Trayvon

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

In RI had the same situation occurred the shooter would have probably been detained and charged with at least manslaughter. They would still be presumed innocent mind you.

-spence

Don't know about RI, but in most states criminal charges are filed by prosecutors (not police) after thorough investigation reveals enough evidence to win the case at trial. Also, in most cases, there is a short time period that a defendant can be held or released if no charge is made. So it is prudent to not arrest a person too quickly if not enough evidence has been revealed. It's better, in serious crimes, to get your ducks in a row. If you charge someone with a crime, that begins the criminal process which can include a grand jury or prelliminary hearing and that quickly leads to a trial. If you postpone the arrest and charges, you have more time to gather enough evidence to be successful at trial.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

If you charge someone with a crime, that begins the criminal process which can include a grand jury or prelliminary hearing and that quickly leads to a trial. If you postpone the arrest and charges, you have more time to gather enough evidence to be successful at trial.

Agree, and that is a good enough reason to delay an arrest. However, I think the problem with the whole story is that I believe the family wasn't explained that and enough kept informed of what was going on in the investigation. I haven't seen the police come out and say those things. Thus, the family and public seem to think the investigation was screwed up. The police should have taken blood/alchohol tests of Zimmerman but didn't.

Also, it is my understanding that the way the law is written, once Zimmerman claimed self defense, the police had to prove it wasn't. The burden of proof may be different???