Zimmerman Not Guilty

YouTube Preview Image

 

 

The jury has just returned a verdict of not guilty in the George Zimmerman trial.  This is a case that should never been brought and I would have been astonished if any other verdict had been returned.

83 Responses to Zimmerman Not Guilty

  • Great news.
    I was just watching a video clip on Hannity where the team of lawyers, cops etc were discussing the case, and most said not guilty.
    Actually, this was reported over here a day or so after it happened – the TV was showing a photo of Trayvon as a 12 yr. old, and people here were generally saying what a useless p o s George Zimmerman was – and that same photo was shown on our (liberal left wing/CBS/CNN style TV stations) just a week or two ago. I have never seen , on our TV, a photo of the tall strong looking young man that Trayvon was.
    I did, however, watch Fox new a few days after the story broke, and saw the whole story laid out by Hannity and others, including his interview with Zimmerman, and have seen what a patently false picture that had been painted of him; saw on TV Obama saying how, if he had a son, it would look like Trayvon, and the whole thing became a national racial issue – aided and abetted by your DOJ, and many others. The Florida cops did not even want to prosecute – but politics became involved, and goodnight nurse.

  • It was a political show trial from start to finish Don, and I am glad that the six ladies of the jury decided not to play along. That took some courage.

  • The Obama/Holder regime spent 17 months fanning polarization and race hate . . .

    Let the riots begin.

  • I actually had a dog.

    I hope the dog Obama ate didn’t look like my poor pooch.

  • For the six Zimmermans (and Grandma Meza) a plea for intercession:

    http://saints.sqpn.com/saint-gertrude-of-nivelles/

    They need to relocate to some place where they can live a quiet life.

    For Alicia Stanley, Stephen Martin and a number of others, a plea to the Blessed Virgin.

    And a plea to St. Thomas More for the disciplinary officers of the Florida Bar. They have some work to do.

  • Heartfelt thanks for the action of pure help, which is not of this world.

  • I have never seen , on our TV, a photo of the tall strong looking young man that Trayvon was.

    Taller than my husband, weighed more than my husband at that age, and dear TrueBlue was stupid-strong. (still is, but aches more and…ahem… his pants keep shrinking at the waistline, while his weight is a bit higher)

    What lawyer for a parent would put THAT picture out?

  • Foxfier.
    :-)

    You think he’s got that on his own?
    Actually, I’m lucky I – and my beloved for that matter – are the same weight we were when we got married 45 years ago. Trouble is, I’m no where near as strong as I was( now 71) but she seems to be as strong as she was (now 66)
    Is that called “the law od relativity”? ;-)

  • Chris Wallace indicated this morning that George was a fault for getting out of his car.
    Metaphorically I wish America (and the World) would get out of their car. There’s a lot of questionable illegal and immoral stuff going on even within our government and governors–and we should get out of our cars.
    We should look into it, and try to be responsible citizens.

    The 20 plus people who watched Kitty Genovese around their curtains and didn’t call in to report something in their neighborhood avoided responsiblity and avoided trouble.

    I think George was racially profiled that night and was not only ambushed then, but he will also be beat up as time goes on.

    Meanwhile the fanning of the flames goes on. I wish the media would get back to national security. Gwen Ifill talked last week about the scandals of this administration being a distraction. The continuing race baiting continues to distract us and allow other bad things to go on. We need lots of “neighborhood” watchers–the “neighborhood” being fields of interest such as freedom of religion, pro- life and human dignity, wealth redistribution, co-opting the military — co-opting in general.

  • It’s not like you needed additional evidence that journalists are as equally evil and moronic as are politicians.

    “If don’t you read the papers (don’t watch TV news) you are uninformed. If you read the papers (watch TV news) you are misinformed.” Either Will Rogers or Mark Twain.

  • Don-
    I claim it’s sympathy baby weight. ^.^

  • I’m not holding my breath waiting for the mainstream press to admit this, but maybe saner heads will one day realize that any culture that excuses petty theft, pot-smoking, gangster pretensions, fighting – in particular, assaulting any cracker deemed sufficiently creepy – as ordinary teenage bravado (as one white liberal pundit put it), is a culture that is suffocating its young men with low expectations. That kind of profiling is what what really killed Trayvon Martin, RIP.

    Best of luck to George Zimmerman in prevailing against any civil suit.

  • I wonder if both the prosecution and the judge deliberately threw the fight. They did not dare do the honest thing–dismiss the charges. But, whether from residual human decency or some other cause, did not really want a conviction. So they introduced ludicrous evidence, tossing in a few patently reversible errors just to make sure.

  • I don’t think the prosecutor threw it. I think he made the best case he could with terrible witnesses, a bad timeline, lack of evidence that would help his case, and plenty of evidence that would cast doubt on it. The judge though…

    I wonder. She made a curious call in allowing the jury to convict on manslaughter. One possibility is that it was obvious to her that there was no way to convict and that she hoped to avoid appeals and allegations against her as one who facilitated an acquittal.

  • PRM

    In Scotland, where we do not have coroner’s inquests, it is usual for all cases of killing in self-defence to be prosecuted as murder. The prosecution’s task is simply to see that the Crown case gets a fair hearing and they call all the witnesses to the incident, whether they support the Crown case or not, so that the defence has the advantage of cross-examining them. Often, at the close of the Crown case, there is a finding of no case to answer.

    Similarly, many cases of industrial accidents are prosecuted as culpable homicide, simply to ensure a thorough examination of the evidence.

  • I disagree on the verdict, in my opinion the charge should have been manslaughter.
    No witnesses, here is a seventeen young man returning from the store near his home. this man Zimmerman had the power a gun! he could have talked to him .I am sure Traven Martin would have explained. this man coming at you would be enough to frighten anyone. we don’t now what was said? but Traven could have been wrestling Zimmerman to defend himself and that how Zimmerman received those injuries. the jurors need to think of common sense along with the info of the case. in todays mentality I would never want to go before the jury

  • Witnesses called by the prosecution stated that they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Zimmerman had injuries to the back of his head consistent with his statement that Martin was on top of him hitting him on the head. The only injuries to Martin were the gunshot wound and abrasions to his knuckles. In that confrontation Zimmerman had every right to use his pistol in self defense. The State had the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The State only succeeded in proving at trial that Zimmerman acted in self defense.

