not used.”
Or the Prosecution, in light of all uncertainty regarding the words said has given up any hope using it to establish an element of the crime Zimmerman has been charged with.
And with Prof. Dershowitz on my side, I’m starting to feel like a prophet regarding my ‘why it was 2nd degree’ theory.
For anyone who hasn’t watched the Alan Dershowitz video linked on the other post, “War On…”, I would highly recommend it.
I think it’s fair to say the affidavit is so weak, he’s ticked off, as in, if this is all the prosecution has, why are they wasting everybody’s time?
It’s really almost funny.
I also recommend checking out the following:
They make the point that the affidavit doesn’t even allege the Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, only using the passive phrase, “a struggle ensued”.
“Mistakes were made” is a passive phrase that’s starting to seem appropriate for the prosecution.
“a struggle ensued” doesn’t fit the narrative of Zimmerman being this racist thug looking to kill a kid. It implies he tracked down a young football player, picked a fight, allowed himself to be knocked down and have his head beat against the sidewalk, and only then produced a gun and fired.
Do they think he is not only a murderous racist, but dumb as a rock too?
“Do they think he is not only a murderous racist, but dumb as a rock too?”
Well. He IS a Democrat after all…
The affidavit had less detail than I thought it would. The critical issue is where the shooting took place and whether Zimmerman was following him at that time or had broken off doing so and was returning to his vehicle.
In its simplicity, it does bring home how sad this was. I do not want to vilify Trayvon Martin in reaction to the bad treatment George Zimmerman got, but something escalated things that night. I hope the trial can explain that.
The whole thing is tragic.
I think the 911 tape definitely shows that Zimmerman gave up the surveillance. But I just don’t think that is relevant anyway. He had a right to follow Martin if he thought he was behaving suspiciously. He knew the police were en route. He lamented that “These guys always get away” or something close to that. Even the affidavit states that. So, he would only think Martin was going to get away if he, Zimmerman, was no longer watching him. Of course, we’re suposed to think Zimmerman’s lamenting Martin getting away is his motive for killing him or at least attacking him, but I think it means that Zimmerman stopped following Martin. But, at any rate, that shouldn’t matter in connection with a second-degree murder charge. The question in connection with the charge, as i understand it, is was Zimmerman committing a felony, and the right kind of felony, up to and when he shot Martin? All the evidence supports Zimmerman’s claim that he is the one who was attacked, not the other way around. If there was some evidence that Zimmerman attacked Martin, thus providing the underlying felony, would the prosecutor not have included this in the affidavit? All they seem to have is a “friend” (the girlfriend) saying she heard someone get shoved and it had to have been Martin because his earpiece fell. Well, I think his earpiece would be more likely to dall from his ear if he was taking a swing at somebody rather than being shoved. But more importantly, how do you tell who is being shoved unless you see it? Hearing some struggling in no way tells you who pushed whom. An earpiece fell, according to a biased 16 yr.old not even present, and that’s the basis for the contention that Zimmerman initiated the attack?
Let’s not forget that we (the onlooker)have not been getting the straight of the story of this shooting from the git-go. I provided the link two weeks ago that the very day after the shooting, Tracy Martin’s girlfriend, Brandy Green, said that Trayvon was just sitting on the porch and this “man” just shot him. We also know that Tracy Martin alledgedly told the police that the voice screamin for help was NOT his son’s voice and that Tracy Martin “clarified” that statement after he had lawyered up.
We also know that the photos that had to be provided by the Martin family of Trayvon were all taken when Trayvon was quite a bit younger. Why would the family give the press such innocent looking photos? Did they not know that the “made” nigga had smeared his image all across the internet?
What does Angela Corey have in common with Mike Nifong? He, too, was running for reelection when he went after the Duke LaCross team members.
Nifong wasn’t just running for eection. he was running for election in a race he had no chance of winning. Both of his opponents were well ahead of him in the race, and he was also broke. Corey is/was not liked in the “African-American community” and there was a petition to recall her in process in the “African-American community”, although I don’t think it was going very far.
Poster JackLong provided this bit of info at the bottom of the long thread too:
Casey Anthony’s lawyer: George Zimmerman’s a victim of prosecutor’s ‘political prostitution’
Cheney Mason, the freewheeling criminal defense attorney who successfully defended tot mom Casey Anthony, is shaking his head over the second-degree murder charge against George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin.
