Trayvon Martin

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:59 am

JULY 29, 2013

Trayvon Martin was Engaged in a "Federally Protected Activity"
Why the Justice Department Can (and Must) Criminally Prosecute George Zimmerman
by ERIC C. JACOBSON
A Florida jury’s recent acquittal of George Zimmerman from all criminal culpability in the death of Trayvon Martin has stunned the nation and provoked a crisis in our race relations reminiscent of the Rodney King officers’ state trial fiasco.

President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder must now decide whether the United States Justice Department will file federal criminal charges against George Zimmerman.

To date much of the commentary on the subject has missed the overall context in which the tragedy occurred and what is now squarely at issue: Whether the backstop of federal protection for: the long drawn-out process of racial integration and reconciliation in America, and its African-American beneficiaries, still endures.

In his statement at a White House press briefing on Friday July 19th, 2013 the president referenced America’s aspiration to continuously perfect our union, reminded the American people of the steady progress we have made in race relations from generation to generation, and stated that his own daughters’ interactions with their friends and classmates demonstrates such progress. “They are better than us,” President Obama said.

The president’s own re-election last November was a further testament to the fact that the nation has partially overcome the legacy of slavery and the multiple generations of Jim Crow and segregation that followed the end of Reconstruction in the aftermath of the Civil War.

One of the reasons why George Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin has traumatized the nation is precisely because the deep south community in which it took place reflected and (literally) embodied the distinct (though still quite limited) progress Americans have made in race relations over the past half-century.

Prior to the civil rights movement and the landmark legislation that emerged from it, the kind of upscale suburban housing tract in which George Zimmerman resided and Trayvon Martin regularly visited would not have been integrated. It would surely have been “whites only”. And it is equally probable that a teenage “Trayvon Martin” (or African-American of any age) in 1963 would have been refused entry into a convenience store in any “lily white” neighborhood in Seminole County, Florida. (It is a region with a particularly ugly history of racism, one that included a very active Ku Klux Klan chapter. Those white mobsters physically menaced Jackie Robinson during a Brooklyn Dodgers’ spring training game in 1947, and firebombed the residence of the regional president of the NAACP and his wife in 1951, killing them.)

Among the odious discriminatory practices the landmark U.S. civil rights statutes passed in the 1960s outlawed were those used to enforce segregated housing and public accommodations precisely in places such as Sanford, Florida. These “fair housing” and “non-discrimination in public facilities” federal laws (eventually fortified by counterpart state laws, including Florida’s) have been remarkably effective – at least for those in or near the upper middle class. In 2012, the residents at the Retreat at Twin Lakes complex, where Tracy Martin’s fiancé Brandy Green lived with her young son (Trayvon bought the Skittles for him) were 50% white, 20% black, and 30% hispanic. Due directly to the operation of these U.S. civil rights laws, in 2012 young Trayvon Martin could visit with his father and Ms. Green in an integrated housing development and patronize the local 7-11 as a matter of course.

Prior to the fateful night of February 26, 2012, if the entire Retreat at Twin Lakes community could answer the “race question” memorably posed by Rodney King, “Can we all just get along?”, the consensus (basic) answer would have been “Yes, we can”.

And that is what makes George Zimmerman’s killing of Trayvon Martin that night so profoundly wrenching and momentous. For, if you are Trayvon Martin, what is the use of having the RIGHT to visit overnight (or temporarily reside) with your dad and his fiancé in an integrated (predominantly white) housing tract, and to go to- and make purchases at a near-by convenience store, when on either the commute to- or (as here) on the return trip, you can be (racially) profiled as a criminal, stalked and gunned down by a civilian “neighborhood watchman” while carrying the items you purchased?

Plainly, George Zimmerman committed a series of reckless acts (following his initial profiling) that culminated in the killing of Trayvon Martin (someone who had the perfect constitutional and statutory right to be in an integrated neighborhood and take a round-trip walk to patronize a local store). Zimmerman (without any license or training even as a security guard):

* exited his vehicle with a concealed firearm,

* disobeyed dispatcher instructions to stop tailing Trayvon,

* failed to extricate himself while still at a distance from Trayvon by announcing his “neighborhood watch” role (and in the unlikely event it was thereafter necessary, drawing his weapon), and

* after “getting the drop” on Trayvon during (or possibly just-following) the tussle, fired his weapon (loaded with hollow point bullets) instead of simply ordering Trayvon to back off.

