Monday, July 15, 2013

On the Zimmerman Trial amd Outcome...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny



Now that the second degree murder trial of George Zimmerman is over, with the jury's proper verdict of "not guilty", the nation begins the process of sorting out what it all means. As well as how the nation should move forward, if it moves at all.

View the following CNN video with Van Jones and Newt Gingrich... then, you be the judge. If reading body language helps pay close attention, it might aid you in making up your mind.



Now, some takes from your's truly...

This case is not about race. It is about a very stupid individual that acted stupidly in ignoring the police dispatcher's instructions on that fateful night.

The DA, as well as the prosecuting team botched both the indictment and the prosecution of the indictment. Place the responsibility where it belongs rather than screaming racism.

Bottom line, Zimmerman walked because an inept DA AMD prosecutors. It was not a case of second degree murder. Manslaughter or negligent homicide yes. And, that is how the state should have prosecuted the case.

Take 2 - The claim of racism has become so commonplace it clouds the ability to look beyond to find the truth.

Take 3 - I'm getting the feeling this whole affair might just have been planed.

1) DA brings wrong charges...
2) Prosecution could not make the case to get a conviction(intentionally?)...

3)In jumps DoD where it left off...
4) Federal civil rights violations charged...
5) Family brings wrongful death suit...

A repeat of the OJ fiasco... and both Holder and the President get some positive publicity.

Just sayin...

Really, Zimmerman should be made to pay some price for his abject stupidity (which by the way in and of itself is not a crime) that resulted in the untimely and unnecessary death of an innocent young man (not a child).

I'm not an attorney or a judge but I think 12 to 20 might be reasonable.

Stand your ground works when you have NO other alternative. Zimmerman had alternatives he CHOSE not to take.

Take 4 - Parents of any young man (or children as well given the drive by shootings and all in neighborhoods) should be concerned that things like this happen.

This is an issue of individual lack of judgement in Zimmerman's case as well as a systemic (cultural) issue.

If reason can prevail (on both sides) there is a chance the systemic (cultural) issues can be resolved.

The individual lack of judgement and respect for the rights of others will always exist. It is how we deal with these that determines who we are as a people.

Calm, following a storm almost always leads to the most appropriate implementation of safeguards.

There you have it. The takes by Van Jones, Newt Gingrich, and your's truly. What is important is your take.

What say you?

Via: Memeorandum

39 comments:

  1. Wasn't about race?

    Zimmerman wasn't profiling? You can't possibly believe that.
    It was about Zimmerman virtually stalking matin because he didn't look like he belonged. Now I wonder what that means.

    This was all about race from the point Zimmerman decided to stalk Martin right through the coverage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ducky: you are imagining things. Show us evidence of racial profiling instead of wild guesses and sleazy innuendo.

      Delete
    2. Ducky, perhaps you have evidence the jurors didn't?

      If so I am sure everyone would be more than interested in seeing it.

      Delete
  2. Here is the actual police transcript of the killer, George Zimmerman, the night he shot Trayvon Martin dead:

    Dispatcher: Okay, and this guy is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

    Zimmerman: He looks Black.

    Dispatcher: Did you see what he was wearing?

    Zimmerman: Yeah. A dark hoodie, like a grey hoodie, and either jeans or sweatpants and white tennis shoes. He's [unintelligible] he was just staring...

    Dispatcher: Okay, he's just walking around the area...

    Zimmerman: ...looking at all the houses.

    Dispatcher: Okay.

    Zimmerman: Now he's just staring at me.

    Dispatcher: Okay--you said it's 1111 Retreat View? Or 111?

    Zimmerman: That's the clubhouse...

    Dispatcher: That's the clubhouse, do you know what the-- he's near the clubhouse right now?

    Zimmerman: Yeah, now he's coming towards me.

    Dispatcher: Okay.

    Zimmerman: He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male.

    Dispatcher: How old would you say he looks?

    Zimmerman: He's got button on his shirt, late teens.

    Dispatcher: Late teens, ok.

    Zimmerman: Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out, he's got something in his hands, I don't know what his deal is.

    Dispatcher: Just let me know if he does anything, okay?

    Zimmerman: How long until you get an officer over here?

    Dispatcher: Yeah, we've got someone on the way, just let me know if this guy does anything else.

    Zimmerman: Okay. These assholes they always get away. When you come to the clubhouse, you come straight in, and make a left. Actually, you would go past the clubhouse.

    Dispatcher: So, it's on the left-hand side from the clubhouse?

    Zimmerman: No, you go in, straight through the entrance, and then you make a left-- you go straight in, don't turn, and make a left. Shit, he's running.

    Dispatcher: He's running? Which way is he running?

    Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood.

    Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?

    Zimmerman: The back entrance... fucking punks.


    "Fucking punks, and "these assholes always get away" and "he looks black."

    Tell us, RN, on evidence did the killer, Zimmerman, have to make him believe Trayvon Martin was a "Fucking punk?" And on what evidence did the killer, Zimmerman, have to make him believe Trayvon Martin was getting away with anything???

    Simple answer: Trayvon Martin was black. Some breaking and entering in that area was perpetrated by some black males. Zimmerman made an assumption based on Trayvon's color that he was a "fucking punk" who would "get away."

    Not one bit of his assumptions were true. Trayvon Martin was walking back to his father's house and was killed by George Zimmmerman because of his racial profiling.

    The transcript is there for everyone to see.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it is, for everyone to interpret, read into, make emotional assumptions, analyze, and conclude what they will. Just as you have done, as I have done, and millions of others have done. None of us sat in the jury box, viewed and heard every piece of evidence nor were we charged with the responsibilty of bringing a verdict.

      I consider my view reasoned and rational, as you and millions of others do.

      Zimmerman, as I stated should serve time. His abject stupidity in ignoring the dispatchers instructions and his decision to pursue Martin and ultimately use deadly force (in self defense) against an unarmed young man was the poorest of judgement. The supposition by the left that Zimmerman was racially profiling Martin is conjecture however.

      At any rate I'm pretty sure much mote will be forthcoming. Political pressure will be immense.

      Delete
    2. As for Zimmerman being a racist, the FBI interviewed 35-40 people and the only person who said anything even remotely untoward was some wayward cousin. a) The man is 1/8th black himself. b) He has mentored numerous young black kids. c) He came to the defense of some older black dude who had allegedly been mistreated by local police. d) He took a black chick (some girl from Barbados) to his own high school prom.......Yes, Trayvon was black. But he was also walking SLOWLY...IN THE RAIN...ON THE GRASS..LOOKING INTO PEOPLE'S WINDOWS (or at least that's what Zimmerman alleges). Being that there had been a bevy of burglaries in that area, maybe it was that that Mr. Zimmerman was profiling here - not his race......And even if he HAD been racially profiling Mr. Martin, that does not give Mr. Martin the right to assault Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, Mr. Zimmerman used some awful judgement in getting out of the car that night, but bad judgement isn't against the law and the fellow had every right to defend himself.......And it's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, Shaw. You do in fact know that, correct?

      Delete
    3. Yes, Shaw. The transcript is there for everyone to see: including how the dispatcher demanded that Zimmerman describe race. Nice "spin" to conjure racial profiling on Zimmerman"s part. Pure imagination. And you ignore the actual racism, racial profiling by Martin: his racist slur into the phone.

      Les: Once we get past leftist imagination on this, I tend to agree with you that Zimmerman should have just gone home:

      http://inaholdingpattern.blogspot.com/2013/07/george-zimmerman-in-better-world.html?m=1

      I would't call Martin "innocent" though: he had engaged in criminal activity and was impaired as a result; and this was surely a factor in the incident also. Just as a drunk driver whose intoxication causes a problem is not innocent either.

      Will also points out the fact that Martin was trespassing on people's yards and prowling. Also criminal activity. A truly bad kid doing bad.




      Delete
    4. Shaw: it is deceptive to describe someone going up to peoples houses and looking in the windows as merely "walking home". Good kids don't do this. Punks do. Race has nothing to do with this, time to stop imagining.

      Delete
    5. Because there were many robberies in that area the last year done by young black males. How many black homes are broken into by young white males? Plus Martin already was already arrested for burglary previously. I would say he was a punk looking to rob a house.
      I don't understand why those on the left are in denial

      Delete
  3. Well, at least Shaw didn't omit the part about the dispatcher ASKING Zimmerman whether the person was black, white, or Hispanic, a la MSNBC (an entity every bit as loathsome as Fox, in my book).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Kudos to Shaw for that.

      Every bit as loathsome as Fox? I'd say more so by a thin hair's width.

      Delete
    2. Yes, Will. It is the height of crazy spin to imagineer GZ answering a dispatcher's question into GZ actually doing "racial profiling".

      I detest the policy of racial profiling, and condemn and never defend it. But I do have standards, and answering a dispatcher's question about race is not racial profiling in any way.

      Delete
  4. ".Yes, Trayvon was black. But he was also walking SLOWLY...IN THE RAIN...ON THE GRASS..LOOKING INTO PEOPLE'S WINDOWS (or at least that's what Zimmerman alleges)."

    That is an allegation that has no proof, except that the killer made the allegation to the police. No proof, except what the killer alleged. You used it above to justify Zimmerman's suspicion of Trayvon Martin. Why?

    His activity "impaired" Trayvon? Now how do you know that? Were you there?

    "Trayvon Martin had traces of THC in his blood.

    Toxicology tests reveal that the drug THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, was in Martin’s system, although it does not mean he had used it on the night of the shooting. Marijuana can stay in the user’s system for 30 days or more depending on the potency of the plant, the user’s metabolism and other factors. Only a trace amount was found in his blood. If he had used it just prior to the shooting, much more would have shown up in tests.


    SOURCE



    The police, in their shockingly sloppy handling of this case, did not test Zimmerman, the killer, for drugs.

    "While the mainstream media made sure to report with exclamations and gasps that marijuana was found in Trayvon Martin‘s system on the night that he was killed, many outlets failed to also report that the level was well below what medical studies show cause “performance impairment.” The same can not be said for George Zimmerman. According to the paramedic report, the vigilante neighborhood watch captain was on the prescription drug Temazepam, reports MSNBC.com."

    Zimmerman used prescription drugs Tamezapan and Adderall. Google George Zimmerman and prescription drugs, and see what comes up. Then research the side effects for the drugs Zimmerman was on.

    Are you not aware of your own prejudiced assumptions here?

    George Zimmerman has a history of physical abuse: On the record, he assaulted a police officer, and a woman, who had to put a restraining order on him.

    That is evidence.

    Not the word of the killer--the only witness who supposedly saw Martin "looking in windows."

    You and Will choose to believe the man who killed Trayvon. That's your choice.

    I don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shaw: You showed no evidence of any such "prejudices". In fact, the only hint of any is found in your comments, where you insist on judging people on skion color instead of looking at facts. Speaking of facts, the drug abuse Martin showed evidence of is a crime in Florida. At minimum, Martin would have served a 30 day jail sentence for what you insist he would have been OK to have done within the last 30 days. In other words, he belong behind bars and off the streets. Why? Because he was a bad kid and chose to engage in these crimes.

      Not sure what you were saying about the witness testimony about Martin prowling. Also noticed you refused to address the problem of his being an evil-minded racist, as proven by his bashing GZ using a racial slur.

      Evidence of any such racism on GZ's part? Crickets...

      Delete
    2. Zimmerman passed numerous lie detector tests, fully cooperated with law enforcement, and didn't lawyer up. That, and all of the forensic evidence supports Mr. Zimmerman's rendering of the story. You're the person whose made a boatload of assumptions here, Shaw.............Other facts - a) The cops lied to Zimmerman and told him that the incident was registered on tape and Zimmerman's response to that was, "Thank God." b) Zimmerman told the police right off the bat that he was screaming for help and he did it well before he knew that there was an audio. c) That Goode witness stated that Trayvon was on the top and administering "ground and pound". d) Trayvon had a full 4 minutes to get to his destination (less than 100 yards away) and instead decided to confront Zimmerman. e) The first charge you cite against Zimmerman was dropped and the second one reduced. f) The forensics clearly indicate that Martin was on the top in that the shirt had to have been dangling for it to have shown the type of bullet hole that it did.............Not only is there reasonable doubt in this case, most of the evidence points to the fact that this was a political and malicious prosecution.

      Delete
    3. Grass stains on the back of his jacket I would also add.

      Delete
  5. The second question a dispatcher is trained to ask is about ethnicity. The first is Male or female. Remember, the dispatcher isn't their and the officer they are sending there is going in blind. Asking the persons ethnicity is not profiling. They are gathering as much info as possible to relay to the officers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very valid observation. The more info the better.

      Delete
  6. I say I agree with Van Jones and disagree with RN and Newt. Stand Your Ground isn't a strong "self defense" law, it is a strong "encourage murder" because you can claim "self defense" law. If not for SYG Zimmerman would have been arrested immediately, the police would have taken the issue seriously, and the evidence would have been properly collected and preserved. Also race WAS a factor. Zimmerman said "they" always get away with it. They = black thugs.

    Will: As for Zimmerman being a racist, the FBI interviewed 35-40 people and the only person who said anything even remotely untoward was some wayward cousin.

    George's dad is a racist! That's where he picked it up.

    Shaw: You and Will choose to believe the man who killed Trayvon. That's your choice. I don't.

    I don't either (for all the reasons Shaw gave).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guess you are banned after all huh wd/DS?

      However, your DW comment, making a sweeping assumption that I agree with Newtie is again your first flawed incorrect assumption. I neither agree with either Newtie or Van Jones in total. But they both make valid statements worth considering. There is truth in both gentleman's statements.

      As to my position read again: "Really, Zimmerman should be made to pay some price for his abject stupidity (which by the way in and of itself is not a crime) that resulted in the untimely and unnecessary death of an innocent young man (not a child).

      I'm not an attorney or a judge but I think 12 to 20 might be reasonable.

      Stand your ground works when you have NO other alternative. Zimmerman had alternatives he CHOSE not to take."

      I realize you are a lock step goose stepping progressive, But, I never really thought you were reading or comprehension impaired. My statement here, as well as similar statements made on other sites have been consistent. They in NO way alleviate Zimmerman of his share of responsibility. His actions were in the final analysis what caused the death of a unarmed young man. Even given that once he determined to follow (or if you prefer pursue) Martins, and in response to Martin's attack and Zimmerman's right to self defense then use of deadly force was not warranted.

      The argument can be made by those who support Zimmerman's use of deadly force that it was necessary to prevent possible further serious injury or even death at the hands of Martins. Of course this is BS and there is nothing that would lead one to believe this would have happened.

      And if Zimmerman had listened to the dispatcher and left Martin to continue home the police would have arrived and the matter would have been handled properly.

      I continue to maintain the jurors verdict of not guilty of second degree murder was the correct one. I blame the DA primarily (incorrect charges brought), and the prosecuting team secondarily (although the case would have been difficult to prosecute regardless of the prosecuting team) for the lack of a conviction.

      The system worked, as designed and intended. That does not mean justice was served. Zimmerman should not have walked a free ,an without doing some time.

      Now I know you progressives just go berserk when someone, or in this case MILLIONS of someones do not see Zimmerman as racially profiling Martin (check his ethnicity, the work he has done with blacks that is positive, etc.) and that it is not a race issue at it's center.

      But as they say wd/DA, you are entitled to your opinion and view and I am entitled to mine.

      Thanks for visiting. But ya really should work on that stretch tendency you seem to have.

      Delete
    2. My wife's parents were both racists/anti-semites and my wife and her 2 sisters WERE NOT. Just because your parents are such and such, doesn't mean that you are. And Zimmerman's mother is 1/4th black. His dad couldn't have been all that bigoted.

      Delete
  7. Thanks for working on WD/DOA. Les. I think he has the capacity to learn.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps. Although there is reasonable doubt on that one as well.

      Delete
  8. ... no evidence of Martin's DNA on the gun despite being shot at close range and testimony from Zimmerman that Martin grabbed the gun.

    No DNA under Martin's fingernails or on his hands.

    Just a small trace on one spot of Martin's hoodie.

    I'm still curious that Zimmerman's account stood up. This evidence indicates Zimmerman was seriously beaten?
    Maybe dmarks can answer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ask the jurors, Ducky. And remember, I tend to agree with Les on what the verdict should have been.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why would anyone pofile?

    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/trayvon-martin-burglary-tools-and-pcp.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. William Saletan at Slate has the absolute best analysis of this:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/07/trayvon_martin_verdict_racism_hate_crimes_prosecution_and_other_overreactions.html

    --Silverfiddle

    ReplyDelete
  12. Emotion does not have to enter one's thinking about this verdict. The law is confusing enough to have reasonable, real differences of opinion. I agree with you, but don't classify those who disagree as emotional nuts. There is plenty of rational disagreements to go around. The idiotic "Stand Your Ground" law, the poor/bad prosecution of the State, and the unknown facts of what happened between the two.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not ready to call "stand your ground" idiotic. The overall idea to allow people to defend themselves against deadly assault is a good one overall.

      Delete
    2. Were people not able to defend themselves with a gun before "Stand Your Ground" laws? I don't remember any out cry of Floridians, or other States saying laws prevented citizens from defending themselves with guns.

      Delete
  13. ADD:
    Shaw is over the top on this and so are millions of others. Race has little to do with it. The jury came to the correct decision given the instructions of the judge and the law. In a State without a "Stand Your Ground" law, Zim would be guilty of manslaughter.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon@12:38 7/17: How am I "over the top?" And since you're scouring the internet for "over the top" comments, why do you not include comments from rightwing blogs that claim Trayvon Martin "deserved what he got?"

    I've said absolutely NOTHING about how Zimmerman should be punished or anything about his character. I referred to him as a killer because he killed a human being. Would people prefer Zimmerman being called a "shooter" because he shot Trayvon Martin? That would not fully explain what he did, since someone can be shot and not be killed. The correct term is "killer." I've never referred to him as a "murderer," as some of the "over the top" commenters on certain rightwing blogs have said--they're sloppy readers for saying that. Zimmerman was cleared of 2nd degree murder. There's a difference.

    Zimmerman will never be "cleared" of killing Trayvon Martin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have been yelling killer and racist for days. Anger, what a trip.

      Delete
  15. "Were people not able to defend themselves with a gun before "Stand Your Ground" laws? I don't remember any out cry of Floridians, or other States saying laws prevented citizens from defending themselves with guns."

    "In Florida, self-defense claims tripled in the years following enactment.The law's critics argue that Florida's law makes it very difficult to prosecute cases against people who shoot others and then claim self-defense. The shooter can argue that he felt threatened, and in most cases, the only witness who could have argued otherwise is the deceased. This problem is inherent to all self-defense laws, not just stand your ground laws. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "In Florida, self-defense claims tripled in the years following enactment.The law's critics argue that Florida's law makes it very difficult to prosecute cases against people who shoot others and then claim self-defense. The shooter can argue that he felt threatened, and in most cases, the only witness who could have argued otherwise is the deceased. This problem is inherent to all self-defense laws, not just stand your ground laws..."

      Perhaps it is just me but this implies, at least IMNHO, that self defense laws are considered by some, certainly the person penning this ridiculous statement that self defense laws are part of the problem. Which leads one to believe the intent is to eliminate the laws regarding self defense as a legal defense matter. Certainly the utopia for a goose stepping statist who considers the state almost as a a religion.

      The issue is that stand your ground laws need more explicit explanation and criteria in which the law should and can be safely exercised and used as a self defense plea. Perhaps anyone owning a firearm should be required to pass a comprehensive training course in firearm safety and including demonstrating an understanding of the law and under what conditions it is appropriate to stand your ground?Of curse for the vast majority of people this is self evident. But as Zimmerman shows all to well there are stupid propoe that have little or no common sense.

      Having said this the jurors rendered a proper decision with respect to Florida law and the testimony and evidence the prosecution presented. IMNHO. This does not mean necessarily that justice was served.

      Delete
  16. Easy to avoid any danger: don't trespass or assault anyone.

    ReplyDelete
  17. dmarks, google Michael Dunn and the killing of another unarmed African-American teenager in Florida.

    Your ignorance of what is happening out there as a result of these insane SYG is appalling.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Not as appaling, Shaw, as your pretzel logic of taking GZ obeying the dispatcher and identifying Martin and twisting it into a claim that GZ was racially profiling Martin. And YOUR own claim that punk = African American (you highlighted it above).

    Les is correct... completely... that self defense laws are not the problem at all, but some refinement would be good. As for Michael Dunn, why do you care so much about the skin color of those involved? You shouldn't: look at the facts of the case instead of your own prejudices.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.