“It’s political prostitution,” Mason said. “Now I don’t have all the facts – no one does – but you look at what we know of the case and it looks like the prosecutor bowed to other pressures.
“The fact is there is lots of racial bigotry in this case,” Mason said. “And a lot of it is coming from the side of Trayvon Martin’s family. I can understand why his family is upset. They lost a child. But they weren’t at the crime scene. None of us was.”
Mason said Corey is too zealous of a prosecutor.
“This is a person who wanted to put a 12-year-old boy as an adult for murder. It’s just too much,” Mason said.
“The only evidence we have now is what Zimmerman says and what an eyewitness says – that Trayvon was beating him,” Mason said. “Well, if that’s the case, this shouldn’t reach a jury. There’s just no evidence showing he acted with a depraved min. If Zimmerman was being beaten, it’s clearly a homicide. He had a right to carry his weapon. He had a right to confront a person who was walking around in a hoodie in the rain around dark when there had been crimes in the neighborhood.”
Mason said there will be a hearing under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law – which expands the right to use deadly force — and the charges could be dropped then by a judge. But, Mason said, “people are using Stand Your Ground to obfuscate the facts of this case. This comes down to the fundamentals of homicide. What’s the evidence? The burden of proof is on the prosecution. It’s not on George Zimmerman. And you can’t blame Stand Your Ground for this tragedy.”
Read more here: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/04/casey-anthonys-lawyer-george-zimmermans-a-victim-of-prosecutors-political-prostitution.html#storylink=cpy
Defamation of punk rock community!
[…] Affidavit of Probable Cause (via Legal Insurrection) crushes the claim that Zimmerman called Martin a “coon” on the 911 call and unless […]
I just saw over at Hot Air that Dershowitz and I are in agreement about the overcharging. I’m not sure if I ought to feel vindicated or sick to my stomach. Maybe both.
I’m gonna take a drink, either way.
Will the trial judge have the stones to throw it out? Knowing that if he does he is putting a target on himself, his home, and his family, and possibly other court officers and employees?
The NBPP has put up bounty posters for GZ “Dead or Alive,” and they haven’t been charged with any crime. Will the judge feel safe? Will the jury? Even if there is a change of venue?
This is pure malicious prosecution for political reasons. Corey doesn’t want to be the one to tell the mob there is no case, and the State doesn’t want the danger to life and property an angry mob presents.
All the more reasonn to stand up to them – or face a mob from a presently more silent and reluctant faction that is fed up with watching our elected officials kow-tow to these savages. We pay these bastards with our hard-earned money and they crap all over us because we are civilized and the other side is not.
The element of the affidavit that strikes me the most is that it does not allege that there were any visual witnesses to the altercation/shooting, but only describes people who heard the events.
Yet there have been reports of witnesses describing visual elements of the altercation.
Does this mean those reports are inaccurate? Or that Corey has chosen to discount them?
It’s obvious to me that Corey has uniquely chosen to take the word of somebody NOT there against the accounts of eye-witnesses. Clearly the police and Wolfinger gave merit to these accounts. Corey clearly views them as being outweighed by the changing observations of a biased 16 yr.old not present and has adopted the teen’s conclusion that it must have been Martin who was shoved first because the teen surmised or clairvoyantly knows Martin’s earpiece fell.
I see a, “Not Guilty,” verdict and a lot of riots to follow.
Of course we still don’t know what trumped up charges might ensue from the Eric Holder gang to appease the restless masses.
Not a shining moment in this nation’s history…
Mark Levin said on his program last night after reading the affidavit he felt it was very weak and really over reaching on the second degree charge.
I believe the police report did say, “manslaughter.”
[…] Zimmerman Affidavit makes no mention of any witnesses seeing Martin on top of Zimmerman, beating him. It also makes a […]
In a pretrial probable cause hearing (I am assuming that Zimmerman brings forth a claim of self defense), a judge will rule on the prosecution’s affidavit and underlying facts as to whether it constitutes probable cause.
Prosecutors are not required and often don’t bring up evidence favorable to the defense in either grand jury hearings or pre-trial affidavits where the indictment is by information.
This is one reason why if you are a defendant do not EVER assume that the prosecution and/or police will present facts favorable to yourself in court.
That is the defense attorney’s job which is why you better hire the best that you can afford.