In so doing George Zimmerman put the nation’s 50 year record of limited progress in race relations profoundly at risk. And because it is morally and politically imperative to safeguard the federally-sponsored process of racial integration and reconciliation in America, the United States must prosecute George Zimmerman under the applicable U.S. criminal statute – 18 USC § 245 (b)(1)(B) governing “federally protected activities”.

Consider the implications if they don’t:

* “George Zimmerman rules” governing the (formally benign) concept of “neighborhood watch” will be legitimized and proliferate. Soon (to bastardize Che Guevara’s famous dictum), there could be “one, two, many George Zimmermans” (and sadly, a corresponding number of Trayvons);

* How many African-American parents will risk continuing to live in integrated communities (at least ones with a history of racism), if a “neighborhood watch” can operate under George-Zimmerman-(self-decided)-ground-rules (ones which differed fundamentally from those recommended by the local police, which discourage any stalking type conduct and prohibit any – much less armed – pursuit)?

* For those African-American families who stay the course of integrated housing, in states with “liberal” concealed carry and “stand your ground” laws, how many older teens and young adult family members will resist the option to arm themselves for self-defensive purposes?

* Due to the bungled state prosecution of Mr. Zimmerman the overwhelming majority of the African-Americans, joined by a sizeable plurality (if not healthy majority) of their fellow Americans, have been required to witness and endure the release “scot free” of someone who they believe has committed at a minimum involuntary manslaughter – the taking of a life through grossly negligent reckless acts without any valid justification or excuse. And a sizeable minority believe Zimmerman formed an intent to kill Trayvon in advance of doing so and murdered him. This deeply offends the feeling of reverence for the life and limb of crime victims upon which our entire system of prosecution of offenders by government personnel is based. A “vigilante” response towards Mr. Zimmerman (such as the one Mike Tyson unfortunately advocated) is not beyond the realm of possibility.

No good can come of such responses. If the (post acquittal) status quo is allowed to stand, at a minimum the general simpatico that prevailed between “the children of former slaves and children of former slave owners”, in Martin Luther King Jr.’s phrase, will be replaced by perennial acute wariness. In a (very) worst case scenario a series of tragedies could ensue that would promote a vicious white backlash (and black separatism movement) that would threaten much if not all of the gains of America’s second Reconstruction and revive of the discredited doctrine of separate but equal.

Many (mistakenly) believe that a federal criminal prosecution of George Zimmerman is only viable if the U.S. prosecutors can prove that Zimmerman killed Martin “because” Trayvon was of the African-American race. One prong of 18 USC §245 (§245(b)(2)(B)) outlaws harming “because of race” those who avail themselves of state-provided amenities. U.S. prosecutors used this prong of the federal criminal statute to re-prosecute Lemrick Nelson, Jr. and other young African-American perpetrators of the 1991 killing of Yankel Rosenbaum, an orthodox Jew, during an (indiscriminate “retaliatory”) “wilding” incident in the Crown Heights neighborhood of New York City (arguing that Rosenbaum was using the city street). There, as here, justice had miscarried during the state prosecution. See US v. Nelson, 68 F. 3d 583 (2nd Cir. 1995).

However this “because of race” facet is not an element of 18 USC § 245 (b)(1)(B). That section of the U.S. code proscribes private individuals (or government personnel) from (in sum) harming any person “because he is participating in or enjoying any benefit…privilege…facility, or activity provided…by the United States.” (Emphasis added.)

The case law is clear that this prong does not require the prosecution to prove the defendant had any racial animus towards the victim. In US v. Pimental, 979 F. 2d 282, 283-284 (2nd Cir. 1992) Circuit Judge Friedman stated:

Nothing in this [statutory] language even suggests, let alone requires, that there must be a discriminatory motive for interference with the victim’s federal rights. The provision covers “[w]hoever” willfully and forcefully injures “any person” because that person has been participating in any federally protected or administered activity — here … an informant in a counterfeiting investigation. There is no reference to any discriminatory motive in this provision.

There is no doubt that (in 2012) Trayvon, his dad and the other African-Americans who comprised the 20% of the population who resided in the Sanford, Florida upscale housing development (Retreat at Twin Lakes) would not have been residing there, or been permitted to patronize the 7-11 convenience store, except for the vast social and legal changes wrought by the landmark (1960s) federal civil rights laws banning discrimination in residential housing and public accommodations respectively.