  • Without trust in God, the faithless have only to demand Justice; they cannot deliver Justice

  • Mildred’s scenario reminds me of the phrase “whatever you want to believe”. In turn that leads me to wonder what it means that people who think conservatively see this case so differently than people who are liberal thinkers.

    When I was a liberal maybe I wanted the facts to fit my schemata, rather than my schemata to fit facts. What I wanted to be true, I wanted to be true. An old quote not original to Bobby Kennedy but often attributed to him, about “dreaming and saying “why not?” ” pops into my mind. And J. Lennon saying “you say that I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one”
    If liberals (Peter Pan) can think positively,it can be true. No need to Fight for the right, no need to have possessions because everybody has everything, no need for neighborhood watchmen against burglars and home invaders because hey mi casa es su casa… it’s a dreamy hazy world.
    As a liberal cum conservative, I didn’t change my viewpoint because someone talked me into it, but because I connected the dots. The world that wants to convict George of Somethiing imagines how it Might have happened, how it Could Have Been.

    Imagine there’s no heaven
    It’s easy if you try
    No hell below us
    Above us only sky
    Imagine all the people living for today

    Imagine there’s no countries
    It isn’t hard to do
    Nothing to kill or die for
    And no religion too
    Imagine all the people living life in peace

    You, you may say
    I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will be as one

    Imagine no possessions
    I wonder if you can
    No need for greed or hunger
    A brotherhood of man
    Imagine all the people sharing all the world

    You, you may say
    I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one
    I hope some day you’ll join us
    And the world will live as one

  • What if all the people who hate whites were born that way?

    I live and work in the NYC area. A few weeks ago, a home invasion was “caught” on a “nanny” camera and ran all over local TV news.

    The man was filmed exhibiting his MMA skills to a 33 year-old mother in front of her three-year old daughter in their suburban, NJ home.

    If I had a daughter, she would look a like that little girl.

    Like Obama’s son (he never had), that man’s son looks like Trayvon Martin.

    Mildred’s comment communicates misplaced mercy, and the (sadly not uncommon) acceptance of the evil, unjust (Obama) regime’s wilful lies.

    In general, the feral thugs just don’t think things out.

  • I disagree on the verdict, in my opinion the charge should have been manslaughter.

    This would be a good time to reference Art Deco’s summary of the case. I realize that for many of those outraged by the verdict, any reference to actual evidence is regarded as impertinent.

  • yes- “In general, the feral thugs just don’t think things out”

    Mark O’Mara called them on that when he said that the media just accepted the story that was fed to them. They didn’t do their homework, they didn’t think.
    They are responsible for the innuendoes and guessing that continues now.

    I don’t think they are “born that way” : ) but through conditioning, and social leading choose (and get to choose ) what they want to believe.

    What they want to believe is that there is no need for self-defense, no need for war. Remember the “Truce” or “Peace of God” ? a good try that was predicated on a fairly cohesive Christian society.. but only limited success. Now they want to “Imagine” that peaceful world sans God.

  • As a mom as I have had to face the reality about my kids;(their behavior which I wanted to deny) and the difficulty of the situations they got themselves in. I know, with Trayvon’s mother that God is my only help and the only help for my children. God does not forsake us or abandon us His children. We all – the O’Maras, the Martin, the Zimmermans – have hope, now and even after death.

  • From Zero Hedge: “’I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white;’ Thomas Sowell begins in this poignant essay amid the protests across the nation this evening. Apparently other Americans also recognize that the sources of racism are different today from what they were in the past. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, 31% of blacks think that most blacks are racists, while 24% of blacks think that most whites are racist. The time is long overdue to stop looking for progress through racial or ethnic leaders. Such leaders have too many incentives to promote polarizing attitudes and actions that are counterproductive for minorities and disastrous for the country.”

  • I read this: “In general, the feral thugs just don’t think things out.”

    As: “In general, the federal thugs just don’t think things out.”

    Considering how quickly any justice in the case was sacrificed on the altar of politics, I think my version is more accurate.

  • I wonder. She made a curious call in allowing the jury to convict on manslaughter.

    If I am not mistaken, manslaughter by act is a lesser included offense under Florida statutes and had to be included in the charge to the jury. She had no discretion on that. The shyster prosecutors attempted to get her to include felony murder as an option in the jury instructions, on the goofy theory that the Trayvon Martin was killed auxilliary to an act of child abuse. The judge declined to be a party to that bit of pettifoggery. The judge also made it a point to explicitly rule out a finding of negligent manslaughter in the instructions.

  • WK:

    I like it.

  • The Zimmerman’s opposition to including Manslaughter in the instructions suggests to me that there is a subtlety to this that I’ve missed.

    By the way; “pettifoggery” is a great old word that I haven’t seen used in a conversation before. Excellent! Perhaps it will make a comeback.

  • Slamming a persons head against the concrete sidewalk is aggravated assault and battery. It could have resulted in Mr. Zimmerman being maimed or killed. If Martin were the only one to survive, would he have been charged with similar crimes? The case is closed. Leave it be. Federal intervention in a matter settled by a state court would be Ultra Vires and a tyrannical violation of the Constitution. It would also reflect badly on an Administration that is excessively ideological and has so many serious high priority problems to resolve. Our foreign policy is a shambles. Our economy is in the toilet. Further, this country has not been so divided since the Civil War. The President should not have commented, the Justice Department should not have dispatched demonstrators last year and the President should do nothing, if he wants to avoid the creation of more troubles. Intervention will be fan the flames and demean his office.

  • It saddens me that so many will be hurt and/killed because of poor reporting and demagoguery. We have had two beat downs here in Wisconsin if media reports are correct. How tragic.

  • Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to get out his car. He followed Trayvon looking for trouble. I am sure he felt sooooooo powerful with his Piece in his waistband. He not only followed Trayvon, he Caught Up With Him. Who knows what was said to Trayvon at this point? Perhaps Trayvon was DEFENDING himself from what he suddenly saw as the Lynch Mob. Trayvon was NOT looking trouble that night. Zimmerman was. Otherwise, he would have stayed in his car as instructed. He couldn’t sit still with his trigger finger itching. Mr. Wannabee Cop envisions the Limelight shining on him while he saves the neighborhood that he so desparetly wants to control. He wants to be Boss. They wouldn’t let him be a Cop. So, let’s show them who the REAL COP is!! And a 17 year old boy lay dead.

  • cherie, it would behoove you to read the facts of the case before displaying your ignorance:
    http://neoneocon.com/2013/07/16/et-tu-wsj/

    There is no evidence that Zimmerman “failed to heed police advice not to pursue Martin”, and some evidence that in fact he stopped pursuit of Martin after the dispatcher told him it wasn’t necessary to follow him. This “following” meme has taken on a life of its own, and it’s time it was put to rest.

    —According to the transcript of his 911 call, Zimmerman said “okay” after the dispatcher said he didn’t need to follow him.

    —Zimmerman mentions that he had lost sight of Martin (who had started running), and never again indicates he knows where Martin is.

    —Zimmerman had been in the car early in the call, and he only gets out of the car after the dispatcher asks him of Martin, “He’s running? Which way is he running?” That’s when he gets out of the car and tries to find the direction Martin is running in order to tell the dispatcher Martin’s probable new location if he can. It is immediately after that that the dispatcher says he doesn’t need to follow him and Zimmerman responds “okay.”

    —Zimmerman spends a great deal of time trying to describe his own whereabouts to the dispatcher so that the police can find him when they arrive. Zimmerman indicates that they should go “straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck.” That’s where he is planning to meet them, although he doesn’t know the exact address. When the dispatcher then asks for Zimmerman’s home address, he worries aloud about giving it to them, because he says,”oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is (inaudible).”

    Sure doesn’t sound like a person who is continuing to follow someone—especially since Zimmerman hasn’t even got a clue where Martin is at that point, and is making arrangements to meet the police, whom he’s hoping will get there very soon. In addition, the fight occurred not far from where the 911 call took place. If it was Zimmerman who was following Martin, why would that have happened? It’s much more likely that Martin doubled back to find Zimmerman, whom he’d gotten a bead on earlier (Zimmerman had described Martin as having stared at him while Zimmerman was in the car making the 911 call).

    This is simply no evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin after the dispatcher suggested he didn’t need to do so, and all the evidence indicates that he did not follow him. I understand why the “follow” story might be promulgated by liberals and the left. But what’s going on with the WSJ editors? Have they really paid that little attention to the facts of the case?

  • Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to get out his car.

    No, he didn’t, per the very person who said “you don’t have to do that.” Go check out Legalinsurection.com’s coverage, she testified.

    He followed Trayvon looking for trouble.

    He followed a guy acting strangely. Hate break it to you, not unusual– have had it happen to me walking around my old complex, and I’m not a large (6’2 per his family, 158lb per the autopsy) male– and not justification of assault.

    Perhaps Trayvon was DEFENDING himself from what he suddenly saw as the Lynch Mob.

    Sudden onset terror is not justification for trying to beat someone to death.

    Trayvon was NOT looking trouble that night.

    Probably true– per his past experience, he wanted an easy victim. That is how the “knock down” game goes, after all– no fun beating the hell out of someone that gives you trouble.
    Unfortunately, the short, fat guy he attacked was able to defend himself. Guess he should’ve chosen an unarmed woman, like the prior criminals at the complex.

  • *tries to picture a one person, short, fat. soft, on the phone with the police, mob*

  • What is amazing about this conversation is that the incredible persistence in misunderstanding the facts must be willful. No one could be that obtuse not on purpose!

  • The purpose of the willful stubborn misunderstanding is to facilitate social engineering .

  • “Trayvon was NOT looking trouble that night.” (sic)

    How do you know?

    Truth is: the system failed poor, little Trayvon.

    Truth: He was staying with his father’s girl friend 200 miles away from home. He had been suspended twice from HS when he twice should have been arrested. If the local school (!!!) PD chief had not ordered his people not to arrest anyone (so he could monkey with his crime stats) your poor little predator would be safely ensconced in a FL juvenile detention center and today be still breathing.

  • “Trayvon was NOT looking trouble that night.”

    Cherie, here is a handy map of the Retreat at Twin Lakes Complex.

    http://zimmerman-vs-martin.blogspot.com/2013/01/retreat-at-twin-lakes-map.html

    1. The fight commenced at the point marked 3. (Zimmerman’s key chain was dropped at that point) and concluded at point 4. What George Zimmerman was doing there (loitering about waiting for the police to arrive) is passably explained by the call to the non-emergency police dispatcher. (Not all of his movements are explained, but his presence is explained).

    2. Point “3″ is along a walkway which connects two streets which run parallel for a time. One is called “Twin Trees Lane” and the other “Retreat View Circle”. George Zimmerman’s truck was parked near where this walkway connects with “Twin Trees Lane”

    3. Trayvon Martin passed by George Zimmerman’s truck during the course of the phone call. Given the distances involved, it would have taken Trayvon Martin between 2 and 3.5 minutes to return home at an ordinary loping pace, depending on which of three routes he might use. (Zimmerman was on the phone with the dispatcher for another couple of minutes).

    4. Martin proceeded from Zimmerman’s truck up the walkway to point 3, then abruptly ran out of sight. The townhouse of Brandi Green, his father’s baby-mamma was about 85 yards away down the block (its front door facing Retreat View Circle). It would have taken him less than 20 seconds to get to the back door and get inside.

    5. Martin shows up about four minutes later and breaks George Zimmerman’s nose at some point between point “3″ and point “4″ on the map.

