Feds Officially Seize Zimmerman Evidence, Gun Included

George Zimmerman's KelTec PF-9 courtesy nbcnews.com

It looks like things are escalating a bit in the possibly forthcoming federal Zimmerman trial. While the local cops had previously simply been asked to hold onto the evidence while the Department of Justice looked into federal charges, now it appears that the DOJ has actually physically taken possession of the evidence themselves. Which means that if Zimmerman wants his gun back, he’s going to need Eric Holder to release it to him instead of the local cops. From CNN . . .

Florida authorities have delivered all evidence related to the George Zimmerman investigation to federal officials, who are weighing whether to pursue a civil rights case.

The Sanford Police Department said it turned over all evidence, including a gun, to the Department of Justice on Monday.

Does this mean that the DOJ is moving forward with charges? Or that they’re continuing with their fishing expedition to see if they can find any scrap of evidence to support a charge? Naturally, the CNN article mentions the numerous race-related organizations calling for Zimmerman’s head on a platter, but no mention of the support from the ACLU against federal prosecution.

comments

  1. avatar Mlopilato says:

    I never thought I would stop hating the ACLU. If they keep this up, they’ll be like the NRA-ILA Jr.

    1. avatar William Burke says:

      The ACLU has been steadfast in support of most of our constitutional guarantees. SOMETIMES, when it suits their purposes. Except for the Second Amendment. Always.

      They’re NOT entirely bad. Just a lot of the time. Should the baby be thrown out with the bath water? Not necessarily. They just badly need a change of direction. How can we change this? By joining the ACLU.

      This is not just my advice to you. It’s also my advice to MYSELF.

      1. avatar Brian says:

        Come over to the dark side. The state level ACLU chapters are often better than the national on a lot of issues, and the best way to make the ACLU more gun friendly is for gun friendly people to join. It gives you a voice and a vote and a stick to use by threatening to withhold contributions.

        1. avatar Blue says:

          I just got after the ACLU for backing this witch hunt and lynch mob. I asked them if they were going for a Leo Franks style conviction. Since this is 2013, I thought it a good analogy.

      2. It might be better to have a countervailing organization. Similar to how Gottlieb and Gura got the NRA to take a more litigious, proactive stance about challenging gun control, some competition for donors’ dollars might help the ACLU stop counting 1, 3, 4, 5…

        1. avatar Brian says:

          If you can come up with an organization that is as good or better than the ACLU on the 1st, 4th, 5th, … and good on the 2nd I want in, but unfortunately I am not aware of one.

      3. avatar Gtfoxy says:

        Noble concept Burke.

        Activism(or Axetivism as I would call it) to take out the dead wood from within.

        Imagime every member of the NRA/GOA &a few others joining at I once… now there’s a thought.

        I could only imagine the coruption & resistance to change that could concievably be encountered.

        1. avatar Brian says:

          Well, the other danger is that in making the ACLU better on the 2nd it would also be made worse on the others.

          Not sure it would profit us to have another good gun group but lose a group that is good in 1, 4, 5, 6 etc.

      4. avatar Max says:

        I’m a member of the ACLU and I constantly email them reminding them I’m a gun owner. Never heard back, but it can’t hurt. They do good work on 1A, 4A, but they can’t count to 10 properly. I love to remind them that my gay friends own guns. Shocking(not really)

      5. avatar int19h says:

        ACLU is upfront about their Second Amendment stance: they don’t consider it an individual human right.

        You and me may disagree, but it doesn’t automatically make an organization bad. So far as I know, they haven’t actually ever been involved in any anti-2A activity, they just didn’t support it. So basically they are neutral on this issue.

        Which is perfectly fine. It’s not like NRA is a staunch defender of 1A or 4A, either.

        So if you care about all your liberties, you really should support ACLU. And NRA (or better yet, SAF). And EFF, who take care of online censorship and surveillance. It’s unfortunate that we don’t have a single organization that would cover all this ground, but we’re fortunate that we do have enough organizations that, between themselves, do cover it – and they do work together on common ground.