Significantly, Trayvon also had the federal constitutional right all U.S. residents enjoy to move around anywhere in their own state or elsewhere in the country: the right to “locomotion” in the Supreme Court’s words in Williams v. Fears, 179 U.S. 270, 274 (1900)). This includes intrastate as well as interstate travel (of any distance). In his concurrence in Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 US 618,642-643 (1969) (text accompanying fn.1), Justice Potter Stewart described the fundamental nature of the right to travel between and within states by adverting to:

* Truax v. Raich, 239 U. S. 33, 39, a 1915 Supreme Court case that involved the rights of an Austrian immigrant to “enter and abide” in any state of the union (emphasis added); and

* United States v. Guest, 383 US 745 (1966) at 760, n. 17. Stewart stated: “As we made clear in Guest, [the right to interstate travel] is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U. S. 449, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all.”

Although it is not impossible that a highly conservative (politicized) Supreme Court (narrow) majority might someday decide otherwise, the federal civil rights laws outlawing housing and public accommodation discrimination, plus the fundamental federal constitutional right to “locomotion” (moving around) Trayvon was availing himself of- as he attempted transit from his dad’s fiancé’s residence to the store and back, are fully sufficient “benefits” and “privileges” provided by “the United States” to support a federal indictment of Zimmerman under 18 USC § 245(b)(1)(B).

Would a federal jury convict Zimmerman? There are as many opinions as there are people regarding the true attitude of George Zimmerman towards African-Americans in general and his specific mindset towards Trayvon Martin that fateful evening. Two things however are certain: If Trayvon hadn’t been an African-American visiting in an integrated neighborhood and out commuting to the store, George Zimmerman wouldn’t have profiled Trayvon as an African-American criminal worthy of Zimmerman’s attention as a “neighborhood watchman”. And Trayvon would be alive today.

In a very real sense, then, Zimmerman fixed his attention on Trayvon simply “because” Trayvon was availing himself of his U.S. civil rights to commute on foot to the store to make a purchase in a (predominantly white) integrated community. This conclusion is fortified both by:

* evidence that Zimmerman did in fact harbor animus towards African-Americans; Zimmerman’s own cousin (designated Witness #9) so attested, as does a (seemingly) racial epithet George uttered “under his breath” to the 911 dispatcher; and

* George’s clearly audible complaint to the 911 dispatcher: “they always get away”. In the latter remark Zimmerman is affronted by the fact that the individuals who come under the suspicion of his (untrained, evidently paranoid) eye, are exercising their constitutional right to move around in the community. (This implies George would have less of a problem with African-Americans who did not venture outdoors on foot.)

Indeed, Zimmerman’s truculent “neighborhood watch” approach to those he suspected might be a criminal would constitute a menace to anyone (of any race) exercising his federal constitutional right to walk around his own community, regardless of whether Zimmerman was motivated by racial animosity. The punishment and deterrence of such civilian recklessness in the guise of “neighborhood watch” activity is reason enough to federally prosecute Zimmerman.

Perhaps the most conservative approach for federal prosecutors to take would be an indictment in the alternative under both main prongs of 42 USC §245(b) – the “federally protected activities” prong that does not require proof of racial animus, and the prong that explicitly requires racial motivation and deprivation of state amenities. As to the latter, Trayvon, like Yankel Rosenbaum, used public streets to commute to the 7-11, and Florida has its own “fair housing” civil rights law. After hearing all the evidence and arguments, the jury could be given carefully drawn jury instructions reflecting both theories of the case.

Fortunately, the George Zimmermans of the world do not get to make their own so-called “neighborhood watch” rules (ones that give the entire concept a bad name), nor can they be allowed to abrogate other people’s civil rights with impunity. Most especially, other peoples’ right to exercise their civil rights and maintain their lives.

In a federal criminal prosecution Mr. Zimmerman would still be able to assert that he killed Martin in self-defense. However, under federal law (as under Florida law even today) Zimmerman’s self-defense argument would fail if a jury determined that Zimmerman’s stalking of Martin started the confrontation. (Florida prosecutors failed to vehemently protest Judge Nelson’s decision not to give that jury instruction.) And, as to that and a myriad of other issues in the state criminal case, it is unimaginable that seasoned federal criminal prosecutors would permit Mr. Zimmerman’s “dream team” defense attorneys to run circles around them the way Zimmerman’s counsel did Florida’s bumbling prosecutors. (Among the state prosecutors’ monumental errors was to introduce materials in which Zimmerman told his version of events without having to endure any cross-examination.)

