The concerns and complaints that Jackson et al have are that they believe that the system , generally speaking, is applied differently when the victim is African-American and the perpetrator is not.

That belief is why Jackson et al state that if the places were reversed- if TM was a white teenager and GZ was an African-American- that GZ would not have been presumed to have acted in self-defense and not charged with any crime but instead would have been arrested for murder, with the implication being that GZ would have been found guilty of murder or at least manslaughter.

The specific issue of black-on-black murder is a completely separate matter. I do not know of Jackson et al efforts regarding that issue. I presume that they have been, are, and will continue to be involved in addressing that and similar African-American centric issues. It's just that those efforts are conducted in a lower profile manner.

I see this morning the DOJ is looking into the case now and is deciding whether to bring Federal charges against him. It never ends for this poor guy.

If George Zimmerman were black, this would not have even been mentioned.

Because Jackson, Sharpton and the NAACP can't reason with their own constituents.
As hard as they try they can't push through a wall of ignorance, so instead they keep pushing and shoveling their hatred through the mass media. Let's keep focusing on truth, it may be a frustrating battle but we have to be open, fair and honest.
Keep looking for answers to the killing/murder rate in Chicago.

I didn't see alll this protesting when O.J. was found nor guilty. Nor did I see all this when Anthony was found not guilty!

And yet we keep this discussion going. Whether we like it or not, a trial was held, the defendant was found not guilty and the media and many others just keep it going and going and going. What do those who continue on want? Zimmerman dead? Don't say jail, I don't believe it for a second.

All we're now seeing is human "pack" mentality. We are human animals and join in just as easily as other beast when pack instincts take over.

I'm venting, too!

I assume he can't recover damages from the state for slander. They get to destroy his reputation and he has no recourse? Is that justice?

You're kidding right? People were protesting in Casey Anthony's neighborhood for months, probably years. The night she was released from jail, she had to be released in the middle of the night, and people were still lined up to protest her release.

The judge had to keep the juror's name secret for 90 days for fear of retailiation and bodily harm. Restaurants in Pinellas County had signs reading "jurors stay out" posted in the window.

To this day she is still being sued. Only two weeks ago she was ordered to pay the Equi Search company $25,000 for the searches they conducted for Caylee, while Casey knew she was already dead.

People did not protest in Times Square, but around Orlando and central Florida there were plenty of protests. Even now two years later, she can't show her face.

I agree Pooh, and I am glad you are in my world to bounce ideas off of. I am glad you are kind and fair and smart and reasonable and see things clearer than I do.

I wonder often at the conclusions that other people draw that are so different from my own.

I wonder how long we in this pack will enjoy fanning the hatred and when we will all just let it die. I wonder if the real issues will ever be stated? No one in my family ever shot anyone, got arrested and put in jail or got thrown out of school. Either they were pretty smart or pretty smart to just keep working and taking care of their own business. I am a HUGE believer in the work ethic. I think it cures a lot of societal ills.

I have found the harder you work, the less trouble you get in and it also seems to improve your luck.

WAY too simple.

Zimmerman
 

Yes, it did. And now Holden is going to poke his nose where it doesn't belong.

Unfortunately the system worked. It worked too well. GZ needs to be accountable but there was just not enough evidence. The whole notion that you can basically provoke someone into attacking you and then shoot them when they attack you is wrong. The notion that you can tail and follow a kid just because of his color and he is wearing a hoode is wrong.

The result of his innocence while the kid whom he provoked and murdered no longer has a life.

When asked what he would do differently he responded nothing and smiles. Well how about for starter you advise TM you are with the neighborhood watch and ask if he needs help when he is beside your car. Zimmerman is a scab of life and the only spec of decency to emerge from this trial is that GZ will no longer live a normal life again. He belongs in his house afraid to leave and afraid to answer the door. If that is all that GZ receives as his sentence then so be it.

Holder has a job to do, or his department does, and they are now going to give lip service but will not do anything, funny how someone's definition of poking their nose in is actually heir job.

Yeah that poor guy.

Attorney General Eric Holder took an oath to uphold the constitution, and part of that job is making sure any citizen's constitutional rights were not violated. If Trayvon Martin's constitutional rights were violated, then this case needs to be investigated for civil right's violations.

George Zimmerman is going to need all the financial assistance he can get to go up against the United States government, if this case is pursued.

Maybe "there just wasn't enough evidence" because it didn't happen they way you insist it did and got it all wrong. All evidence points to the fact Trayvon could have gone home and didn't have to beat the hell out of GZ.

1] do you have and factual evidence that shows tm was next to gz's car or gz could have gotten his car next to tm; or that gz had the oppty to tell that to tm - or can we consider that gz was decked and jumped on for a pound and ground before he could so advise?

2] as far as scabs go, do you have any factual info to show that tm was any sort of upstanding pillar of any community?

just asking..................

Well, he eventually will get a bundle from NBC for what they did to the evidence, and at least in consideration is the violation of his rights in stopping the police investigation in Sanford...the distorting of the evidence, meaning the playing of tapes for the Martin family with no other presence including the police.

Not sure if he can do any of this since found innocent, but the NBC thing, he will get a nice sum.

This Uncomfortable Truth: The State Of Evidence in the George Zimmerman Prosecution | emptywheel is so powerful and so well written it needs to be shared.


Uncomfortable Truth: The State Of Evidence in the George Zimmerman Prosecution
Posted on July 11, 2013 by bmaz

I have said this from the get go: In the case of State of Florida v. George Zimmerman, under the actual facts of the case from the State of Florida’s own disclosure, as opposed to hype from Benjamin Crump and his public relations team, who have self interest from representation of family members in a civil damages case, not to mention well meaning, even if uninformed, mass and liberal media, there has never been a good factual rebuttal to George Zimmerman’s own account of self defense. You know why? Because there is not any compelling rebuttal within the facts as adduced in the investigation and entered in the record at trial. And the presumption of innocence and burden of proof in the American criminal justice system still mean something.

Yes, I know what I am saying runs counter to the popular meme and what people emotionally feel and want to hear. But everything I have noted from the start of this case has been borne out in the trial evidence and resulting posture as the case heads to closing arguments and to the jury for deliberation.

Did you know that powerful local mayoral office politicians involved themselves, by meeting with only the victim’s family and their attorneys, in an improper ex-parte manner, to go over the most critical evidence during the early stages of the investigation and before said Martin family members’ statements were relied on to file charges? I bet you did not, but that has been the testimony in the trial record.

Did any of you see the young female neighborhood homeowner, Olivia Bertalan, that testified Wednesday as to the crime spree that was ongoing in her and Zimmerman’s neighborhood, Retreat at Twin Lakes, including the home invasion where she and her child were victims of one or more home invaders, and who was effusive in her praise for the concern of the neighborhood watch program and George Zimmerman? Did you know that, thanks in part to the actions of Zimmerman and his wife, the juvenile suspect was caught and sentenced as an adult by this same judge, Debra Nelson, to five years in prison? Probably not is my guess. But that, too, is the evidence.

Did any of you see the other neighbors, of all races, in Retreat at Twin Lakes who testified on Zimmerman’s behalf about the the facts of the case, that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor on top of Zimmerman when the shooting occurred, and the crime afflicting the neighborhood and the need for the neighborhood watch program? My guess is you did not. But that, too, is part of the evidence in the trial record.

Did any of you see the parade of witnesses that laid the foundation for the fact Trayvon Martin was the aggressor in the actual critical physical encounter between him and Zimmerman, and was on top of Zimmerman, and beating Zimmerman, both moments before, and at the time of, the key gun shot? And supported by both the case detectives and one of the foremost expert pathologists, Dr. Vincent di Maio, in the world? My guess is you did not. But that, too, is in the trial record as hard evidence.

Yes, all of those facts are exactly what was testified to in open court. Most of the witnesses were literally the state’s own witnesses, including the two main case detectives, Detective Chris Serino and Detective Doris Singleton. Did you know that the state’s own veteran case detectives, Serino and Singleton, testified they believed George Zimmerman and thought his version of the facts consistent and credible? My guess is you don’t know that. Yet all of that is exactly what the sworn testimony has been in open court.

Did you know that the state, by and through Angela Corey, relentlessly engaged in Brady violations with regard to discovery and evidence disclosure and that, as a result, discovery and depositions thereon have been ongoing even during the trial, all to the detriment to, and prejudice of, Defendant Zimmerman? My guess is you did not, but that too is part of the record.

In spite of all of the above, the political, and cravenly so, prosecution may still tug on enough emotional and falsely racial heartstrings to wrongfully convict Zimmerman. Almost surely there will be no conviction of the always wrongfully charged 2nd degree murder charge; but the possibly of a flawed compromise verdict to a lesser included charge of manslaughter, battery, or other lesser included offense, is very real. If so, it will, despite all the emotions of this case, be a tragedy of justice.

No matter what you think of George Zimmerman personally, the rule of law should militate in favor of an acquittal. Yes, if the burden of proof in the American criminal justice system is truly “beyond a reasonable doubt”, and if there really exists a common law right to “self defense”, then acquittal is exactly what the verdict should be, and must be.

I have no affinity for George Zimmerman. Frankly he strikes me as a hapless dope. Under no circumstances do I support George Zimmerman, or anybody else, wandering around with concealed carry, locked and loaded, firearms on neighborhood patrol (even though he was not on patrol, but only on his way to Target for family shopping). It is a tragic event waiting to happen and nowhere close to what the founders had in mind with regard to the Second Amendment. But my, and your, beliefs are not the law of the land either in Florida or anywhere else in the United States under District of Columbia v. Heller. And that is the law of the land, both for the Zimmerman case at bar, and and all others elsewhere.

We shall see how willing to follow the law the jury will be, and what their verdict is. But this case is not now, and NEVER has been, about what has been pitched and portrayed in the media. Never. It is not about racial prejudice and profiling (and the DOJ Civil Rights Division so found), and it is not about murder. It is about a tragic and unnecessary death, but one that is not a felony crime, despite all the sturm and drang.
State of Florida v. Zimmerman is a straight up traditional self defense case. It has never been pled as a Stand Your Ground defense case, irrespective of all the press coverage, attention and attribution to Stand Your Ground. It’s never been Stand Your Ground, and certainly is not now that the evidence is all in on the trial record. It is a straight self defense justification defense, one that would be pretty much the same under the law of any state in the union including that which you are in, and that I am in, now (so don’t blame “Florida law”).

There is nothing whatsoever unique in the self defense posture that has been effected in this case. Nothing. And it is, whether it is comfortable or not, a compelling self defense case. Actually, let us be honest: It is not comfortable. Not even close. But no matter how uncomfortable it is to say, Zimmerman needs to walk, because the self defense case is strong. The burden of proof in the instructions to the jury will read that not only is there a general presumption of innocence afforded Zimmerman but, moreover, the state must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense. Under the facts as adduced in the trial record that ought be, by all rights, an impossible burden for the jury to get past, whether on the pending count of 2nd degree depraved murder or any possible lesser included charge given to the jury.

The facts, the rule of law, and the constitutional burdens of proof compel an acquittal. Uncomfortable to hear; yes, it is. Necessary for an acquittal to occur; also, yes it is.

I am sure you will be providing credible IN EVIDENCE facts to back up your accusations !!!!

WOW...you do know you cannot just make things up.

Hi Bucco. It is nice to see your words again. I've missed reading your sanity. BK

I am starting to feel insane however which for me is a short trip.

This entire thing has just awakened me....I did not follow the trial because I was living parttime in Tampa and without getting specific was just sickened at the interruption of a police investigation that I watched and then the constant distortion of truth to satisfy someone....not sure if it was to satisfy a political thing....a network thing...but it sure got out of hand quickly

BUT, from what I know from the investigation and from reading your post, the police had it right from the beginning

I am just so sparked having people insinuate racial motives because I do not think that politicians or folks who make a LIVING inspiring unrest should interfere in our police department work and our legal system. I do not and never will understand.

Thanks for "recognizing" me....was feeling a bit alone today !

i recognize you, too, bucco, and i am sure many are happy to see your wise words.

Even tho the police really bungled the investigation, I think the outcome would have been the same. The prosecution was almost as bad.

I wonder if these "Detectives" (and I use that term loosely) were trained by the Detectives from the Jon Bonet Ramsey case in Denver.

A couple of other posters say I'm not using factual information to make my case that there is a flaw in the system.

As I write this, CNN is conducting the first interview with Juror B-37 in the case. She has cited the same three facts I cited in my posts.
1) George Zimmerman decided to confront the person he saw. "He never should have gotten out of his car that evening."
2) GZ should have acted in a more "responsible way" since he was armed.
3) GZ had every right to carry a gun, "just like everyone".

The juror, who admits she favored a 'not guilty' verdict from the beginning, couldn't have put her finger on the system flaw any better. She admits the jury essentially ignored facts #1 & 2 because they had to follow Florida laws.

In my opinion, what Florida obscures through it's laws, including 'stand your ground' is the RESPONSIBILITY armed people have to use a higher level of good judgement while they are armed. I again liken it to the 'rule' that guns should be securely locked away especially in homes where there are children. If things go wrong when the facts are like those stated above, the armed person should not be able to walk away with NO RESPONSIBILITY for the incident. If someone leaves a gun unsecured and someone is killed or injured by it, the gun owner should not be able to walk away with NO RESPONSIBILITY for the incident.

Hopefully my conclusion and the facts I've cited to support it are now clear to you.

thanx, ijusluvit. cleared it up...and now i am sure that i don't agree entirely. i will never give up the opinion that it is okay to use deadly force when confronted with the threat of death and a pound and ground beating. i wonder what that juror thinks would have been a 'more responsible way' - just sit there yelling for help while being beaten and maybe killed? hmmm...

as far as responsibility for securing a gun when not in use - yes - responsibility there is a must. my sisters always asked parents if there were guns in their house before allowing a play date - and now their children do the same with their children! but that is a different situation than having your life threatened and being beaten. responsibility there boils down to survival and self-defense to achieve same.

anyone who kills with a gun never forgets it - ask any vet.

This is what I read in your previous post....

"Originally Posted by Monkei
Unfortunately the system worked. It worked too well. GZ needs to be accountable but there was just not enough evidence. The whole notion that you can basically provoke someone into attacking you and then shoot them when they attack you is wrong. The notion that you can tail and follow a kid just because of his color and he is wearing a hoode is wrong."

Where was the "provocation" you speak of. I read and reread this new info and cannot find it. You were pretty specific in saying "provoked someone into attacking you". The juror you cite certainly didn't even hint at that. She said according to you that he should not have gotten out of his car....ok, I can buy that judgement, but see no provocation of any kind in your new info.

Nobody has even tried to make Zimmerman a hero.....but our system is not based on what you think. It is based on admitted facts. Your provoke statement is what YOU say and that does not make it a fact.

And while you want to blame the state, I ask if you know how many states have the same kind of law AND how many are in the process of making it law ?

Stop bending things to fit YOUR scenario..what, for some reason you wish it to be. The law nor life can work that way. This was not a sporting event...we are not on teams. It was a court of law. Using your imagination to come up with might have happened is no better than people calling young Martin a thug or whatever. It, and your premise, is not based on FACTS.

Very well put!!! Thank you for your insight!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 'more responsible way' was simply not to have put himself into the deadly force situation. The juror asserts that GZ had the opportunity to do that and chose not to. Again, I'm focusing on what happened BEFORE the deadly incident, just as my example of not securing a gun which may come well before a tragedy.

Zimmerman did not place himself into a deadly force situation. Martin placed Zimmerman into the deadly force situation.

I think Eric Holder will have a tough time proving racial profiling in this case. If you listen to the FULL/ENTIRE 911 call where Zimmerman describes the suspicious person. He never said it was a black person....the operator had to ask him what the color of the person was.
It was the press who "spliced" the 911 recording so it sounded like Zimmerman said it was a black man in a hoodie.

How convenient, you left out everything that happened before the altercation. Like it never happened.

I assume the term circling the car means he was close enough for the defendant to talk with him.

Why do we even have to consider TM position in life? He was not the defendant.

Are you denying that at sometime GZ could not have peacefully approached TM during this whole cat and mouse game that GZ was playing. What am I making up. Common sense is not making things up.

I will not argue facts in evidence, but when you say "could have"and use the word game as if you read minds, you answer your own questions.

People PLEASE this was not a stand your ground case - it was self defense. And the jury had to decide if George Zimmerman acted in self defense - period. Not who should have stayed in their car, who threw the first punch, not if Trayvon should have called 911 or run home if he was frightened, but if Zimmerman honestly believed his life was in danger and was justified in defending himself.

...and the jury returned a not guilty verdict exactly as a jury did for Casey Anthony. Both are not guilty!

There is/was no need to include it because it is/was IRRELEVANT to the case!

So the cops tell Zimmerman to stay in his car and he wants to play hero and ends up killing someone walking back to his house. They have a struggle and Zimmerman fears for his like but you think he would of got some blows in but not a mark on martin. Martin is strattling him with his legs tight up against zimmermans legs but magically he is able to unholster his gun and shoot martin. Lousy prosecution.

The entire Zimmerman case from start to finish is sadly typical of the forces that motivate this country. If certain elements of this country are unhappy about a situation they use the media to peruse their agenda. The remainder of the country sits back and says nothing.
If the outcome of the case resulted in Zimmerman found guilty or initially in his death the liberal media and others would remain silent.

The testimony was that GZ was "squirming" to get out from under TM tight hold of GZ body and in doing so,GZ's jacket rose up over his waist and TM saw his gun which in turn made GZ afraid that TM would grab it (in fact he testified that he felt TM sliding his hand down towards his stomach area towards the gun and that's how GZ was able to reach for his gun.

i thought the juror said that both tm and gz chose to enter into the confrontation - neither party chose the kind of responsibility of which you post.