The NRA has been the moving force behind the "stand your ground" laws all over the USA and the "immunity clause" has been a major part of it as the civil court has been used, previously, to bring ruination to those involved in self defense shootings who had not been found guilty of any crimes. However, I have read that FL law numerous times and share TJC's usureness of just exactly how this all works. I would certainly agree that the reason Ziimerman was NOT arrested before was because there was not enough evidence to show he commited a crime, under FL law.
...."I think the prosecutor was responding to political pressure by forcing the charges......... and the reluctance of the MSM to cover those, or the apparent reluctance of the police to investigate those"......
There is a really simple answer to that. Look up at my previous post and watch the video by Mike Carroll. He explains this very simply. There is only money to be made, and political power to be gained, by the professional race-baiting industry, which includes most of the main stream media, when it is "white on black racism" thus the necessity of making Zimmerman a "white hispanic".
Blacks killing other blacks is not interesting to these critters at all!
Here's the $64 question for today:
Will George Zimmerman take the stand? I can think of at least three reasons NOT to do so, and three to do so, Moreover, this is more akin to marketing than math.
Zimmerman won't have to take the stand, my guess is there won't be anything to add to the statements he's already made to police, and I think the evidence I've seen so far is clearly in his favor that there is no need to do so. What's he going to add? " Q: Did you have malice in your heart when you observed Martin? A: No, I did not.
During the 911 call with the police, there was the following exchange:
Dispatcher: Just let me know if he does anything, ok?
Zimmerman: (unclear) See if you can get an officer over here.
Dispatcher: Yeah we've got someone on the way, just let me know if this guy does anything else.
That's need to be put into the context of the entire exchange but takes quite a bit of air out the the weak claim that Zimmerman "wasn't following police instructions".
The lefties, including the media, get to (1) Villify a gun owner, (2) Attack the SYGL, (3) "Prove" thier claims of wide-spread racism (4) Generally push the victimhood mentality, and prevent people from taking any responsibility for theirt own situaution, and also, this is subtle, (5) deflect critisism from the police for the "driving while black" mentality, and push that anger onto citizens who would merely try to protect their own property and selves.
Crump, Jackson and Sharpton have put themselves in a place where merely to question them in this situation is called a racist act. That's why Geraldo tred so gently with Crump.
Plus, I suspect Crump has dollar signs in his eyes when he thinks about the possibility of suing Zimmerman and the homeowner's association. It is very much in his own FINANCIAL interest to push this, and try to lay the blame completely on Zimmerman.
Reading some of the lefties' comments on this case, I'm amazed at how they have just dug into their failing position.
Put your liberal hats on for a minute and ponder just what you would do if faced with;
a) Racial unrest being fanned by the race baiters, including Obama over this unfortunate incident.
b) An innocent (at least until proven otherwise) civilian in need of protection from said race baiters.
I suspect the DA took the easiest course of action in order to get George Zimmerman off the street and under protective care while soothing the racial turmoil.
Of course, this has only postponed the outcome, because Zimmerman will walk, and the ghettos will burn. IMHO
Another fact I found interesting was a review of the census report of the neighborhood in which Martin was killed is shown as about 49% while, about a quarter black, and hispanic/oriental for the bulk of the remainer.
Zimmerman couldn't have been profiling Martin soley because he was black. If that were so, he would have called in a quarter of the people walking around that neighborhood. Zimmerman had other reasons for being suspicious of Martin other than merely his race.
If Zimmerman is not tried or is tried and found innocent does ANYONE think the black community will behave in a sane and reasonable way as the white community did when OJ the Slayer was found "not Guilty"? I don't recall riots, deaths, looting etc from the OJ verdict. I do recall them from the Rodney King verdict.
A friend of mine was visiting a relative in that area of Florida and made a couple of observations. He makes the rounds of gun shops every time he is down there and they were having difficulty keeping any guns and ammo in stock since the shooting. The majority of the purchasers are white, then black, followed by everybody else, all appeared to be mostly middle class, were expressing self preservation concerns about the aftermath should Zimmerman be found not guilty.
I predict a a not guilty will result in mayhem in the lower income communities, the surrounding middle class communities will be testing the stand your ground law en mass....
Does anyone have any stats on the demographics of the area. I would say the unique element would be the size of the "black middle class" in area. They are the demographic that is never spoken about . I also think that BC's
take on the situation is correct.
Go here for demographics. Whites 55%, blacks 40%
Another contradictory leftie claim is that Zimmerman:
(1) Should have just called the police, and
(2) Proof that he is a hair-trigger hysteric is that fact that he called the police a couple of times a month about suspicious activity in his neighborhood.
I guess with the lefties no matter what you do, you're scr#wed.
This is interesting:
A judge must review a Stand Your Ground defense before trial, and the case must be dismissed if the evidence shows it is more likely than not that the person was acting in self-defense.
Even if Zimmerman's conduct sparked the confrontation, he could still be protected under Stand Your Ground if he did not strike the first blow, experts say.
Evidence against Zimmerman lacking, legal experts say
If true, that would describe how a self-defense "finding" would be created.
As far as what happens if there are riots if Zimmerman is freed? At this point I say, so, what, go at it. The people who are going to be rioting and looting are the least stable, most immature and selfish of soceity. Reasonable people of all ethnic persuations will steer clear of the thing.
We shouldn't have to babysit and enable people who have the emotional maturity of six-year olds.
Tom C I understand your feelings here but in all riots, innocents get hurt. I say if a riot erupts, put it down fast and furious.
Hold those people responsible who instigate the thing.
You'll see a lot less of it.
Zimmerman's attorney is moving to seal some, if not all of the evidence (that hasn't been released yet, I guess.)
This makes sense to me. I've seen some inflammatory opinions expressed by some of the witnesses that the witnesses should not necessarily have opined on. Zimmerman doesn't need those uninformed opinions bandied about in the media which is looking for any thin shred to put their silliness on.
UPDATE: The prosecution seems to want to pursue the "Zimmerman initiated the confrontation" tack. However, I've only seen evidence from one person who was a witness to those minutes before the fight - Trayvon's girlfriend "Dee Dee" who has made statements about what she heard in her conversation with Trayvon.
One problem - Crump talked to Dee Dee before the police did. For about a week after Crump talked to her, she refused to talk to the police. Only then, after being in communication with Crump for over a week did she make her statement to police.
The defense attorney would definately try to keep that testimony out of the evidence. Watching Martin's mother turn 180 degrees after opining that the shooting was an "accident," you can imagine the pressure that that 16 year-old kid has had put on her.
The leftie media is making a lot about some witnesses "changing their stories."
These witnesses seem to have changed their stories some time after the incident - while the anti-Zimmerman circus was running on the TV!
Forget just this case, but have any of you noticed all the Black on White (or Black on other races) crime that has been happening over the last couple years? Senseless Beatings, Flash Mobs, murders, etc - WTH! Every other day it seems like something and the media does its best to either not report it or downplay it. I'm beginning to think this is really going to blow up!
It will blow Marlin, when those preparing to instigate class warfare want it to blow.
I agree Spider. All you PC people out there (including too many conservatives - on this issue) need to start speaking up and calling out this racism! Damn - be outraged a little! That is part of the problem, a certain % of the Black Community (note, I'm not saying all....but it is more than a few) feel entitled to act like this because nobody dares to call it out. You white guilt types created this monster or played a part in it.
It's already come undone, dozens or hundreds of youth looting store in "flash lootings", etc. The media just refuses to consider the social problem attached.
The leftie media is in spasms of excitement reguritating the lastest spin:
Witnesses change accounts in Trayvon Martin case in ways that could hurt Zimmerman: newspaper review
You'd have to dig to find the REAL story - these witnesses changed their accounts AFTER the one-sided media blitz:
A neighbor in the complex first told an agent March 20 that she saw two people on the ground, but wasn’t sure who was on top.
Six days later, after seeing news reports, she said she believed Zimmerman was on top of Martin.
So, how about a little honesty? How about:
"AFTER SEEING NEWS REPORTS ABOUT THE INCIDENT the witnesses changed their stories."
Secondly, how does this hurt Zimmerman's case? At least one witnesses has admitted being influenced by news reports, how many saw news stories about the incident? Also, I'd want to know - did any talk to Crump and Company? Witness DeeDee was in contact with Crump for five to six days before she talked to police.
Thirdly, changing stories hurts the witnesses credibility, and under the circumstances gives greater weight to the original story.
Finally, this adds some pretty strong fuel to the defense claim that winteness were biased by news reports, and the claim that they can not receive a fair trial.
These are obvious conclusions, why are the newspapers only telling half the story, and being deceitful, at that?
UPDATE: This writer dismisses each of the "changed" stories, and even goes so far as to raise questions of possible witness tampering:
Witness tampering in Trayvon Martin case?
This writer argues that Crump & Co. needed an arrest to proceed with the civil suit:
Trayvon Family – Show Me The Money Motivation….
I don't know if that's true. It's complicated from a logic legal standpoint.
State attorney 'outraged' by federal review request in Trayvon Martin case
We've seen the story change, and even lies perpetuated by the Crump side. I hope there is a reckoning.
There'll be no rekoning, Tom C.
The lawyers hold ALL the cards.
Including the jokers.
If anyone is near one of these flash points, I would suggest loading up on ammo.
You mean get ready to "go Korean."
Interesting connection - Crump talked to Sharpton and Jackson who then went to the media. The media repeated the distorted story, and that, in turn, influenced the witnesses. I think that could be established pretty easily, especially based on the comments of Witness Number 12. There's a bit more to that, but I haven't confirmed it.
It would take a brave defense attorney to call Sharpton and Jackson to the stand and inspect their motivavtions for coming up with the story they did. Any editor for a newspaper that picked up the story could then be brought to the stand and asked if he should have given print and creedence to Sharpton and Jackson at all after the experinces with the Tawana Brawley and Duke Lacross case. The editor could be asked if, based on his years in publishing, if he believes that the public would be influenced by his reporting.
All the defense attorney would be doing is establishing that the witnesses were influenced, and how they were influenced, which is a natural way to get the defense to discount the witnesses changed statements.
The bonus would be to get these people on the stand, and to make statements under oath, and discredit the original statements by Crump & Co. before the many revisions. I think the sham would be exposed.
I don't think you'd ever get to call Sharpton, et al. to the stand, precisely because they were NOT witnesses, if all you could show was misleading meda contact. After all, if the media are wrong, it doesn't much mattr WHY they are wrong. You could get into what news or other "stories" any witness had read / seen.
Also, if any witness changed stories because of the fear of retaliation (from the media), you could get into that. If a witness told a friend "I'll get killed if I tell it like I told the police", you could call the friend.
Moreover, if a witness had talked to Crump or Sharpton himself, or any agents for same, you could get into that - and THAT might be enough to get Crump and Sharpton to the stand.
DeeDee talked to Crump for over a week before she made her official statement. Crump appears to have influenced Martin's mother after she made a statement that she thought the shooting was "an accident." He is not above coaching people what to say.
Crump tells a lie, or a baseless narrative. Shapton and Jackson repeat it. The media reports it, the witness hears it, and uses it to change her testimony.
Just a simple chain of events that lead to changed testimony. It shows Crump influenced the witness IN FACT.
The sole legal point of putting Crump on the stand would be to establish the chain of events that led to the changed testimony, and why it was tainted.
What you would like to do is give higher credibility to the original statement, and show just why the revised statement should be discounted.
I see in the MSM breathless reports that Zimmerman was seen "wandering around police headquarters unaccompanied in the days following the shooting."
So what? Zimmerman gave 5 different statements related to this incident, doesn't it make sense that he's be in police headquarters to give them? And when I've had police business to do, I'm let in and then directed where to go, I'm not "accompanied".
Where is the MSM getting its snide hysteria?
Digging a little reveals the answer!
... Zimmerman walking unescorted through the police station. That suggests a “cozy” and “comfortable” relationship with the police, said Benjamin Crump, an attorney for Martin’s family.
George Zimmerman's 'Cozy' Relationship With Sanford Police Questioned
Aha! They are getting their marching orders from Crump & Co!
What a surprise!
Well now, Tom. That article kinda bolsters my contention he was a wannabe cop doesn't it.
He was more than that, he rode with the cops for a while and delivered a blistering report to the City Commision about police failures that he observed.
He was truly involved and believed in neighborhood safety.
I doubt if reporting publically the police "sleeping places during patrol" made him too "cozy" with those on the other side of the Thin Blue Line. Nor do I think it would go over well in a potential interview for a possible police position.
Released yesterday: Prosecutors seem to be basing their case on inconsistant and possibly self-incriminating statements Zimmerman made in his several interviews with the police.
Charlie Neville...if a person wants to be a cop is he a bad person? You use the"wannabe" epithet as a condemnation. Is it? I always wanted to be a cop until I watched the COPS TV show. That cured me.
Cops are a necessary evil............and they have to come from somewhere.
In Zimmerman's case, watcher, "wannabe" is a condemnation. He became a "cop" vicariously through the neighborhood watch program, at least in his mind. Didn't turn out too well for anyone involved, now did it! So far as I can tell Martin had done nothing to invite Zimmerman's suspicion other than walking through the neighborhood. Zimmerman had no authority to investigate why he was there. Should have listened to the 911 dispatcher and waited for the cops to show up.
Charlie, I guess we will have to agree that we won't see this the same way. I don't know that Zimmerman viewed himself as an ersatz or wannabe cop because I don't know what was "in his own mind".
You are correct that .."as far as you know Martin did nothing to invite Zimmerman's suspicion...". It is also correct isn't it, that as far as you know, Martin may have done something suspicious....
Zimmerman had all the "authority to investigate" anything he pleases to investigate. It is a free country and whatever investigation Zimmerman did was legal and required no approval or authorization from anyone.
Yes, it didn't turn out well for anyone.
While we are dealing with the issue of "wannabees", I have a trivia question for you:
Who said: "Yu ain't tell me you swung on a bus driver," ?
To whom was it said, and in what medium?
What does it indicate about what one participant wanted to be, and was?
I give up TJC, educate me.
Questions 1 & 2: Trayvon's cousin to Trayvon via Twitter. (Shortly before Trayvon met his destiny)
Question 3: Wannabe tough guy.