One thing I haven't seen addressed in the Zimmerman case. Apparently Trayvon Martin initiated the violence by punching George Zimmerman in the face, not the other way around (Zimmerman had a broken nose. Martin had no facial injuries). So the question arises. Why did Martin feel he was justified in punching Zimmerman?
I suspect that when Martin saw Zimmerman eyeballing (or following) him, he decided that Zimmerman was dissin' him. And in Martin's circles, when someone is dissin' you, you punch him in the face.
I think this is also why so many blacks insist that Zimmerman started the fight, even though it was Martin who apparently threw the first punch. In many black quarters, dissin' someone is starting the fight. Zimmerman disrespected Trayvon. No way could Martin just let that go.
Monday, July 15, 2013
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Wrong Again (I let my natural pessimism show through again)
Well bless my soul (and the those of the jurors too). Yesterday they found George Zimmerman not guilty. Later I listened to civil rights attorney Leo Terrell on KABC radio. Terrell said it was an easy case. The state had to prove that George Zimmerman had not acted in self defense and they simply had no evidence.
I must say I have developed a new respect for Leo Terrell. He would not let callers to his show make emotional speeches unsupported by any facts. One caller, a young white male, started off making all these assertions and Leo asked for his evidence that Zimmerman did anything illegal. The guy, as was typical of virtually all Terrell's callers last night, ignored the question and began saying instead why he thought Zimmerman should be punished. Terrell wouldn't let the caller off that he easy. He repeatedly demanded that he produce evidence that Zimmerman did not act in self-defense. After about the third time he asked the same caller that question, all we heard on the radio was silence. The guy had no answer. Finally he said Terrell was about to cut him off for disagreeing with him. Terrell told him he'd be happy to let him speak but he had to answer the question. What was the evidence? And of course this caller, along with every other previous caller, simply had none.
I have never seen a radio host shovel the caller bullshit so effectively as I did last night. My hat is off to Leo Terrell. It was the best radio program I've listened to in 10 years.
I must say I have developed a new respect for Leo Terrell. He would not let callers to his show make emotional speeches unsupported by any facts. One caller, a young white male, started off making all these assertions and Leo asked for his evidence that Zimmerman did anything illegal. The guy, as was typical of virtually all Terrell's callers last night, ignored the question and began saying instead why he thought Zimmerman should be punished. Terrell wouldn't let the caller off that he easy. He repeatedly demanded that he produce evidence that Zimmerman did not act in self-defense. After about the third time he asked the same caller that question, all we heard on the radio was silence. The guy had no answer. Finally he said Terrell was about to cut him off for disagreeing with him. Terrell told him he'd be happy to let him speak but he had to answer the question. What was the evidence? And of course this caller, along with every other previous caller, simply had none.
I have never seen a radio host shovel the caller bullshit so effectively as I did last night. My hat is off to Leo Terrell. It was the best radio program I've listened to in 10 years.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Zimmerman Screwed
The defense in the George Zimmerman case isn't quite as hapless as I thought it was going to be. I say this because it did two things in the closing arguments that I had been urging the defense lawyers to do. They produced cardboard cutouts of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman showing that Trayvon was actually taller than Zimmerman, not the 135 pound junior high school student the media liked to portray him as.
And they found themselves a piece of concrete sidewalk somewhere and held it up for the jury to see to show them that Trayvon was not as weaponless as the prosecution maintained.
Despite this, the prosecution (and the judge) will be everywhere celebrating after the jury returns its verdict. I read one story about the closing arguments saying that the prosecution was thundering that Zimmerman hadn't "proven he was innocent" of killing this poor child who only wanted to buy a bag of Skittles and return home. A female juror (all the six jurors are female) was seen wiping a tear as the prosecutor spoke. I hope the defense pointed out to the jury that it was not Zimmerman's responsibility to prove he was innocent. It was the prosecution's burden to prove he was not.
It rankles me how corrupt and vicious the prosecutors are in this case. They invariable talk of "this child," as if someone who called him self a "No_Limit_Nigga" on his website, was selling guns with his cellphone and had been caught with a bag of stolen property and "burglary tools" (in this case a screwdriver) was somehow a mere child. A child is someone who no adult would worry about if he encountered him on the street. Trayvon was over 6 feet and intimidating in manner. He boasted of the fights he'd won. Is there any grown man who would regard someone who is taller than him as a "child?"
In my opinion the prosecution isn't making a good faith argument for Zimmerman's guilt at all. They are deeply invested in this case. They hate Zimmerman so much they can't speak his name without their lips twisting into an involuntary sneer. Angela Cory, the special prosecutor, who was assigned to investigate this case held a press conference (with the Martin family) at the beginning of the process to announce that her goal was to obtain "justice for Trayvon Martin." Well shoot. Didn't she go to law school? Doesn't she know her goal is to find justice for both Martin and Zimmerman. Justice doesn't only apply to one side.
I don't have a good feeling about this case. The defense was never allowed to present evidence showing Martin was actually a young thug. The prosecution handled this case with deep malice towards Zimmerman. If the prosecution already has the jury shedding tears it is entirely possible they will find Zimmerman guilty at the last minute of manslaughter, which in the hands of this judge will result in Zimmerman serving just as long a sentence as he would have received had he been convicted of second-degree murder.
I think the judge in this case and the prosecution were both under enormous pressure from the Atty. Gen., Eric holder, and Barack Obama himself, to find Zimmerman guilty. This is one of the reasons the judge harangued Zimmerman over whether or not he would testify. She kept asking him if it was his own decision. Since when is a defendant supposed to make a major decision like this by himself? That's why he has an attorney. To help him make such decisions.
Even if the jury acquits Zimmerman of both second-degree murder and manslaughter his life is still over. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder will immediately file a civil rights lawsuit against him. This will have lower standards of proof. The second time around the witnesses for the prosecution won't be so laughable.
But even if he escapes conviction his ordeal still won't be over. The family will sue him for $100 million on the theory that any case that galvanized a nation like this one did deserves nothing less.
For the time being all this is in the future. What he really needs to worry about is what seems like a very likely manslaughter conviction. And we know what will happen when Zimmerman goes to jail. He won't last two weeks. All the people who promised to kill him if he was acquitted will now send their incarcerated relatives and friends to kill him in prison.
And they found themselves a piece of concrete sidewalk somewhere and held it up for the jury to see to show them that Trayvon was not as weaponless as the prosecution maintained.
Despite this, the prosecution (and the judge) will be everywhere celebrating after the jury returns its verdict. I read one story about the closing arguments saying that the prosecution was thundering that Zimmerman hadn't "proven he was innocent" of killing this poor child who only wanted to buy a bag of Skittles and return home. A female juror (all the six jurors are female) was seen wiping a tear as the prosecutor spoke. I hope the defense pointed out to the jury that it was not Zimmerman's responsibility to prove he was innocent. It was the prosecution's burden to prove he was not.
It rankles me how corrupt and vicious the prosecutors are in this case. They invariable talk of "this child," as if someone who called him self a "No_Limit_Nigga" on his website, was selling guns with his cellphone and had been caught with a bag of stolen property and "burglary tools" (in this case a screwdriver) was somehow a mere child. A child is someone who no adult would worry about if he encountered him on the street. Trayvon was over 6 feet and intimidating in manner. He boasted of the fights he'd won. Is there any grown man who would regard someone who is taller than him as a "child?"
In my opinion the prosecution isn't making a good faith argument for Zimmerman's guilt at all. They are deeply invested in this case. They hate Zimmerman so much they can't speak his name without their lips twisting into an involuntary sneer. Angela Cory, the special prosecutor, who was assigned to investigate this case held a press conference (with the Martin family) at the beginning of the process to announce that her goal was to obtain "justice for Trayvon Martin." Well shoot. Didn't she go to law school? Doesn't she know her goal is to find justice for both Martin and Zimmerman. Justice doesn't only apply to one side.
I don't have a good feeling about this case. The defense was never allowed to present evidence showing Martin was actually a young thug. The prosecution handled this case with deep malice towards Zimmerman. If the prosecution already has the jury shedding tears it is entirely possible they will find Zimmerman guilty at the last minute of manslaughter, which in the hands of this judge will result in Zimmerman serving just as long a sentence as he would have received had he been convicted of second-degree murder.
I think the judge in this case and the prosecution were both under enormous pressure from the Atty. Gen., Eric holder, and Barack Obama himself, to find Zimmerman guilty. This is one of the reasons the judge harangued Zimmerman over whether or not he would testify. She kept asking him if it was his own decision. Since when is a defendant supposed to make a major decision like this by himself? That's why he has an attorney. To help him make such decisions.
Even if the jury acquits Zimmerman of both second-degree murder and manslaughter his life is still over. Atty. Gen. Eric Holder will immediately file a civil rights lawsuit against him. This will have lower standards of proof. The second time around the witnesses for the prosecution won't be so laughable.
But even if he escapes conviction his ordeal still won't be over. The family will sue him for $100 million on the theory that any case that galvanized a nation like this one did deserves nothing less.
For the time being all this is in the future. What he really needs to worry about is what seems like a very likely manslaughter conviction. And we know what will happen when Zimmerman goes to jail. He won't last two weeks. All the people who promised to kill him if he was acquitted will now send their incarcerated relatives and friends to kill him in prison.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
I Didn't Know They Could Do That
The Zimmerman trial throws me another zinger. Just before closing arguments the prosecution says it wants to add a new charge--aggravated assault. It's obvious why. The prosecution knows it hasn't proven second degree murder and it is desperate to get him on something. If the judge allows this--and she probably will--Zimmerman's goose is cooked. The jury won't want to convict him of something for which there is no proof but the jurors will also want to throw the state a bone, after all the trouble it went to prosecuting Zimmerman and all.
One thing about the trial. The judge absolutely badgered Zimmerman to testify. The judge kept asking if he knew that it was his right to testify. Of course he knew that. Asking that in a criminal trial is like asking if water is wet. And if he didn't know his attorneys certainly told him. The judge was adamant however. When his attorney tried to speak the judge angrily brushed him aside. Twice. Then she asked Zimmerman if it was his own decision not to testify. Why should it be his decision? That's why he is paying the attorney--to advise him on such matters.
The judge wants a conviction. And if she thinks the jury won't go for 2nd degree murder she will allow them to compromise at this late date by adding the new charge of aggravated assault.
One thing about the trial. The judge absolutely badgered Zimmerman to testify. The judge kept asking if he knew that it was his right to testify. Of course he knew that. Asking that in a criminal trial is like asking if water is wet. And if he didn't know his attorneys certainly told him. The judge was adamant however. When his attorney tried to speak the judge angrily brushed him aside. Twice. Then she asked Zimmerman if it was his own decision not to testify. Why should it be his decision? That's why he is paying the attorney--to advise him on such matters.
The judge wants a conviction. And if she thinks the jury won't go for 2nd degree murder she will allow them to compromise at this late date by adding the new charge of aggravated assault.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Riots in LA Over Zimmerman Verdict
I might as well put my prediction on paper so I can't pretend I expected something else.
Will there be riots in LA if George Zimmerman is acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin?
No, there will not be. And the reason is, Zimmerman will instead be convicted of manslaughter. An appeal will follow. Zimmerman might very well win that one. But it will be 18 months down the road. No one will closely follow the appeals process. There won't be breathless dispatches from the courtroom and bloggers (and the mainstream media in general) won't be demanding Zimmerman's head. Any outrage at that point will be too attenuated to cause a riot.
Now in the off-chance that Zimmerman is acquitted both of murder and manslaughter, Attorney General Holder will try to head off riots by immediately announcing a civil rights prosecution of Zimmerman and the family of Trayvon Martin, including mother, step-mother, father, brother and numerous relatives will sue Zimmerman,, just as O.J. Simpson was sued by the families of the two he murdered.
Will that calm the waters?
Probably not. Obama could help by announcing in advance that this country won't work if people don't respect the rule of law. But frankly Obama doesn't respect the rule of law either. Otherwise he wouldn't continue to give aid to Egypt in spite of the coup and in the face of an express law prohibiting this. He also wouldn't delay implementation of certain provisions of Obamacare despite his having no authority to do so. He wouldn't try to use executive orders to implement new rules in place of getting bills through congress.
In short, if we have riots after a Zimmerman acquittal, they will look a lot like the ones Obama didn't lift a hand to try to prevent.
Will there be riots in LA if George Zimmerman is acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin?
No, there will not be. And the reason is, Zimmerman will instead be convicted of manslaughter. An appeal will follow. Zimmerman might very well win that one. But it will be 18 months down the road. No one will closely follow the appeals process. There won't be breathless dispatches from the courtroom and bloggers (and the mainstream media in general) won't be demanding Zimmerman's head. Any outrage at that point will be too attenuated to cause a riot.
Now in the off-chance that Zimmerman is acquitted both of murder and manslaughter, Attorney General Holder will try to head off riots by immediately announcing a civil rights prosecution of Zimmerman and the family of Trayvon Martin, including mother, step-mother, father, brother and numerous relatives will sue Zimmerman,, just as O.J. Simpson was sued by the families of the two he murdered.
Will that calm the waters?
Probably not. Obama could help by announcing in advance that this country won't work if people don't respect the rule of law. But frankly Obama doesn't respect the rule of law either. Otherwise he wouldn't continue to give aid to Egypt in spite of the coup and in the face of an express law prohibiting this. He also wouldn't delay implementation of certain provisions of Obamacare despite his having no authority to do so. He wouldn't try to use executive orders to implement new rules in place of getting bills through congress.
In short, if we have riots after a Zimmerman acquittal, they will look a lot like the ones Obama didn't lift a hand to try to prevent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)