- ISIL creates all-female brigade to terrorize women into following Sharia law
- ISTOOK: Obama wants to be impeached
- Obama to Latin leaders: Help with border
- Military bans troops from Baptist church event honoring ‘God’s Rescue Squad’
- ‘Pocket drones’: U.S. Army developing tiny surveillance tools for the next big war
- Belgian cafe posts sign: Dogs allowed, but Jews stay out
- Gen. Dempsey: Pentagon studying Russian readiness plans not viewed ‘for 20 years’
- John McCain: Botched, two-hour execution of murderer is ‘torture’
- House GOP ready to move border bill
- Bomb squad called after live WWII artillery washes on Cape Cod beach
SHAPIRO: Why Justice has no case against Zimmerman
Proof of a racist motive is missing
Question of the Day
Under federal law, the Justice Department has the power to prosecute criminal acts of violence motivated by racial hatred, but considering the “elements” that the U.S. government must prove to have federal jurisdiction or secure a conviction, it is highly unlikely they will ever have a viable case, even under civil rights statutes.
Federal criminal civil rights prosecution of private citizens such as George Zimmerman is extremely rare and federal jurisdiction in a state case is very hard to prove. In cases where a defendant has already been prosecuted by a state law enforcement agency, successive federal prosecution is almost unheard of, but it has happened.
Here are the Justice Department’s options:
Federal murder and manslaughter statutes exist under Title 18 of the U.S. Code, Section 1111 and Section 1112, respectively, and despite Mr. Zimmerman’s acquittal in the state of Florida, the “separate sovereign” doctrine would not necessarily prevent the United States from re-prosecuting someone already convicted of a state crime even under the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.
However, the Justice Department would probably lack federal jurisdiction for those substantive crimes since the killing occurred within a state territory, not a federal property. It did not occur within U.S. maritime waters or on an Indian reservation and did not involve an enemy combatant. In short, there was no federal territorial jurisdiction.
In the past, officials have used Section 242 to prosecute individuals acting under color of law, meaning someone with government authority such as a police officer. Mr. Zimmerman did not work for the government, so this statute would not apply.
The Justice Department has also previously utilized Section 241 to prosecute private citizens who are not acting under color of law. However, this particular statute applies to “two or more persons who conspire to injure, threaten, oppress or intimidate any person of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution.”
Since Mr. Zimmerman acted alone, there is no conspiracy.
The only viable option the Justice Department may have is to prosecute Mr. Zimmerman under Section 249 — the recent hate crime legislation, which applies to individual private citizens, not just government officials acting under “color of law,” and no conspiracy with other individuals is required. The government can probably get federal jurisdiction under this statute because it permits such jurisdiction when “the defendant employs a firearm or other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce.”
Let’s re-examine the facts:
There was not a single piece of evidence introduced in the original state trial that demonstrated racial motivations on Mr. Zimmerman’s part, and the state of Florida did everything possible to prove the accused guilty.
There is, however, actual contrary evidence that Mr. Zimmerman was not acting out of racial prejudice. When Mr. Zimmerman first called the police dispatcher and was asked to describe Trayvon’s appearance, Mr. Zimmerman did not volunteer any information about Trayvon’s race; he simply described Trayvon’s clothing.
About the Author
Jeffrey Scott Shapiro is a nationally recognized investigative journalist and a former Washington, D.C., prosecutor. He is currently general counsel for MDB International, a D.C.-based international investigations firm, and a legal analyst for The Washington Times. He can be reached at email@example.com.
- SHAPIRO: Thomas Jefferson's Monticello welcomes naturalized immigrants on Fourth of July
- ANALYSIS: Benghazi prosecution faces legal rights minefield
- White House censors and slows release of information, agencies' workers say
- SHAPIRO: Supreme Court strikes down expanded abortion clinic buffer zone
- SHAPIRO: Supreme Court clamps down on Internet video streaming services
TWT Video Picks
By Mark Davis
The nation founders, the Lone Star State thrives
Get Breaking Alerts
- Rahm Emanuel: Send illegal immigrant shelter kids to Chicago
- Washington Times strikes content and marketing partnership with Redskins
- D.C. seeks stay in order striking down ban on handguns in public
- 'Pocket drones': U.S. Army developing tiny spies for the next big war
- CURL: Obama, staffers not even pretending any more
- DCCC raising money on suggestion Obama impeachment is imminent
- NAPOLITANO: What if our democracy is a fraud?
- Ohio university quiz implies atheists are naturally smarter than Christians
- ISTOOK: Obama wants to be impeached
- Federal judge rules D.C. ban on handguns in public is unconstitutional