    2. avatar Gov. William J. Le Petomane says:

      I think there’s an analogy about a broken clock that explains this phenomenon.

    3. avatar Chris says:

      What sucks about the ACLU is they do an AWESOME job promoting and supporting the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments but when it comes to the Second and Tenth Amendments, which are arguably the most important, the ACLU is a huge disappointment.

      Prior to the Heller decision, the official position of the ACLU regarding the Second Amendment was that it protected a “collective” right (whatever the hell that means). After Heller, there was some evidence to suggest that the ACLU would become more accepting of the Second Amendment but that obviously never happened.

      The Tenth Amendment, if enforced, would pretty much end the federal government’s regulation of firearms (along with other federally-initiated silliness), is persona non grata on the ACLU website.

      1. avatar Brian says:

        What is odd about the ACLU is that some state level orgs have different positions from the federal org, and the 2nd is one of those areas where that happens. Like every other organization the members who show up, vote, and write the checks are the ones who matter, so if you otherwise like most of what the ACLU does it might be worth joining and working to move them to the side of truth and light re the 2nd. Also, great opportunity to provide an example of a thoughtful, intelligent pro-gun guy to people who (probably because of their own echo chamber) don’t see that too often.

      2. avatar int19h says:

        The important thing about ACLU is that they don’t push their take on 2A and 10A on anyone else. They won’t defend it for you (but that’s what NRA/SAF/GOA/… is for), but they won’t attack it, either. Just consider them a limited scope organization that excludes 2A from its scope, just as NRA is a limited scope organization that excludes everything other than 2A.

  2. avatar William Burke says:

    What does “seized” mean? They already SEIZED it. You mean they KEPT it.

    1. avatar Doug says:

      No, the feds didn’t have it, the state did.

  3. avatar Pulatso says:

    If Gov Scott was half the “tea party conservative” he made himself out to be in his campaign, he’d be fighting this.

    1. avatar Brian says:

      There isn’t much to fight. Until the separate sovereign doctrine gets stuck down the Feds have the option of investigating people for possible violations of federal laws that arise from the same transaction as a possible state crime, even if the suspect was acquitted of the state crime. The state isn’t really a participant.

      Zimmerman could try and fight it by seeking some sort of injunction based on double jeopardy but that would require SCOTUS overturning current precedent. (though just such a case is seeking cert before the court now)

      1. avatar Blue says:

        Too bad it wasn’t 1 of 6 sheriffs in Florida that had it. The would have informed Eric “Brainwash Americans Against Guns” Holder that the property had already been returned to its legal owner. P.S. Pound Sand.

  4. avatar MojoRonin says:

    Transferred from state/county custody now to federal

  5. avatar J says:

    …”Does this mean that the DOJ is moving forward with charges? Or that they’re continuing with their fishing expedition to see if they can find any scrap of evidence to support a charge?…”

    Think of it in terms of how they “found” trace amounts of “agent 15” in Syria; allowing the messiah to bring his gun running Libya>Syria out of the closet.

    When you can’t find evidence; plant it.

    1. avatar mark_anthony_78 says:

      Stupid thing is, there’s no dispute that this was the gun used in the incident.

      How does this physical gun prove anything as far as civil rights violations?

      Are they going to ask the gun how George was feeling that night?

      1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

        I think they automatically just hold all evidence, regardless of whether it’s in dispute or not, until the suspect has been cleared completely. As GZ already has been. No, another round of theater to placate the rabid mob that wants to lynch GZ.

        1. avatar J says:

          Bingo; this is theater at its worst. I think they are counting on outlasting the dopes in the streets because if this were to be resolved in the “wrong” way, I expect there would either be an actual lynching or bloody streets.

          One thing for sure, the “protestors/rally attendees/prayer participants” are seeking blood not just recompense. They have chosen their narrative and they are prepared to live by it or make someone pay.

          But I also think Holder/BO and company see this as an opportunity to “right past wrongs”.