Wow, I read this, and it sounds like Zimmerman didn’t act to inappropriately. Gated community, string of crimes committed. stranger doped up, walking strange. I would have to say, that this case should be dismissed.
The Prosecutor is probably going to try to say that Zimmerman “profiled” Trayvon through the simple fact that Trayvon was wearing a hoodie and walking around at night, assuming that Trayvon was a punk, which, by all accounts, it appears that he was (see the school info that is slowly leaking out).
The Prosecutor’s “profiling” argument will go something like this:
1.) it is well know that African-American youth have adopted the hoodie as a cultural garb, and have a tendency to loiter on the streets in the evenings. (sidenote- anybody remember “midnight basketball?” -end sidenote)
2.) Zimmerman knows this, and identified the person walking around in a hoodie as likely African-American.
3.) Zimmerman believes that African-Americans did not belong in his neighborhood.
4.) Because Zimmerman believes that African-Americans did not belong in his neighborhood, he followed Trayvon, confronted him, and ultimately killed him.
That will be the argument. I’m hoping that the Prosecutor is foolish enough to make it just to see her laughed out of court when Zimmerman’s attorney starts talking about Zimmerman’s community ties and then ethically disciplined, or better yet, DISBARRED for making a case wholly unsupported by the facts.
It really will be telling to see what the tox-screen comes back as containing. And we WILL find out, due to Florida’s “open discovery” laws. Unless they try to seal the document, which will be a disastrous public relations move for Ben Crump, because the immediate question will be “what are you trying to hide?”
In connection with what you’ve said, I will re-emphasize the girl friend’s claim that Trayvon told her on the phone that he was putting his hood up in response to being followed (which makes no sense, but it’s what she said to Crump in a dual interview on ABC). If true, that would mean Martin’s hood was down prior to that when Zimmerman began following him. If that were true, it follows that Zimmerman could more clearly see that Martin is obviously black, and that then becomes the motive for following him in their narrative.
Zimmerman says Martin was wearing a hoodie when he spotted him. That’s on the 911 tape. It was raining that night. I conclude the girl is furnishing the hoodie-was-originally-down theme as a trumped-up (or Crumped-up) means of assigning a racist motive to Zimmerman’s decisions that night. I think it also provides the camel’s nose under the tent that Holder wants to take it federal.
The girl friend’s claim about the hoodie is too out of place, too “off the wall” and too convenient to be believed.
I can kind of see Trayvon putting up his hood from a “street-smarts” perspective. Here’s my thinking:
Trayvon realizes he’s being followed. He pulls up his hoodie in order to look more menacing to a mugger, thinking that if he does he will not mugged. It has the opposite effect in this instance because he’s being followed by someone who is on the lookout for suspicious characters, and Trayvon has just made himself even MORE suspicious by attempting to hide his face.
Zimmerman should argue that it is a reasonable assumption that someone who is walking around, at night, in the rain somewhere he doesn’t live, ATTEMPTING to look menacing, is likely a community threat REGARDLESS of race and it was entirely reasonable that Zimmerman followed the potential threat.
It all keeps circling around to “what happened next?” Who confronted whom and the exact positioning of the individuals at the time the firearm was discharged.
So…you believe the GF rather than Zimmerman with regard to the hoodie?
No. I don’t really have an opinion yet. I’m still looking and waiting for evidence.
I was merely stating that I can see a theory where someone (Trayvon) who has the mentality of a thug would attempt to make himself look more threatening either before confronting the person following him or attempting to leave.
Thugs accost people who the thug think are weaker than the thug is. A street-smart thug who thinks he is being followed would attempt to make himself look bigger, meaner and as dangerous as possible to try to change the mental calculation of the follower.
This is largely why “concealed carry” works so well. It changes the mental calculation of a thug, because they never know who might have a concealed pistol (either the victim or a close-by third party). The risk calculation changes from “am I willing to get caught and go to jail sometime in the near future?” to “am I willing to risk getting shot and killed right now?”
Affidavits, like print corrections are useless. The word has already gone out and is believed by the majority of blacks; mainly, because they are always looking for this kind of stuff and believe it goes on daily.
That’s why they’re a bunch of tools. They’ve been taught this from the cradle, which is why they’re still on the plantation and don’t know it.
[…] popular “fact” about this case. That whole Zimmerman said “coons” business? Not so fast One of hotest topics of argument has been whether George Zimmerman said “f-ing coons” under […]