Why George Zimmerman Is Not Entitled To A Presumption Of Innocence

That is, at least according to one liberal website posting.1 Here's the disturbing comment found on that website, "… there is no constitutional right to the presumption of innocence." 

It's amazing that those who clamor for full Constitutional rights for Guantanamo terrorists are the same ones who are ready to take Zimmerman's head now.
This is evidence enough to make an observer believe that Liberalism is a mental disorder.

The writer must have slept through Civics or Government class. Or, maybe the writer is a victim of public school education. Or, perhaps both occurred.

Most of those on that website and others don't understand the concept of the presumption of Zimmerman's innocence, unless and until he is found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at a trial by jury.

Many liberals are accusing conservatives of defending George Zimmerman to the detriment of Trayvon Martin. No, if Zimmerman is guilty, then so be it. Conservatives, by and large, are actually defending the right of a trial by jury and not one by a torch and pitchfork carrying mob at midnight.

This "Presumption of innocence" right derives from the Constitution's 
6th Amendment, that states, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

It also derives from common law, and state law. 


Here is the actual Florida jury instruction mandated by Florida Law for criminal trials.

"2.03 PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE
DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF

The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty. This
means you must presume or believe the defendant is innocent.
The presumption stays with the defendant as to each material
allegation in the [information] [indictment] through each stage
of the trial unless it has been overcome by the evidence to the
exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.

To overcome the defendant's presumption of innocence
the State has the burden of proving the crime with which the
defendant is charged was committed and the defendant is the
person who committed the crime.
The defendant is not required to present evidence or
prove anything.
Whenever the words "reasonable doubt" are used you
must consider the following:
    
(Note to Judge:)
It is recommended that you use this instruction to define
reasonable doubt during voir dire. State v. Wilson, 686 So.2d 569
(Fla. 1996).
    
A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt,
a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt
must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty
if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other
hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing and
weighing all the evidence, there is not an abiding
conviction of guilt, or, if, having a conviction, it is one
which is not stable but one which wavers and vacillates,
then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable
doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty
because the doubt is reasonable.

It is to the evidence introduced in this trial, and to it alone, that
you are to look for that proof.
A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the
defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the
evidence or the lack of evidence.
If you have a reasonable doubt, you should find
the defendant not guilty. If you have no reasonable
doubt, you should find the defendant guilty."

And. Here is the Florida jury instruction on the how the jury must evaluate evidence introduced in all Florida trials like the one Zimmerman faces.

"2.04 WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE
It  is  up  to  you  to  decide  what  evidence  is  reliable.  You
should use your common sense in deciding which is the best
evidence, and which evidence should not be relied upon in
considering your verdict. You may find some of the evidence not
reliable, or less reliable than other evidence.
You should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as
what they said. Some things you should consider are:

1. Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to
see and know the things about which the witness
testified?

2. Did the witness seem to have an accurate
memory?

3.  Was the witness honest and straightforward in
answering the attorneys' questions?

4. Did the witness have some interest in how the
case should be decided?

5. Does the witness' testimony agree with the other
testimony and other evidence in the case?
    
(Note to Judge:)
The instructions covered under paragraphs numbered six
through ten, inclusive, are not common to all cases. These
numbered paragraphs should be included only as required by the
evidence.

6. Has the witness been offered or received any
money, preferred treatment or other benefit in
order to get the witness to testify?

7. Had any pressure or threat been used against the
witness that affected the truth of the witness'
testimony?
8. Did the witness at some other time make  a
statement that is inconsistent with the testimony
[he] [she] gave in court?
    
(Note to Judge)
The  court  also may wish  to  give  as part of  this  instruction
the instructions covered under 2.04(a) and (b), concerning expert
witnesses and accomplices. If so, the Committee recommends that
they be given as additional numbered paragraphs, which would
precede the last two unnumbered paragraphs of this instruction.

9. Was it proved that the witness had been
convicted of a crime?

10.  Was it proved that the general reputation of the
witness for telling the truth and being honest
was bad?

You may rely upon your own conclusion about the
witness. A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the
evidence or the testimony of any witness."

The presumption of guilt until the Defendant proves himself  innocent is used in France and in other countries that use the old Napoleonic Code.


1 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/22/george-zimmerman-bail-release-sanford-florida-jail_n_1444296.html

Here's What Will Happen To George Zimmerman Next In Florida

Revised 04/12/2012


We know George Zimmerman has been charged with second degree murder.  Here’s what will happen next on the State Court level. There are now certain formalities that must take place as required by the US and Florida Constitutions. He turned himself in at the Jacksonville jail.d by a lawyer.