For President Obama and Attorney General Holder this is a (if not the) “defining moment” of their tenures in the nation’s highest offices: The president’s thoughtful statement of July 19th and the constructive (but too-limited) initiatives he alluded to, must not be a sop the African-American community and all concerned citizens receive INSTEAD of justice for Trayvon Martin and his parents.

To prosecute under either or both prongs of 18 USC § 245(b), Attorney General Holder or another senior U.S. Justice Department official has to certify that “in his judgment a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.”

Few propositions regarding matters of state have ever been more self-evident.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Aug 02, 2013 3:21 pm

Trayvon Martin’s parents meet with federal authorities in Miami


Sybrina Fulton, mother of Trayvon Martin, holds up a card with a photo of her son as she speaks at the National Urban League's annual conference, Friday, July 26, 2013, in Philadelphia. Fulton told the National Urban League gathering to use her story, tragedy and broken heart to stop the same thing from happening to another child. MATT ROURKE / AP

BY JAY WEAVER
JWEAVER@MIAMIHERALD.COM
The parents of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer met with Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents at the U.S. attorney’s office in Miami Wednesday to discuss the status of a criminal civil-rights investigation into the fatal shooting of their teen-age son last year.

The federal investigation, which was opened while George Zimmerman faced prosecution for the death of the 17-year-old, gained renewed interest last month after Zimmerman was acquitted in state court of Martin’s killing in a Sanford gated community.

Prosecutors with the Justice Department’s criminal civil-rights section and FBI agents from Central Florida met with the late teen’s parents, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, and their attorney, Benjamin Crump, to bring the family up to speed, according to sources familiar with the meeting.

The meeting was held in Miami to accommodate the parents. Trayvon had lived with his mother in Miami Gardens before his death, which occurred while he was visiting his father in Sanford.

A spokeswoman for the Miami U.S. attorney’s office confirmed the meeting took place there Wednesday, but she could not say who was present. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Tampa referred a reporter’s call to the Justice Department, which declined to comment because of the “ongoing” investigation.

If the Justice Department were to pursue criminal civil-rights charges against Zimmerman, the case would be filed in the Middle District of Florida, which includes Sanford, north of Orlando.

The Justice Department has a handful of criminal civil-rights laws at its disposal, and has filed charges in the past after state juries have returned acquittals.

In Zimmerman’s case, it’s possible the Justice Department might consider using the federal hate-crime statute, though legal experts say that type of prosecution would be a long shot.

The Justice Department has said that authorities “will determine whether the evidence reveals a prosecutable violation of any of the limited federal criminal civil rights statutes within our jurisdiction” and “whether federal prosecution is appropriate.”

In South Florida, legal experts said it’s going to be a formidable challenge for Attorney General Eric Holder to press forward with a hate-crime case against Zimmerman under U.S. civil-rights laws, because Florida jurors found Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder.

Jurors found that prosecutors failed to prove that Zimmerman, the volunteer neighborhood watchman at the Sanford gated community, possessed “ill-will,” “hatred” or “spite” in the fatal shooting of Trayvon. Instead, the six female jurors found that Zimmerman acted in self-defense.

So experts said it would be legally inconsistent for the Justice Department to consider filing criminal charges against Zimmerman under the federal Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. Generally, that law prohibits someone from “willfully causing bodily injury” to another person because of his race, color, religion or national origin.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/08/01/3 ... rylink=cpy
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Aug 07, 2013 4:16 pm

10 Reasons Lawyers Say Florida's Law Enforcement Threw Away George Zimmerman's Case
A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts say Zimmerman didn't face anything like a serious trial.
August 6, 2013 |

Florida law enforcement, from the local police to the special prosecutor overseeing the Trayvon Martin case, did not want to see George Zimmerman convicted of murder and deliberately threw away the case, allowing their prosecution to crumble. A growing chorus of attorneys and analysts who know jury trials and courtroom procedure say this is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from the parade of otherwise incoherent missteps by George Zimmerman’s prosecutors.

