• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

FBI to George Zimmerman: "We don't have to give you our files"

JackFrost

JackFrost

Banned
Joined
Jul 12, 2012
Messages
3,471
Reaction score
513
Location
El Monte, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Bad news for team Zimmerman:(

FBI George Zimmerman: FBI to George Zimmerman: We don't have to give you our file - OrlandoSentinel.com

Lawyers for the FBI say the federal agency should not give George Zimmerman's lawyers all the evidence from its case file, even though a Sanford judge has ordered it.

The U.S. Department of Justice filed paperwork Monday, arguing that federal regulations trump a state court judge's ruling. It's asking that judge, Debra S. Nelson, to undo her Feb. 5 order.

"This court has 'no power or authority' … to compel the FBI to produce the documents at issue here," wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean P. Flynn.

In her order, Nelson agreed with a defense request and ordered the FBI to open its case file to Zimmerman's attorneys.

Zimmerman is the 29-year-old former Neighborhood Watch volunteer charged with second-degree murder for shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old, one year ago in Sanford.
 
Last edited:
The FBI is in the wrong here (if indeed the documents requested are pertinent to the case).
 
JackFrost said:
Seems legit to me:

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press... on Amended Demand for Specific Discovery.pdf

The defense has not made a proper request in conformance with Federal Regulations. Counsel for the defense has yet to meet their obligations in this regard.
Click to expand...

Yet, a judge ordered the FBI to surrender its documents to the defense. Which means that the FBI is trying to hide behind some meaningless procedures to not present evidence. They are either working because of political command or in the political interest.
 
Rainman05 said:
Yet, a judge ordered the FBI to surrender its documents to the defense. Which means that the FBI is trying to hide behind some meaningless procedures to not present evidence. They are either working because of political command or in the political interest.
Click to expand...

Lord knows the FBI has never done this sort of thing before, right? :mrgreen:
 
clownboy said:
The FBI is in the wrong here (if indeed the documents requested are pertinent to the case).
Click to expand...
the state court cannot direct the federal government's actions
 
It's actually good news. The FBI WILL be compelled to release that information, and the jurors will also know the obama-gubment has made it near impossible for GZ to get a fair trial. GZ can also use this for fudn raising efforts. The writing on the wall for some time now has been that GZ was being racially railroaded. More people will donate the more absurd the prejudice becomes apparent.

Simon W. Moon said:
What steps have you taken to rule out which other possibilities?
Click to expand...

Do you have some to offer him?
 
justabubba said:
the state court cannot direct the federal government's actions
Click to expand...

You're correct of course, and it's a real **** you from the feds to the states. They can't even goto a district court to get relief now because the case is currently before a state court. So the feds can easily frustrate justice.
 
Makes one wonder why they don't want to give the defense those papers....
 
My guess: the feds want to hold something back to use against him federally in case he's found not guilty.
 
If the files are not being used in Zimms prosecution there is no reason the Feds should disclose and there should be no need. Isn't that the law? Not that sure though.
 
clownboy said:
My guess: the feds want to hold something back to use against him federally in case he's found not guilty.
Click to expand...

Not sure if they are legally able to do that since they are legally obligated to press charges the moment that have proof of a criminal act. I could be mistaken though.....But if they can and this is the case...that seems wrong to me. Seems like it would be a violation of the intent of the double jeapordy clause...even if it may not technically be a violation.
 
Slateriesling said:
If the files are not being used in Zimms prosecution there is no reason the Feds should disclose and there should be no need. Isn't that the law? Not that sure though.
Click to expand...

Actually the prosecution is mandated by law to disclose ALL of its evidence and files to the defense where as the defense does not have to disclose anything at all. Of course in this case its the federal government and not the prosecution but it seems to me that anything that pertains the case should be disclosed to the defense regardless of its source. LEO's be they state or federal should be neutral period. If they are with holding evidence then it seems to me that they are not neutral. In which case...not to sound extreme or anything but...we (normal citizens) are ****ed.
 
justabubba said:
the state court cannot direct the federal government's actions
Click to expand...

Thank you, just going to borrow your quote to clear up some conspiracy theories/political agenda stuff on here:lol:

Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution is known as the Supremacy Clause because it provides that the "Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land." It means that the federal government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power.
Click to expand...

Judge Nelson can NOT order the FBI to hand over any files, per the Constitution of the United States of America. There is no ulterior motive, just procedural errors on the part of Judge Nelson and O'Mara being his incompetent self. Per the FBI's legal doc I linked, they are working with the defense, but have not met the requirements to get the files.

Now to me, this shows once again Mark O'Mara is coming up short as counsel. Believe me or not, I WANT Zimmerman to be properly represented by competent counsel. I just don't see that in O'Mara. I want this to be determined by evidence, no excuses.
 
JackFrost said:
Thank you, just going to borrow your quote to clear up some conspiracy theories/political agenda stuff on here:lol:



Judge Nelson can NOT order the FBI to hand over any files, per the Constitution of the United States of America. There is no ulterior motive, just procedural errors on the part of Judge Nelson and O'Mara being his incompetent self. Per the FBI's legal doc I linked, they are working with the defense, but have not met the requirements to get the files.

Now to me, this shows once again Mark O'Mara is coming up short as counsel. Believe me or not, I WANT Zimmerman to be properly represented by competent counsel. I just don't see that in O'Mara. I want this to be determined by evidence, no excuses.
Click to expand...


How does the judge's order interfere with any enumerate constitutional power the FBI was carrying out? Note, you have to show an actual contradiction between the two. If this were in federal court the judge there could make the same order and the FBi would have to comply, no questions asked, so you would be hard pressed to point out how there is a contradiction at the state versus federal level.
 
JackFrost said:
Zimmerman is the 29-year-old former Neighborhood Watch volunteer charged with second-degree murder for shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old, one year ago in Sanford.[/I]
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything?

Zim is the 29 year old former League Bowler and Webelos...
 
vendur said:
Do you have some to offer him?
Click to expand...
Me personally, no. But the FBI does.
They mention their reasons in the paperwork they filed which has been linked to in this thread. Post #3 iirc.

:shrug:
 
Kal'Stang said:
Makes one wonder why they don't want to give the defense those papers....
Click to expand...
I did wonder, That's why I read the document that the FBI replied with. It's actually much more boring and mundane than the conspiracy theories. But that's the fun of conspiracy theories--they're exciting.
 
vendur said:
How does the judge's order interfere with any enumerate constitutional power the FBI was carrying out? Note, you have to show an actual contradiction between the two. If this were in federal court the judge there could make the same order and the FBi would have to comply, no questions asked, so you would be hard pressed to point out how there is a contradiction at the state versus federal level.
Click to expand...

Really? In all of our history, you don't think something like this has come up before?

State law is invalid when it conflicts with a federal statute or regulatory framework. Ever hear of cases like Florida Lime and Avacado Growers, Inc vs Paul; Mayo vs United States; Boron Oil Company vs Downie?

General prohibition of production or disclosure in Federal and State proceedings in which the United States is not a party.
(a) In any federal or state case or matter in which the United States is not a party, no employee or former employee of the Department of Justice shall, in response to a demand, produce any material contained in the files of the Department, or disclose any information relating to or based upon material contained in the files of the Department, or disclose any information or produce any material acquired as part of the performance of that person's official duties or because of that person's official status without prior approval of the proper Department official in accordance with §§ 16.24 and 16.25 of this part.
(b) Whenever a demand is made upon an employee or former employee as described in paragraph (a) of this section, the employee shall immediately notify the U.S. Attorney for the district where the issuing authority is located. The responsible United States Attorney shall follow procedures set forth in § 16.24 of this part.
(c) If oral testimony is sought by a demand in any case or matter in which the United States is not a party, an affidavit, or, if that is not feasible, a statement by the party seeking the testimony or by his attorney, setting forth a summary of the testimony sought and its relevance to the proceeding, must be furnished to the responsible U.S. Attorney. Any authorization for testimony by a present or former employee of the Department shall be limited to the scope of the demand as summarized in such statement.
(d) When information other than oral testimony is sought by a demand, the responsible U.S. Attorney shall request a summary of the information sought and its relevance to the proceeding.

General prohibition of production or disclosure in Federal and State proceedings in which the United States is not a party.

Also, non-party subpoena and orders are subject to sovereign immunity UNLESS waived by congress as seen in Louisiana vs Sparks; and Sharon Lease Oil Co. vs FERC. States lack power to compel Federal agencies or employees to produce government records or other evidence.
 
There's absolutely no way that it could actually be banal red tape & bureaucrat bull**** that caused a govt agency to act the way it did. That never happens and is unlikely as all get out. Much more likely is that there is a wide flung conspiracy to get some nobody in Florida. Totally has to be the case. There's no other possible possibility.


or not idk w/e



roflmao
 
JackFrost said:
Copy/paste from the Orlando Sentinel. Ask them:lol:
Click to expand...

Yet you post this mindless crap because you can't think for yourself...

Z was on his way to the grocery store. Z was NOT patrolling the area or acting on behalf of the neighborhood watch that night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom