Zimmerman's Medications

[ariesgodofwar]

Especially if LE was suspicious of his story...we had a John Doe who was shot after an apparent struggle. LE didnt know what had happened and whether it was a hit, kwim? Wouldnt someone have given GZ a tox to see if he was high, drunk etc?

What is SOP?

AFAIK, SOP is Investigative Detention, which will then ultimately likely determine if charges are filed and if further investigation is warranted. You cannot compel someone to take a Tox Screen without a warrant or charge, however, if you have someone in investigative detention whose story seems to mirror what the facts of the case appear to be, and they claim self-defense, you are not going to get a Judge to issue a Charge, without anything to justify the charging document that would be required to be submitted. so they have to be cut lose. You cannot charge someone who claims self-defense when you cannot prove that they were not defending themselves. That said, you might discover evidence a month later, and then charge the individual, and can take a tox screen at that time, but unless they appear under the influence and you can charge them on sight for "carrying a firearm under the influence" or whatever FL's firearm charge is that covers that.

Point being, you cannot initiate a tox screen without either voluntary consent, or reasonable suspicion of possession of a deadly weapon while intoxicated (think 4th Amendment here). An officer would not have one done typically if they do not see anything that is indicative or gives them suspicion that the individual might be under the influence.

 

[Sherbie]

Does anyone know whether it is SOP to run a tox screen when someone is actually arrested unless they appear to the officer to be intoxicated? Does it depend on what the charge is? Does the officer also have to have reasonable suspicion that the arrested person is intoxicated? I have no idea how that works.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

AFAIK, SOP is Investigative Detention, which will then ultimately likely determine if charges are filed and if further investigation is warranted. You cannot compel someone to take a Tox Screen without a warrant or charge, however, if you have someone in investigative detention whose story seems to mirror what the facts of the case appear to be, and they claim self-defense, you are not going to get a Judge to issue a Charge, without anything to justify the charging document that would be required to be submitted. so they have to be cut lose. You cannot charge someone who claims self-defense when you cannot prove that they were not defending themselves. That said, you might discover evidence a month later, and then charge the individual, and can take a tox screen at that time, but unless they appear under the influence and you can charge them on sight for "carrying a firearm under the influence" or whatever FL's firearm charge is that covers that.

Point being, you cannot initiate a tox screen without either voluntary consent, or reasonable suspicion of possession of a deadly weapon while intoxicated (think 4th Amendment here). An officer would not have one done typically if they do not see anything that is indicative or gives them suspicion that the individual might be under the influence.

They could have asked him to give a blood sample. He gave everything else freely. They heard the slurring of the words on the 911 tape, his inability to give directions in his own neighborhood and his poor judgement in following a person in the dark, in the rain he just acted all frantic about saying he had his hand in his waistband, suspicious and hurry and get an officer here.

 

[Sherbie]

I'm wondering, since Zimmerman was handcuffed and taken to the PD for custodial interrogation, whether the same rules that apply for a tox screen in the case of formal arrest would apply in his situation. If so, it might be easier for us to research and pin it down.

 

[Sensei]

I'm wondering, since Zimmerman was handcuffed and taken to the PD for custodial interrogation, whether the same rules that apply for a tox screen in the case of formal arrest would apply in his situation. If so, it might be easier for us to research and pin it down.

I might be wrong, but I believe that part of the contract between you and the state when you apply for a license to carry a gun is that in the event that you find yourself in the situation that GZ found himself in that night that they can and should immediately acertain whether or not you are under the influence of alcohol or any other type of drug legal or illegal....I would think that would be standard in any situation where a person is dead from a gunshot but then again, it may simply be too logical for some I guess since it was not done here. IMO JMHO and stuff.

 

[Sherbie]

I might be wrong, but I believe that part of the contract between you and the state when you apply for a license to carry a gun is that in the event that you find yourself in the situation that GZ found himself in that night that they can and should immediately acertain whether or not you are under the influence of alcohol or any other type of drug legal or illegal....I would think that would be standard in any situation where a person is dead from a gunshot but then again, it may simply be too logical for some I guess since it was not done here. IMO JMHO and stuff.

Thanks, Sensei. Do you happen to know whether the testing would be mandatory or whether it's done only when LE has a suspicion of intoxication?

 

[Sensei]

Thanks, Sensei. Do you happen to know whether the testing would be mandatory or whether it's done only when LE has a suspicion of intoxication?

IMO it should be mandatory, but in truth I honestly don't know if it actually is, but I am very certain that if you shoot someone, under any circumstances, and you are not law enforcement, then they can request and most likely even force a test to see if you are under the influence of any intoxicant...after all they can force a test if they suspect you are driving under the influence, I find it ludicrous to think that they could not force a test if there was a possibility however remote it may be that you shot someone while intoxicated. But once again that's my opinion and I have been wrong before, so it is JMHO and stuff.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

I saw no mention of Adderall in any of the documents. The other two listed in my first post are noted on the SFD report that was written by the EMT concerning Zimmerman.

IIRC, this was the 'note' the doctor wrote for GZ to be cleared to return to work, even as he listed himself as unemployed at the SPD....He claimed GZ was given adderall and Temazepam...for I was wondering the weight loss from GZ, could have been from the adderall...and wonder if he did stop his alcohol consumption...this is why SPD should have tested him that fateful night...

According to medical records obtained by the network, he also had a minor back injury. Zimmerman takes Temazepam, an insomnia medication, and Adderall — which is prescribed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or narcolepsy — “medications that can cause side effects such as agitation and mood swings, but in fewer than 10 percent of patients,” ABC reported.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/15/2801162/george-zimmerman-had-a-broken.html#storylink=cpy

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Watch the video of GZ's first court appearance.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmermans-first-court-appearance-16125248

IMO, he is having side effects from the Librax, "restless muscle movements in your eyes". He did it 7 times in that 2 minute video. I remember people commenting about it when the video was first viewed.

The no apparent reason appears to be because he was beating the bejeebus out of GZ.

IMO!

He had, in the Bond Hearing what I would call a herky jerky head. His reaction to people next to him at the table talking to him. His head was like one of the new light bulbs that take a moment before they turn on. I don't know how to describe it, but I noticed and thought it was unusual. 'Herky, jerky'.

I noticed those eye movement and head jerks from the arrignment...and I thought he was faking PTSD...maybe he didn't inform the jail doctor he was prescribed those meds, or they would have given him a dose...

Now I wonder if the defense will put on a diminished capacity defense given the drugs he allegedly was taking..for it appears the downside is the paranoia like symptoms and I believe GZ to be one paranoid dude...it still goes back to him, had he stayed in his vehicle TM would be alive and he wouldn' be facing murder charges...it's all on GZ and his need not to follow orders...

 

[RANCH]

IIRC, this was the 'note' the doctor wrote for GZ to be cleared to return to work, even as he listed himself as unemployed at the SPD....He claimed GZ was given adderall and Temazepam...for I was wondering the weight loss from GZ, could have been from the adderall...and wonder if he did stop his alcohol consumption...this is why SPD should have tested him that fateful night...




Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/15/2801162/george-zimmerman-had-a-broken.html#storylink=cpy

BBM
Are you saying that GZ was unemployed when he went to the doctor on 2/27? Link?

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

BBM
Are you saying that GZ was unemployed when he went to the doctor on 2/27? Link?

No, I'm sayin the initial police report has him listed as unemployed, you can find it in the documents thread....and IIRC during the bond hearing umemployment benefits were brought up with both GZ and his wife...

 

[SNOWINMEMPHIS]

Thanks, Sensei. Do you happen to know whether the testing would be mandatory or whether it's done only when LE has a suspicion of intoxication?

Having been a passenger in an 18 wheeler (with my ex-husband driving), and a very intoxicated driver pulling out in front of us, and subsequently being fatally wounded in the accident (18 wheeler vs. SUV), I can relate the following concerning drug/alcohol screens:
in the state of TN whenever there is a vehicle accident involving a fatality there is always drug and alcohol screening of all drivers.
[where a commercial vehicle is involved, such as an 18 wheeler, even the passenger is tested]
My ex and I were put in the back of a Highway Patrol car and driven to the Med where they took blood samples from both of us. Even though I did not and had never driven his 18 wheeler.
They told us that if either of us had any unprescribed meds or alcohol detected we would be arrested when the tests came back. We both knew we had nothing in our samples so we didn't worry.
[the SUV driver was unfortunately almost 3x the legal limit on alcohol.that didn't help my ex-husband feel any less remorse for being involved in a traffic fatality, and in fact he had to see a psychologist and take some time off work.Any normal person would feel that way!]

All of this just to say: if drivers involved in a motor vehicle accident involving a fatality are always screened, why wouldn't both people involved in a fatal shooting be screened? To do otherwise makes absolutely no sense to me.

jmo

 

[Reality Orlando]

In DUID cases, it does not matter if the driver is under the influence of a drug that is legal or illegal.

http://www.nocuffs.com/dui/duid/duid_case.php

it doesn't matter how high of a dose you have in your system, if you're pulled over and drug tested and you have vicoden or some other narcotic in your blood you'll be arrested. At least in Calif. Who knows in Florida though? They seem to have a whole different set of laws that are somewhat SHOCKING to say the least.

Of course Florida has laws against DUI including prescriptions.

"Florida's DUI law is officially called "Driving Under the Influence of Alcoholic Beverages, Chemical Substances, or Controlled Substances."

"Controlled Substances" means prescription drugs - and as far as a DUI charge goes, it makes no difference whether you have a prescription or not, and whether or not you took the prescribed dosage. If the controlled
substance has impaired your ability to drive, you can be convicted of DUI."

http://www.defense-florida.com/lawyer-attorney-1919950.html

 

[Littleone48]

Having been a passenger in an 18 wheeler (with my ex-husband driving), and a very intoxicated driver pulling out in front of us, and subsequently being fatally wounded in the accident (18 wheeler vs. SUV), I can relate the following concerning drug/alcohol screens:
in the state of TN whenever there is a vehicle accident involving a fatality there is always drug and alcohol screening of all drivers.
[where a commercial vehicle is involved, such as an 18 wheeler, even the passenger is tested]
My ex and I were put in the back of a Highway Patrol car and driven to the Med where they took blood samples from both of us. Even though I did not and had never driven his 18 wheeler.
They told us that if either of us had any unprescribed meds or alcohol detected we would be arrested when the tests came back. We both knew we had nothing in our samples so we didn't worry.
[the SUV driver was unfortunately almost 3x the legal limit on alcohol.that didn't help my ex-husband feel any less remorse for being involved in a traffic fatality, and in fact he had to see a psychologist and take some time off work.Any normal person would feel that way!]

All of this just to say: if drivers involved in a motor vehicle accident involving a fatality are always screened, why wouldn't both people involved in a fatal shooting be screened? To do otherwise makes absolutely no sense to me.

jmo

I don't know it just baffles me that no drug testing was done on GZ after the shooting. This tells me that on that night LE had decided that it was the SYG law and was not going to investigate it.

If this is true that is so very scary for all of the residents of the State of Fla IMO. It also tells me that they took the word of GZ without any investigation or checking of facts.

I also think with all of the different testimony/stories from LE coming out now IMO they are/were in CYA mode the days following the shooting.

At the very least, blood should have been drawn and saved for testing later.

 

[RANCH]

I've seen post's saying that GZ voice sounded "slurred" on the recorded call to LE. If he was intoxicated by the medications and perhaps along with alcohol, could he been arrested for "disorderly intoxication"? Could they then test his blood? Did the cops drop the ball on this one?

856.011 Disorderly intoxication.—
(1) No person in the state shall be intoxicated and endanger the safety of another person or property, and no person in the state shall be intoxicated or drink any alcoholic beverage in a public place or in or upon any public conveyance and cause a public disturbance.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ng=&URL=0800-0899/0856/Sections/0856.011.html

 

[Karmady]

I've seen post's saying that GZ voice sounded "slurred" on the recorded call to LE. If he was intoxicated by the medications and perhaps along with alcohol, could he been arrested for "disorderly intoxication"? Could they then test his blood? Did the cops drop the ball on this one?


http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ng=&URL=0800-0899/0856/Sections/0856.011.html

I have never thought that George's voice sounded slurred. I did, however, right away note that one of the female callers sounded absolutely blitzed. It was the one who was in the house with someone looking out the window. I'm still not sure whether this is mary or not lol. Then I listed to the dispatcher and she sounded a little "slowed down," too. I concluded that it was just the recording equipment. Jmo, of course.

Personally, I think if they were going to risk taking him into custody in the face of the immunity statute, they would have used any other reason they could come up with to actually arrest him. Even if was just to question him while avoiding immunity issues, of which I think they were VERY conscious. They could have done that and still released him a few hours later if they wanted to, and there would have been no issue as to whether they were on the hook under the SYG at all.

jmo

 

[RANCH]

I have never thought that George's voice sounded slurred. I did, however, right away note that one of the female callers sounded absolutely blitzed. It was the one who was in the house with someone looking out the window. I'm still not sure whether this is mary or not lol. Then I listed to the dispatcher and she sounded a little "slowed down," too. I concluded that it was just the recording equipment. Jmo, of course.

Personally, I think if they were going to risk taking him into custody in the face of the immunity statute, they would have used any other reason they could come up with to actually arrest him. Even if was just to question him while avoiding immunity issues, of which I think they were VERY conscious. They could have done that and still released him a few hours later if they wanted to, and there would have been no issue as to whether they were on the hook under the SYG at all.

jmo

BBM
Yes. They could have done the flashlight test to his pupils and said your showing signs of intoxication and brought him in and done a blood draw. JMO.

 

[HiHater]

I think this is the most appropriate thread to ask this question, I'm sure someone will let me know if it is not.

Will Zimmerman be subjected to a psych eval as part of this case? Is it something that is routinely done, or will the state/defense have to request it?

 

[Karmady]

I think this is the most appropriate thread to ask this question, I'm sure someone will let me know if it is not.

Will Zimmerman be subjected to a psych eval as part of this case? Is it something that is routinely done, or will the state/defense have to request it?

I think not unless he modifies his plea in a way that would justify it, imo. The State would never have him psych tested b/c the defense rebuttal would be to show diminished capacity, again jmo. The defense won't do it unless they're going to rely on it to show the same. I don't see O'Mara doing that in this case AT ALL. Especially since it appears that there were no objective indicia of impairment at the scene. still more jmo

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Having been a passenger in an 18 wheeler (with my ex-husband driving), and a very intoxicated driver pulling out in front of us, and subsequently being fatally wounded in the accident (18 wheeler vs. SUV), I can relate the following concerning drug/alcohol screens:
in the state of TN whenever there is a vehicle accident involving a fatality there is always drug and alcohol screening of all drivers.
[where a commercial vehicle is involved, such as an 18 wheeler, even the passenger is tested]
My ex and I were put in the back of a Highway Patrol car and driven to the Med where they took blood samples from both of us. Even though I did not and had never driven his 18 wheeler.
They told us that if either of us had any unprescribed meds or alcohol detected we would be arrested when the tests came back. We both knew we had nothing in our samples so we didn't worry.
[the SUV driver was unfortunately almost 3x the legal limit on alcohol.that didn't help my ex-husband feel any less remorse for being involved in a traffic fatality, and in fact he had to see a psychologist and take some time off work.Any normal person would feel that way!]

All of this just to say: if drivers involved in a motor vehicle accident involving a fatality are always screened, why wouldn't both people involved in a fatal shooting be screened? To do otherwise makes absolutely no sense to me.
jmo

BBM

It should be mandatory to screen for drugs/alcohol when there is a shooting, especially with a fatality...but nothing SPD did made any sense. It appears they were initally fine with having a John Doe go unidentified..SPD dropped the ball big time...and now are under fire for that..