“I find it personally difficult to believe it was not thrown,” said Warren Ingber, a New York-based attorney who has practiced law for decades. “I am far from alone in this assessment, and it reveals even harder truth why this case was a miscarriage of justice.”

Ingber detailed his reasons in a letter sent to a NPR’s "Left, Right and Center" program after its liberal analysts would not touch that possibility. But there’s been a growing chorus saying the Zimmerman prosecution was not merely incompetent, but going through the motions and intentionally losing. This includes Florida talk radio host Randi Rhodes, who covered the trial daily, to New Orleans Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry whose source canvassed 20 local prosecutors, to celebrity lawyers like Alan Dershowitz and other legal analysts, and longtime lawyers like Ingber who was indignant at NPR’s commentators ceding too much ground to right-wingers.

Here are 10 key points the lawyers in these reports cite behind this conclusion.

1. There was enough evidence to convict, despite biased police work.That assessment “is itself a miracle,” Ingber wrote, citing how the Sanford, Florida police handled the killing. “Martin’s body lay in the morgue as a John Doe for three days while his mother was asking for his whereabouts. His cell phone records indicated he was on the phone as he was being killed. The person he was on with had no idea where he was. Meanwhile his admitted killer was on the loose and allowed to produce exculpatory evidence while crime scene evidence was deteriorating. It appears from videos of Zimmerman ‘strolling’ into custody that he was not that badly hurt. But in Florida the right of self-defense includes, for whites, the freedom to exculpate oneself. And when that wasn’t enough, the police stepped in, as when the lead detective Chris Serino told Zimmerman the screams for help were his, not Martin’s, over his objection.”

2. The governor’s handpicked prosecutor enters with an agenda.“No account of this trial is complete if it does not start with how the deck was stacked before the trial took place,” Ingber said. “But it continues in the identity of the person that Florida’s [Republican] Gov. Rick Scott selected to prosecute the case: Angela Corey, the prosecutor who sentenced Marissa Alexander [a black woman] to 20 years for firing a gun into the air in her own garage in defense against a convicted abuser of women. I’ll leave it to Alan Dershowitz, who knows the law of defamation, to describe her professional lapses that ‘bordered on criminal conduct.’”

3. No change of venue was demanded.There were a series of decisions made by the prosecutors that incrementally lowered their chances of obtaining a conviction. The first concerned not seeking a jury trial in another county. The Seminole County district attorney and multiple judges recused themselves, “proof that the case was a political hot potato and that there was a fear that there would be negative political ramifications following a Zimmerman verdict,” Times-Picayune editorial writer Jarvis DeBerry wrote. But the state did not want to move the trial.

4. The early mishandling of the jury.Prosecutors meekly tried to remove two jurors with very strong pro-Zimmerman biases, but did not use more forceful “preemptory challenges,” DeBerry noted. “Juror B-37… should never have been let onto the jury after she said there were ‘riots’ in Sanford over this case,” Ingber added. “How was that allowed to occur? B-37’s interview is worth a listen.” She called Martin a “boy of color” (at 10.41) and mentioned “rioting” twice (12.12 and 14.32), calling it “organized” by Martin supporters and adding that she didn’t trust mainstream media.

5. There were no men on the jury.DeBerry, citing a former prosecutor who “handled hundreds of homicide cases over his career,” said opposing an all-female jury was “prosecuting 101. In a fatal fight between men, you fight to get men on the jury. Men are more likely to convict.”

6. The jury was improperly sequestered.While talking about the jury—before turning to what the prosecution did and didn’t do with witnesses—it’s also important to note that the jury wasn’t properly kept away from interacting with the public. “Why wasn't the jury properly sequestered?” Ingber said. “Why was it given time with family members, time enough for, oh, I don’t know, arranging a book deal?” (Juror B-37 signed a contract with a literary agent immediately after the trial ended.)

7. Missteps with the state’s witnesses.The prosecution failed to adequately prepare its witnesses, such as Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with Martin during the confrontation “and was the closest thing the state had to a star witness,” DeBerry wrote.

“Why was the jury’s prejudices given free rein to suppose, as the entire nation did, that Rachel Jeantel was stupid because of her speech when she has an underbite that will require surgery that she is putting off?” Ingber explained. “Why did even close observers of the trial learn this only afterward, from this supposedly stupid witness? Could the prosecution have been even stupider? Or is prosecution of a white man for killing a black man in the South just stupefying?”

