-
Obama’s Unaffordable Act
June 19, 2013 | 58 comments
-
Curbing the IRS
June 12, 2013 | 70 comments
-
Can We Get It Back?
June 5, 2013 | 39 comments
-
The Ronald Reagan of Virginia
May 29, 2013 | 72 comments
-
Time to Go for the Kill
May 22, 2013 | 67 comments
Another Perspective
Stand Your Ground, America
A sober look at the case against George Zimmerman.
(Page 3 of 3)
Enforce the Damn Law
Florida is governed
by top notch conservatives, such as Attorney General Pam Bondi, who
has tremendous future political potential, and Tea Party Governor
Rick Scott. They are the ones with the clear duty now, to enforce
the law and maintain public order.
What is on the horizon is that race hustlers like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the New Black Panther Party will attempt to intimidate judge and jury by agitating mob violence. Even more obvious is the threat of extreme mob violence when the jury acquits Zimmerman.
What Bondi or Scott or both need to do is to hold a press conference and announce that the public order will be maintained and mob violence will not be tolerated. They may think they are in a tough spot now, but their political futures will be obliterated if they stand by while Sharpton, who has incited mobs to kill before, and/or Jackson or the New Black Panther Party incite racial riots that result in the death of innocents.
Scott needs to announce that the integrity of the legal and jury process, and public order, will be enforced by the National Guard if necessary, which will be armed and on high alert until after the jury trial is completed. And Bondi needs to announce that if Sharpton or anyone else does incite racial violence, the agitators will be arrested and prosecuted under state laws.
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (255) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/04/18/stand-your-ground-america
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Confessions of a Soft-Drinking Newspaperman
- Screwtape Protests
- Sweet Home, Alabama
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jeffrey Shapiro| 4.18.12 @ 7:24AM
I agree the media has been disgraceful in this matter, and that justice must run its course with a fair and open trial.
Let us not, however, lose sight of the big picture. Zimmerman was armed with a concealed weapon. Martin was unarmed, and did not know Zimmerman had a gun.
I am suspicious about armed citizens provoking fights, knowing that they are secretly armed, and then using their gun and claiming self-defense as a justification. It has happened before.
Therefore, in this case, the burden is on Zimmerman to show that Martin was the unequivocal aggressor, that Zimmerman had no opportunity to defuse the confrontation, and that when he shot Martin, he reasonably believed he was in danger of death or very serious injury.
Darin| 4.18.12 @ 7:40AM
You rightfully discredit the media and go on to jump on their bandwagon. How was Zimmerman "provoking" a fight? How was he to know Martin was not armed (it's very easy to conceal a gun in a hoodie)? The neighborhood had been robbed numerous times. Putting the burden of proof on Zimmerman is a joke. Is he not innocent until proven guilty? The media has already convicted Zimmerman. It sounds like you have done the same.
Warrior | 4.18.12 @ 11:40AM
He is innocent until proven guilty. It's yahoo's like Shapiro who want to change the judicial process to net a desired outcome. Liberals care less about the process, it's just the outcome. If he wants to defuse confrontations, then he should demand the arrest of Sharpton and the NBP for "hate speech" and attempting to take the civil rights away from Zimmerman.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 12:58PM
Why do you assume Shapiro is a liberal? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't automatically make them a liberal.
Trinacria| 4.18.12 @ 3:19PM
Well, let's examine the evidence, shall we?
1) Has there ever in the history of human civilization been a conservative named Shapiro?
2) Mr. Shapiro adopts the classic liberal position of drawing conclusions that are not only inconsistent with the evidence, but in direct contradistinction to the facts as recorded in the police report (Zimmerman attacked Martin? While lying on his back? And he called 911 to identify himself prior to perpetrating the attack?).
3) Mr. Shapiro, again in classic liberal fashion, willfully disregards the foundational principle of 200+ years of US jurisprudence by placing the burden of proof on the ACCUSED in order to contort the law into a form that would support his predetermined conclusion.
4) Finally, Mr. Shapiro retreats to the quintessential liberal appeal to "not lose sight of the big picture". Liberals love the big picture, because details become blurry as the field of view broadens. Justice, however, isn't about the big picture, it's about facts and indisputable proof, both of which require a sharpness of focus.
So there you have it - three strikes (plus one for good measure).
JmsA| 4.20.12 @ 10:05PM
"Has there ever in the history of human civilization been a conservative named Shapiro?"
Check out Ben Shapiro, author of 'Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future.'
Humanist | 4.19.12 @ 3:49AM
George Zimmerman deserves a medal for reducing the number of violent drug dealers, thieves, and thugs by one. If every American would take out one gangster this country would be a paradise.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 8:24AM
I agree with Shapiro above. The burden of proof is with Zimmerman to prove that his life was in danger and that he was attacked first. The author makes much of the conservative reputation of both Governor Scott and Attorney General Bondi. Well these are the people who appointed a special prosecutor to examine the case. The prosecutor had Zimmerman arrested and charged. Based on the evidence I see it was the right decission. Zimmerman will have to prove his case to a jury if, it isn't dismissed before hand. Of course there is always the possibility of a plea bargin for a reduced sentence.
Scontrone| 4.18.12 @ 9:18AM
Jack, respectfully, the burden of proof in a criminal prosecution is not on the defendant; it is on the state. Does "innocent until proven guilty" ring a bell?
Doctor Right| 4.18.12 @ 9:25AM
You have to remember that Jack's model for jurisprudence comes from Germany between the years 1933-1945...
Jeffrey Shapiro| 4.18.12 @ 9:31AM
Actually, Scontrone, self-defense is typically an affirmative defense, in which the defendant has the burden of proof. In other words, the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed a homicide, and then it is Zimmerman's burden to provide a lawful justification.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 10:40AM
Mr. Shapiro,
Since, this particular fact of the case is not at issue, i.e., that Mr. Zimmerman shot and killed Mr. Martin, the prosecution still has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that this action violated the laws of the State of Florida.
The prosecution can't just claim that there is no evidence to support Mr. Zimmerman's version of events. They have to prove his intent to commit a crime, or, that he unlawfully escalated the confrontation.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 12:32PM
Shapiro must be a lawyer. He is right again. Let the jury and the system decide. For a self defense, defense, there must be reasonable threat to one's life. I am sure glad in those fist fights, tavern brawls, and vicious business disputes, I have been involved in, no-one brought a gun.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 1:04PM
"Shapiro must be a lawyer."
And, Jack-boot must be a moron. He is wrong again.
"there must be reasonable threat to one's life."
I guess repeatedly slamming someone's head into the concrete doesn't count, to a nazi stormtrooper such as yourself, eh Jack-boot?
I say too bad those guys forgot to bring a gun.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 1:54PM
Jack would've run away anyways. How can we take seriously any advice on self defense from some loser who calls himself a "proud 4-F" & who glowingly recounts the tale of his daddy telling him that "its better to be a live coward."
Let's just add that to the context of Jack's moronic statements. It adds such depth & richness to the full character that is the Jack we've come to know & despise.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 4:55PM
I never ran away from a fight in my life, either in my personal life or my business life. I probably should of. I can also say that I directly saved 2 lives. One of them was a little 2 year old girl who darted into traffic and another time when I was able to stop a tragedy on a job site. I don't have to answer to a chickenhawk like con job who wants everyone else to fight his fantasy wars.
One if by land...| 4.18.12 @ 5:25PM
Jack in Wi. = Straight up liar! Please go attack yourself and then kill your attacker
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 5:47PM
"I don't have to answer to a chickenhawk like con job who wants everyone else to fight his fantasy wars."
In other words, you're a coward to the bone. Coming from you, the a proud 4-F & someone's who's Daddy told him it was "better to be a live coward," I can see why you won't engage. Cowardice must run in the family.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 7:27PM
I don't believe in fighting stupid wars for stupid people like you chickenhawk, con job. I can't think of a war worth fighting certainly not anything the chickenhawk neocons like Cheney and Kristol push. Blessed are the peacemakers.
Brian| 4.18.12 @ 3:35PM
If everyone had a gun, would a fist fight, tavern brawl, or vicious business dispute even get started?
Aquanomics| 4.18.12 @ 6:56PM
An armed society is a (very) polite society.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 7:39PM
Just what you need, a bunch of drunks all armed with guns shooting it out on Saturday night. Where is Wyatt Earp when you need him? One thing is sure the bunch of pusseys on this site couldn't fight their out of paper bag, just like Zimmerman. Real cops carry billy clubs and tazers to control unruly people. They try not to use guns to kill every guy who takes a swing at them. In my opinion, Zimmerman was just another wantabe cop who didn't know what he was doing.
I worked in black neighborhoods off and on for years and never had much trouble. You guys just don't know how to handle yourselves. The trouble with all these weaklings and women that they make cops now, is that they get scared and reach for the gun first and not as a last resort.
Frank Natoli| 4.18.12 @ 6:15PM
A "homicide" is the killing of a human by another human. There is no implication of guilt or illegality in the term. A capital punishment execution is officially described as a "homicide".
Mike 3/505| 4.18.12 @ 7:57PM
Frank,
You are correct....I'm glad you pointed that out....also...while we are defining terms...there is absolutely no such thing (except in Liberal minds) as "racial profiling." "Profiling" is the use of multiple tactical factors in order to make a judgement about a given situation...the military uses it joust like cops do. "Racial Profiling" which essentially translates to "single, multi-element analysis." Kinda stupid. Makes about as much sense as intelligent Liberal...a contradiction in terms.
Frank Natoli| 4.18.12 @ 9:18PM
3rd battalion, 505th PIR, what does "3 Panther H-minus" mean? Not trying to be a smart ass, just curious.
"Band of Brothers" has to be the most perfect, now and forever, rendering of what it was like. Each time I saw a scene where I thought "wait a minute, that's not how it really happened", and I checked my copy of Ambrose's book, I was wrong, the HBO version was right. Really first class.
Mike 3/505| 4.18.12 @ 9:34PM
"H-Minus" comes from "H-Hour" which is the "Go Hour." "H-Minus 10"= 10 hours until liftoff...or the green light or crossing the Liner of Departure.
3 Panther....the 505th Regiment is the panther regiment...3 Panther is the 3rd Battalion of that Regiment. In the current 82nd Airborne Division...the 505th also is the Base Piece of the 3rd Brigade.
Mike 3/505| 4.18.12 @ 9:35PM
* Line of Departure
Scontrone| 4.18.12 @ 10:01PM
Jeffrey, it is true that self defense is an affirmative defense. After the state presents its case, the defense will ask for a directed verdict. If the state hasn't made its case, the judge will dismiss. If not, then the case will proceed and then the defense will attempt to prove any defense to the charge. So I again say, the burden is on the state to prove the crime, and only when the state does that will the defendant be under a burden of proof
benny havens| 4.18.12 @ 9:33AM
Thank you.
gearjammer| 4.18.12 @ 9:33AM
Good retort to an ignorant fool. I have been in one serious encounter with a maniac in a fight-these young men the adrenelin flows. On top of you banging head against hard road, you see stars. Just wanna survive.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 10:29AM
All Jack-boot had to see was the name Zimmerman to conclude that he was guilty.
I'm sure the fact that Mr. Zimmerman is Hispanic was also a strike against him, in Jack-boot's neo-nazi world.
He is a Hitler apologist, after all.
Doctor Right| 4.18.12 @ 12:13PM
His REAL name is Zimmermansteinbergowitz...
Jack saw through the masquerade.
Jack in Wi.| 4.18.12 @ 12:37PM
I have a surname which has been mistaken as hispanic on many occasions. I have been mistaken for hispanic on several occasions with my dark coloring and name when younger. Now you could call me whitey. I didn't know Zimmerman's father is Jewish, so what? I still think he should have been arrested and so does the special prosecutor.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 12:55PM
" I still think he should have been arrested"
That's because you think alllll Jews should be arrested, Jack-boot.
You know, because you're anti-Semitic and a Hitler lover.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 1:59PM
According to the cops & the detectives, there was no need for an arrest. And why, all of the sudden, was this case NOT brought before the Grand Jury, as it was supposed to be?
You've bought into the narrative spun by the media, unsurprisingly. Then again, you probably think that the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is a REAL book, written by REALLY SINISTER Jews, so, again, its no shock you've bought in.
W| 4.18.12 @ 5:06PM
ConChef
Glad to see you posting!
How come Florida does not appoint special prosecutors when blacks kill blacks?
Once a special prosecutor is appointed, he will file criminal charges and go to trial.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 5:52PM
It'd be nice to see. However, I'll be willing to bet that said special prosecutors would be busier than a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. They'd need to run them in 3 shifts.
Harry the Horrible| 4.18.12 @ 8:28AM
This should actually be pretty easy.
The Prosecution MUST prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman initiated force against Martin, by striking him, or by threatening him with violence.
If Zimmerman attacked Martin or threatened him with violence, then Martin’s violent response was entirely justified and Zimmerman is guilty.
If the Prosecution cannot prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, then Zimmerman is innocent.
Personally, I lean towards Zimmerman being innocent, but I don't know all the evidence and we sure as heck can't trust what we’ve heard and read in the Media. They've done nothing but try to inflame this. As somebody pointed out, Florida is a swing state, and the Democrats and race pimps (but I repeat myself) are going to exploit this for all it is worth.
And of course the evidence may not really matter. The jury will be twelve people too dull to get out jury duty, subjected to emotional appeals rather than rational argument, and threatened by racial violence if the "correct" verdict is not returned. Expecting rationality out of them is foolish. Evidence probably won't have much to do with their verdict.
And, in any case, innocent or guilty, Zimmerman is ruined. He will be bankrupt, likely unemployed, and a pariah outside the circle of his real friends.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 12:04PM
I keep reading "guilty" versus "innocent" in these comments. To acquit, the jury does NOT have to view Zimmerman as "innocent," they merely have to judge him to be "NOT GUILTY," which is less of a hurdle for Zimmerman. In this case, guilt must be proven BEYOND A REASONABLBE DOUBT, or he will be acquitted. It there is reasonable doubt, the jury will not convict. In other words, Zimmerman doesn't have to provce he is innocent, the State has to prove he is GUILTY OF 2ND DEGREE MURDER BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, or he will be found NOT GUILTY, and will thereby be acquitted.
2Anglico| 4.18.12 @ 9:51AM
Shapiro, you did not even read the article, did you?
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.18.12 @ 11:35AM
I almost stopped reading at this point, "But the evidence needs to be laid out in a court of law, and resolved by a jury of Zimmerman's peers."
BULL! Since when does Sharpton and rest of the hustling scum decide who gets a trial and who doesn't? The police officers on scene didn't find a reason to arrest him. The detectives assigned to the case concluded it was self-defense and the district attorney's office declined to file any charges.
A string of misleading reports while the Jackson/Sharpton machine rides into town and we get a "special" prosecutor and 2nd degree murder? This is justice?
Warrior | 4.18.12 @ 11:46AM
Exactly!
TrueBlue | 4.18.12 @ 9:00PM
Followed by race riots when Zimmerman is proven Not Guilty. Just a precursor to what will happen in November if Obama doesn't win.
Bubba T. | 4.18.12 @ 10:06AM
I have few doubts as to how this trial will end. When the hands are played and the dealin's done, the howling mobs will get their demanded ... pound of flesh, and Sharpton will have absorbed more of NBC's allotted face time. See, flesh and face time are what this circus of opportunity is all about, anyway. I suspect, too, that somewhere whispered during the pretrial jury selection will be the line O.J. muttered to Johnny Cochran during that OTHER big trial:
"I want that jury to look like my momma."
In the end, the question will be: "Do we want to see Florida burning ... or go ahead fry George Zimmerman?"
For a politician, that's an easy one.
Cpm| 4.18.12 @ 2:32PM
A large percentage of dead police officers were killed with their own weapon when the suspect made a play knowing full well the officer was armed. A suspect in an assault finding his victim is armed is highly likely to use it if he can get it away from the victim in a scuffle because in that situation it quickly escalates to life or death.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 4:36PM
You say "It has happened before." in regard to your allegation that armed citizens might pick fights with unarmed citizens in order to shoot them but I see no link or citation to give credence to your claim which leaves me in doubt. I know of no such instance but since you claim that you do please post a link to the story, I would presume it made news wherever it happened, so as to remove any doubt of the facts.
Kitty | 4.18.12 @ 7:32AM
"Little-Known DOJ Cell Watches Trayvon Martin Protests"
http://www.whitehousedossier.c.....-protests/
Brian Mc| 4.18.12 @ 8:02AM
No matter the number of troops on the ground, Zimmerman and the State of Florida, if not the Nation, better hope that he is exonerated by a black jury. Even that might not be enough to stop what is coming.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 3:43PM
No Brian it's easy to stop riots. The mayor or the governor says "lawbreakers will be prosecuted." Then the cops make a big show and arrest ANYBODY misbehaving. It has worked in every riot situation here in the last 50 years! Watts, the OJ trial, anytime that is the approach - the riots stop. The sooner that approach starts, the less damage and death there is. Works everytime it's tried.
Don't Tread On Me.
Mary Carter| 4.18.12 @ 8:02AM
If Zimmerman was so intent on shooting someone that night, then why would he call 911 and seek help. It is obvious his intent was NOT to fire his weapon.
vtwin| 4.18.12 @ 11:54AM
Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder, not first-degree (premeditated) murder, which is defined as an intentional killing that is not planned in advance and/or a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the defendant’s obvious lack of concern for human life.
Skippy| 4.18.12 @ 1:07PM
I'm rapidly developing an obvious lack of concern for human life.
Namely for Sharpton and whoever else riots after the acquittal.
We have gone 20 years since the ghetto erupted in gunfire and flames.
Time to clean up a bit again.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 3:45PM
OJ was in '95. Championship riots are quite common...Kentucky two weeks ago?
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 4:44PM
An example of the general loss of respect for law and order in our modern, ever so sophisticated, ever so liberal society. But then why would anyone respect the law in a society that guards the rights of criminals more than the rights of victims? Or refuses to arrest and prosecute rioters simply because they are minority or students or - well you can supply your own adjective. I'm sure you see my point.
Gary B| 4.18.12 @ 8:03AM
"...conservatives are in power, and they have to start acting like it." And therein lay the challenge. They must stand up to the press, the attorney general and even the president of the United States.
This case is just too tempting for the race hustlers. They've come racing out from under their rocks into the light of day. We can only hope it blows up in their faces and revive the outrage over the Black Panther voting intimidation case.
Appleby| 4.18.12 @ 8:08AM
Lynch mobs are unfortunately a part of American history, and I pray this won't turn into such a stampede. If some mob of Black vigilantes manage to kill Mr. Zimmerman, he will become a folk hero/martyr and the trouble will escalate. There is little respect for the rule of law among the Tweethead generation, who seem to believe that if their mob is the biggest, they get to decide innocence or guilt. Witness the Occupiers, who think yelling "We are the 99%" makes it true. (As a sidebar, the word "Bolshevic" means "Majority" and althought the original Bolshies were not in fact the majority, they took over because people accepted the word as evidence.)
Justice will play out if we are fortunate, and those who still uphold the law will accept the verdict either way. May cooler heads prevail.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 3:46PM
Not with the Holder Justice Department tolerating New Black Panther bounties on private, un-indicted, unconvicted citizens...intimidating white voters...fomenting voter fraud...illegal immigration...
David C| 5.21.12 @ 11:26PM
"Justice will play out if we are fortunate, and those who still uphold the law will accept the verdict either way. May cooler heads prevail."
One might accept any verdict while being unsure of the facts and believing he couldn't know any better than the jury. But your statement seems to imply that upholding the law means accepting injustice when you clearly recongnize it simply because legal authorities didn't.
I can't accept that. Perhaps I'm just not a cool head. (But then accepting injustice because the law called for it is exactly how the US got itself into the racial mess its in -- and apparently will be in till its doom.)
olainfree| 4.18.12 @ 8:11AM
You make a number of good points, but I take exception to your characterization of the event in this paragraph, Mr. Ferrara:
"On the night of the shooting, Zimmerman going to the store himself observed a black youth, 6 foot plus, high school football player walking alone in the rain and looking around, possibly for opportunity, in a gated community that had been robbed many times before. Zimmerman knew the community's residents, and correctly identified the youth Trayvon Martin as not one of those residents."
Zimmerman did not identify Martin as a black youth until later questioned by the operator for a further description. It was Martin's erratic behavior on that rainy night that aroused Zimmerman's interest. Martin was not behaving like someone who belonged in the neighborhood.
Zimmerman's response seemed to sound unsure about the identity of the race. After all, wouldn't that hoodie have made an ID less certain. And, no, I am not suggesting that wearing hoodies is a racially-charged or gang-related garment. They are popular with all teens.
olainfree| 4.18.12 @ 8:16AM
Another point that I find troublesome in the media's portrayal is that they (and the race-baiters) act as if Zimmerman was stalking Martin with a drawn gun.
olainfree| 4.18.12 @ 8:16AM
Another point that I find troublesome in the media's portrayal is that they (and the race-baiters) act as if Zimmerman was stalking Martin with a drawn gun.
John| 4.18.12 @ 8:18AM
Excellent article. But why does Ferrara adopt the media's use of "Trayvon" and "Zimmerman"? This is an extremely subtle way of making us familiar with "Trayvon" while distancing us from "Zimmerman." Why not refer to one of the subjects as "Martin" and the other as "George"? The media has already created the picture of a cherubic young boy (often referred to as a "child" even though he was a 6 foot tall football player) who was shot by a scruffy looking malcontent.
martin j smith| 4.18.12 @ 8:19AM
I wish I could have faith in our criminal justice system. Time will tell. But in the mean time the media the President and race industry have already convicted Zimmerman and this special prosecutor who seems like a real jerk is of no help at all-- her agenda is to appease the mob.
I do hope Zimmerman gets real justice not the phoney baloney crap of the Communist Party's show trials..
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 4:53PM
Remember Nifong? I'm betting that Zimmerman will be exonerated like the Duke U boys and this 'special' prosecutor, who's undoubtedly up for election soon, will find herself out like Nifong. But then, I'm an incurable optimist.
numbatdog| 4.18.12 @ 8:37AM
Dear Peter,
Please don't let facts interfere with a nice PC public lynching.
A white Jewish (Hispanic) gun toting predator shot a candy loving 13 year old honor student for walking while black.
What could be clearer? Already tried and found guilty in the media and the black panthers, Zimmerman is a walking dead man.
So move on. Besides, a race war is good for Obama's re election.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 3:50PM
All people named Zimmerman are not Jewish.
Neither are all people named Stein Jewish.
Nor all people named Berg.
Names are not indicators of one's religion - especially if the last name is preceded by Reverend, as in Jackson or Sharpton.
Thinking so, is a sign of insufficient information, or more formally, ignorance. Wise up.
numbatdog| 4.18.12 @ 6:31PM
Dear DTOM,
It's a little sad when someone completely misses the point of a comment.
Anyhow, to enlighten you, each of the references to Zimmerman or Martin were used by the MSM at some stage. It is therefore a tongue. in cheek piece
The Jewish label was added by the black panther spokesman.
All American American| 4.18.12 @ 11:27PM
What about people named Steinberg?
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:01PM
My dear friend Shlomo Zimmerman is Jewish and was devastated to hear that all Zimmernans are not Jewish. Does your statement mean that he's been suffering a delusion lo the past seven decades?
I think you mean to say that not all Zimmermans are Jewish rather than to limit Jewishness to nonZimmermans.
See olainfree? I know how to pick nits too. And I'll bet there are lots of others who can as well.
R Martin| 4.18.12 @ 8:51AM
So many people have voiced strong opinions about this case with no real knowledge of the facts. My knowledge of the facts is just as good as theirs and here's what I think: a man very likely to become a career criminal, and a violent one at that, has been eliminated. And I'm standing my ground on that view.
Frekki| 4.18.12 @ 9:49AM
Thank you. As someone who has lived in very dangerous areas that's my take on it too.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:06PM
Thanks R, there's nothing I like better than a declaredly closed mind. Most people might hesitate to predict another's future based on a story that they admittedly know little about so I suppose it's very courageous of you to do so. Or something...
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.18.12 @ 9:12AM
Under Florida law people who "stand their ground" do not have to face trial. There is little evidence available to convict Zimmerman.
Contrary to the comments above this is still America and Zimmerman need prove nothing. The burden of proof is on the state and I'm amazed the whole process hasn't been thrown out of court for lack of evidence.
The reason the reason the prosecutor dropped the Grand Jury option is because she knew that based on the evidence available a Grand Jury would not indict George Zimmerman.
The article claims that a trail must be held. If that's true it's only because the prosecutor needs the publicity.
The real shame here is that Zimmerman's rights are being forfeited for the convenience of the state.
For a prosecution to be succesful under the charge the state must prove a "depraved mind." That will most likely not happen.
Also, the article refers to Trayvon Martin as a high school football player. More accurate would have been high school drug dealer.
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 2:14PM
According to the 5th Amendment, no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime except on indictment of a Grand Jury. Is 2nd degree murder an "infamous crime?" And I think you are right in that a Grand Jury would have refused to indict. This entire process from the Florida AG is a travesty. It is politics, not justice.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:07PM
With the possible exception of your closing sentence, hear hear!
Scontrone| 4.18.12 @ 9:12AM
Excellent article, but I question the suggestion that a jury trial is appropriate in these circumstances. Granted, a jury trial would clear the air and reduce tensions, and that that might be a benefit even to Zimmerman, but why should the burden of a jury trial be imposed on Zimmerman when the State of Florida has done such a poor job of stating a criminal charge against him. The special prosecutor has avoided putting the question to a grand jury probably because she realizes that a grand jury would likely reject a criminal charge against Zimmerman. Instead she charged Zimmerman on her own authority with 2nd degree murder. A number of legal experts have questioned the viability and propriety of such a charge with at least one characterizing her action as unethical. A jury trial might be the best thing politically, but it is Zimmerman himself that must bear the expense and stress of a trial to say nothing of the fear that a jury may feel a conviction of Zimmerman would be less costly than the social disruption of an acquittal. No one should have to stand trial just because a lynch mob is howling, especially where it appears from the available evidence that no crime has been committed.
The Big E| 4.18.12 @ 9:45AM
"No one should have to stand trial just because a lynch mob is howling"
This is very true. It is also true, however, that no-one should be able to avoid trial simply becuase they have a louder mob of supporters.
When this situation is boiled down to its barest essence, you have a case where an armed man shot an unarmed man on a public street.
Was it self-defense? Was he just "standing his ground"? If Mr. Ferrara's article accurately relates the facts, the answer to those questions is yes. But regardless, they are questions which should be answered by a jury.
There are consequences which flow from killing another human being, even when that killing was justified.
I don't have any reason to belive George Zimmerman stalked Trayvon Martin, enticed him into a confrontation knowing that he, himself, was armed with a deadly weapon, and shot him out of malice. But if he does not face trial for shooting an unarmed man on a public street, someone else will do exactly that.
However this case ends, it will not end well. If Zimmerman is acquitted, Florida (and other places) may explode in riots. If Zimmerman is convicted, Florida (and other places) may explode in riots. If Zimmerman was never charged, Florida (and other places) might have exploded in riots.
And let's be honest about it - there may nothing that Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan and their ilk would like to see more that Florida, and other places, exploding in riots.
I fear it's going to be a long, hot summer (and fall, and maybe winter and spring , too).
albert constantine jr.| 4.18.12 @ 10:18AM
As is noted above, Self defense is generally an affirmative defense (even with a statutory Stand Your Ground provision, if my very limited familiarity with Florida law is accurate). It must be asserted in a judicial proceeding; if not a jury trial, before a judicial office knowledgeable about the law's provisions.
While judges in Florida are elected, I'm not sure that pressure doesn't cut both ways in this one. Likewise, one can add the fact that Zimmerman's father is a former elected judge there (I believe in the contiguous county).
Should the proceedings against Zimmerman be terminated with acquittal or other means without a finding of guilt, I would not be surprised ly large scale civil unrest. It is important to remember that the riots in 1992 did not occur after the Rodney King arrest in 1991, they followed the acquittal of Wynn, Briseno, and Kuhn of assault in the case bu a Simi Valley jury of their peers.
It also bears mentioning that the jury did not acquit Powell on all counts in that case, but was unable to reach a verdict. Having followed a lot of the trial testimony on my lunch hour, I remarked prior to the conclusion that I thought Powell didn't look good, but not guilty verdicts were likely for the three defendants who were ultimately acquitted, based on the evidence I had seen presented (which included the entire video and context of the encounter, frame by frame). The jury, which viewed all of the evidence presented in the case drew the same conclusions.
The rioters in L.A. (and elsewhere) were apparently less concerned with the defendants receiving due process, and erupted instead in the spectacle which included Reginald Denney getting his skull drop kicked by Damian "Football" Williams.
Meanwhile, I imagine the Korean Marine Association of L.A. and others are replenishing their supply of ammunition, and clearing their fields of fire, awaiting what happens in this one. The property owners in the Liberty City district of Miami are also likely consulting their insurance policies, recalling the wave of destruction following the acquittal in the McDuffie homicide.
As the French say (with much better accents, spelling and punctuation than I), "Plus ca change...".
Mike W| 4.18.12 @ 10:20AM
I would say that if the riots materialize (I am not convinced they will, regardless of this issue's resolution) then we should all be Korean Grocery Store owners. Think back to the LA riots of 92 and the only people that stood up to the rioting mobs.
Appleby| 4.18.12 @ 4:47PM
They did so in Atlanta, too I have heard that the Korean Grocers Association is the best trained militia in America.
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.18.12 @ 12:51PM
"But regardless, they are questions which should be answered by a jury."
Why? Do you think it's appropriate for every person who defends themselves resulting in death should be automatically tried for murder? Nonsense! Charging a person for a crime when none was committed is wrong.
The Big E| 4.18.12 @ 5:33PM
"Charging a person for a crime when none was committed is wrong."
And in our system, who makes the ultimate determination of whether a crime has been committed? You? A law enforcement officer? A prosecutor? A judge? Or a jury?
If Mr. Zimmerman was acting in self defense then I hope he is acquitted. If he was not, then he should be convicted. But a jury of his peers should make that decision, not you or me.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 6:09PM
The Big E,
But, in this country, we don't have trials to determine if a crime has been committed. That is what an investigation is for.
Only if enough evidence is found to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime was committed, do we proceed to a trial.
The investigative process was short-circuited thanks to Al Sharpy-Sharp, and the other race hustlers.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:15PM
You're mistaken Nick. Reasonable doubt is for the jury to decide otherwise we'ed have prosecutors rejecting case because they were not 'slam dunks'. While that does happen it is the exception, and I'd like to keep it that way for obvious reasons, rather than the rule.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:11PM
Again E, hear hear!
Cpm| 4.18.12 @ 2:50PM
"When this situation is boiled down to its barest essence, you have a case where an armed man shot an unarmed man on a public street."
This apparently took place during an assault where there was a firearm present which was essentially up for grabs and the first one to it would be the only one to walk away.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 4:09PM
You forgot one important fact.
The unarmed man was sitting on the armed man's chest, banging his head on concrete.
Ask yourself this question: If a 170 lb person is sitting on your chest and you go for the gun in your waist band, why oh why, wouldn't the guy on your chest be able to take the gun away from you?
Maybe, it was because he had both hands on your head and was too busy banging your head on the ground to notice you trying to save yourself.
I'm sorry, but anyone missing this simple point is an idiot, just an idiot.
And the alternative to 'standing one's ground' is 'retreat.' Where are you supposed to retreat to when the guy is sitting on your chest? Are you supposed to tunnel out from underneath him?
And if every time someone saves his own life he has to endure and pay for a jury trial, you can kiss your freedom goodbye. A jury trial will cost you half a million dollars, minimum. And that's not covered by Social Security, Medicare, or ObamaCare. And your submerged house won't cover it either, will it?
That liability is just another freedom ending.
Hey, kids! You do not have the right to act like a criminal, beat the crap out of somebody, then be memorialized as some kind of hero when your poor, stupid victim gets lucky and saves himself at the cost of your life!
Trayvon might be in Hell. Trayvon might deserve it.
He might be in Heaven. He might deserve that, too.
I don't know and you don't know either.
But George Zimmerman is IN Hell on earth - no question...and he to all appearances to law enforcement back in FEBRUARY when this actually happened as not liable under the law!
Where the Hell is LA Raza to take on Sharpton and Jackson, anyway?
Yucchh!
The Big E| 4.18.12 @ 5:43PM
And if you are correct in your assertion of the "facts," then George Zimmerman should be, and probably will be, acquitted - which means the justice system will have worked.
But if you are incorrect, if the facts are not as you contend, then George Zimmerman might have committed murder. And if he did, and is never charged, then a murderer would be allowed to walk the streets without having faced a trial.
The Big E| 4.18.12 @ 5:35PM
The key word there, CPM is "apparently." The "facts" you cited are disputed. The facts I cited, that an armed man shot and unarmed man on a public street, are undisputed.
Disputed facts are properly resolved by a jury.
Cpm| 4.19.12 @ 5:11AM
So if it was reversed and Trayvon had wrested Zimmerman's gun from him and shot him, then it is still an armed man shot an unarmed man on a public street. I see your twisted logic. Scratch "apparently". There WAS a struggle. There WAS a firearm present. You assault an armed man you are probably going to get shot.
ggoblue| 4.18.12 @ 9:18AM
i sent money to him at http://therealgeorgezimmerman.com/
his paypal addy is
zimmermangeorgem@gmail.com
this man will be crucified in our place. lets support his family in a big way.
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.18.12 @ 3:05PM
ditto
kwan| 4.18.12 @ 9:27AM
More than likely this is a political decision by prosecutor Corey in an effort to cool down the situation. Were Zimmerman to be found guilty the concept of self-defense would be thrown into total chaos. Any judge with an iota of competence would, based on the evidence dismiss Corey's case as a waste of taxpayer money. Should that happen you can count on AG Eric Holder to try and turn it into a civil rights case.
Doctor Right| 4.18.12 @ 9:29AM
...and lurking behind all of this is the ever-present and unspoken threat of widespread violence by black Americans if Zimmerman is acquitted.
And who can blame them, actually?
After all, who will ever forget the way that white Americans went on a rampage after O.J. was acquitted, and decimated suburban neighborhoods throughout major American cities?
What??
That never happened?!?!
Well wadda' ya know?
jaytrain| 4.18.12 @ 9:32AM
In an attempt to add some utilty to the 'debate' here , I recommend the chapters in Boston's Gun Bible which relate to firearms , personal defense and the law . Good advice from an unabashed even proud defender of the 2nd Amendment
gearjammer| 4.18.12 @ 9:38AM
Our media suffers from more than political bias. These journalist are perverse sick animals. They want the riot the blood the violent days-they are monsters.
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:21PM
"If it bleeds it leads." gearjammer.
nathan| 4.18.12 @ 9:50AM
The facts presented here are a bit selective. What Mr. Ferrara doesn't tell us is that we have been told that Mr. Williams called his father? someone and told him he was being pursued by a strange white person. Again given that it was dark and rainy, both of them could not see well adding to the problem.
The dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow. Stand your ground means stand your ground. When you are not doing that how much of the law applies? Zimmerman has an obligation to demonstrate that he had a REALLY good reason to follow Williams instead of waiting for the police. Does what we know support that? Doesn't look like it. He claimed that he needed an address to give to the police. He lives in the hood and he didn't know where he was? How credible is that?
But also again, Williams if he made that call it suggests HE was fearful for his life. Supposedly when Zimmerman encountered him Zimmerman reached into his pocket for his cell phone. You're Williams here. You've already expressed concerns about this guy. Dark rainy night. What do you think he's reaching for? A weapon? Was Williams acting in self defense? Maybe. And would have been unnecessary if Zimmerman had in fact STOOD HIS GROUND and not pursued.
So yes let the jury see this one but see all of it. Hear about the phone call Williams made if he made it. Let's have some insight into Williams state of mind too. Because if in fact he was fearful for his life, then what he did to Zimmerman made perfect sense. What any of us, unarmed, might have done too.
Neighborhood watch people are not the police. When they are told to do something BY THE POLICE, they probably need to pay attention. That may be the lessons learned here.
2Anglico| 4.18.12 @ 9:58AM
You did not read the article either. Or you have no reading comprehension. ALL of your concerns are addressed in the article. No "selective" editing was done by the author. You just don't like the obvious conclusion, Zimmerman was justified!
Len| 4.18.12 @ 10:06AM
It is amazing to watch this kind of thing.
Nathan says " the dispatcher told him not to follow"
Dispatcher actually said " you don't have to do that."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan says Zimmerman pursued
The article stated Zimmerman returned to his car and was confronted there.
Just 2 examples. I could go on, but really how can someone converse with someone who continues with a manufactured narrative contrary to the facts presented?
Old Soldier| 4.18.12 @ 10:10AM
If this really makes it to trial, Zimmerman's attorney is going to have a field day exposing inconsistencies and outright lies by William's family.
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 11:38AM
Who the Hell is Williams????? Is he a white/eskimo who was stalking the police dispatcher? Unbelievable ignorance.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:23PM
Ha ha ha!!! It is amazing how the subconscious mind works. Nathan erroneously called Martin "Williams" no less than seven times, and then Warrior called Martin "Williams." Right train, wrong track. Hello??
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 10:19AM
With every new comment that you post, Nathan, you manage to get stupider and stupider. Quite an accomplishment, really.
The person that Mr. Zimmerman shot was named Martin, brainiac. But, you know all the facts of the case, don't you, moron?
Mike W| 4.18.12 @ 10:21AM
You said it for me. How can this Nathan person have any credibility when he repeatedly uses the wrong name?
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:25PM
Who's on first? Williams.
gearjammer| 4.19.12 @ 10:40AM
He'll soon be hired as a fact checker for NBC.
albert constantine jr.| 4.18.12 @ 10:30AM
Nathan;
I believe the deceased in this case was Trayvon Martin, not Williams. That notwithstanding, while I think letting the facts being revealed through due process is appropriate, I find your position a little surprising.
Generally, you seem to embrace an absolutist approach to civil liberties, and a rather libertarian distrust of governmental authority, particularly when you think it has been abused.
In this post, you seem to value the advice of an emergency communications dispatcher, and conflate it with the sworn authority of the police.
While the article and other accounts are in dispute as to whether or not Zimmerman was in compliance with the operator's suggestions, I find it curious that you are siding with the authority of the government over what could be construed as the rights of a citizen.
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 1:21PM
What about the rights of a citizen to walk down a street without being chased by an armed man?
albert constantine jr.| 4.18.12 @ 1:53PM
DRed;
I think you need to explain the definition of your use of the word "chase". I have read or heard of no account of the events in February that suggests that the standard usage of this verb has any application in what occurred.
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 2:07PM
Well, if you listen to the tape of Zimmerman's call to the police, he complains to the dispatcher that 'these assholes always get away' and then that Martin is running and that he's following him. I suppose he could have been following him very slowly, but if you've caused someone to run away from you and you are following them, I believe it's reasonable to state that you are chasing that person.
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 2:17PM
"Chase" implies an attyempt to capture. Zimmerman made no attempt to approach or capture. He merely reported what he saw and stayed in visual contact to complete the report.
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 4:29PM
He saw a kid walking down the street at 7pm talking on a cell phone. Why was he even calling the cops? What's so suspicious about that?
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 6:02PM
Were you there, DRed?
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 6:27PM
No, I wasn't. Were you? You seem far more certain about what happened than I am. So maybe you can tell me what was so suspicious about Trayvon. Kid walking home with some candy at 7pm. That's not really a time when you'd expect someone to be out breaking into houses. I wonder what it was about him that was so suspicious, or how it was that Zimmerman knew that he was one of those assholes who always get away with it. (whatever that is) Any ideas?
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 6:54PM
No, DRed, I wasn't there.
And, unlike you stinking, racist lefties, I haven't made any conclusions in this case. You are the one who is "certain" that Mr. Martin couldn't have been acting suspiciously, remember?
All of this is beside the point, anyway.
Again, it is not against the law to follow someone.
The only point of fact that determines whether, or not, a crime was committed, is who attacked whom first.
But, you racist liberals aren't interested in facts, are you? You want to distract and obfuscate with, "How was Trayvon acting suspicious?"
Or, "Zimmerman used a racial slur" (which turned out not to be true. What a shock! Liberals lie!)
Or, "Zimmerman didn't have any cuts or blood in the police video" (another lie!)
You have already made up your mind. You want this Hispanic male convicted.
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 7:18PM
No, I'm not certain. Since he went to the store to buy candy before watching the NCAA championship and he was killed very close to the house where he was staying, I think it's reasonable to think he was just walking home. We know from phone records that he was on the phone. So I wonder why it was that Zimmerman found him so suspicious that he had to chase after him. Had it been you on the street in a hoodie, do you think he would have called the cops?
Stinking, racist lefties? Sigh. Nick, Nick, Nick-didn't you used to lecture Margie about not living up to Christian standards of behavior when she'd start insulting others? But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 8:27PM
Blah, blah, blah, DRed. That is all supposition and speculation on your part. You don't know anything. I don't know anything. Only the detectives and prosecutors know the facts.
That doesn't stop you bleeding hearts from ignoring information not favorable to Mr. Martin and believing any rumor that casts Mr. Zimmerman in a bad light. I'm willing to wait until the prosecutor produces her proof before I conclude one way or the other. Even if she does seem to be a flake.
Mr. Zimmerman is a Hispanic male. Liberals want to convict him without all of the facts. That's what makes you guys racists. This a tenet of liberal ideology. I'm only using your playbook, remember?
Besides, what would you know about Christian virtues? Lefties hate Christians.
albert constantine jr.| 4.18.12 @ 11:24PM
DRed;
From a professional standpoint, I've chased people and I've followed them. The objective is clearly different.
Of course, the subject of either may not be aware of my objective. While young Master Martin is reported to have expressed concern about the person following or watching him, I've yet to hear that he called (or asked anyone to call) the police, or anyone else to assist him. The absence of that might tend to suggest that he might not have feared for his safety, or he was confident that he could deter the threat with his superior size, strength or skills. If it was the latter option, he was tragically mistaken.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 3:05PM
How many times do I have to tell all of you racist lefties, DRed?
It is NOT against the law to follow someone.
Stop trying to railroad this Hispanic male into prison.
Trinacria| 4.18.12 @ 3:30PM
What about the price of tea in China?
K.Hunter| 4.20.12 @ 5:44PM
Okay nathan, let's start with your first error -
The victims name was Martin, not "Williams", second no one told Zimmerman not to follow Martin, instead he was told that it was unnecessary to continue to do so, third this case does not involve the Stand Your Ground law since neither Martin nor Zimmerman was doing so by any reasonable definition of the term, fourth Zimmernam took the dispatcher's advice, abandoning his surveillence of Martin to go find a street address aid the police in finding the two men, something for which you evidently find fault, fifth you seem to have little if any command of the facts as known through the police report, statements, testimony and recordings available. All in all one is left to conclude that you have no idea what you are talking about and simply want to cast doubt on the shooter's motives in which case your comments might be more appropriate on the Huffington Post or Daily Kos or NBPP websites.
Frank Drackman| 4.18.12 @ 9:50AM
Ground, Schmound,
I just wanta know what 9mm load stops a Strapping Young umm....
"Youth" with one shot.
And I know a puny 25 auto to the left ventricle will do the job even if it's spent 90% of its marginal muzzle velocity pentrating skin and clothing..
The FBI wasted several clips of 9mm on those Miami Bank Robbers in 86' and only won when an agent shot one of the bad guys in the head with a .357 magnum.
and whats the over/under on how many substances will be found in the Late Mr. Martin's precious bodily fluids?
I'm thinkin THC, PCP, and a little of Columbia's best Co-Cai-ane...
Frank
Ted| 4.18.12 @ 11:23AM
The best 9mm load to stop a big strong man? Anything chambered in .45 ACP.... ;)
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 11:48AM
And I've seen people killed with a .22. One guy was offed by a fellow prisoner with a single thrust to the chest of a welding rod (I opened his chest in the ER - he nailed his right pulmonary artery). Shirley, Frank you know that 9mm PARABELLUM means "for war" and was the standard pistol and submachine gun round used by the Germans in both world wars. The hundreds of thousands killed by 9mm rounds weren't on THC. PCP, or "Co-cai-ane" (but maybe you are). There is no doubt that a single 9mm chest wound killed Trayvon Martin (aka "Williams"). What the hell is your point??????
Louis Jenkins| 4.18.12 @ 12:01PM
We shouldn't get into an argument over the size of a round or ballistics. .22, .25, 9 mm, .40, or .45, all have the potential to kill a man. It's the placement of the round. Keep shooting until the subject collapses, or catches on fire.
Jack London| 4.18.12 @ 10:22AM
Amazing. Ferrara must have been there as he knows exactly what happened. I take it he will be first defence witness.
The facts as they are, of course, is that the police failed to secure the crime scene and failed to investigate properly, and it was only through the diligent efforts of Trayvon's family that a case is being brought.
The disgusting comments here from the usual AmSpec white supremacists only underline the deeply unpleasant fact that are still too many such crud who would gladly see summary lynchings for blacks make a comeback.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.18.12 @ 10:26AM
You sound like a black supremacist. Congratulations!
DC| 4.18.12 @ 10:47AM
Bill--Jack knows exactly what he's talking about. See, he was a decorated military veteran and police internal affairs investigator, knowledgeable about how and when to properly use firearms, and I'm sure well acquainted with violence in his own neighborhood, and experienced at taking careful, racially-sensitive, measured responses.
Or, he's a braying jackass, a foaming at the mouth racist, and the kind of person who's going to be facing the various barrels of guns that FL residents are (if they aren't insane) stocking up on in record numbers right now.
Jack L has thrown in with the Sharptons, the welfare addicted scum, the race hustlers, and the liars, who aren't at all interested (despite their protestations) in knowing the facts (most on this site are humble enough to know that they don't know all the facts, per Don Rumsfeld, there are a lot of known unknowns here). What they want is Dear Leader's Praetorians to support their disarmament agenda, and keep heading inexorably down the path of turning former American citizens into slaves of the Socialist States of America, with Il Duce Nero as the beneficent capo thereof. Anything and everything, including a dead black teenager, whether or not justifiably killed, that advances that agenda must be milked dry of all political power before moving on to the next distraction. Nice work, Jack. Hope you've got good reflexes or good body armor. Actually, I hope you don't.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 10:40AM
Spare us your sophomoric hyperbole, Jack. No one cares. Justice is being done. Just because you can't see Zimmerman hanging from a tree at the hands of the Black Klan (the Not-So-New Black Panthers) doesn't mean justice hasn't been done.
Go lick Al Sharpton's hair. He's got one out of place, you lackey.
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 10:46AM
"The facts as they are, of course, is [sic] that the police failed to secure the crime scene and failed to investigate properly..." How do you know this? Based on the preponderance of evidence already presented publicly, the police did a rather thorough investigation and found no basis for prosecution. Just because the investigation does not support your pre-conceived notions does not mean a proper investigation was not done.
It is the tactic of the revolutionary to take an incident and turn it into something it isn't for propaganda purposes. Mr. London is one of those "useful idiots" of the Left who does this, as his post clearly demonstrates. This was not a racial profiling case. This was a neighborhood watch seeing someone suspicious, in an area where numerous crimes have already been committed. This was not "vigilantism". It was a case of protecting one's neighborhood. And this was not an attack on Martin. Martin himself initiated the confrontation that led to his death. Zimmerman did not approach Martin. He REPORTED him. Martin then assaulted Zimmerman and threatened his life. (If you don't think having your head bashed into pavement is life threatening, you are quite stupid.)
Nothing posted here today suggests that any poster is a "white spuremacist." To make a brazen accusation such as this is simply a lie.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:19PM
It's really surprising how, knowing that we all know who you are and that you repeatedly misrepresent facts, you continue to post here. I guess Media Matters really must pay you by the post.
Trinacria| 4.18.12 @ 3:33PM
Read the article, sport. First page. The author states that the facts are taken from the police report. Dumbass.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 10:36AM
I'm not a big guy. I'm about 5'4, 147 & 33 years old. I've taken judo & aikido since I was 17. If confronted with a fight, my objective is not to trade punches with people, but throw them down so I can get the hell away. And if I can take someone to the ground, even better. I've had to use my training a total of 3 times, and only one of those ended up on the ground.
Those were party/bar fights from my mis-spent youth. But even then, the idea that someone could easily pull out a gun was foremost in my mind. Which is why I have always been careful & have picked my battles. Now, however, every kid, be they black or white, think that they're extras from "The Wire." In my hometown of Memphis, EVERYONE now packs because the criminals have not STOPPED packing, nor have they stopped the 3-5 violent car jacking a day. 3 years ago, 2 black men carjacked another black man. The victim's car was a stick. And the carjackers shot him.
Better tried by 12 than carried by six is my motto.
Y'all MUST WATCH this Video! I heard this on Quinn & Rose in the Morning yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....plpp_video
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 10:51AM
It must be remembered that gun control laws affect only those who actually obey law. Crimninals carry weapons all the time and no one stops them. Gun control laws are INTENDED to disarm victims so criminals can go about their trade unimpeded by citizens. Yes, you read that right. Government INTENDS that there be crime and that citizens are powerless to stop it. There are numerous political reasons for this and it has great historical precedent.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 11:36AM
I couldn't agree more!
obeara | 4.18.12 @ 10:43AM
I am a Florida resident, and I am disgusted with what is happening in the court here. I saw Bondi on MSM. She said she wants "justice for Trayvon". Note the fist name as if he is a child not a 17 year old. And she does not want justice, but "justice for Trayvon". She said she had met Trayvon's parents and they are "amazing people". She also said their lawyers "are friends of mine". She said she had appointed a special prosecutor, and listed her qualities. Compassion was on the list. A case based on feelings not fact, including the feeling that the parents are "amazing people", and their lawyers are Bondi's friends does not look as if there is going to be justice in Florida. And Gov Scott gave the go ahead to this farce when he took the case off the regular route and handed it to Bondi to reroute to Corey. I have not seen Gov Scott standing up to Sharpton and the Black Panthers.
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 12:05PM
Scott and Bondi have seriously damaged themselves through their willing participation in this transparently political indictment. I've read the affadavit which MUST support the charge of second degree murder in order for this case to get past the first motion to dismiss. How many others have read it? It is a disgrace.
The "affadavit" starts by stating flatly that Zimmerman "profiled" Martin. This is a purely political statement, and in fact, we're not even sure of its definition. The affadavit proceeds to declare that Zimmerman "confronted" Martin. There is absolutely NO evidence for this conclusatory statement (which does not indicate whether the "confrontation" was visual, verbal, or physical) and Zimmerman's version to the police is otherwise. Putting all else aside, if Martin struck the first blow then Zimmerman is innocent (without even needing to invoke the "Stand Your Ground" statue and it's all over.
The affadavit fails to include the obvious exculpatory evidence of Zimmerman's injuries, grass stains on the back of his shirt, and AN EYEWITNESS WHO SAW ZIMMERMAN LYING ON HIS BACK WITH MARTIN ON TOP OF HIM AND BEATING HIM.
The affadavit is REQUIRED to state a factual basis which supports the charges. It fails to do so. Even the slanted language noted above does not state a factual basis upon which Zimmerman could be convicted. Any ethical and knowledgeable judge would throw it out and flail the prosecutor for submitting such an inadequate document to the court. Don't expect it.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:33PM
Conclusatory? Are you inventing words?
Wade Smith| 4.18.12 @ 10:59PM
Conclusatory Adj. See Conclusory
Conclusory adj. (1923) expressing a factual inference without stating the underlying facts on which the inference is based -- Also see conclusional: conslusionary.
BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 329 BRYAN A. GARNER ed. 9th ed. (2009).
Barky K9 | 4.19.12 @ 3:09AM
I've read all the comments and yours if the most intelligent...Thank you Buckeye
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 4:16PM
I thought the statue of justice wears a blindfold because she doesn't care what you look like, just what you did!
'member?
Father of Marines| 4.18.12 @ 10:44AM
Amen. Sanity at last!
"Civil unrest" by progressives ends when order is enforced with risk of bodily harm. To the FL National Guard dealing with riot situations I say, look toward the back of the crowd and pick out the ringleaders egging them on.
cuban pete| 4.18.12 @ 4:08PM
The ringleaders will be at the nearest all you can eat buffet, no where near the "action".
John Ortmann| 4.18.12 @ 10:55AM
Regarding the so-called "profiling." As I understand it, it was dark, raining, Martin was wearing a "hoodie," and Zimmerman presumably first saw Martin as some distance. I can't believe Martin's race was even apparent when Zimmerman first became suspicious of him, before making the first 911 call.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:35PM
How do you know from what distance Zimmerman observed Martin?
Jill Johnson| 4.18.12 @ 10:58AM
Ah, one little quibble here -- the case should not need to be resolved by a jury, it needs to be dismissed. There is not enough evidence to even get it to a jury, as the initial investigation showed.
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 12:08PM
Amen. Justice has not been serve to this point. Idiotic comments about how a jury needs to decide this case show contempt for the cause of justice.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:15PM
These idiotic comments are made with the mindset that the public needs to be convinced Zimmerman is not guilty. I think it was a line echoed by Rick Scott when he decided to throw his hat into the ring. The public needs to be reassured, they say. Forget about actual justice, it's the public opinion that matters.
Von Mises Jr| 4.18.12 @ 10:59AM
Perhaps Holder is indicating that federal charges may be brought against Zimmerman in case Florida pushes the decision past the election and violence does not otherwise occur?
A crisis is a terrible thing to waste.
Anthony| 4.18.12 @ 11:05AM
The Zimmerman arrest warrant is the most flimsiest, fact challenged statement necessary to support the elements of 2nd degree murder, that I've seen in over 30 years as a trial lawyer.
This state's attorney is a disgrace; and if I were the judge, I'd throw this warrant back in her face and give her a homework assignment, similar to what the 5th Circuit did to Obozo and Holder's corrupt Justice Department, on how to write an arrest warrant with necessary facts.
However, if this is the level of justice in Florida, especially with the mob mentality that is screaming for Zimmerman's head, then I'm afraid there is little hope for Zimmerman getting a fair trial.
Time will tell, but so far, poor Zimmerman looks to be set up for a sacrifice to the mob.
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 12:09PM
And if they can do this to Zimmerman, they can do this to any of us.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:13PM
Remember the whole Casey Anthony debacle? The mob in Florida already condemned Anthony, but when it came time to present evidence in court, there wasn't any and the jury found her free. This gives me some hope that Zimmerman will also be given a fair trial with an unbiased jury.
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 2:25PM
Mr. Anthony, as a trial attorney can you tell me why you think the AG avoided the Grand Jury? And is a charge of 2nd degree murder NOT an "infamous crime"? If it were, then a Grand Jury would be mandatory, according to the 5th Amendment. And I agree completely. This is politics, not justice.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 2:51PM
Ground Control,
The grand jury requirement of the Fifth Article of Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America does not apply to the several states. In Michigan, we don't have State grand juries, we have preliminary examinations.
Therefore, the requirements for impaneling a grand jury would fall under Florida law, not COTUS.
Nite| 4.18.12 @ 8:02PM
I do not think Zimmerman can get a fair trial in Sanford. If he is acquitted, then Sharpton and the New Black Panthers will fan the flames. The New Black Panthers already offered a bounty on Zimmerman dead or alive. Then there is Holder in the background and watching out for "his people". You are correct, this state's attorney is a disgrace.
cowgirl| 4.18.12 @ 11:22AM
This whole things smells as rotten as the Rodney King debacle...
Pete| 4.18.12 @ 11:33AM
At least the race hustlers in power are revealing their stack ranking of race biases to us. It appears that some minorities are more equal than others. Shocking. I hope all Hispanics take note of this lynching of one of their own and vote accordingly in November.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:12PM
They won't. They have race baiters of their own who will follow the Democrat Party line and stand with Sharpton and other race hustlers. It's why the media was quick to label Zimmerman as white, and white only.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:39PM
No, they called him a "white hispanic." No one ever called him "white" that I am aware of.
Ground Control| 4.18.12 @ 2:26PM
If I remember correctly, "white hispanic" was used by the "Media" a few hours after "white" had been the published narrative.
loulou| 4.18.12 @ 11:44AM
I must say, the death of Trayvon is not a tragedy. It's sad for his family and friends but I don't see a tragedy there.
The real tragedy is the railroading of George Zimmerman. He has the weight of the federal government against him.
Trinacria| 4.18.12 @ 3:36PM
Loulou,
Spot on. Tragedies occur when bad things happen to good people, not the converse.
Louis Jenkins| 4.18.12 @ 12:04PM
The trial will be interesting. Let's see just how much evidence the prosecution has, and then see how it will get lambasted by the defense. However, the jury's make-up will be the deciding factor.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:08PM
If Casey Anthony could get a fair trial in Florida, I think Zimmerman has a good chance at a fair trial as well. Remember, the public was already calling for the death sentence even before Anthony went to trial.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 4:20PM
Was the Casey Anthony trial fair? How the hell can you know?
Or is your definition of a fair trial one that ends with an acquittal? Because that is not the definition of a fair trial; it is the definition of the end of law and order!
buckeyeman| 4.18.12 @ 12:12PM
The facts of the case which are publicly know do not support the charges. If the prosecutor has other evidence, it should have been put into the affadavit. Since it was not, it is reasonable to assume that such incriminating evidence simply does not exist. Shame, shame, shame, on Governor Scott and AG Bondi, as well as that "thing" of a special prosecutor, Corey.
Drek| 4.18.12 @ 12:04PM
None of us should ever, ever forget the role of Pam Bondi in this, and the role of that rotten Governor, Scott.
Call their offices!
Let them hear how outraged you are.
Burn down their damn phone lines!
You'd be surprised how much such things register with such people.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:07PM
I always felt that Scott was going to turn out rotten. His dealings with Solantic never sat right with me. I personally wanted Bill McCollum, the former AG who is one of the people leading the fight against Obamacare in the Supreme Court, to win the Republican nomination for governor in Florida, but Scott had more money.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:05PM
See, Peter, the part of Zimmerman following Martin is the part that almost everyone gets wrong, either to deliberately mislead or because they have been misled themselves. Zimmerman was following Martin, but then he stopped following Martin and went back to his car. It was then Martin who went looking for Zimmerman.
This particular detail would weaken the case of Sharpton and the New Black Panthers in the court of public opinion, so no wonder it's been twisted and misreported so much in the national media.
Bob S| 4.18.12 @ 12:06PM
Oh, and on the second page, it's Trayvon MARTIN, not Trayvon Williams.
Drek| 4.18.12 @ 12:11PM
The author says that Bondi and Scott have great futures ahead of them in our party.
No.
They need to be made to understand that their futures just blew up, because they caved to savage demands from howling mobs in the street.
They failed THE test of governance, which is courage and character.
Especially Bondi, who was on thin ice with her whacked out defense of Romneycare and her support for his nomination!
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 12:37PM
There is NO evidence in the 'public record' what it will come down to is who STARTED this altercation, we KNOW Zimmerman chased after Martin, what we don't know is who grabbed who first, if it was Zimmerman, he is toast, if it was Martin, it would depend on the provocation, maybe he was standing his ground with a crazy Hispanic guy messing with him. THE second question is how did the gun come into play, starting to lose a fight is NOT lethal force territory. Yes, you can get punched in the face even knocked down, no you can't just start shooting.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:43PM
How many times do you have to be punched or had your head slammed to the ground before you can use that gun? Does he have a duty to die first?
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 1:49PM
Less, if you worked out your body and didn't rely on a gun to make up the difference in your physical shortcomings.A Police Office might Mace,Taze or beat you with a Baton, but wouldn't shoot you unarmed.
Skippy| 4.18.12 @ 2:05PM
And that is the difference between a dead cop abiding by his silly ROE's, and a living George Zimmerman.
BTW, don't bullshit us by saying a cop would go through each ascending level of threat response when being beaten on the ground before he shot the perp.
You know that's a crock.
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 2:27PM
Well that's the ONE reason, I don't like female cops, because of their weak physical strength they escalate into gun use FAR quicker than a Big Male Cop, who can handle most situations physically.
Cpm| 4.18.12 @ 3:14PM
No attacker is going to leave his victim armed. If he discovers his victim is armed, he is either going to run away or try to disarm him. When there is a struggle for a firearm that is a life or death struggle.
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 4:32PM
That is exactly what did NOT happen.
OK consider: Witnesses reported that Martin was sitting on top of Zimmerman.
Zimmerman's gun was in his waist band.
Why didn't Martin just grab the gun away from Zimmerman?
Because Martin's hands were too busy banging Zimmerman's head on the concrete.
Otherwise, the second Zimmerman pulled his gun from his waistband, Martin would have seen it and grabbed it. Being on top, Martin would have had the leverage advantage to grab and control the gun.
So Zimmerman got the point blank shot off to stop his head being bashed to smithereens.
Dark? Couldn't see the gun? Too bad. Want to avoid getting shot? Don't sit on top of citizens and bang their heads on the ground.
Oh yea and all of Reverend Jackson and Sharpton's braying will only bring harm and misery to Trayvon's family in the long run.
Just wait and watch.
DTOM
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 3:14PM
What do YOU know about cops. How many do you know personally? The ones I know, back home, have a department that's so pisspoorly run (so's the City of Memphis), they can't afford tasers. They carry collapsible Asp batons, police issue chemical mace & a S&W .40 cal. In a city like that, you are not afforded much time to think about whipping out your Asp to bash someone who's already on top of you. Plus, if someone goes for a cop's gun, they are trained to go for it first, if possible. They are taught to treat that as a direct threat to their lives.
Did you know most cops also carry folding knives like a CRKT M-16K-Z not only for cutting seatbelts, but as a holdout weapon?
Oh, & I don't care how much you "work out" or "take care of yourself." If all it takes is someone to blindside you, then what do you do? Tell us, Zen fight master.
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.18.12 @ 3:27PM
"...if you worked out your body and didn't rely on a gun to make up the difference in your physical shortcomings"
Is it too late to nominate for dumbest post of the day? Zimmerman was in the wrong here because he wasn't in good enough shape? Are the handicapped allowed to own guns in your world?
DTOM!| 4.18.12 @ 4:34PM
Or 105# women? The number one beneficiaries of concealed carry legislation!
Slacker| 4.18.12 @ 12:44PM
1. Zimmerman can’t get a fair jury trial because race trumps truth everytime.
2. Had Treyvon punched a cop in the nose, and the cop shot him, the cop would not be on trial. The cop would get a medal.
3. Those top notch Florida conservatives will flop.
4. Sharpton, Jackson, and the Black Panthers will get their way (they always do).
5. Riots are equally likely, be they in celebration or protest of the final outcome.
6. Zimmerman is screwed.
8. The term “white Hispanic” tells you all you need to know.
PaulC| 4.18.12 @ 1:13PM
Do you mean to say that anyone who shoots somebody in self-defense, no matter how clear-cut the circumstances, should be hauled before a jury. The facts may be less than clear in the Zimmerman case, but I can imagine situations (I don't even have to imagine them, since there have been countless real-life situations, such as home invasions) where the person acting in self-defense is so obviously justified in pulling the trigger that an investigation should be unnecessary.
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 1:26PM
Absolutely, What if your Conservative Son was dating some girl, went to her house one night to see her and her Dad shot your Son dead, would YOU want an investigation? This does bring up a good point though some of you gun nuts DO want that, NO investigation, IF that wouldn't fly with a police officer involved shooting why should it with a private citizen. The reason is because your scared what an investigation might find, that you are a coward and killed someone who wasn't a threat.
PaulC| 4.18.12 @ 1:59PM
Did my son break into the house, or simply knock on the door? That would make a difference. How about the recent case of the young mother who shot and killed one of the two thugs who broke into her house? Should she have been investigated? Too bad the man whose wife and two daughters were killed during that home invasion in Connecticut wasn't able to save them by killing the two intruders. If he had been, should he have been subjected to an investigated? I said I can imagine clear-cut cases where shooting somebody in self-defense is so obviously justified that no investigation should be necessary. Do you believe the two cases I've cited here fall into that category?
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 2:09PM
Sure, either one is 100% justified, but the way you determine that is with an investigation. I am sure that was done in the case of the young Mom, but it was VERY clear cut. The guy broke her door down, was armed with a melee weapon and was shot in her house during the time she spoke to the police. Remember even if the police/prosecutor charge you it, doesn't mean your guilty, all it means is now you have to convince a jury, should be NO problem if you are clearly in the right.
PaulC| 4.18.12 @ 3:02PM
I was only taking issue with his statement that if someone is shot and killed, even when the shooter acted in self-defense, "the ensuing investigation is not going to be easy for the shooter, in any event." In some cases the investigation should be easy for the shooter.
Slacker| 4.18.12 @ 3:10PM
I don’t know why I bother with an asinine chump like you but…
Once you are charged with a crime, you are fucked –which is why we have of stand your ground laws. Right isn’t enough when one goes to trial (criminal or civil). Even when one is 100% innocent, the prudent things to do is plea bargain or settle. Jury vindication usually isn’t worth the risk or expense.
The system depends on honorable prosecutors. In this case either the first DA or the new special prosecutor has acted wrongly. Something sucks either way.
Now go off and masturbate or something you pathetic clown.
LiveFreeOrDie| 4.18.12 @ 3:41PM
I don't know why anyone bothers. His posts are juvenile and show a lack of knowledge, experience or common sense in any discussion regardless of the subject matter. King, what grade are you in this year pal?
truebluepatriot| 4.18.12 @ 8:25PM
When I took my conceal-carry class to carry in more states, we were told to expect to have out-of-pocket expenses in the neighborhood of at least $50K regardless of the circumstances. If you shoot someone for any reason, whether justified or not, it's going to cost you big bucks. I think they even said something about an "insurance policy" you can get as a carrier.
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 1:28PM
Blacks contributed three things to America: poverty, crime, and AIDS.
scotchieguy| 4.18.12 @ 1:45PM
And your contribution to the discussion? Zilch.
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 2:27PM
I contributed to Liberty.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 3:16PM
You contribute to furthering Move On's agenda with your false flag bullshit.
Poser troll
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 2:53PM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 3:11PM
NICK, You're a moron and a racist, Bigot NICK.
GO AWAY!
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 3:17PM
Aren't you capable of telling the truth, Billy the Bigot? What a sad, little man you truly are.
If you can't live with your racist rants, GO AWAY!
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 4:05PM
You assaulted my First Amendment.
Aren't you capable of telling the truth, NICKT the Bigot? What a sad, little man you truly are.
If you can't live with your racist rants, GO AWAY NICKY!
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 4:35PM
The first Amendment doesn't apply to private property, like this site. Hence the reason they can ban your false flagging, posing ass.
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 4:44PM
The first Amendment applies to private property. Wise up.
How many names you got?
Leave me alone.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 5:56PM
Ha! Suffer from delusions of paranoia as well as greatness, do you? Then tell me, dumbshit, why sites like this can ban your false flagging ass anytime they want to & you cannot sue them for a violation of your First Amendment rights?
I breathelssly await the staggering might of your intellect being brought directly to bear on me. I'm shivering with fear.
Dumbshit.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 5:57PM
I will never leave you alone, Billy the Bigot.
You had a chance to stop posting racist rants. You refused.
So, now, I will continue to hound you. Forever.
Don't like it? Then leave! Racist Pig.
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 7:00PM
Nick the bigot, I know that you're a racist moron, but didn't know that you still cannot give up your union thuggish mindset.
You get the hell out! Don't like it? Then leave it! Racist pig! Suck Al Sharpton's janital.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 7:04PM
What's the matter, Billy the Bigot? You going to cry?
Oh, I almost forgot:
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 3:18PM
Wow. Just... wow.
Bill, does your mommy know you're pushing the buttons on the big machine today?
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 4:45PM
Con Chef BS, does your mommy know you're urinating in your bed today?
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 5:57PM
Again, "wow," is really all I can say. This is the best the false flaggers at MoveOn got? Where's this putz from? The JV Troll Patrol?
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 7:01PM
wasting my time!
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 9:26PM
And yet you still answered.
Again, dumbshit
truebluepatriot| 4.18.12 @ 8:27PM
Yeah, THAT comment really elevated the level of civil discussion here. Go away.
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 1:31PM
Trayvon Martin was a tresspasser and got whacked. No big deal! FL will defend the Second Amendment and the Stand Your Ground law. No exception!
DRed| 4.18.12 @ 1:47PM
Hey, our favorite racist is too stupid to understand what a trespasser is! Color me surprised.
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 1:52PM
I have never seen so many people defend a FAILURE in my life. Zimmerman was a failure, he profiled a kid wrong based on his own paranoia, yet this LOSER is a HERO to people who also like to make up stuff in their heads.
albert constantine jr.| 4.18.12 @ 1:55PM
I've defended you, your majesty, but that makes me a minority of one.
Kingofthenet| 4.18.12 @ 2:10PM
Thanks Al, but I can take care of myself ;) WITHOUT needing a gun.
Con Chef (NB) | 4.18.12 @ 3:19PM
Yes. I'm sure that you will negotiate with the meth headed or smack seeking junkie who's breaking into your place & about to harm you or your loved ones, all in the hopes that the cops will get there in time. Meanwhile, you will use your krav maga know-how to disarm & incapacitate said bad guys, right?
Bill| 4.18.12 @ 2:30PM
DRed, Trayvon Martin attacked Zimmerman, and Zimmerman acted in self-defense. 2012 is an election year, and just like Rodney king in 1992, DNC is playing the race card to defeat GOP. Guess what, in 1992, after the Rodney King fiasco, Bill Clinton defeated incumbent senior Bush. Race card works always.
Nick| 4.18.12 @ 7:04PM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill the Bigot, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bigot Bill.
GO AWAY!
ebonystone| 4.19.12 @ 2:18PM
Not always. What Zimmerman needs to do is to claim that he's a Moslem, and that Martin had insulted "the Prophet". The leftist media and politicos would rally 'round Zimmerman in a flash. The Islam-victim card trumps the black-victim card.
rou
The Bruce| 4.18.12 @ 2:09PM
If anything, Zimmerman should have been cited for littering (and nothing more) -- after all, he did leave about 180 pounds of trash on the lawn.
JohnK| 4.18.12 @ 2:34PM
Can I just point out that even in England, you do not have to retreat from your own home if attacked. Just last year in my locality, two citizens killed violent attackers, one in his home, the other in his place of business. Neither citizen was charged with a crime, much less sent to trial. Both citizens had to use a knife rather than a gun, this is England after all!
Sean| 4.18.12 @ 3:21PM
Charging Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder is a miscarriage of justice. People should not be charged with a crime if all the evidence points to them being innocent. The actual charge of a crime places a burden on the innocent because they now have to provide bail, hirer attorneys, ect. The prosecutor is only suppose to prosecute a case where there is an actual crime. Putting innocent people on trial is not justice.
Herman | 4.19.12 @ 3:19AM
Yes, absolutely right...Sean.
Pat| 4.18.12 @ 3:32PM
As Tina Turner once crooned: “What do facts have to do with it?”. This latest “it must be racism” bedroom comedy is all about perception, facts are irrelevant. Over in Detroit, the local media pundits see Zimmerman as a race baiting, murdering thug. And Detroiters certainly know a thug when they see one. And, for the majority of Detroiters, the mainstream media didn’t have to doctor the 911 tapes to make Zimmerman say what the media assumed he was really thinking – they figured that out for themselves. Dan Rather nailed it also – as when he was wrongfully accused of smearing Bush, Rather knows it’s always about intentions, not about lack of evidence.
A petition collected 200,000 signatures to protest a Michigan teacher suspended for organizing an “Avenge Trayvon, kill that Hispanic cracker” rally. The Feds had to investigate this local Florida crime – the Boss said so. And Obama would have adopted someone who looked just like Trayvon if he had wanted a son – or something to that effect.
In the end, what will it matter in today’s America? This was never about justice for anyone, just revenge. And should the Hispanic community be outraged over this rush to judgment? Nah, Obama quickly assured Hispanic voters he also wanted a son who looked just like Zimmerman – or at least until he’s re-elected.
MikeN| 4.18.12 @ 3:36PM
What a ridiculous article. How does Peter Ferrara know what happened, or even what Zimmerman said? I have seen one website go through second by second with a map and it concluded that Zimmerman got back to his truck where he was confronted by Martin, then Martin left and Zimmerman got down to follow him again to see where he was going. The second time, Martin attacked Zimmerman. The place of the shooting was not near a car, as it was on an inside walking path.
But that's not what makes the article so horrible. Even having the trial just to appease the mob is A BAD IDEA. Zimmerman has rights, and they do not include letting the mob and Al Sharpton decide your fate. Even a fair trial that acquits would not appease them, and would make rioting more vicious. If there is no basis to charge, then there is no basis. Why should Zimmerman have to sit through a trial, his life resting in the hands of 12 strangers when there is no case?
WM| 4.20.12 @ 5:09PM
The prosecution admitted this morning that they did not have any evidence contradicting Zimmerman's version fo events.
One if by land...| 4.18.12 @ 5:28PM
That Zimmerman has spent a single second behind bars just goes to show how lost our country is. He should have been given and award instead of a trial. Shame on you black community!
hey middle america| 4.18.12 @ 6:23PM
776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
---------------------------
what this means is that the charges are going to be dropped
The Bruce| 4.19.12 @ 2:32AM
HMA,
You're letting the rule of law get in the way of racial politics.
An angry mob, led by the race-pimps Sharpton and Jackson, need their pound of flesh. And they'll milk it for every cent it's worth, until the public finds Zimmerman swinging from a tree -- justice be damned.
Sharpton might even make enough to pay the $1M+ in debt and back-taxes he owes to both the IRS and his creditors (who funded his 2004 campaign).
BackToBasics| 4.18.12 @ 6:24PM
I think Zimmerman was charged as a delaying tactic to keep blcks from burning cities before the election. Sharptin and Jackson were probab;y told to cool it.
It wouldn't surprise me if the case will be thrown out after the November election; at least I hope it is. Zimmerman should not have been charged period, but I still think it is nothing but a delaying / defusing tactic to give Obam a greater chance of winning in November.
It's still "law" by mob rule but I don't think it will go anywhere, long term.
There's lot's of mob-rule built into this country however. The whole welfare-state is nothing more than mob-rule in disguise.
BackToBasics| 4.18.12 @ 6:42PM
I also wonder what the reaction would have been if Zimmerman had not been involved in community watches? If Zimmerman had been in a Hispanic gang and had done the same thing to Martin who was a gang member, although no doubt in a different location/circumstances, would the outcry have been as great?
The Bruce| 4.19.12 @ 2:41AM
BTB,
You actually answered your own question. Zimmerman was initially reported to be white. When it came out that he was half-Latino, the media had to invent a new term to keep the racist (white on black) narrative going forward -- White Hispanic, a term that was never before used in human history.
When it was obvious that this "crime" involved one minority on another, the MSM realized that they no longer had a story with any teeth. So they invented a new racial term, and let the pimps stir up the mob.
The Bruce| 4.19.12 @ 2:44AM
Looking back, I'd have to say they were successful.
And they have a good T-Shirt/Hoodie business to boot. Who knew?
steve100| 4.18.12 @ 7:02PM
I spent the time reading through these comments which include some perceptive and intelligent insights buried amidst the interminable rants and personal insults. Ferrara's main point is that a jury is the appropriate means for arriving at the truth. Like the OJ jury?? In America, the cultural bias has overwhelmingly brainwashed the citizenry to believe that black skin conveys one with virtue and victimhood and that black youth are driven by whitey to commit defensive acts that often land them in jail. With such standard beliefs, any jury in Zimmermman's trial will be too biased to believe any facts that depict Trayvon as the aggressor. If one jury member dares to believe in Zimmerman's innocense, and a guilty verdict is not achieved, Sharpton's agitation will again result in hordes of looting rioters with a high probability of some resulting fatalities. Of course, Sharpton will prevail and even rise to greater prominence. MSNBC will annoint him their prime cultural warrior and even our dear leader will join with Eric Holder in raising Sharpton to a new liberal sainthood. The small minority who recognize the criminal actions of the propaganda ministry MSM and their fraudulent doctoring of evidence, as presented to their viewers, will have minimal influence against the hordes of brainwashed useful idiots, poised to re-elect their Messiah, Obama. We are doomed!
hey middle america| 4.18.12 @ 7:09PM
you can preach that jury crap all you want but until you've suffered the mental anguish of waiting a year or more for a trial and having to pay your life savings for a lawyer to defend you and then have to go through a trial when the law is clearly on your side...only then will you understand the wisdom of stand your ground
Are you kidding me| 4.18.12 @ 7:22PM
The facts of the case are that if Zimmerman had followed police's common sense instructions to not follow the victim, that the police would handle it, he would not be on trial for the murder of an innocent kid. There's the letter of the law saying that Zimmerman was not obligated to follow the instructions and then there's the damn fool neighborhood armed amateur busybody that does not use good sense and stalks a possibly armed man and puts HIMSELF in danger by instigating the confrontation with his victim. That FACT and only that fact is why Zimmerman shot an unarmed kid and is on trial for second degree murder. If Zimmerman is not a busybody and has the good sense that God gave a goose and followed EXPLICIT instructions to not follow the victim, then the police would have shown up in about 4 minutes and would have talked with Trayvon Martin and would have found out that YES, he belonged in the neighborhood and YES that he was unarmed and not a threat to anyone, and we would not be having this discussion.
The problem comes when the Sanford police did not treat this case like a normal shooting case and released Zimmerman without doing a thorough investigation of the incident to ascertain what actually happened, did not attempt to identify the victim and generally screwed the pooch police procedure wise. They took the word of a man who has shown violent tendencies in the past, having been fired for assaulting a drunk girl in a snap rage when she did not immediately do what he told her to do when he was working as a security guard at an illegal party.
I have a feeling the prosecution has facts that they have not revealed to the public that will come out at trial and this will cause Zimmerman to be a guest of the state for a while for his wanton and uncalled for actions in this incident.
Slacker| 4.18.12 @ 8:22PM
You’re right about the lack of common sense but, if Treyvon struck Zimmerman, he was no longer an innocent kid. We shall see.
A 17 year old male is an emotional child in an adult body. The 17 year old version of me would have no trouble kicking the crap out of the current me (or Zimmerman). A 17 year old is a dangerous individual.
Trinacria| 4.18.12 @ 8:42PM
I'm sure we all appreciate your thorough analysis, Geraldo. However, at the risk of raining on your otherwise brilliant analytical parade with pesky factual details, I hasten to point out the following:
1) You state that Mr. Zimmerman failed to follow explicit police instructions not to follow Mr. Martin. In point of fact, as the tapes irrefutably demonstrate, there was no explicit instruction; on the contrary, the 911 operator's statement ("you don't need to follow him") is neither a police instruction (911 operators are not trained police officers) nor an explicit order mandating compliance.
2) You characterize Mr. Zimmerman's actions as "stalking a possibly armed man". Two points: One, if one were to accept your characterization, it might very well be the first reported case in all of human history of a "stalker" actually calling 911 to report himself while engaged in the act of stalking. Two, Mr. Zimmerman was patroling the neighborhood as part of a Neighborhood Watch, the primary purpose of which is to WATCH for possibly armed men, yet you seem to be suggesting that all could have been avoided if Mr. Zimmerman was, well, a less watchful watchman. Again, brilliant analysis, except for the fact that it's neither brilliant nor analytical.
3) You accuse the police department of failing to conduct a thorough investigation of the incident to ascertain what actually happened. With all due respect, Quincy, you don't know jack shit about what the police department did or did not investigate on the night of the incident or in the ensuing days. So let's dispense with the armchair quarterback analysis, shall we?
4) You "have a feeling that the prosectution has facts that they have not revealed to the public that will come out at trial". Well, that's lovely, because I have a feeling I'm going to sleep with Salma Hayek tonight (I just hope a man's life doesn't depend on it).
DaneChile| 4.19.12 @ 7:02PM
There is no evidence to show that Z continued following M after being told it was not necessary. The author addresses this in his article if you will read it somewhat carefully.
Z was not acting in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch volunteer. He acted as any concerned resident of a private community should and would. (After this incident perhaps they won´t; they´ll remain in their straw homes and hope the Big Bad Wolf doesn´t choose them.)
Why do you ASS-U-ME the SPD did not perform a thorough and professional investigation?
M had no ID on his person and no fingerprints in any data base. SPD asked neighbors if they recognized him. Yet you claim SPD made NO attempt to ID M.
You really need to read Florida law before claiming that SPD was negligent in not arresting Z that same night. And don´t assume they had finsihed with the investigation when Attorney Crump contacted all the black activist groups to start the hooplah that he needed in order to exercise his specialty: civil rights and wrongful deth tort suits.
Frank Natoli| 4.18.12 @ 9:09PM
"Even staunch advocates of gun rights and self-defense need to recognize that if someone is shot and killed even in self-defense, the ensuing investigation is not going to be easy for the shooter, in any event."
Pete: you are correct, though the "ease" of the investigation in this case is literally and figuratively colored by the racial aspect. The local prosecutor said "no case" because a professional and objective analysis of the evidence said "no case". Now that wouldn't be tough on Zimmerman, would it? But the racists in America required the unprofessional and subjective special prosecutor to charge Zimmerman with murder, and that will indeed be tough on Zimmerman.
That said, when I went through NRA pistol instructor training 15 years ago, our instructor covered use of a firearm in self defense. Remember now, he was speaking for NY and NJ not FL, and not "colored" by race. He told us that any shot fired in self defense should be considered to be a $5,000 bullet, because that is what it would cost you to hire a lawyer for your grand jury defense. If you prejudiced your case, either through foolish statements to the police at the scene, or to the grand jury, it then became a $50,000 bullet, because that is what it would cost you to hire a lawyer for your murder trial defense. And those are 15 year old numbers. Inflation, inflation.
PCP Smoker| 4.18.12 @ 10:13PM
"Even staunch advocates of gun rights and self-defense need to recognize that if someone is shot and killed even in self-defense, the ensuing investigation is not going to be easy for the shooter, in any event. Indeed, it should not be."
This is equivalent to tyranny. If the government can relentlessly investigate you over a justified shooting, the right to self defense is, essentially, nulled. The Sanford police and DA reviewed the evidence and made a choice. The governor, a Charlie Christ Repubic apparently, decided to give in to the passions of a misled public and override the original decision.
Charles Martel| 4.20.12 @ 6:33PM
Charlie Crist is history. He left the Republican Party before the end of his term, because he had announced for the Senate, but Marco Rubio was clobbering him in the polls for the Republican nomination. So, Charlie Crist ran as a "No Party Affiliated" (Florida for Independent). Marco Rubio beat both Charlie Crist and the Democrat.
You can't fault Governor Scott and Attorney General Pam Bondi too much for appointing a Special Prosecutor, since the DA withdrew from the case, once it because political, because he knew Zimmerman's father.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the race-baiters and those using this case for political gain!
Don't blame the victims, like Zimmerman!
POST American| 4.19.12 @ 1:00AM
---We'll do a pass on this latest orchestrated
ethnic chain pulling by 33rd degree 'MAY--SINS'
and high profile Christian SAP ops ----Sharpton and Jack--sun.
----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
ebonystone| 4.19.12 @ 2:28PM
from the article: " It takes just one juror to insist that the evidence does not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for the defendant to go free."
Not necessarily. If one juror insists in holding out against the opinion of the others, then it results in a dead-locked jury. The it's up to the prosecution to decide if they want a re-trial with a new jury.
Charles Martel| 4.20.12 @ 6:25PM
More likely that one juror would insist on "guilty" while the others see this trial is all political.
Leonard Gilbert| 4.20.12 @ 6:55PM
You may have hit on something Charles. Everyone worries about George Zimmerman being unable to get a fair trial but I see it more likely that the interference by Al Sharton, Jesse Jackson, the Congressional Black Caucus...and yes, even the President and AG Holder, before the evidence was in, may make if even more unlikely that Trayvon Martin will get post mortem justice.
SetOurChildrenFree | 4.19.12 @ 5:57PM
FINALLY THE TRUTH! This doesn't guarantee justice will be served, because the mainstream media and the race hustlers still prefer mob rule. Gov. Scott and Pam Bondi have to have the guts to enforce the law. If they do, I predict easy re-election.
DaneChile| 4.19.12 @ 6:49PM
Very good article but with one error:
"Under the law, an attacker cannot claim the right to self-defense for what ensues thereafter"
Not correct. See Florida Statute 776.041(2)(a)
Resist We Much! | 4.19.12 @ 8:46PM
"Everyone in the country has heard of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman but few know the name of Trevor Dooley-a central Florida man who shot and killed a neighbor and is defending himself using Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. The Dooley shooting has a number of similarities with the Zimmerman shooting but has not been the subject of the mainstream media meltdown nor the focus of cries of racism, even though the shooter and the victim were both of different races."
Continue reading:
Sympathy For The Devils, Race-Pimps, Grievance-Mongers, & Great, White Guilt-Trippers?
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....pimps.html
Picture of the Day: If Obama Had A Son, He Would Not Look Like Trayvon
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....on-he.html
fsilber| 4.20.12 @ 12:26PM
"Even staunch advocates of gun rights and self-defense need to recognize that if someone is shot and killed even in self-defense, the ensuing investigation is not going to be easy for the shooter, in any event."
It shouldn't be easy in cases where the person shot had a clean record and no weapon and there were no witnesses. But when the person shot was carrying a weapon with his fingerprints on it (particularly a gun with his prints on the bullets in the magazine) and a criminal record for doing crimes of the kind from which the shooter claimed he was defending himself -- then the investigation most certainly OUGHT to be easy for the shooter.
WM| 4.20.12 @ 5:01PM
I don't agree that this should go to trial. The judge needs to throw the case out immediately. George Zimmerman is a human being trying to live his life, not a caricature created to serve the public or anyone's political agenda. The charges are bogus. Dismiss them and let him go on with his life. We conservatives are supposed to be individualists, and this is about as stark of an example of individualism vs. collectivism you will find.
Second, if the prosecutor comes back with a manslaughter charge, the prosecutor and anti-Zimmerman side should not be coddled - they should be denounced as vicious, immoral, lawless, and fit for retirement. The justice system is about justice, not redistributing reward or penalty so as to suckle those who have lost something (their life, a son, a racial grievance, etc.). Trayvon Martin's parents shouldn't be given a pity conviction. This is not about a compromise of interests, as in, "Oh, somebody suffered, so can't we all just defuse our tensions and conflict with a manslaughter charge as a compromise? I don't care whether it is right or wrong, somebody NEEEEDS it..." Do not help evil! Stand by the inalienable rights of the individual. Draw a hard line and support justice, and stick to it regardless of how much the other side cries, whines, pleads, threatens, or takes revenge.
Charles Martel| 4.20.12 @ 6:22PM
The only defense Angela Corey has against being disbarred for the arrest affidavit on her letterhead is that she did not sign it.
If she is that much of a coward, she should have brought the case before a Grand Jury who would have refused to indict and waste our time and money with a trial.
Leonard Gilbert| 4.20.12 @ 6:49PM
This case will hinge upon whether George Zimmerman had been released and was standing when he shot Trauvon Martin or whether he was still being pinned and beaten.