He will be arraigned within a short period of time where a Judge or Magistrate will tell him what the charges are, the possible penalties, and set a bond. When setting a bond the official looks at the gravity of the crime, community connections, employment, criminal history, flight risk, substance abuse, and the like. It is also a positive if a lawyer comes in and explains how these factors apply to his client. It is a very good factor for the judge to consider in his bond hearing that he voluntarily turned himself in. 

Where Zimmerman “disappeared” to would have a bearing on any bond If he left the state. Although he could have left the state. He was not charged with anything earlier. But, any prosecutor would say, "He left the state once, he will do it again if he is released on bond."  


If bond is granted, it can be personal recognizance, meaning that Zimmerman promises to attend all future court hearings or face a big monetary payment and probable immediate incarceration. Not likely here.  It can be a cash/surety bond, meaning that he has to get a bondsman to post the bond or the defendant must post the entire bond amount with the Court. This is possible., In some states, there is a cash/or percentage bond set. This means that he can put up a percentage of the bond with the court and if he doesn’t show up later, he forfeits the entire bond amount.

Next, before everyone gets excited about a trial, since he will be charged directly by the Prosecutor with an "Information,” and not charged by indictment by a Grand Jury, a Preliminary Examination must be held by the Court first.

The Prosecutor must prove there's probable cause for him to go to trial. After the Prosecutor presents evidence and witnesses, Zimmerman's lawyer can cross examine the witnesses and challenge credibility of evidence and witnesses. The Prosecutor only has to prove that there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. Zimmerman can challenge all charges and ask for them to be dismissed or lowered in severity.

Don't expect Zimmerman to testify. Do not expect his attorneys to present evidence because this just invites a trial because if the Prosecutor says one thing and the Defendant presents  evidence that says another, it then becomes a jury question almost immediately. Its all about the Prosecutor's evidence.

This is NOT a trial. This hearing does not prove guilt or innocence like a trial. Zimmerman's attorney's job is to challenge state's evidence and try to convince the Judge that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor is not sufficient to move the matter to trial as charged. It's  also a chance to see what evidence there is against Zimmerman.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Judge decides it the evidence fits the elements of the charged crime, and goes through each part of the definition of the charged crime. He could send it to trial as charged. Or, he can dismiss or lower charges.

The Prosecutor would refuse to talk to him, as she did, because he was apparently still represented by attorneys when he contacted her. Her talking to a represented person would cost her job and she would lose her law license. That's a terminal violation of rules governing lawyers. This isn't TV, or CS, or any of the Law and Order shows, where there's no reality. This is the real deal. This is real life.

Before everyone gets excited about a trial, since he will be charged directly by the Prosecutor with an "Information, a Preliminary Examination must be held by the Court first.

The Prosecutor must prove there's probable cause for him to go to trial. After the Prosecutor presents evidence and witnesses, Zimmerman's lawyer can cross examine the witnesses and challenge credibility of evidence and witnesses. The Prosecutor only has to prove that there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. Zimmerman can challenge all charges and ask for them to be dismissed or lowered in severity.

Don't expect Zimmerman to testify. Do not expect his attorneys to present evidence because this just invites a trial because if the Prosecutor says one thing and the Defendant presents  evidence that says another, it then becomes a jury question almost immediately. Its all about the Prosecutor's evidence.

This is NOT a trial. This hearing does not prove guilt or innocence like a trial. Zimmerman's attorney's job is to challenge state's evidence and try to convince the Judge that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor is not sufficient to move the matter to trial as charged. It's also a chance to see what evidence there is against Zimmerman.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Judge decides it the evidence fits the elements of the charged crime, and goes through each part of the definition of the charged crime. He could send it to trial as charged. Or, he can dismiss or lower charges.

.When this is set for trial, if it is, there will certainly be a Change of venue motion to get the trial out of Sanford to somewhere else in Florida. But, the practical result is that Zimmerman has replaced Casey Anthony as the most hated person in America.

Zimmerman will probably be bound over for trial. Many experienced lawyers have never prevailed at a Preliminary examination because the burden of proff for the Prosecutor is so low to send a case on to trial.


And, it’s not over unless or until her is found guilty of every charge beyond a reasonable doubt. But, there’s also the issue with Eric Holder; but, that’s the subject for another day.

The Prosecutor has refused to talk to Zimmerman directly because he was apparently still represented by attorneys when he contacted her. Her talking to a represented person would cost her job and she would lose her law license. That's a terminal violation of rules governing lawyers. This isn't TV, or CS, or any of the Law and Order shows, where there's no reality. This is the real deal. This is real life

visit our other blog
secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com

All In Favor Of More Gun Control, Please Raise Both Hands

The "anniversary" dates of the Virginia Tech massacre and Columbine are approaching, and anti gun rights organizations are gearing up for it. Some members of these groups have written this week that it would have been "stupid"  for a student to have been armed in a Virginia Tech classroom where a murderer killed 33 people. One anti gun rights blogger wrote that crossfire would have caused more injuries, and that the police wouldn’t know who the murderer was when they arrived and would shoot a student defender instead.  We hear the same thing over, and over... and over. They prefer police response and guards in the classroom. That is ridiculous.

According to some news accounts, some Tech Students jumped from windows to escape and others tried to shield their friends, but many of Hueng-Chu Ho's victims sobbed quietly and pled for their lives as they obeyed his orders as they were shot one by one as they complied. They were apparently waiting for a life saving miracle or intervention. 

One armed student or instructor with a legally carried handgun at least could have had a chance to try to stop this man as he methodically killed students there. He even had to reload during his trip to a second classroom that students attempted to barricade. There's one opportunity to stop this man if there was none before.

There will never be "guards' in all the classrooms. The statement that police will shoot the wrong person is fallacious. Local police at Virginia Tech took nearly six minutes to enter the barricaded building. By the time cops showed up, it was already over. The killer was dead by the time they arrived. Police are there in minutes when seconds count. We all know that. 

A no guns policy will never stop a determined killer either. We all know that too. 
A victim's attempt to stop a killer in the act of killing 33 people is just plain stupid, isn't it?

Here’s one anti gun rights Group’s Press release:

###

MEDIAPRESS RELEASE

Gun Violence Victims Challenge Congress to Keep Guns from Dangerous People, on April 16, 5th Anniversary of VA Tech Shooting

Letters Sent Requesting Meetings with Congressional Leaders

Apr 9, 2012

,

 D.C. – On behalf of the 32 Americans murdered by guns every day, Colin Goddard and at least 31 other victims of gun violence will converge on Capitol Hill on April 16 and 17 to challenge Congressional leaders and members to keeps guns out of the hands of dangerous people, the Brady Campaign announced today. The victims’ challenge comes as the nation observes the anniversaries of the mass shootings at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School, and as Americans continue to express outrage over the killing of Trayvon Martin and the guns anywhere for just about anybody agenda of the gun lobby.

Screenings of the documentary, Living for 32, which features Goddard’s journey from gun violence survivor to advocate for gun violence prevention, will also take place on college campuses and in communities on April 16.

Goddard, who survived being shot four times on April 16, 2007, Tom Mauser, whose 15-year-old son Daniel was killed in the Columbine High School massacre on April 20, 1999, and Sherialyn Byrdsong, whose husband Ricky was killed on July 2, 1999 by a white supremacist who should not have gotten a gun, will be joined on Capitol Hill on April 16 and 17 by about 30 other victims of gun violence from cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and Philadelphia.

Goddard emailed and hand-delivered letters over the past few days to eight members of Congress seeking meetings with them and the victims on Tuesday, April 17.  Those members include Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada), Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), House Majority Leader Eric Cantor  (R-Virginia), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California), and sponsors of what the Brady Campaign calls the “George Zimmerman Armed Vigilante Act,”  Sen. John Thune (R- South Dakota), Sen. David Vitter (R-Louisiana), and Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska).  

“Time and again after high-profile shootings, we’ve heard members of Congress say that now is not the ‘appropriate’ time to discuss legislation to prevent these tragedies,” said Goddard, who works as Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs for Brady. “Well, 32 Americans are murdered every single day in this country. We want to know: When will it be ‘appropriate’ to talk about keeping us safe? We are tired of living with the tragedy of gun violence, and we want Congress to act now to protect us and keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people. We won’t rest until they do.”

Brady Campaign President Dan Gross, whose brother Matthew was shot while visiting the Empire State building in 1997, will bring the voice of the American people to bear on April 16 and 17. 

“We are coming to Capitol Hill to demand that Congress stand up to the gun lobby. We are coming to demand that Senators reject the 'George Zimmerman Act' and pledge to put the safety of the American people ahead of the gun lobby,” said Gross.  “Trayvon Martin, the victims of Virginia Tech and Columbine, Sherilyn Byrdsong’s husband, my brother’s friend, and thousands of other Americans are all dead because the gun lobby has made it easy for dangerous people to get, carry, and use guns.  Too many members of Congress have been their accomplices. We’re marching up to Capitol Hill to say ‘Enough is enough! We will hold you accountable for putting the gun lobby’s agenda ahead of the people you were elected to represent.'”
       
The Brady Campaign recently began mobilizing to stop bills S 2188 and S 2213, which make up what it’s calling the “George Zimmerman Armed Vigilante Act.” The Senate bills, similar to HR 822, which passed the House late last year, would allow dangerous people like Zimmerman to carry guns in public places, from downtown L.A., to New York’s Times Square, even though those states’ concealed carry laws make it highly unlikely that Zimmerman would be granted a permit to carry a gun in public.

A copy of a report about the implications of the Act can be found here.

A Tentative Schedule of Events for April 16 and 17

Monday, April 16th

12:00pm - 1:00pm - News Conference with 32 victims from across the U.S. -  Outside U.S. Capitol or Room 2456 Rayburn House Office Building

1:00pm - 5:00pm - Media availability with victims; One-on-one interviews

6:30pm - 8:00pm - Reception at George Washington University Screening of Living for 32

8:00pm - 9:30pm - Screening of Documentary Living for 32, followed by Q&A, led by Colin Goddard, George Washington University, Marvin Center

Tuesday, April 17th

11:00 am - News Conference with Congressional leaders and victims from across the U.S., Room 121 Cannon House Office Building – Will discuss specific action Congress can take to prevent gun violence

9:00am - 12:00pm - Reserved for Capitol Hill meetings with Congressional members

1:00pm - 5:00pm - Reserved for Capitol Hill meetings wth Congressional members

Student organizers have arranged screenings for Living for 32 on April 16, at colleges coast-to-coast including: George Washington University, Brown University, Colorado State University at Boulder, Ithaca College, New York University, Northwestern University, Princeton University, Rice University, Skidmore College, State University of New York (SUNY) Binghamton, SUNY New Paltz, Tulane University, University of Arizona Tucson, University of Kentucky, University of Maryland - Baltimore County and the University of Maryland’s main campus at College Park, Maryland.
Click here for more information.

###

The Brady Campaign, with its dedicated network of Million Mom March Chapters, is the nation's largest, non-partisan, grassroots organization leading the fight to prevent gun violence. The Brady Campaign works to enact and enforce sensible gun laws, regulations and public policies to create an America free from gun violence, where all Americans are safe at home, at school, at work, and in our communities.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence is a national non-profit organization working to reduce the tragic toll of gun violence through education, research, and legal advocacy.

Dan Gross is the President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the Brady Center. A photo and more information about Dan Gross is available here.

For more insight on gun violence prevention, follow The Brady Blog, Facebook Page and Twitter Account."

VISIT OUR OTHER BLOG:

secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com

Obama Campaign Twists The Truth In Latest Campaign Video...And Is Busted

Obama Campaign Twists The Truth In Latest Campaign Video...And Is Busted

Here are the latest Campaign distortions in a video made against Mitt Romney by the Obama campaign that is hitting email in boxes now. 


The video is very deceptive. For example, when Romney accuses Obama of Apologizing for America in the video, Obama is immediately seen in the video in response saying, "We will not apologize for our way of life..." But this was said in January 20, 2009, before Obama ever set one foot into the Oval Office and began his Apology Tour. This video was released yesterday. What a misleading outrage. Just one of many put forth. How stupid do they think people are? I guess the question answers itself. We will see in November.  


Ironically, the email that solicits three dollar donations states, "You'll help the Truth Team -- a grassroots-driven operation that that's setting the record straight door-to-door, on the phones, and online... After reading the email, and viewing the video, the most ironic statement in it is, "make sure Romney is held accountable whenever he leaves the facts behind...


Maybe they should have run this video through their "Truth team, before posting the video.  


Here's the email.


xxx


"Friend --


You need to see for yourself the baseless attacks we'll be facing from here on out.


In his mission to defeat President Obama, Mitt Romney will stop at nothing -- certainly not the truth.


Watch this video, then fight back with a donation of $3 or more.


Backed by his special-interest fundraising machine, and now helping raise money for the Republican National Committee, Romney will spare no expense to attack the President and tear down our progress.


This campaign is backed by you, and we need to hit back every single time they lie about the President's record.


Watch our new video and help make sure the facts -- not the smears -- win out in November:


https://donate.barackobama.com/Romney-Distortions


Thanks, and as always, stay tuned.


Stephanie


Stephanie Cutter
Deputy Campaign Manager
Obama for America"


P.S. -- By pitching in what you can today, you'll help the Truth Team -- a grassroots-driven operation that that's setting the record straight door-to-door, on the phones, and online -- do its job, and make sure Romney is held accountable whenever he leaves the facts behind."


xxx

Video One



Video Two


VISIT OUR OTHER BLOG
secondamendmentfreedom.blogspot.com

Anti Gun Rights Groups Held At Bay In Court's "Assault Weapons" Decision