Jeantel was hardly the state’s only bad witness. “What of the ill-prepared "I know nothing" state medical examiner, who changed his testimony in the course of his examination, including waffling on the absurd notion that marijuana might have made Martin aggressive?” he wrote. “Why did he ignore testimony that Zimmerman was the aggressor? One wonders who got to this man. Surely not those Sanford rioters!”

8. More missteps with Zimmerman’s witnesses.If your side’s witnesses are falling down, lawyers usually work even harder to undermine their opponent’s case. But exactly the opposite unfolded.“The defense witness that impressed B-37 the most was that friend of Zimmerman’s (whom she mistook for a doctor) who testified he knew it was Zimmerman’s voice based on a knack acquired in military service,” Ingber said. “He had been sitting in the courtroom throughout the trial before his testimony—undisguised and adjacent to the defense team—in flagrant violation of the witness sequestration rule. He should never have been permitted to testify. Where was the prosecution?”

He cited other examples: “How could the prosecutors have been so stupid as to allow Zimmerman to testify in his own defenseby admitting into evidence his Sean Hannity interview on Fox News for the ostensible reason of admitting a minor detail?” Inger said. “Could it have missed the predictable effect on the jury’s sympathies of the defendant appearing before a fake journalist on Fox? Could it not see this for a one-sided waiver of Zimmerman’s Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination? Without risking cross-examination?”

DeBerry’s ex-prosecutor source noted more examples. “A Sanford police officer who was asked if he believed Zimmerman’s story of self-defense was allowed to answer yes without the prosecution objecting,” he said. “Witnesses should not be permitted to offer an opinion on the credibility of other witnesses or other evidence. The next day prosecutors asked the judge to strike that portion of the investigator’s testimony, and she complied. But why did the prosecutors sit quietly as the question was asked and answered?”

9. Florida’s abysmal laws compounded the botched prosecution.Many media outlets analyzed Zimmerman’s acquittal by saying that the state overcharged him—because second-degree murder has a higher standard of proof than the lesser charge of manslaughter. The lawyer-critics don’t buy that analysis, however.

“All of the evidence is that Zimmerman was the aggressor,” Ingber said. “Jeantel testified that Martin was being stalked and that Martin’s cell phone was knocked out of his hand in real time and fell to wet grass just as the struggle—obviously self-defensive on Martin’s part—commenced. The tape of the 311 call is to the same effect. Zimmerman’s self-serving testimony, the coached evidence from the detective about whose voice it was—it’s all fluff. The two telephone calls set it all out. Who was on top for a moment means nothing. They rolled around. The injuries were not consistent with a ground-and-pound attack.

“But say they were. Is the explanation of the not-guilty verdict as to manslaughter that the jury thought it is legal for a man with a gun to initiate an altercation with an unarmed boy and shoot him dead if he starts to lose the fight and fears for his own?”

The Florida law deciding this case is abysmal, Ingber said, saying that added to the jury’s confusion in getting its charge from the judge and during its deliberations. “Try reading the instructions. Really try. I did,” he wrote. “I am an attorney and thought I knew what the elements of manslaughter were until I read this. Anyone who can parse this—in written form, never mind by ear—qualifies for a Supreme Court nomination.”

“But it’s even worse,” he continued, saying these were yet more prosecutorial blunders. “During deliberations the jury, having only the legal smarts of a mere circuit court judge, asked for clarification as to manslaughter but never received them. Why was that?”

10. Florida wanted to get rid of the case, not win it.The Times-Picayune’s DeBerry said his ex-prosecutor source “said he’s polled about 20 prosecutors in New Orleans, and though all aren’t sure that they would have been able to get Zimmerman convicted as charged, each of them is convinced that he or she could have gotten more than an acquittal. It was a clear case of tanking, he argued: ‘They didn’t want to win this case.’”

There are political benefits to that outcome, Ingber said, explaining what would be the state’s motive for proceeding so sloppily and working not to get a conviction.

“Bear in mind how cost-free all of this shoddy prosecution is,” he said. “Once jeopardy attaches and a defendant is exonerated the prosecutor will suffer no judicial embarrassment because any further proceedings would be double jeopardy. Translation: Zimmerman can’t be retried and the prosecution also gets off the hook. So this could all be swept under the rug and Angela Corey and Rick Scott… can go their merry way.”

Who wins when the state deliberately loses?

It is clear that the details of the Trayvon Martin case will not be forgotten by people who watched the trial or heard it described in detail by radio hosts such as Randi Rhodes, who understand how Florida’s legal system can be stacked in favor of white defendants. The striking conclusion after listening to these lawyers is that even with all the state’s policing and courtroom errors, there was enough to obtain a conviction.

“It takes no partisan slant to see the procedural injustice in this case,” Ingber said. “It is not hard to make the case that the evidence supported a manslaughter verdict beyond a reasonable doubt. This was another O.J. [Simpson] case, except this was not a case of jury nullification. It is to the Emmett Till case what modern-day voter suppression is to the poll tax. You need to drill down to see it for what it is.”
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby parel » Sat Sep 14, 2013 8:10 pm

Medical Examiner: Zimmerman Shot Trayvon In The Back

By dave-dr-gonzo with 70 comments September 13, 2013 08:20




Dr. Shiping Bao drops a bombshell:

Image

According to the former assistant coroner, the results of Martin’s autopsy clearly showed that, despite Zimmerman’s statements regarding their altercation, there was no feasible way for Martin to have been on top of Zimmerman when the gun was fired, because the bullet entered Martin’s back.
Bao claims that the prosecution never actually asked him the questions that were crucial to the success in the case, and that he changed his opinion from the time he initially examined Martin and the time he was on the stand. Bao and his attorney say they believe he was fired for questioning the way the case was handled, and possibly for not going long with the desired narrative.
Bao testified in court that the amount of marijuana that was found in Martin’s system at the time of his death would have had little to no effect on his ability to reason—even though initially he had stated that the drug could have possible impaired his mental state.
parel
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:07 pm

^^^^thanks

Medical Examiner in Trayvon Martin Case Preparing $100M Lawsuit
September 12, 2013
*Some of you may recall former associate medical examiner Dr. Shiping Bao who testified during George Zimmerman‘s second-degree murder trial in the shooting death of an unarmed Trayvon Martin.
According to WFTV 9 (Orlando) , Bao is planning to file a $100 million lawsuit in the case.
During Zimmerman’s trial, Bao’s testimony raised quite a few eyebrows.
“I believe it is my opinion that Trayvon Martin was in a lot of pain, and that he was suffering,” Bao said July 5 during testimony in the Zimmerman trial.
Bao took the stand and changed up his testimony about vital statements he’d made. He explained that he had changed his mind on Martin being alive for only three minutes after the shooting.
“I believe he was alive one to 10 minutes after he was shot. His heart was beating until there was no blood left,” Bao said.
Well now Dr. Bao has announced that his attorney is preparing a $100 million lawsuit with claims that the medical examiner, state attorney’s office, and Sanford Police Department were all biased against Martin.
“He says their general attitude was that he got what he deserved,” Attorney Willie Gary told Channel 9.
According to Gary, Bao was made to be a scapegoat and was wrongfully fired from the medical examiner’s office. He said his client was prepared to offer proof that Martin was not the aggressor.
“He was in essence told to zip his lips. ‘Shut up. Don’t say those things,’” Gary said.
Gary said prosecutors never asked Dr. Bao a question crucial to their case.
“He wanted a question that would have allowed him to explain to the jury with scientific evidence how there was no way Trayvon Martin could have been on top of George Zimmerman,” Attorney Gary said.
Gary said that question never came.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby parel » Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:32 pm

Proud Of Killing: George Zimmerman Retweets Picture Of Trayvon Martin’s Body For All To See


In yet another effort to prove that he in fact has absolutely no remnant of a soul, George Zimmerman retweeted a picture of Trayvon Martin’s body, after he shot and killed him in 2012, on Twitter yesterday evening.

Twitter users picked up on the retweet and as of this writing, the tweet is still live.

Most of the comments under the picture have been supportive of Zimmerman.

@NavyDad0007 photoshopped the tweet to blacken out Trayvon’s lifeless body, in order to show respect for the slain teen and his family.


Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you recognize this sh*tcan as the “man” who killed the unarmed teenager in Florida in 2012 after stalking him against 911 dispatcher recommendation and getting into a confrontation with the teenager.

Zimmerman was acquitted in 2013 and unwilling to walk away with the get-out-of-jail-free card he was given and since then, he’s played his hand over and over again with law enforcement multiple times. He has been arrested for domestic violence and aggravated assault multiple times but as is often the case with domestic violence, the charges were dropped against him after the victims recanted their stories.