    6. Either Martin walked back up the block (85 yards or more) to where George Zimmerman was schlepping around or Martin hid in some shrubbery or hid in in some shadows and then re-emerged. Neither would be indicative of someone whose objects were benign, though I suppose you could manufacture some excuse.

  • But what’s going on with the WSJ editors? Have they really paid that little attention to the facts of the case?

    They employ ‘reporters’ at the Wall Street Journal, right? Do the reporters ever talk to the editorial writers?

    I have had to conclude that a great deal of the commentary on this has been driven by the games people play when they are trying to make a point, maintain stauts, or maintain their sense of self. That’s the only way I can make sense of it. The sequence of events is not that complicated, the inferences one might draw not that counter-intuitive, the important evidence all online and easy to locate. The assessments of culpability the Zimmerman-despisers make are just perverse and I cannot imagine ordinary people making them in the course of their daily lives or reading a low-temperature news story. I can imagine Todd Flowerday trading in that, but he’s a serial sophist. (What ever happened to Todd? “Peace, All”).

    What’s interesting about this is that its not just the usual portside status games being played. Nor are the starboard remarks confined to the usual Republicans-for-hire (Scarborough, &c). The American Spectator has published two idiot articles on the subject (one bereft of factual content but indicting Zimmerman due to a supposed resemblance to other neighborhood watch captains the author had known; the other dismissing Zimmerman as a wimp). If you are a student of starboard opinion journalism, you now know who the social climbers are.

  • RACISM IN AMERICA: A black man with pistol permit shot a white teen, and was acquitted. Unbelievably, the trial didn’t get any MSM/DOJ coverage. ‘Cuz it did not advance the narrative.

  • Perhaps if Mr. Zimmerman had possessed the intestinal fortitude to take the stand and tell the whole world the truth we would not be voicing endless subjective opinions.

  • Perhaps if Mr. Zimmerman had possessed the intestinal fortitude to take the stand and tell the whole world the truth we would not be voicing endless subjective opinions.

    1. His videotaped statements to police, both at the station house and at the scene, were entered into evidence. These were offered without counsel present.

    2. There was ample forensic, photographic, and third-party evidence of his claims.

    3. Criminal defendants seldom take the stand at their trials. It just is not done. No need to insult Mr. Zimmerman for his absence of ‘intestinal fortitude’.

  • “Perhaps if Mr. Zimmerman had possessed the intestinal fortitude to take the stand and tell the whole world the truth we would not be voicing endless subjective opinions.”

    No competent criminal lawyer will ever allow his client to testify unless necessary for an acquittal. A competent prosecuter will twist whatever the defendent says against him. Neither truth nor intestinal fortitude has anything to do with it.

  • “subjective opinions” (I repeat myself). I think that you means facts that you don’t like: they don’t support your agenda/narrative/opinions.

    Let’s try this “subjective opinion.” You couldn’t tell from DOJ race-baiting and media coverage but that 48% of Americans believe the Zimmerman verdict was correct and 34% think it wrong; and 18% (the smart ones) don’t care.

    ‘Cuz the Holder DOJ and the media exist to serve the evil, unjust regime and the sordid, subjective narrative.

  • Had I been called to jury duty, I should hope I would not have been chosen to serve on this jury. I had it clearly in my mind, just a few hours after the story broke, that the narrative presented was darned close to the truth. I could not have been an impartial juror because I sucked up the story and failed to question it further.

    Unfortunately, this is the reality of our mass media age. A narrative is put forth before facts are known. Many of us form our opinions on the basis of that narrative and, having “made sense” of it, shelve the issue. As required, we dust off our opinion and present it in as new and fresh a light as we can – like re-gifting that crystal decanter that one received as a wedding present.

    I was wrong. Wrong in the facts, wrong in how the facts I DID know fit together, wrong in my assessment of the characters of the characters, wrong in everything… That is what happens when one lets others do the thinking for us.

    I will do my darnedest to just stand down from the next story – to step back, ignore first narrative presented, and wait for facts. Please call me on it – as y’all did on this site – the next time I act like the Democrat Party’s mascot.

  • “No competent criminal lawyer will ever allow his client to testify unless necessary for an acquittal. A competent prosecuter will twist whatever the defendent says against him. Neither truth nor intestinal fortitude has anything to do with it.”

    Bingo Mike! In this case it was obvious that the prosecution was doing a lousy job and it would have been malpractice to toss them a life ring by putting Zimmerman on the stand. After an hour of agressive cross examination even Saint Francis of Assisi would come across as a liar to a jury.

  • “I will do my darnedest to just stand down from the next story – to step back, ignore first narrative presented, and wait for facts. Please call me on it – as y’all did on this site – the next time I act like the Democrat Party’s mascot.”

    O K Dave, but only if everyone also overlooks my complete misreading of the 2012 election from start to finish. Being mistaken has never been a handicap for giving an opinion on this blog! :)

  • I would be interested in hearing your current reading, or the changes in your perception of the 2012 election.

  • Most of the polls were way off, and Romney decided to sit on a nonexistent lead after his victory in the first debate. Obama gained his victory by keeping the turnout among blacks at record highs. This allowed him to win even though his support among whites declined. Obama’s vote declined by several million over 2008, but Romney just barely did better than McCain’s pathetic totals.

    For 2014 I think the Republicans will add to their majority in the House and stand a decent change of taking the Senate. The third election cycle of a two term President is usually a disaster for the party in power and I see no reason why Obama will fare any better.

  • Dear Donald, If there was enough evidence to get an indictment, then there is enough room to assume there are some holes somewhere in Mr. Zimmerman’s story. It would be the prosecutor’s job to find those holes in cross examination. You are suggesting that we have an incompetent judicial system that does not allow the truth to surface in the courtroom. If Mr. Zimmerman could not face the jury and the court, I am inclined to believe that there is more to the story than what we know. If he was truly free of guilt and could honestly and genuinely talk of what occurred that night, it would put everything to rest. Getting past all of that and looking forward, I think one of the problems that will surface when the smoke clears is the fact that Neighborhood Watch Vigilantes should not be allowed to carry concealed weapons. They need to have some kind of identification that alerts everyone that they are Armed and Dangerous.

