<p>
Yep. I won’t continue to hijack this thread and will post eventually. It’s just a little on the specific side to post right now.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Trayvon</a> Martin Case: Police Wanted Warrant To Arrest George Zimmerman, Prosecutor Says](<a href=“Trayvon Martin Case: Police Wanted Warrant To Arrest George Zimmerman, Prosecutor Says | HuffPost Voices”>Trayvon Martin Case: Police Wanted Warrant To Arrest George Zimmerman, Prosecutor Says | HuffPost Voices)</p>
<p>If this is to be believed, then the governor told them “no”? I think that’s a big detail that there doesn’t seem to be much coverage on so I’m not sure what to take away from it…</p>
<p>I am afraid that I need a translation of the quoted statement. Please?</p>
<p>The quoted statement does not make sense, and reading the original article didn’t help. I think that the two paragraphs are referring to different times. The first paragraph refers to the time of the shooting, when the police investigator considered the shooting manslaughter/homicide, but the state attorney did not agree to file charges. The case was closed, and nothing was happening, until the parents managed to get enough publicity that there was public outrage. Then the authorities took up the case again, scheduling a grand jury, but the governor appointed a special prosecutor, who is now working on the case. </p>
<p>The two paragraphs seem to be connected but aren’t, really.</p>
<p>thank you NYMom.</p>
<p>It was beginning to feel like an LSAT question.</p>
<p>In fact, even the answer, “the two paragraphs seem connected but are not,” seems like a comp. question.</p>
<p>If it turns out that there was political interference because Zs father was a judge, I think it’s going to go badly for those involved. This is one of those career destroyers.</p>
<p>The article was very poorly written. I’m sorry to hear that the LSAT questions sound like this!</p>
<p>Joe Oliver is looking stranger and stranger:</p>
<p>[msnbc.com</a> Video Player](<a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/46877639#46881197]msnbc.com”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/46877639#46881197)</p>
<p>I don’t think LSAT questions are like this. Just the answers. </p>
<p>At any rate, everyone involved in this probably really wishes they’d arrested Mr. Z and investigated.</p>
<p>The stand and defend law is maybe too ambiguous, imho.</p>
<p>I think everyone who shoots someone needs to be investigated, end of story. For the protection of all of us and for the protection of an innocent shooter, as well. Is “innocent” the right word for a shooter? Probably in some cases. yes.</p>
<p>Yes, the article was very poorly written. It’s why I tried to seek out other sources but haven’t found much yet. That’s why I was very confused. The article would make so much more sense if that one quote wasn’t in there.</p>
<p>So Joe Oliver is just a publicity-seeker. OK.</p>
<p>Thanks for explaining. I take back my negative comment about the police and transfer it to the so far nameless states atty.</p>
<p>What are we to make about the Fla Gov’s special prosecutor appt vrs. the grand jury? Is this common?</p>
<p>Well, what if it goes to a grand jury and gets no-billed (not indicted)? Would that be accepted? Spec. prosecutor (1) makes the Gov. look like he is “active” and (2) may be more likely to result in an indictment. </p>
<p>After Casey Anthony, how much is this going to cost the State of Florida?</p>
<p>NYMomof2…</p>
<p>Ah hah!!! I didn’t see the Laurence O’Donnell interview, but I had suspicions that Joe Oliver was either a fraud or an oddball. And when I read that he apparently runs his own consulting business, I thought of an old canard that we applied to a goofball who “testified” at the Thomas-Hill Hearing; consultant = currently unemployed.</p>
<p>A good flack can sound very credible and certain, but anyone who believes Zimmerman based on Joe Oliver’s pronouncements needs to watch Lawrence O’Donnell from last night. For reasons that become more and more murky, Oliver has inserted himself into this story based on little more than a “gut instinct” about Zimmerman, whom he doesn’t actually know very well, as it turns out. O’Donnell and his guests did a good job of exposing the fact that there isn’t much there there.</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/joe-oliver-not-a-close-friend-of-george-zimmerman/2012/03/28/gIQAFayGgS_blog.html]Joe”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/joe-oliver-not-a-close-friend-of-george-zimmerman/2012/03/28/gIQAFayGgS_blog.html]Joe</a> Oliver not a “close friend” of George Zimmerman <a href=“video%20at%20the%20end”>/url</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They’ll be “wrong.” Remember the public has already convicted the guy. He’s racist, he’s violent, and he is completely wrong.</p>
<p>Lake Washington, Oliver is saying that he was working for the same company that Zimmerman works for, but he had to take a leave because of concerns about his speaking out on Z’s behalf - vague statements about threats and problems with clients. So his story is that he gave up his job to travel around giving interviews about his “gut feeling” about Z. He also says that he tried to get in touch with Z, finally contacted him through his lawyer, to offer his services, because he was experienced being on the air. Sounds like a PR person, but he claims that he is not being paid.</p>
<p>I’m glad that O’Donnell and the journalists unmasked this guy, but I found some parts of the interview hard to watch. I hate it when interviewers drown out interviewees, interrupting and speaking over them. It would have been better to let the guy answer the questions. He hung himself eventually.</p>
<p>“Well, what if it goes to a grand jury and gets no-billed (not indicted)? Would that be accepted?”</p>
<p>“They’ll be “wrong.” Remember the public has already convicted the guy. He’s racist, he’s violent, and he is completely wrong.”</p>
<p>SO True. If the posters here were in charge - Zimmerman would be hanged tonight.</p>
<p>^^ Not true; all anyone is asking for is justice. This case was dead until the public outcry forced the FL authorities to do what should have been done immediately after the shooting.</p>
<p>I’m no particular fan of that self-important blowhard Lawrence O’Donnell, but I did watch the Joe Oliver interview and clearly Zimmerman’s friend Joe Oliver has nothing worthwhile or exculpatory to contribute to this conversation. His testimony, if we can call it that, is that he has a “gut feeling” that Zimmerman is innocent. He hasn’t seen Zimmerman since the shooting, and only talked to him on the phone last week.</p>
<p>
LOL , I LOVE that expression!! Too funny. Can I steal it??</p>
<p>I find Lawrence O’Donnell pompous and insufferable, but I watch him sometimes because he is one of the smartest people on TV, and he has a lot of knowledge and insight about the workings of the federal government because of his experience as legislative aide to DP Moynihan.</p>