Tamara ruined that particular breakfast item for me a year ago. I am not going to link it.
Jon
KC
Tamara ruined that particular breakfast item for me a year ago. I am not going to link it.
Jon
KC
Ignore Alien Orders
All I was trying to say is we don't have all the facts. Won't be the first time the newspapers sensationalized a statement to sell newspapers.Originally Posted by ToddG
If it turns out to be tampering then case should be dismissed.and someone should be prosecuted for tampering.
CC
That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;
No... what you said (to which I replied) was that there might be backups and if so it wasn't a problem. My response was simply that regardless of backups, destroying evidence is pretty much always a problem.
Reading the article again, though, I do think there is merit in the suggestion that we've all been reading "deleted text messages" as an action rather than a description. IOW, they were possibly texts deleted by Martin and then recovered by the government, not deleted by the government.
+1 to the first sentence.
With regards to dismissing the case, how would that work in conjunction with FL stand your ground civil prosecution protections. If Zimmerman was found to have used force in self defense either by a stand your ground hearing or criminal trial it is my understanding Martin's parents can't bring a civil suit. Would that still hold if the criminal trial was dismissed due to evidence tampering? Can there still be a stand your ground hearing after the criminal case is dismissed. Truth be told I didn't understand the tactic of forgoing the stand your ground hearing and going right to trial. What was the downside of trying it and not having a favorable ruling?
Zimmerman and his attorneys are already crying about the lack of funds, can Zimmerman afford a civil suit as well. Having just been through a civil proceedings (in the FL court system by the way) with my company I know how fast the attorney fees can rack up. Plus according to our attorney if the jury finds in favor of the plaintiff FL juries historically hand out uncharacteristically huge awards.
Scott
Only Hits Count - The Faster the Hit the more it Counts!!!!!!; DELIVER THE SHOT!
Stephen Hillier - "An amateur practices until he can do it right, a professional practices until he can't do it wrong."
Also wouldn't be the first time the State Attorney's office has acted unethically with respect to this case.
I never understood how a person could be found guilty of something in civil court for the same crime. Isn't that double-jeopardy?
CC
That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state;
Being found not guilty in criminal court really isn't the same as being found innocent. All it means is that you couldn't be found guilty because of reasonable doubt. Civil court is a different animal all together. It's based on the preponderance of evidence. You could be totally innocent but if the plaintiff's attorney is good at construing the evidence to look like there was a very good chance that you probably did it you are screwed.
Scott
Only Hits Count - The Faster the Hit the more it Counts!!!!!!; DELIVER THE SHOT!
Stephen Hillier - "An amateur practices until he can do it right, a professional practices until he can't do it wrong."
I'm pretty sure in Georgia we have a law that prohibits a civil suit if a person who acted in self defense is not charged with or found guilty of a crime. Evidently not the case in Florida?
Florida
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/.../0776.032.html
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776
No. Double jeopardy means that a particular sovereign government tries twice to prosecute someone for the same criminal act.
For example, take carjacking. To the best of my knowledge every state has a law against carjacking. There is also a federal statute criminalizing it. If you carjack someone and are found not guilty in state court, the federal government can still try you for the same crime because it's a separate "government" doing so. The USDOJ has a policy that ordinarily prevents them from trying someone who's been found not guilty at the state level but they make exceptions when it suits them. The officers convicted in the Rodney King incident could tell you all about that...
Being found not guilty at criminal trial doesn't get you out of civil liability unless a statute specifically provides that protection. The burden of proof is different in a civil court (making it easier for a plaintiff to win compared to a prosecutor in criminal court) and the issues that need to be proved are often different, as well. OJ Simpson could tell you all about that...
Reply With Quote