  • “Dear Donald, If there was enough evidence to get an indictment, then there is enough room to assume there are some holes somewhere in Mr. Zimmerman’s story.”

    Not really. Prosecutors really can indict a ham sandwich if they wish. If judges find probable cause, a very low standard indeed, cases proceed on their merry way, even if the evidence is lacking to gain a conviction. I have been doing criminal defense for over three decades and pathetically weak prosecutions are not terribly uncommon.

    “You are suggesting that we have an incompetent judicial system that does not allow the truth to surface in the courtroom.”

    We have an adversarial system governed by elaborate rules of evidence and procedure. Evidence that may be true, such as hearsay statements, is excluded all the time.

    “If Mr. Zimmerman could not face the jury and the court, I am inclined to believe that there is more to the story than what we know.”

    The right not to be compelled to testify is a precious right for any defendant in a criminal prosecution. People who are not attorneys really cannot imagine how devastating skillful cross examination can be in the eyes of jurors. Zimmerman had no requirement to prove his innocence; the State had the burden of proving his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and the prosecution team failed miserably in their attempt to do so.

    “Getting past all of that and looking forward, I think one of the problems that will surface when the smoke clears is the fact that Neighborhood Watch Vigilantes should not be allowed to carry concealed weapons.”

    Actually I think Trayvon Martin’s assault on Zimmerman shows the wisdom of concealed carry laws. I hope that the next thug who seeks to pound someone who looks at him cross-eyed into the ground might benefit from Mr. Martin’s sad fate. It is a tragedy that he died at 17, and my heart goes out to his parents, but like most of us Mr. Martin determined his own destiny through his choices and decisions. In any case what Zimmerman did, based upon the evidence, was clearly self-defense and he should not have been prosecuted.

  • ” …but like most of us Mr. Martin determined his own destiny through his choices and decisions. In any case what Zimmerman did, based upon the evidence, was clearly self-defense and he should not have been prosecuted. ”

    Now, (an example reported as follows) the hapless victims of the irresponsible, atrocious politics of community organizing have become literal thugs.

    ‘ BLACK MOB HITS HOLLYWOOD: Hollywood Hit by Roaming Band of Robbers, Police Say

    At least 14 people were taken into custody Tuesday night and many more remained at large after marauding bands of young people conducted a string of robberies, assaults and acts of vandalism along Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles police said late Tuesday.The robbers knocked down tourists and grabbed their phones, Kato said. In at least one incident, they hauled off a cash register from a business. There were no reports of weapons involved in the attacks.
    http://clashdaily.com/2013/07/black-mob-hits-hollywood-hollywood-hit-by-roaming-band-of-robbers-police-say/

  • Dear Donald, If there was enough evidence to get an indictment, then there is enough room to assume there are some holes somewhere in Mr. Zimmerman’s story.

    You apparently missed the part where he wasn’t indicted until outside pressures forced it.

  • Cherie Frances Glover wrote, “If there was enough evidence to get an indictment, then there is enough room to assume there are some holes somewhere in Mr. Zimmerman’s story.”

    As a former Advocate-Depute, I can assure you that is not the case. If the precognitions, which are all the prosecutor has to go on, establish that A killed B and A denies guilt on any ground, it is not for the prosecutor to judge the credibility and reliability of A and his witnesses. That is the function of the jury. It is for the prosecutor to decide whether there is sufficient, that is corroborated, evidence on which a jury, properly directed, could (not will) convict.

    Or suppose A is found in possession of recently stolen goods. He tells the police he bought them from B. Unless the circumstances are wholly exceptional, if B denies it, I would indict A for theft; I should, of course, call B as a Crown witness, thus giving A’s counsel the benefit of cross-examining him and discrediting him. It would be oppressive to leave A to call him and I am sure that, if a prosecutor attempted it, the court would intervene, by deserting the diet.

    If B admits selling the goods to A, I would indict them “both and each or one or other of them, of the crime of theft or of the crime of reset, or of one or other of them, guilty, actors or actor or art and part,” followed by a narrative of the facts, thus giving full scope to the jury to decide. That, by the by, would probably force both of them into the witness box, where they would be cross-examined both by the Crown and each other’s counsel.

    Written statements are one thing, but observing the demeanour of the witnesses in court and under cross-examination is, often, very different. The prosecutor’s initial opinion on guilt or innocence is very nearly worthless; indeed, he may have no opinion on the matter at all.

  • Dear Donald, If there was enough evidence to get an indictment, then there is enough room to assume there are some holes somewhere in Mr. Zimmerman’s story.

    Cherie, the former chief justice of New York, Sol Wachtler, is the source of the aphorism that a grand jury would ‘indict a ham sandwich’ if a prosecutor so instructed. At that time (ca. 1990), grand juries in New York returned a finding of “no true bill” a grand total of 0.3% of the time. Angela Corey could not even be bothered to put this case in front of a grand jury; the equivalent of an indictment was secured by her signature on an affidavit of probable cause, an affidavit Alan Dershowitz called fraudulent.

  • If Mr. Zimmerman could not face the jury and the court, I am inclined to believe that there is more to the story than what we know.

    You are inclined?

    It is unremarkable that there are lacunae in a sequence of events taking place over a period of 6 or 7 minutes; the lacunae are not necessarily decisive in assessing guilt.

    In this case, there is an autopsy report, crime scene photographs, the statement of eyewitness John Good, forensic testimony about the path of the bullet, the recording of Zimmerman’s call to the non-emergency dispatcher, and the deductions to be made from Trayvon Martin’s evident movements throughout the complex. Zimmerman’s statements are not strictly necessary to piece together what happened.

    The only ‘more to the story’ that might be of any interest is if Zimmerman antecedently smacked at Martin, chased him, or lunged at him. That would raise the bar to making a valid self-defense claim. None of the neighbors heard even a verbal interjection (e.g. “hey you”). The testimony of Martin’s phone friend Rachel Jeantel offered no illumination of how it was that Martin came to be 85 yards away from his temporary residence 3.5 minutes after he could have been home sipping his iced tea and viewing whatever sporting event there was on the tube. The witness Selene Bahadoor, who thought she saw someone chasing someone else, was taken apart on cross-examination (and even she could not testify who was chasing who; given the direction, the thesis that Martin was chasing Zimmerman would be your default choice).

    Oh, but you are quite sure that “Trayvon Martin was Not looking for trouble”, and that “Zimmerman disobeyed police orders not to get out his car.” (Demonstrably untrue. The entire 4 minute conversation with the police dispatcher has been available online for more than a year).

    Give it up, sister.

  • I sat on two courts martial during my time. The myth was that when the JAG had enough to convene a court, the alleged perp was guilty. And, military justice is to justice as military music is to music.

    Not so, we acquitted both troops in both courts martial.

    I do not think it’s incomepetence. The judicial system is corrupt.

    This witch hunt/show trial was a DOJ-attempted persecution of a Latino intended to stir the Obama racist base for the 2012 election.

    Now, the acquittal is a distraction for the horrid economy and the 20, or so, major scandals the MSM cheerleaders (hated FOXNews is the only “15 year-old girl” not “sleeping” with Obama) are suppressing.

    The question remains, “What if these people that hate whites were born that way?”

  • Michelle Malkin has called the Zimmerman/Martin affair a “Weapon of Mass Distraction”. Clever and probably right. Wiped clean from news coverage are the NSA, IRS, Fast & Furious scandals, the Obamacare train wreck, the comatose economy, and the collapse of our foreign policy. Holder also attempts to whittle away at our fundamental right to self-defense by his remarks before the NAACP in Florida. We have far too much community organizing and not enough leadership from the current President, and most of it not in the best interest of the free constitutional republic into which we were born. May God and our conscience help and guide us out of this mess.

  • Dear Donald, you wrote:
    Actually I think Trayvon Martin’s assault on Zimmerman shows the wisdom of concealed carry laws. I hope that the next thug who seeks to pound someone who looks at him cross-eyed into the ground might benefit from Mr. Martin’s sad fate. It is a tragedy that he died at 17, and my heart goes out to his parents, but like most of us Mr. Martin determined his own destiny through his choices and decisions. In any case what Zimmerman did, based upon the evidence, was clearly self-defense and he should not have been prosecuted.
    in reply,
    I am saddened that you are so hardened. You speak so flippiantly about a deceased young man you did not know. We should be discussiing how to end the gun violence. You were not there in those final moments, we won’t know unless Zimmerman truthfully tells us the whole story. What if Trayvon had been on top during the fray and when he felt he had safely subdued his predator, stood up, at which time Zimmerman had enough leeway to easily reach for his Weapon and FIRE. You are correct, this is truly a tragedy. As Catholics, we should be concerned with prevention, not in advocating more violence. Let the Holy Spirit be your guide, not the gun lobby.

  • cherie- you don’t mention the potentially fatal violence perpetrated by Martin. If the gun fired that night had been at just a little different angle Martin may have lived. George did not fire again or try to make sure he was dead; George was distraught when told that Martin had died. I would say that George’s intent was not so much to kill, as it was to save himself. It seems that Martin’s violence was to inflict great and potentially fatal injury to a person he had profiled as a creepy *** cracker.

  • What if pigs could fly?

  • “You speak so flippiantly about a deceased young man you did not know.”

    No, I did not speak flippantly. Mr. Martin attacked Mr. Zimmerman and met the fate of thugs who decide to attack the wrong victim, i.e. someone who has the means to defend himself.

    “We should be discussing how to end the gun violence.”

    Perhaps we could begin by having an honest discussion as to why most murders involving guns consist of black on black attacks. The fact that Mr. Martin died of a gunshot wound does not, sadly, make him unusual. What is unusual is that the man who killed him was not black, or at least he was not considered to be black by the mainstream media. We do not have a gun violence problem in this country. Rather we have a problem with out of control criminal violence in predominantly black urban areas due to many factors with the collapse of the black family being the prime culprit. Blaming guns for this problem is intensely silly.

    “What if Trayvon had been on top during the fray and when he felt he had safely subdued his predator, stood up, at which time Zimmerman had enough leeway to easily reach for his Weapon and FIRE.”

    Your hypothetical completely contradicts the autopsy report, as well as libeling Zimmerman as a “predator”.
    “The Volusia County medical examiner found that Martin was killed by an injury resulting from a single gunshot to the chest, fired at “intermediate range”, between 1 and 18 inches according to a forensic expert.[8][Note 6] An FDLE analysis of Martin’s body and clothes described the distance as “a contact shot”.[115] The autopsy also found that Martin had one small abrasion on his left ring finger below the knuckle. No other injuries were found on Martin’s body at the time of his death.[8] Physicians who reviewed the official autopsy report for the Orlando Sentinel, stated in their opinion that Martin lived from 20 seconds to several minutes after he was shot, and that Martin likely remained conscious “for a little time, anyway”.[116]”

    The autopsy report substantiates what the witnesses reported: Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, when Zimmerman fired.

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-beaten-prosecution-witnesses/story?id=19517236

    “Let the Holy Spirit be your guide, not the gun lobby.”

    Somehow I rather think the Holy Spirit has little interest in making certain that only criminals, and the State, possess guns.

  • Prevention – We can not reasonably prevent gun ownership or sidewalks or ball bats or knives … Prevention of bad human behavior doesn’t deal with the implements of fighting as much as it does with the human heart.

    There could have been some prevention here. Stolen goods and burglary tools? Martin’s school and his parents and the general societal attitude of disrespect and moral apathy could be seen as indirect causes, where early prevention and good guidance might have been helpful for the anger and resentment. Sadly,he was brought up and formed in a broken home, as so many of young rebellious people are. That hurts more than people admit.
    But he was well past the age of reason and he could have himself prevented trouble by going home and calling 911 if he thought he was being followed by someone threatening.
    I don’t think of sweeping changes to the law, but repentance and renewal in individuals families and churches from Florida to Chicago, from NY to LA. Wouldn’t it be great if these kinds of troubles would lead us to a revival of faith, instead of more breakdown.
    I am not blaming Martin’s mom and dad particularly–one broken home is one thing– but when most of society seems to be a broken home; schools are at a loss, entertainment is reprehensible, and the dignity of the human person doesn’t seem to be recognized anywhere, young people flock to fight training, because that’s the way they see life.

  • i hear you t shaw ;) Yes it is what it is- I was just reacting to George being called “predator” and to say the outcome could have been very different. Another clarification: I am not pointing out that Other People or Society need repentance and revival- I mean me too.

  • I am saddened that you are so hardened. You speak so flippiantly about a deceased young man you did not know.

    He tried to kill some dude that he didn’t know.

    How can you be so hardened about Zimmerman, just because he DIDN’T DIE?

  • Oh, wait; his not-a-girlfriend-girl-friend says that Martin wasn’t trying to really hurt Zimmerman, it was just an “*sswhuppin.”

    Which implies that Martin was in the habit of assaulting people enough to send them to the hospital but not the morgue, because it was normal in his circles.

    Incidentally, Seattle has a couple of deaths a year from what were probably</i just supposed to be “*sswhuppins.” Most famous was the Tuba Man– feel free to search for that. I’m sure you can spin some sort of story where he was a predator, too.

  • You were not there in those final moments, we won’t know unless Zimmerman truthfully tells us the whole story.

    Madam, simply recycling falsehoods in a discussion does not convert them into true statements. The autopsy report, eyewitness testimony, the recording of Zimmerman’s call to the police dispatcher, crime scene photographs, and a map of the complex will give you a satisfactory idea of the sequence of events. There will be some lacunae. As for what Zimmerman tells, his videotaped statements at the police, including station house interrogation and a re-enactment undertaken at the scene were introduced into evidence. He told his story, it is just that you are not listening, as you are not reading and digesting what people say to you here.

  • The principle of self-defence is a simple one, but not necessarily easy of application.

    To justify causing death, there must be violence so extreme or continued, without the person attacked having the means of getting away, as to cause reasonable alarm of serious injury to the person. Repeated blows, even with the fist, might infer a murderous intent on the part of the assailant. But it seems reasonable, in such a case, to require very strong evidence of continued and outrageous abuse before presuming such a murderous purpose as justifies resort to lethal force.

  • MP-S would strong evidence be being pinned to the ground while someone smashes your head into the cement?

    Too many ppl fail to understand that one “good” blow to the head can kill. A fist fight can be a life or death situation. I have a God given right to self-defense and I will assert that right.

    Cherie F Glover – I will pray for you that you start living in the real world not the fantasy land you are living in full of “what ifs” and ignoring the facts.

  • A black teenager, Trayvon Martin, is accosted while walking home. He is guilty of no crime, suspected of no crime. He has every reason to be where he is. He does, however, look “suspicious” to a mania-driven neighborhood “watchman” with a Rambo fantasy. (What exactly looked “suspicious” was never explained.) This gun-toting Good Neighbor, George Zimmerman, has decided there will be a confrontation if he has to instigate it himself. Zimmerman stalks the teen for ten minutes—in a car and then on foot—and shoots him square in the chest when Martin finally reacts. The killer is hailed a hero, the teen is relegated to the ranks of all the other “suspicious” black men we are lucky to be rid of. No harm, no foul.

    What about the good-hearted neighbor with such benevolent purity of intention? His history reveals a credible accusation by a relative of sexual abuse; documented domestic violence with an ex-fiancee; and documented harassment and racist taunts toward a former co-worker who was so happy when Zimmerman left his job he threw a party. We are asked to believe that a man of such demonstrably low character would then make the judicious decision that it was necessary to kill an unarmed teenager because of an “imminent threat.” It doesn’t pass the smell test.

    The concept of legitimate self-defense has been turned on its head and is now a caricature of itself. In the Zimmerman case, it has morphed into the kind of lawlessness conservatives used to decry. This new paradigm permits one individual to forcibly engage another in a public venue—to restrain, intimidate, and harass him—until a physical altercation finally occurs and it becomes “necessary” to kill. This new paradigm manifestly declares,”You are not free. You must assent–or prove why you shouldn’t.” Failure to comply is now a reason to be killed.

    Trayvon Martin was operating under a faulty presumption: that he had the same rights as any other law-abiding citizen. That he had the right to keep walking, to direct his own movement, to determine his own associations. That he had the right to defend his personal space against hostile intrusion. That he had autonomy over his own person, the right to refuse communication with an unidentified stranger without having to explain himself. That we had the autonomy we’re supposed to grant even tall, black teenagers wearing hoodies, or tattoed counterculturists with eight earrings in one ear, or anti-social old men in dirty shirts who just want to be left alone. He was wrong.

    George Zimmerman is not behind bars, but he will never be free. Poetic justice for a man who, in his colossal hubris, appointed himself the last and final arbiter of another man’s liberties.

  • A black teenager, Trayvon Martin, is accosted while walking home. He is guilty of no crime, suspected of no crime.

    False.
    He is noticed walking slowly, in the rain, around the back-side of houses, in the rain. He is not “accosted,” he is *followed.*

    Several minutes later, after having evaded this follower and talking on the phone for several minutes, he physically attacks this man– who, despite your slander, we have no reason to believe has “Rambo fantasies.”

    The woman that Martin was on the phone to has stated as a natural, basic assumption that Martin would assault someone with the intent of delivering an “ass whupping,” though she claims the 6’2 (according to his family), 158lb (according to autopsy) football player wouldn’t have been trying to kill the shorter, older, fat little guy.

    Unfortunately, the target for physical assault didn’t have to depend on his physical abilities, because he was armed….unlike, say, Seattle’s Tuba Man, or most woman victims.

  • Trayvon Martin was operating under a faulty presumption: that he had the same rights as any other law-abiding citizen

    False.

    The evidence, including his only injures being a scraped knuckle and the point-blank gun shot wound, indicate that Martin believed he had the right to physically assault others.

  • “A black teenager, Trayvon Martin, is accosted while walking home.”

    Actually it was Mr. Martin who accosted Mr. Zimmerman which led to the death of Mr. Martin.

    “He is guilty of no crime, suspected of no crime.”

    Which probably was a change of pace for Mr. Martin, as he was suspended from school after jewelry not his somehow found its way into his backpack. He was a devotee of “Lean” , and he had purchased some of the ingredients to make it on the date in question. His text messages indicated that he was a devotee of this dangerous cheap high as did the damage to his liver which his autopsy revealed.

    “He does, however, look “suspicious” to a mania-driven neighborhood “watchman” with a Rambo fantasy.”

    How dare Mr. Zimmerman attempt to keep his neighbors safe from crime.

    “Zimmerman stalks the teen for ten minutes—in a car and then on foot—and shoots him square in the chest when Martin finally reacts.”

    Martin had every opportunity to walk home or call the cops. Instead he confronted Zimmerman, and was in the process of beating his head into the pavement when Zimmerman shot him in self defense.

    “The killer is hailed a hero, the teen is relegated to the ranks of all the other “suspicious” black men we are lucky to be rid of.”

    Actually this is completely the reverse. Martin was hailed as an innocent victim instead of the thug he was and Zimmerman, one-quarter black, was magically transformed by the media into a “white Hispanic” and a devil figure for the left in this country. Zimmerman quickly found himself facing a criminal prosecution for which there was no evidence due to the need of the Obama administration to whip up the black vote for last year’s election.

    “His history reveals a credible accusation by a relative of sexual abuse; documented domestic violence with an ex-fiancee; and documented harassment and racist taunts toward a former co-worker who was so happy when Zimmerman left his job he threw a party.”

    His history actually reveals a man who campaigned against a local cop who beat a black homeless man. Zimmerman handed out fliers and went to black churches as part of his campaign that led to the prosecution of the cop. As part of the neighborhood watch Zimmerman phoned in whites as acting suspiciously in his neighborhood, and warned cops that a black kid was in jeopardy because he didn’t seem to have an adult taking care of him. He is also a registered Democrat and voted for Obama in 2008. An FBI investigation found no racial motivation by Zimmerman.

    “The concept of legitimate self-defense has been turned on its head and is now a caricature of itself.”

    You are joking right? Martin is on top of Zimmerman, beating him and telling him he is going to die, and you wonder if Zimmerman had a right to self-defense? Prosecution witnesses testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. This was a clear case of a self-defense shooting and there was no grounds to prosecute, as the local cops found after their initial investigation before the case was taken away from them.

    “Trayvon Martin was operating under a faulty presumption: that he had the same rights as any other law-abiding citizen.”

    Mr. Martin’s faulty presumption was that he thought he had the right to physically assault someone who had done him no harm. I guess it never occurred to him to call the cops, simply go home or do many other things that would have left him quite alive. Instead he attacked Zimmerman and made the fatal mistake of attempting to beat someone who could fight back.

    “George Zimmerman is not behind bars, but he will never be free.”

    Free? I will be surprised if he does not end up dead, and all for the sake of politics.

  • leslie, your account is notable for being innocent of established facts (some of which are discussed above). Mr. Zimmerman’s call to the police dispatcher is available on Youtube. You can listen to the whole four minutes. Maps of the complex are available online and a discussion of their implications can be found on the “Wagist” site. The autopsy report is available with a little online searching. Photographs taken at the scene of Mr. Zimmerman are also available. The testimony of John Good should also be available. It is not that difficult to do a little inductive reasoning and reconstruct the salient events. The two questions you need to ask are as follows:

    1. Given that it has been established that Mr. Zimmerman was on his back being beaten at the time he shot Martin, could he have a valid self-defense claim?

    2. What if anything occurred prior to Martin beating Zimmerman would vitiate Zimmerman’s self-defense claim? (Hint: the correct answer is “nothing that anyone knows”).

    Happy trails.

  • Donald M McLarey wrote “You are joking right? Martin is on top of Zimmerman, beating him and telling him he is going to die, and you wonder if Zimmerman had a right to self-defense?”

    There is still the question of excessive self-defence, a matter that was recently considered by the High Court of Justiciary, when a man repeatedly stabbed a jealous ex-boyfriend of his girlfriend who broke into their house and assailed him with a baseball bat. Please read the judgment, which is very short.

    http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2013HCJAC61.html

    He was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment for Culpable Homicide, reduced to seven on appeal. The judgment has been widely welcomed as an indication that the knife culture has no place in a civilised country

  • Read the decision MPS. It is idiocy on stilts and makes me say, for the 1019th time, thank God for 1776!

    http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/policy-report/2004/3/cpr-26n2-1.pdf

  • Donald: Thank you for the CATO report on the criminalization of self-defense in the UK. Is this what Obama has in mind for us, as he launches his campaign against “Stand your Ground” laws? Is this why he has politicized the Zimmerman case?

  • I doubt he has any master plan other than ensuring that blacks come out to vote in large numbers in 2014. This administration has always been about short term political gain, and hang the consequences.

    http://pjmedia.com/blog/bored-with-obama/2/

  • Donald R McClarey

    “The jury in fact found that there had been excessive force….”

    What is reasonable is eminently a question of fact. In Haddon’s case, the Crown obviously satisfied at least eight out of the fifteen that the degree of force was not justified.

    Scottish juries (I cannot speak for the rest of the UK) pretty closely mirror public attitudes

  • “Scottish juries (I cannot speak for the rest of the UK) pretty closely mirror public attitudes”

    More is the pity. I guess a Scotsman’s home is not his castle, even when an intruder comes in with a baseball bat to wreak havoc on the inhabitants.

Follow TAC by Clicking on the Buttons Below
Bookmark and Share
Subscribe by eMail

Enter your email:

Recent Comments
Archives
Our Visitors. . .
Our Subscribers. . .