        2. avatar neiowa says:

          Zimmerman WAS cleared. This demonstrates that the locals don’t have the stones to stand up to out of control thug Feds.

          Correct response for local Police Chief. “Sorry Mr Holder, I don’t work for you and I’ve already returned Mr. Zimmerman’s firearm to him. Now as murder is not a Federal issue FOAD”

  6. avatar Douglas Mason says:

    Wait… the gun is black… doesn’t that prove he isn’t a racist?

  7. avatar BillF says:

    I don’t know what they could possibly find on the gun that hasn’t already been found, especially after dozens of nosepickers have handled it since Zimmerman. Holder probably already has a buyer–in Mexico.

    1. avatar Douglas Mason says:

      I don’t know what they could possibly find on the gun that would indicate he is a racist.

    2. avatar pyratemime says:

      Ahhh, but this is “one more gun off the streets” and therefore lives will be saved.

      /sarc

  8. avatar tangledthorns says:

    I’m certain if Romney was president that’d we be seeing violent riots last week. That being said Holder still runs the DOJ and it wouldn’t surprise me if they if try to go after Zimmerman on the smallest charge possible.

  9. avatar jwm says:

    As we all know I’m not a big fan of GZ. I think he and TM were way to stupid to survive but one of them managed it. But it’s time to move on. The court said he was a free man. So be it. This fishing expedition to prove a racial motivation is just dumb. The FBI already cleared that up before the trial.

    At what point does it stop being a search for justice and just becomes a petty hunt for revenge?

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      A long time ago.

    2. avatar SAS 2008 says:

      We are long past that point. It became a witch hunt the second they decided to consider civil rights charges after Zimmerman was already investigated by the FBI.

    3. avatar pyratemime says:

      Somewhere between 10 days and 18 months ago.

    4. avatar J says:

      That’s all the “protestors” are looking for; blood. Verdicts, facts and evidence be damned.

  10. avatar Matt in FL says:

    The process is the punishment.

  11. avatar Mike says:

    Look for the phrase “Death to Ni**ers” to magically appear engraved on the gun

  12. avatar Jack says:

    If only Zimmerman hadn’t used the racial slur “cracker,” he wouldn’t be in this mess. Or something like that.

    1. avatar DonS says:

      Where “or something like that” means “if only Martin hadn’t used the racial slur ‘cracker'”.

    2. avatar Blue says:

      Creepy Ass Cracker was TM’s line.

    3. avatar Ropingdown says:

      Clearly Jack is joking. Nobody on the “feds should charge him” side cares about evidence, so why transfer it. “We don’t need no stinkin’ evidence,” as they say.

      1. avatar Jack says:

        Yep, I was joking. Only one of them is on record as having used a racial slur, and it wasn’t Zimmerman.

  13. avatar KCK says:

    Politically, they have to go through the motions of looking into it, knowing they don’t have a case.
    Ruh roh!
    That was Angela Corey’s story wasn’t it?

    1. avatar neiowa says:

      Probably have to complete the New Black Panther voter intimidation investigation before they get to Zimmerman though.

      1. avatar Blue says:

        That New Black Pansy case was dismissed by Eric.

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

      She was indicted by a “citizens’ grand jury” which means as much as “poll of the guys at the poker table last night” or “consensus of the ladies at the quilting bee.”

      In other words, it means absolutely nothing, but it drives pageviews to every site that publishes the story, because another wave of people who don’t know any better post it on their Facebook and forward it to everyone they know.

      I do not mean offense against you, but now you know, so you can educate others that you care about, so they don’t look silly.

    2. avatar Brian says:

      I don’t think that “indictment” is in any way legally meaningful.

    3. avatar pwrserge says:

      If only she was indicted by an actual grand jury with actual legal authority… A citizen’s grand jury has no legal standing.

  14. avatar G.R. Mead says:

    I know it is quaint and old-fashioned to ask — but :

    1) Has a warrant issued to seize this citizen’s property ?

    2) Has any magistrate found probable cause to believe he has committed any federal crime?