His latest incident was earlier this year during a road rage accident after he was nearly killed by another driver, Matthew Apperson, whom he has a history of violence with. This was their third run in with each other. Anderson is currently awaiting trial on second degree murder charges for the incident.

While other, slightly more human, individuals may have taken what happened in 2012 to turn their lives around and show the world they were worthy of the opportunities they had been given, George Zimmerman seems determined to prove to us that he is in fact, exactly the person we all assumed he was.

Image

Retweeting that picture was braggadocio in its purest form. That was a man saying here is what I did for the world to see. Gone are the claims of self-defense and ‘stand your ground’ rhetoric.

In his mind and those that support him he truly is “a one man army”. He was judge, jury, and executioner of a kid. And he’s damn proud of that fact.

This isn’t the first time Zimmerman has bragged about killing Trayvon Martin.

Editor’s note: The KKK and Neo-Nazis troll me frequently, and they retweet from Zimmerman’s account all the time. Zimmerman blocked me but not his racist followers.
parel
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Aug 04, 2016 10:03 pm

Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Fri Aug 05, 2016 8:24 am

Clearly, most people are not like George Zimmerman or he really would be dead already. Go ahead, George, keep saying it. Keep writing those checks and having to call in LE like the pussy you are when you can't cash them. :twisted:
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby Luther Blissett » Fri Oct 21, 2016 6:01 pm

A paraphrase of this quote about Ta-Nehisi Coates's friend Prince Jones has been shuffling around in my head all week this week.

Think of all the love poured into him. Think of the tuitions for Montessori and music lessons. Think of the gasoline expended, the treads worn carting him to football games, basketball tournaments, and Little League.

Think of the time spent regulating sleepovers. Think of the surprise birthday parties, the daycare, and the reference checks on babysitters. Think of World Book and Childcraft.

Think of checks written for family photos. Think of credit cards charged for vacations. Think of soccer balls, science kits, chemistry sets, racetracks, and model trains.

Think of all the embraces, all the private jokes, customs, greetings, names, dreams, all the shared knowledge and capacity of a black family injected into that vessel of flesh and bone.

And think of how that vessel was taken, shattered on the concrete, and all its holy contents, all that had gone into him, sent flowing back to the earth.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4990
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby Burnt Hill » Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:24 pm

I can feel how that would stay with someone, Luther. :hug1:
User avatar
Burnt Hill
 
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:42 pm
Location: down down
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Trayvon Martin

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu May 24, 2018 11:28 am

George Zimmerman tells court he's $2.5M in debt, needs a public defender

Zimmerman speaks about life since trial
(CNN)A court allowed George Zimmerman to use a public defender in his alleged stalking case after he filed documents saying he's $2.5 million in debt and has zero income.

Zimmerman is facing stalking accusations in his latest legal woes since his 2013 acquittal in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

Details of his finances were filed in a Seminole County court to support his request for a public defender. In the documents, he lists that he's unemployed and has $0 in assets including cash, bank accounts and equity on property.

Zimmerman is accused of repeatedly threatening and harassing Dennis Warren between December 16 and December 25 of last year, the sheriff's office said.

Warren is a private investigator who was hired by a production company that was working on a documentary about Martin's life, according to CNN affiliate WKMG.
Deputies said Zimmerman called Warren 55 times, left 36 voicemails, texted him 67 times and sent 27 emails over a nine-day span,according to the affiliate.

This is just the latest in a lengthy list of legal issues for Zimmerman. He was a neighborhood watch captain in Sanford, Florida, in February 2012 when he shot and killed Martin, an unarmed black 17-year-old.
In 911 calls that night, Zimmerman told a dispatcher about a "real suspicious guy" walking in the neighborhood. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman if he was following the person, and he responded "yes."

"OK. We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher responded. Zimmerman continued to follow him, leading to the fatal shooting.

Zimmerman said he acted in self-defense when he shot Martin. After a public outcry, he was charged with second-degree murder. A jury found him not guilty in July 2013.

Two years after his acquittal, he was arrested on suspicion of aggravated assault and domestic violence with a weapon. Prosecutors decided not to file charges in the case after the alleged victim backed off her claims.
In yet another incident, he attempted to auction off the gun that he purportedly used to kill Martin, sparking outrage.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/24/us/georg ... index.html
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests