GZ didn't have any felony charges against him.
The incidents were brought up before the judge, we heard them, the prosecution brought them up to prove their point but the evidence was presented. The first one involving a 'police officer' was tossed out entirely and nothing put on his record by order of the judge then. The 2nd was determined to be a case of he said/she said and tit for tat and again - no charges - no convicions - no criminal record.
The paper that is writing those articles had one of their journalists on television today still spouting the same nonsense. The sad thing is that when directed by another person on the panel to stick with the facts of this case, the journalist kept harping back to his own 'theory' and telling his 'theory' about what happened as a fact. Same thing that happens on here - you print a fact - people tell you it's a lie - if a journalist keeps claiming a lie is a fact and people believe it, then the facts never matter do they? That includes in this case. sammieswife
PS - check out the Miami Dade SPD scandal. The one where school records were kind of falsified so they could reduce the number of black youths passing through the criminal system. So if Martin had been charged with burglary and theft - both crimes - and the police had entered it into the criminal records - should that criminal record have come into play when Zimmerman believed the suspicious person could be a burglar? Could we point to intent to burgle homes based on Martins criminal past? So many of the 'what ifs'....