    Yes, …. I know.

    But, still….

    1. avatar Blue says:

      That is a good point. That is exactly why one of the 6 sheriffs I mentioned would have told them to pound sand.

  15. avatar S&W Fan says:

    “Which means that if Zimmerman wants his gun back, he’s going to need Eric Holder to release it to him instead of the local cops.”

    So all he has to do is cross the border into Mexico to get it back then?

    1. avatar Matt in FL says:

  16. avatar NCG says:

    I’m firmly in the “GZ is a d1ckhead” camp, but the trial was thorough and certainly public. Not like some secret tribunal. DOJ Civil Rights actions should be targeted at systematic abuses (voter intimidation, police abuses, etc., etc.), or terrorist groups like the KKK, which Southern states notoriously refused to pursue. The DOJ should only step in when states are violating people’s rights, or looking the other way as those rights are systematically violated. Even if GZ was covered in White Power tattoos (white-ish power?), he’s just one guy. Don’t make it a Federal case. It doesn’t even really make political sense to make more of a martyr of the guy.

    Meanwhile, Obama is still pushing serial civil rights abuser and Bloomberg cronie Ray Kelly to head DHS.

    1. avatar Stinkeye says:

      “It doesn’t even really make political sense to make more of a martyr of the guy.”

      Nope, but it makes a lot of political sense to keep the press salivating over this case instead of, you know, doing their jobs and investigating the numerous scandals dogging various departments in this administration.

      Unfortunately, we’re all playing into that, too. The more attention these stories on Zimmerman get, the more stories they’ll run. Only when it’s obvious the public is bored with it and not paying attention any more will they stop beating this particular dead horse.

    2. avatar neiowa says:

      Can you point out “civil rights” in the Constitution for us?

      1. avatar Brian says:

        Towards the back, listed under Amendments, generally 1-8 and then 13-15.

      2. avatar NCG says:

        Take away the “civil” and just look for “right.” You might find a little something.

    3. avatar tdiinva says:

      Why don’t you ask the homeless man who Zimmerman got justice for if he’s a dickhead?

      Better still why don’t ask the people he pulled out that car wreck if he’s dickhead?

      I know a dickhead when I see one.

      1. avatar NCG says:

        Or ask the ex-girlfriend or the cop he allegedly assaulted.

        Look, I don’t think he’s the worst guy in the world by a long shot, nor do I think he’s some sort of racist murderer. I’m glad he helped the people in the car crash, though I’d like to think any of us would have done that. Obviously I don’t know the guy personally.

        I do think he’s the kind of guy that seeks conflict when he doesn’t have to, which is sort of my definition of a D.H.

        Mostly I’m just ready for this story to go away now.

        1. avatar Pablo says:

          Ah, so he’s “allegedly” a dickhead. And yet no court can find him guilty of any alleged action.

        2. avatar int19h says:

          It’s not illegal to be a dickhead in the USA. So, yes, you can be a dickhead, and the court will nevertheless not find you guilty of anything.

          (I don’t think we have enough information about the Zimmerman case to conclude either way, though. It all hinges on his motivation of following Martin, which only he himself knows.)

        3. avatar Matt in FL says:

          They did ask the ex-girlfriend. The restraining order she had against him was matched by the one he had against her. They were both later dropped. When the FBI asked her about him as part of their “civil rights” investigation, she didn’t have anything bad to say.

          The cop he allegedly assaulted was an undercover cop who dragged his underage-appearing friend out of a bar (supposedly without identifying himself as law enforcement). The alleged assault was GZ grabbing the cop by the shoulder and saying something like, “Hey, what the hell are you doing?” much like you’d do to any random guy that tried to drag your friend out of a bar. The felony assault charges were immediately dropped to a misdemeanor, and then dismissed entirely when GZ went to some sort of pretrial anger management class. Given that assaults on police officers are usually processed to the fullest extent, and then some, the fact that this went away so completely and so quickly tells me that there is really nothing there to hang an argument on.

        4. avatar NCG says:

          Again, I’ve got my opinion, I may be wrong. I guess the broader point is that both sides are painting elaborate pictures of what happened. Only GZ really knows, so we can believe he told the whole truth or not.

          TM had never been convicted of a crime, either. We should examine our criteria for who’s a “thug.” If TM had been arrested for the things GZ was, most people here would count it firmly against him.

    4. avatar Blue says:

      It would be kind of risky for a Jew/Peruvian guy to go hang out with skin head Nazis and KKK unless he wanted to end up like Leo Franks.

  17. avatar Chris says:

    Didn’t the feds investigate Zimmerman last year and find that race had nothing to do with the shooting?

    1. avatar Brian says:

      Yes, and that fact will make a prosecution embarrassing and difficult. I think this is a combination of thorough police work to ensure proper chain of custody for the evidence just in case and a fair amount of theater to placate those portions of the base that are looking for a federal trial.

  18. avatar Ralph says:

    The feds intend to give Zimmerman a fair trial, followed by a first class hanging.

  19. avatar Cameron S. says:

    MSM, Holder and Obama can all take a perpendicular walk on the Golden Gate as far as I’m concerned.

    This is race baiting and fueling to the highest degree. Ignorantly playing emotions and cards that never should have entered the trial in the beginning.

    Also, “White-Mexican”

    They have been more racist than Zimmerman could have possibly been.

  20. avatar tdiinva says:

    If this administration were rational they would move on but they place ideology over rationality. The prosecution’s star witness is now on record as saying she whipped up her drug addled boyfriend into a rage over the “queer rapist following him. You can bet that the video from the Piers Morgan interview will be placed in evidence as a defense exhibit. I wouldn’t be surprised if she ended up a [reluctant] witness for the defense. If she gets called by the prosecution she will have to explain her interview with Morgan. This case is even deader on arrival than the second degree murder charge. The only purpose a prosecution would serve is to rev up the base so they will come out in 2016 and that is exactly why the Justice Department will go ahead an prosecute him on civil rights charges. The trial will hit the media just in time for the election. The outcome doesn’t matter to Obama and Holder because it will energize the base. We live in a schizoid nation right now. The Federal Government is run by Juan Peron while other parts of the country still live in Constitutional Republic.

    I don’t know if Zimmerman has his passport but if he does he should tell Holder and Obama to pound sand and take extended vacation with his family in Peru. I wouldn’t be surprised if he couldn’t get a Peruvian passport based on his mother if the Feds have taken his passport away.

    1. avatar Michael B. says:

      I’m thinking Russia might be a safer bet, if they’d have him.

    2. avatar JT says:

      Don’t forget the video interview with Huffington Post where she said she thinks Martin took the first swing and that he had made it to the back porch of where he was staying but went to confront Zimmerman instead of going inside.

      She also implied that she was in fact his girlfriend. If so, then she is guilty of perjury.

  21. avatar aweds says:

    I guess Obama meant something else when he said, “… once the jury has spoken, that’s how our system works”.

  22. avatar The Original Brad says:

    The mob must be appeased!

    1. avatar Blue says:

      Barry works mobs. That is what this was about. It was an opportunity like any other crisis. When a big one don’t exist, create one.

    2. avatar jerry says:

      I firmly believe that is all this is Brad. Just drag this out long enough to appease the NAACP and self-hating white liberals like Chris Matthews and Joan Walsh before telling everyone no evidence exists to move forward with charges.

  23. avatar Mediocrates says:

    I am thinking Holder needs some new weapons to run to Mexico.

  24. avatar Southern Cross says:

    Can Zimmerman launch a counter case against Tavyon’s estate for denying his civil rights, along with the added emotional distress from Tavyon’s criminal actions (aggravated assault, etc)?

    1. avatar Pablo says:

      No. Martin’s estate isn’t violating his rights, the DOJ is. There should be a federal civil rights case, filed by Zimmerman as plaintiff.

  25. avatar Mark says:

    That’s ok. Now he can get a better firearm in a larger caliber.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email