so that was meant for me?
Doofus snuck a post in ahead of me.
you
Doofus snuck a post in ahead of me.
so that was meant for me?
Doofus snuck a post in ahead of me.
you
I did.
It didn't miss the point I was making.
Actually, in your post previous to the previous post you're referencing; you said this...
...to which I responded, "You don't ask a prosecutor to defend you either."
It's all about the context, baby.
Need help understanding?
You never made a point. Other than you talking to yourself.
An actual prosecutor walked in here and told you your faux-outrage has no merit. crofl
So, in a nuts , I was completely right that your LE background gives zero authority to your interpretation of a legal do ent.
All about context indeed.
OMG! It's settled then.
At least you didn't say THE Prosecutor walked in here...
No, you were wrong.
Indeed, it is.All about context indeed.
lol overridden by an actual prosecutor.
alleged prosecutor...after all, this is an anonymous internet forum
Overridden? How so?lol overridden by an actual prosecutor.
alleged law enforcement... cuts both ways...
I owned up to being wrong about TheProfessor agreeing with me.
I still think the affidavit was a piece of crap.
I guess that means I think TheProfessor is wrong.
We're both en led to our opinions. Just as is Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor that has probably seen more than few probable cause affidavits in his life.
I encourage you to read all of it.I strongly disagree with David French’s analysis. I’m inclined, instead, to agree with commentators ranging from former Reagan Justice Department official Mark Levin to Harvard’s Alan Dershowitz that the affidavit is stunningly weak — “unethical,” as Prof. Dershowitz puts it. In fact, I go further (which, after nearly 20 years of writing and supervising the writing of complaint affidavits, I think I’m qualified to do). This affidavit is not law, it is agitprop: invoking, for example, the explosive term “profiled” but carefully avoiding any discussion of what it means and failing to note that (a) there is no evidence of racial profiling, and (b) absent an invidious racial component there is nothing wrong with profiling (indeed, we want police to do it so that innocent people don’t get hassled).
...
...one thing I can say with confidence is that there is not probable cause in that affidavit for the charge the prosecutor has selected, second-degree murder. It requires proof of depraved indifference to human life. Nothing in the affidavit, and nothing we otherwise know about Zimmerman, indicates such a state of mind — and it’s really not close.
It appears both I and Andrew McCarthy disagree with TheProfessor. There's no shame in that, it just is.
You are overridden.
It also seems McCarthy sees merit in the "media " moniker...
Absolutely, I've never asked anyone to believe me. But, please note, I took at face value TheProfessor's claim of being a prosecutor.
I have no reason to doubt that.
I now have reason to doubt he's a good one (if, as he says, he believes the Probable Cause Affidavit is good work), but, no reason to doubt he is one.
Oh yeah, and hanging out on a political forum during a regular workday for prosecutors (they're all government employees and today isn't a holiday) would also tend to support TheProfessor is not exactly diligent in his duties either.
I can see where he just might be capable of writing a shoddy probable cause affidavit like the one in the Martin shooting case.
Yep.
You're still talking to yourself
SMH
The actual prosecutor approved the affidavit.
You are over overridden
He lies too then. when you cannot counter the merits of an argument claim they are lying. At least i have the decency to wait until I can demonstrate they are lying before I call them out.
From what i can tell your opinion towards prosecutors is flavored by having been prosecuted yourself. Plea bargain or guilty verdict?
Apparently not.You're still talking to yourself
Who are you trying to convince, Yoni?
Yoni, if it makes you feel better, I am taking a sick day. I can't even access these forums at work. But I see how it works - I disagree with you (and whatever Articles you find) and so you feel the need to attack me to validate your opinion. Do not pretend that we are being civil if this is the way you operate. It is cowardly and you are pitiful.
As to the affidavit, I already expressed that I had issues with it, but it's just a determination of probable cause. Not exactly a high burden. As it says at the bottom, not a summation of all the evidence and testimony that will be elicited at trial.
Last edited by TheProfessor; 04-17-2012 at 06:42 PM.
It doesn't make me feel better. You are absolutely right, I was wrong. It was an unwarranted attack and characterization you didn't invite. I sincerely apologize.
But, there is a burden no?
The "whatever article" I chose to reference is written by Andrew C. McCarthy, a somewhat notable federal prosecutor. His opinion is the probable cause affidavit didn't meet that burden and, in fact, damn near amounted to prosecutorial malpractice.
It is my understanding a general principle, common to all affidavits, is it must "stand on its own" and be based on "what is within its four corners." That there must not only be sufficient information to cover all requisite elements necessary to support the charge, all such support must actually be in the affidavit. Is that your understanding?
To be honest, this affidavit, within its “four corners” arguably does not even meet the necessary burden of probable cause for Manslaughter under Florida section 782.07, much less the “depraved mind” necessary under Florida’s Second Degree Murder charge in section 782.04(2).
George Zimmerman may have committed a crime, but it is not demonstrated in this affidavit.
Hmmm... where did I read that before....
And the general principle common to all such affidavits, whether for search, arrest or charging, is that it must “stand on its own” based on “what is within its four corners”
and
To be honest, this affidavit, within its “four corners” arguably does not even meet the necessary burden of probable cause for Manslaughter under Florida section 782.07, much less the “depraved mind” necessary under Florida’s Second Degree Murder charge under section 782.04(2) as charged in the information. George Zimmerman may have committed a crime, but it is not demonstrated in this affidavit, and certainly is not as to the crime charged, Second Degree Murder. Charles Blow can praise this thing until the cows come home in the august pages of the New York Times, but it is still a pile of junk.
Oh yeah... http://www.emptywheel.net/2012/04/14...it/#more-26370
Why is any of this important?
Because, when prosecutors can just claim you violated the law, write it on a piece of paper, and have you thrown in jail - based on that unsupported claim, we've kind of crossed a line, don't you think?
I get the sense you believe the probable cause affidavit is perfunctory and not that important in the course of a criminal action.
I disagree with that as well. I believe it is part of the due process we're guaranteed in the 5th and 14th amendments to the Cons ution. George Zimmerman may be cooling his heels in jail when he did nothing wrong.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions