George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #5

As for Zimmerman, he has to be going in his pants around this time. He knows good and well that all this type of publicity is not good for his "self defense" claim. From now until the trial he will be thinking about going to jail for the rest of his life (or close to). He knows things don't look good for him and once he is convicted no bondsman will be able to get him out of jail.

As for O'Mara, it doesn't always work in the attorney's favor when handling cases where their client is hated by so many. We saw it in the SP case, which may have brought in money at the time for Mark Geragos, but it didn'twe saw it witfamous as he thought it would. Then we saw it with Baez, who also thought it was going to rake in the money for him and he ended up having to write a book to try and recoup his loss (he had the time to write a book so his business must not have been too good)> And we will see it here as well, These donations will cease soon and O'Mara will be looking for state money to complete this trial. O'Mara will probably try and get in all the media coverage he can to keep those donations flowing in, but eventually they will stop because the donor's will see that it is all going to the lawyer.

I just pray that the jury that is selected for this trial aren't picked from the "hater's", I would hate to see another CA outcome.

Please excuse my typing error's, my computer keeps freezing and unfreezing for the last couple of days. Rebooted and rebooted but it doesn't seem to help.

CherokeeNative wrote:I have to admit that I have been known to "post and run" the pro-GZ sites. It does no good to remain and argue, but I will from time to time sit down and write up a comment laying out everything that is wrong about GZ's self-defense claim so that the pro-GZ are forced to read it on their own site.

I can't find these sites, I would like to voice my opinion about them also. I can't even find the site of O'Mara asking for money (not that he'd get a cent from me, that's for certain) just like to give him a piece of my mind also.

Bravo CN, I agree with everything you have written. I am all for a defendant receiving a fair trial and the best possible defense, but MOM crossed the line not in the name of justice, but in the name of the almighty dollar. This is not a complicated case, and I would assume that among all those online contributors and supporters,
there are individuals who would donate their time and resources to provide expert, testing, testimony, etc., had he made a simple plea. For me, it's not about the Internet presence, it is about the way the Internet has been used in this particular situation.

CherokeeNative wrote:

KZ wrote:Cher, I hear your outrage at MOM's internet presence...

IMO, any crook can hold out their hand for donations for their defense, as far as I'm concerned. No one has to donate. Now, once convicted, the convicted should not be able to receive a single penny for anything related to their crime. That's where I draw the line....

KZ, I was admittedly appalled when MOM originally created his GZ Legal Defense site seeking money for GZ's defense for the many reasons that others have already responded. But I tried to look at it from the same perspective you are that "well, at least it is preventing the taxpayer from having to foot the bill" and "we want him to get a fair trial." But what I was trying to point out with my recent post that I obviously did not emphasize enough to get across was MOM's most recent statement seeking additional donations following Judge Lester's raising of the bond to $1,000,000. MOM immediately posted the following statement:

"For those who have given in the past, for those who have thought about giving, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman's shoes, for those that think Mr. Zimmerman has been treated unfairly by the media, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman has been falsely accused as a racist, for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights -- now is the time to show your support."

As a criminal defense attorney, MOM has crossed the line in every sense of the words "ethical" and "professionalism." As a human being, MOM has lost all sight of the fact that a young teen, who had a very promising future, has needlessly lost his life because his client perceived him as a thug when in fact, he had every right to be where he was while walking home and talking to his girlfriend on his cell phone. MOM has thrown compassion for the victim out the window in exchange for greed and fame. As Porky aptly pointed out, when MOM first came on the scene, he spoke about the community healing, how the killing of this teen was a tragedy, and having compassion for his parents, but that is before the money started to flow in. That MOM has allowed his monumental ego and greed take over is particularly disconcerting and distasteful to say the least. If MOM's statement is not a call to racists, what is it? Think about that statement - For all those who would do the same - meaning for all that would shoot a youth who was doing nothing more than walking home while black with a bag of Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea. It was unnecessary in his process of pandering for more legal defense funds. It's disgusting, tasteless, and MOM should be called to account for it. I have no doubt that this is just a small indication as to what lengths MOM will go in order to see that his client wins at all costs. This is not an entirely innocent man, he has admitted shooting Trayvon and the inconsistencies of what occurred that night give cause to believe that he committed a murder. We will see if his self-defense claims relieve him of responsibility for the death of Trayvon. We are long past the days where the defense attorney would blame the woman who was the victim of rape for her manner of dress or demeanor realizing that such treatment lacks compassion and respect for the victim. It is no different for Trayvon. Because GZ perceived this teen as a thug and potential burglar, he followed and caused a confrontation where this unarmed teen was wrongfully killed. To imagine what fear must have been going through Trayvon's mind gives me the shudders. How dare MOM pander to the extremists who see Trayvon as expendable and not worthy of a life - and that is exactly who that statement is intended for. I am outraged. MOM's reputation as a respectable defense attorney has been tarnished. It is no longer about justice - MOM is attempting to turn it into a racist and political contest. I now perceive him as about the lowest form of life in existence and I am not proud that he is a member of the legal profession.

The phrase -for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights - is meant for the gun enthusiasts, members of NRA, and others who own firearms. While I am not outraged by this statement as I am the above discussed phrase, I am still troubled that MOM is pandering to this group of individuals for support. Anyone who has the most elementary knowledge of how our laws are created and enacted knows that this case is not going to make or break the SYG law. No matter the outcome of this case, the SYG law is going to be scrutinized - in fact, it is already being reviewed. MOM knows this, but for greed and ego, he is pursuing that group of people as donors.

The Florida Bar Association needs to reprimand MOM and demand that he cease and desist maintaining a GZ web site that discusses the case. I don't care if he keeps his little Paypal button and continues to collect funds from GZ's supporters, but the comments regarding the case need to stop.

KZ wrote:Snowbird, thank you for explaining your thoughts. I can see how it could seem very unfair that he is getting defense money from complete strangers, and others accused of crimes don't. I can also understand the emotional feeling that he should be somehow "forced" to remain poor, and given an overworked, underpaid public defender, or even a "substandard" defense-- that he doesn't "deserve" vigorous, top notch defense, since he is accused of a heinous crime, and a lot of people hate him. I can understand people wanting him quickly convicted and thrown in prison.

However, I really disagree. I want every criminal to have the best defense money can buy. I want rightful convictions to STICK-- with no room for appeal. I want top notch defense attorneys to volunteer their services MORE so that NO ONE has to have an overworked, underpaid public defender. Everyone is free in America-- our system has flaws, but it is better than any legal system in the world-- in spite of the machinations of high profile cases.

Everyone likes to hate on defense attorneys....right up until the point where they (or someone they know or love) needs one. I have no love for GZ, but I have no hate for MOM. I think he has done a good job so far with an awful case. I am bemused that the pro GZ supporters hate him, and it seems plenty of pro TM supporters hate him, too. I think that indicates he is probably doing as GOOD a job as it is possible to do in a case of this high profile.

That was kind of my point about public defenders they are over work, but why should the special people who get national attention get the "good attorney" while the other people in jail get the over work poor public defenders. Why is George so special that he should not have as you said an over worked, under paid public defender? So you don't think that attorney that work for I court systems are good enough for George, but they were good enough for the other people that they had defended. Only George deserved a vigorous defense, but the one sitting in jail now didn't entitled to be vigorous defended. What really makes George so special? I am not against defense attorneys in fact I admire the public defenders very much for the job they do without national attention or writings books.
Why should George be forced to be "poor"? George didn't do anything to earn money other than kill another human being. That is why I believe he should stay "poor" or his parents could have mortgage their house for his defense, that has been known to happen too. Then when he got out of this mess he could have worked to pay back his family. This case being high profile that is what it takes to make money.
His attorney O'Mara could take this case pro bono if he feels like the public defender system would not do good for George, it is required that attorney take so many pro bono case a year.
I will never feel ok with people getting paid when they are accused with killing a person or in George's case admits he killed this 17yr boy.
George is no special than any other person he just happened to get national attention for his crime. In my eyes this will always be morally wrong.

snowbird wrote:

KZ wrote:Snowbird, thank you for explaining your thoughts. I can see how it could seem very unfair that he is getting defense money from complete strangers, and others accused of crimes don't. I can also understand the emotional feeling that he should be somehow "forced" to remain poor, and given an overworked, underpaid public defender, or even a "substandard" defense-- that he doesn't "deserve" vigorous, top notch defense, since he is accused of a heinous crime, and a lot of people hate him. I can understand people wanting him quickly convicted and thrown in prison.

However, I really disagree. I want every criminal to have the best defense money can buy. I want rightful convictions to STICK-- with no room for appeal. I want top notch defense attorneys to volunteer their services MORE so that NO ONE has to have an overworked, underpaid public defender. Everyone is free in America-- our system has flaws, but it is better than any legal system in the world-- in spite of the machinations of high profile cases.

Everyone likes to hate on defense attorneys....right up until the point where they (or someone they know or love) needs one. I have no love for GZ, but I have no hate for MOM. I think he has done a good job so far with an awful case. I am bemused that the pro GZ supporters hate him, and it seems plenty of pro TM supporters hate him, too. I think that indicates he is probably doing as GOOD a job as it is possible to do in a case of this high profile.

That was kind of my point about public defenders they are over work, but why should the special people who get national attention get the "good attorney" while the other people in jail get the over work poor public defenders. Why is George so special that he should not have as you said an over worked, under paid public defender? So you don't think that attorney that work for I court systems are good enough for George, but they were good enough for the other people that they had defended. Only George deserved a vigorous defense, but the one sitting in jail now didn't entitled to be vigorous defended. What really makes George so special? I am not against defense attorneys in fact I admire the public defenders very much for the job they do without national attention or writings books.
Why should George be forced to be "poor"? George didn't do anything to earn money other than kill another human being. That is why I believe he should stay "poor" or his parents could have mortgage their house for his defense, that has been known to happen too. Then when he got out of this mess he could have worked to pay back his family. This case being high profile that is what it takes to make money.
His attorney O'Mara could take this case pro bono if he feels like the public defender system would not do good for George, it is required that attorney take so many pro bono case a year.
I will never feel ok with people getting paid when they are accused with killing a person or in George's case admits he killed this 17yr boy.
George is no special than any other person he just happened to get national attention for his crime. In my eyes this will always be morally wrong.

BBM

That just did not "happen".

In all fairness, the genesis of media s*@!t storm of attention on this case can not be factually traced back to Zimmerman nor O'Mara.
O'Mara nor BDLR are not the architects of the Sunshine Laws of FL.

And if the high profile status of this case is driving up the cost of this investigation and trial, and it is not of their explicit doing, then what is the deal here?

It is wrong for him to file for indigence and also wrong to accept donations for his legal fees?
People want this to go to trial but not allow him to be prepared for it?

Open discovery and a gag order too?

It can not be both ways.

TM, the public, George Zimmerman, SPD, and Florida all deserve to have the evidence argued and tested in the best of possible ways.

IMO, it is events like this in which I expect my tax dollars to be put towards.

I do not like all of their decisions but I am 100% behind the Department of Justice.

My point was not how it got national attention, but that when something like this happens then the rewards come in.

Every one accuse of a crime deserves to have evidence argued and tested in the best way possible, not just the ones that get national attention and have the money come in.

I could do gag order and think it would be best for the trail, even though I would not be able to see before trail and I would have anything to talk about.

Deal to me it is morally wrong to collect money for killing a kill. If it was accident, self defense or plan old murder.

Tamta wrote:

snowbird wrote:
That was kind of my point about public defenders they are over work, but why should the special people who get national attention get the "good attorney" while the other people in jail get the over work poor public defenders. Why is George so special that he should not have as you said an over worked, under paid public defender? So you don't think that attorney that work for I court systems are good enough for George, but they were good enough for the other people that they had defended. Only George deserved a vigorous defense, but the one sitting in jail now didn't entitled to be vigorous defended. What really makes George so special? I am not against defense attorneys in fact I admire the public defenders very much for the job they do without national attention or writings books.
Why should George be forced to be "poor"? George didn't do anything to earn money other than kill another human being. That is why I believe he should stay "poor" or his parents could have mortgage their house for his defense, that has been known to happen too. Then when he got out of this mess he could have worked to pay back his family. This case being high profile that is what it takes to make money.
His attorney O'Mara could take this case pro bono if he feels like the public defender system would not do good for George, it is required that attorney take so many pro bono case a year.
I will never feel ok with people getting paid when they are accused with killing a person or in George's case admits he killed this 17yr boy.
George is no special than any other person he just happened to get national attention for his crime. In my eyes this will always be morally wrong.

BBM

That just did not "happen".

In all fairness, the genesis of media s*@!t storm of attention on this case can not be factually traced back to Zimmerman nor O'Mara.
O'Mara nor BDLR are not the architects of the Sunshine Laws of FL.

And if the high profile status of this case is driving up the cost of this investigation and trial, and it is not of their explicit doing, then what is the deal here?

It is wrong for him to file for indigence and also wrong to accept donations for his legal fees?
People want this to go to trial but not allow him to be prepared for it?

Open discovery and a gag order too?

It can not be both ways.

TM, the public, George Zimmerman, SPD, and Florida all deserve to have the evidence argued and tested in the best of possible ways.

IMO, it is events like this in which I expect my tax dollars to be put towards.

I do not like all of their decisions but I am 100% behind the Department of Justice.

I am having internet connection problems, so if I disappear - that is what is going on until the cable company can get here today to fix it.

Whether this is a popular statement or not, I am going to make it. The only way that the criminal justice system can be fair and equal to all, the prosecution and the defense, for ALL criminal defendants who are brought before Lady Justice is to have the prosecution and the public defenders try all cases - no private practice attorneys whether paid for or pro bono - no matter how rich you are to be able to afford the ultimate "dream team" or how poor you are - everyone gets the same public defenders. These prosecutors and public defenders need to be paid equally and sufficiently to make it a worth while profession and not so overloaded with cases that they cannot give their best representation - all funded by the taxpayers. The Bar Associations need to impliment rules that prohibit either side from discussing the case in the media. I am also a firm believer that we need to have professional jurors who are knowledgeable in the specific area of law that is at issue in the case...no more worrying about whether or not the prosecution or defense has managed to stack the deck.

I agree with Snowbird to the extent that we have thousands of defendants sitting in jail who could not afford to have a "dream team" defense representing them in their case - even though it may have been a winable case but for the lack of money to put on that defense. There needs to be a solution to that problem - that justice is only available for the rich and not the poor is not right. The scales of justice cannot be burdened with political issues or racism and still be considered a fair trial.

I am sure there are a lot of issues that I haven't considered as I throw this statement out here - but there certainly needs to be something done to prevent what is occurring in this case, and what occurred in the CA case. There are those who feel that GZ has been railroaded by the media but not really - so what they showed an old picture of him versus a young picture of Trayvon - that doesn't change the facts and evidence. I am intelligent enough to set those photos aside and consider the facts and evidence. Despite the media hype, I am intelligent enough to figure out that common sense tells you that GZ should have listened to the dispatcher that he not follow Trayvon. Common sense tells us that he ignored that advice. The discrepancies and inconsistencies in his statements and the evidence clearly show that GZ is not telling the truth - and are we surprised? He has lied through every stage of this case. But common sense tells us that a young teen who was minding his own business on a rainy night should not have been killed because of the paranoid suspicions of a wanna-be-cop who was packing heat on his hip.

Hmmmm, I had a post that disappeared....will try again.

I am going to go out on a limb here and try to put my thoughts down on paper....errrr....screen.

Would we even be talking about this case if the roles were reversed and TM had shot GZ and claimed the SYG defense? Would supporters have come out of the woodwork to support TM with their $$? Would MOM have come to defend TM pro bono? Or would people say that TM "had fulfilled his destiny to become a young black thug?"
Would we be discussing this case for hours on end and dissecting every nuance of the evidence?
Murders like this happen every day in this country. What made this one what it is? Why is this case different?
I think that this case would have been a blimp in the news that we read about, shook our heads and moved on.
Why is GZ the poster boy that he is? What, about this case, makes it THIS CASE?
I don't pretend to have any answers to these questions, but I have to wonder, would my child, if put in either position, be treated like GZ or TM? Would he be revered or vilified? Would he get a public defender or a high priced lawyer? Would donations be forthcoming or would I have to mortgage my house. Doesn't seem quite fair to me.

Hi all-

I have not opined much, but keep in the know. I personally feel had this case not received the political and media attention GZ may not be facing criminal charges at all. However, GZ has been charged and this is officially a high profile case.

I am trying to understand why GZ having a high profile attorney that is reimbursed by the state is considered unfair? Why GZ receiving public donations is unfair?

I tend to believe it is all a direct result of the media attention. In the very beginning who solicited the media attention? I don't think it was GZ because he wanted it all to go away. I am in NO way judging the use of the media or public figures to bring attention to TM case. I believe you cannot have it both ways. In my opinion the initial attention brought positive recognition to this case. The prosecution brought charges against GZ. Now that same attention is working in a somewhat positive manner for GZ. Whether we like it or not it works both ways.

CherokeeNative wrote:

... But what I was trying to point out with my recent post that I obviously did not emphasize enough to get across was MOM's most recent statement seeking additional donations following Judge Lester's raising of the bond to $1,000,000. MOM immediately posted the following statement:
"For those who have given in the past, for those who have thought about giving, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman was justified in his actions, for those who feel they would do the same if they were in Mr. Zimmerman's shoes, for those that think Mr. Zimmerman has been treated unfairly by the media, for those who feel Mr. Zimmerman has been falsely accused as a racist, for those who feel this case is an affront to their constitutional rights -- now is the time to show your support."
As a criminal defense attorney, MOM has crossed the line in every sense of the words "ethical" and "professionalism." ...

Just want to say CN I had the same reaction to MOM's latest statements and call for donations. Besides being, imo, racist and inciteful, I believe there is little evidence so far that truly supports GZ's version of events or even a single one of GZ's version of events, ... so what I believe it is going to come down to in the courtroom is whether in the space of about a minute or two, a kid who was yacking with his girlfriend on the phone and trying to get home out of the rain suddenly put GZ in danger of losing his life, warranting a kill. UNLIKELY. Omara'a statements do truly pander to ignorance and racial profiling IMO.

Lash wrote:Hi all-

I have not opined much, but keep in the know. I personally feel had this case not received the political and media attention GZ may not be facing criminal charges at all. However, GZ has been charged and this is officially a high profile case.

I am trying to understand why GZ having a high profile attorney that is reimbursed by the state is considered unfair? Why GZ receiving public donations is unfair?

I tend to believe it is all a direct result of the media attention. In the very beginning who solicited the media attention? I don't think it was GZ because he wanted it all to go away. I am in NO way judging the use of the media or public figures to bring attention to TM case. I believe you cannot have it both ways. In my opinion the initial attention brought positive recognition to this case. The prosecution brought charges against GZ. Now that same attention is working in a somewhat positive manner for GZ. Whether we like it or not it works both ways.

I don't have a problem that GZ has supporters. I may grumble, but I don't really have a problem that there are those who are wealthy enough to help fund his defense. What I have a problem with is when his attorney panders to a specific demographic, the NRA, gun enthuisiasts and extremist groups who practice hatred, hostility, and/or violence towards members of the black race. Read my post above - that's my gripe.

You are right - GZ did want this to go away. He wanted to be able to kill a young teen and then walk away like it was perfectly understandable why he would do that. And he almost succeeded- the Sanford PD was not going to charge GZ - he was going to get away with killing Trayvon and I firmly suspect that this was because of some form of corruption. Never should one person be able to determine whether or not one person killing another was legal or not - that is for a jury. But for the media GZ would have walked away from this scott-free. And this is where the public became outraged - the fact that GZ was going to walk free but for someone getting it out there in the media. I know that is what got my attention - it had nothing to do whether the parties involved were black or white or hispanic.

It is not GZ having a high profile attorney that is reimbursed by the state that I consider "unfair." What is unfair is when that high profile attorney starts pandering to the groups I mention above instead of getting to work getting this case to a final resolution - it is the press conferences - it is the need to trash the victim - it is the fact that GZ has profited from the death of Trayvon - and indeed, greed has taken over to the point that MOM no longer thinks he can defend this case for 1 million, now he is saying 2 million - those are the issues I consider unfair and unethical.

Chickenbutt wrote:Hmmmm, I had a post that disappeared....will try again.

I am going to go out on a limb here and try to put my thoughts down on paper....errrr....screen.

Would we even be talking about this case if the roles were reversed and TM had shot GZ and claimed the SYG defense? Would supporters have come out of the woodwork to support TM with their $$? Would MOM have come to defend TM pro bono? Or would people say that TM "had fulfilled his destiny to become a young black thug?"
Would we be discussing this case for hours on end and dissecting every nuance of the evidence?
Murders like this happen every day in this country. What made this one what it is? Why is this case different?
I think that this case would have been a blimp in the news that we read about, shook our heads and moved on.
Why is GZ the poster boy that he is? What, about this case, makes it THIS CASE?
I don't pretend to have any answers to these questions, but I have to wonder, would my child, if put in either position, be treated like GZ or TM? Would he be revered or vilified? Would he get a public defender or a high priced lawyer? Would donations be forthcoming or would I have to mortgage my house. Doesn't seem quite fair to me.

Well said CB - and I hate to say that no, your son would not be getting the same attention or support. And I guess that is what bothers me so much about this case - to me, it wasn't about one of the individuals being black and the other half white - it was about the corruption within our LE and justice department that almost allowed a person to walk away from a questionable killing of an unarmed teen. THAT is what made this case IMO - but, you can't help but wonder why LE and members of the state justice department was willing to allow this to occur - and I believe this is where Sharpton and Jackson entered into the scene - what else were they to think? And NOW, thanks to MOM and his call to action, racism is once again front and center. MOM is relying on these extremists to support and fund GZ's defense - his very statement clearly reflects that. Instead of simply placing a noncontroversial statement out there asking for more funds, he purposely focused on a certain demographic. It's unethical and disgusting.

Gizmo sorry if someones posted allready you said you cant find the pro GZ sites apart fom his legal fb pay pal site this is the main one I think C N REFERING TO http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/

So, if I go out tomorrow and shoot a young black teen because he looks suspicious to me - I can expect to have all of my debts paid off and my living expenses paid. I don't know how anyone cannot see that as profiting from his kill. Even if he is convicted, GZ and Shellie have profited. Only in America.

ITA with you CN....just don't go shooting someone....all your friends are broke....
You would have to rot in jail.

I M O As has been stated its not so much that George Zimmerman has supporters,,Its down to Trayvon haveing HATERS ,Not him per se but the colour of his skin ,,So sad ...

Chickenbutt wrote:ITA with you CN....just don't go shooting someone....all your friends are broke....
You would have to rot in jail.

LOL - I am through with my rant.

CherokeeNative wrote:So, if I go out tomorrow and shoot a young black teen because he looks suspicious to me - I can expect to have all of my debts paid off and my living expenses paid. I don't know how anyone cannot see that as profiting from his kill. Even if he is convicted, GZ and Shellie have profited. Only in America.

I am bumping my own comment, and I promise to try and let it rest after this post (won't swear, but I will try). But you have to admit that there is something wrong with our justice system when you can profit from your killing of another human being. We have managed to enact laws that prevent criminals from reaping profits from their crimes, but because of that little loop hole that GZ has yet to be convicted, he can profit all he wants up until that time. Since when does a criminal defendant get his debts paid off and his living expenses paid once charged of a crime? We, the people, need to enact laws that prevent this type of financial boon as well.

This is what is bothering me about this case. Attitude. Just because GZ has a right to carry does not OBLIGATE GZ to carry. The comments he made to medical personnel regarding his right almost sounded as if GZ felt it was his DUTY to carry.

Anyone who feels he MUST carry a gun just to go to the store in the early evening or to drive around 3 blocks really needs some serious mental work-up done. It sounds as if he has a paranoia complex and they only way he feels safe is with a loaded gun. And a bullet proof vest. And a body guard. And talking in code.
(See? Told you this guy is nucking futz!)

The question is: Did GZ know the difference between right and wrong ? Yes. So try him. I don't care how "paranoid" he plays it. IMO, GZ was wanting to prove himself to his wife, homies, PD, and self and he wanted a blood badge. Now, he is wanting to show everyone what a "Big" man he is by renting the very system his father purportedly upheld.

Good parenting, Rob! Hate to be at your family reunions.

Great observation Freckles.

Interesting observations, Freckles.

Lash wrote:Hi all-

I have not opined much, but keep in the know. I personally feel had this case not received the political and media attention GZ may not be facing criminal charges at all. However, GZ has been charged and this is officially a high profile case.

I am trying to understand why GZ having a high profile attorney that is reimbursed by the state is considered unfair? Why GZ receiving public donations is unfair?

I tend to believe it is all a direct result of the media attention. In the very beginning who solicited the media attention? I don't think it was GZ because he wanted it all to go away. I am in NO way judging the use of the media or public figures to bring attention to TM case. I believe you cannot have it both ways. In my opinion the initial attention brought positive recognition to this case. The prosecution brought charges against GZ. Now that same attention is working in a somewhat positive manner for GZ. Whether we like it or not it works both ways.

I haven't opined much, either - even though I also keep in the know.

Totally agree that "this case" is so high profile as a direct result of the media attention - and the way the media "misled" the public in the beginning.

As far as I know, there is no proof positive of exactly what happened. I can only use my best guess and, at this point, all of the evidence hasn't even been made public. IMO, "at this point", there is no way to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt" as to what happened.

Who knows what the new evidence dump next week may bring. I also believe that this case has gotten so much attention because there is that lack of "proof" and it leaves the case wide open for speculation and emotions to take over. One can see that from forum-to-forum: it's palpable.

By no "proof" I'm not talking about the fact that TM was shot by GZ; what I'm talking about is two people were involved: one is dead, one alive. We have the story of the person alive. We have no eye witnesses of the actual confrontation; therefore, we have one man's word and if he's not believed, there's no "proof" that he's not telling the truth...."reasonable doubt".

I don't see how reasonable doubt can be avoided, with the information that has been made public.

Like I said, we'll see what the new evidence dump discloses next week.

Tamta wrote:

snowbird wrote:
That was kind of my point about public defenders they are over work, but why should the special people who get national attention get the "good attorney" while the other people in jail get the over work poor public defenders. Why is George so special that he should not have as you said an over worked, under paid public defender? So you don't think that attorney that work for I court systems are good enough for George, but they were good enough for the other people that they had defended. Only George deserved a vigorous defense, but the one sitting in jail now didn't entitled to be vigorous defended. What really makes George so special? I am not against defense attorneys in fact I admire the public defenders very much for the job they do without national attention or writings books.
Why should George be forced to be "poor"? George didn't do anything to earn money other than kill another human being. That is why I believe he should stay "poor" or his parents could have mortgage their house for his defense, that has been known to happen too. Then when he got out of this mess he could have worked to pay back his family. This case being high profile that is what it takes to make money.
His attorney O'Mara could take this case pro bono if he feels like the public defender system would not do good for George, it is required that attorney take so many pro bono case a year.
I will never feel ok with people getting paid when they are accused with killing a person or in George's case admits he killed this 17yr boy.
George is no special than any other person he just happened to get national attention for his crime. In my eyes this will always be morally wrong.

BBM

That just did not "happen".

In all fairness, the genesis of media s*@!t storm of attention on this case can not be factually traced back to Zimmerman nor O'Mara.
O'Mara nor BDLR are not the architects of the Sunshine Laws of FL.

And if the high profile status of this case is driving up the cost of this investigation and trial, and it is not of their explicit doing, then what is the deal here?

It is wrong for him to file for indigence and also wrong to accept donations for his legal fees?
People want this to go to trial but not allow him to be prepared for it?

Open discovery and a gag order too?

It can not be both ways.

TM, the public, George Zimmerman, SPD, and Florida all deserve to have the evidence argued and tested in the best of possible ways.

IMO, it is events like this in which I expect my tax dollars to be put towards.

I do not like all of their decisions but I am 100% behind the Department of Justice.

Tamtra - TY - good post!

CherokeeNative wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:So, if I go out tomorrow and shoot a young black teen because he looks suspicious to me - I can expect to have all of my debts paid off and my living expenses paid. I don't know how anyone cannot see that as profiting from his kill. Even if he is convicted, GZ and Shellie have profited. Only in America.

I am bumping my own comment, and I promise to try and let it rest after this post (won't swear, but I will try). But you have to admit that there is something wrong with our justice system when you can profit from your killing of another human being. We have managed to enact laws that prevent criminals from reaping profits from their crimes, but because of that little loop hole that GZ has yet to be convicted, he can profit all he wants up until that time. Since when does a criminal defendant get his debts paid off and his living expenses paid once charged of a crime? We, the people, need to enact laws that prevent this type of financial boon as well.

Great post and how many other cases with the right to defend your self are their in the US that don't get national attention therefore they had to pay their own defense and didn't have their bills payed by the public. I know of at least one and that was in Texas he was found guilty of shooting his neighbor over a loud party. To my knowledge he did not have a defense fund and a living expense fun set up to help him out. I'm am sure their are alot more out their that I don't know about. IMO even if they showed Martin as younger then he was but he still was in no way an adult as George is suppose to be, who says Martin was scared for his life because George was following him. He could have been defending himself, but we will never know because dead men can't tell tails.

ecossie possie wrote:I M O As has been stated its not so much that George Zimmerman has supporters,,Its down to Trayvon haveing HATERS ,Not him per se but the colour of his skin ,,So sad ...

You have made such a good point in my heart of heart I believe if George had shot a white or spanish 17 year old, then I don't believe he would be getting all this support. It really is so sad.

I hope they dump the evidence on Monday & don't drag it out until the end of the week. I'm also keeping my fingers crossed for those new charges against George!

Hi all! I went cold turkey on posting after the fiasco with the Caylee verdict. Have read the HM and have missed it so much. I had surgery and missed the Trayvon Martin case being discussed on there. But, after just about beating my keyboard to keep from posting...lol...I couldn't keep my big mouth shut so here I am....hope I've not duplicated anyone's avi...if so, let me know.

I didn't post much at the HM, had posted a lot at Blink's early in the three year debacle. But, I want to put my thoughts on the present topic out for discussion :) so here goes.....

We welcome your comments. Most of us here on refugees from THM. RC has been so kind to us. We are glad to have you here, comment away!

welcome aboard Hinky Refugee, bet my bottom dollar you'll like it here.

Chickenbutt wrote:Hmmmm, I had a post that disappeared....will try again.

I am going to go out on a limb here and try to put my thoughts down on paper....errrr....screen.

Would we even be talking about this case if the roles were reversed and TM had shot GZ and claimed the SYG defense? Would supporters have come out of the woodwork to support TM with their $$? Would MOM have come to defend TM pro bono? Or would people say that TM "had fulfilled his destiny to become a young black thug?"
Would we be discussing this case for hours on end and dissecting every nuance of the evidence?
Murders like this happen every day in this country. What made this one what it is? Why is this case different?
I think that this case would have been a blimp in the news that we read about, shook our heads and moved on.

Why is GZ the poster boy that he is? What, about this case, makes it THIS CASE?

I don't pretend to have any answers to these questions, but I have to wonder, would my child, if put in either position, be treated like GZ or TM? Would he be revered or vilified? Would he get a public defender or a high priced lawyer? Would donations be forthcoming or would I have to mortgage my house. Doesn't seem quite fair to me.

Chickenbutt, imo, this case isn't like any other case because of Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton. They have had a positive & a negative influence on this case, angering many, other's thought they were appropriate even though Trayvon's family had fine legal representation & they were no longer needed. Sharpton/Jackson made the photo opts, but many thought they were self serving & self promoting, other's loved it.. imo, this behavior could have led some to donate to GZ, not so much that they support GZ but possibly some could just be tired of the same grand standing in many cases by the duo & voiced their complaint by donating money, I am just speculating, it doesn't make any difference as to the donations, the bottom line is, the website is not illegal as KZ has stated countless times.

why does every missing child not get the same publicity as Caylee got? imo, the Media drove the sensationalism as well as the defense & family but countless children went missing in Fla. & didn't get coverage BECAUSE the Media was reporting on KC's commissary order. OUTRAGEOUS imo. The Fla. MEDIA machine is keen to the revenues sensational cases bring. Jennifer Kesse's case is one that didn't get reported on but there were many during Caylee's murder/trial. The Media has driven this case, even editing tapes to make some reporting more inflaming, more sensational, imo, it doesn't serve anyone well. In Trayvon's case, the family has 2 to 3 of their attorney's commenting on everything done in the case on IN SESSION & HLN, every document, every hearing, so I am not offended if MOM speaks on anything nor am I offended by anything the attorney's for Trayvon's parent's share, I like to hear all the opinions offered by all sides.

Scott Peterson's family has had a website asking for money for his appeal for years, after all, he is a convicted murderer of 2. Nobody cares about his website, it too is not illegal, GZ hasn't been convicted yet, but Scott has.

art tart wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Hmmmm, I had a post that disappeared....will try again.

I am going to go out on a limb here and try to put my thoughts down on paper....errrr....screen.

Would we even be talking about this case if the roles were reversed and TM had shot GZ and claimed the SYG defense? Would supporters have come out of the woodwork to support TM with their $$? Would MOM have come to defend TM pro bono? Or would people say that TM "had fulfilled his destiny to become a young black thug?"
Would we be discussing this case for hours on end and dissecting every nuance of the evidence?
Murders like this happen every day in this country. What made this one what it is? Why is this case different?
I think that this case would have been a blimp in the news that we read about, shook our heads and moved on.

Why is GZ the poster boy that he is? What, about this case, makes it THIS CASE?

I don't pretend to have any answers to these questions, but I have to wonder, would my child, if put in either position, be treated like GZ or TM? Would he be revered or vilified? Would he get a public defender or a high priced lawyer? Would donations be forthcoming or would I have to mortgage my house. Doesn't seem quite fair to me.

Chickenbutt, imo, this case isn't like any other case because of Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton. They have had a positive & a negative influence on this case, angering many, other's thought they were appropriate even though Trayvon's family had fine legal representation & they were no longer needed. Sharpton/Jackson made the photo opts, but many thought they were self serving & self promoting, other's loved it.. imo, this behavior could have led some to donate to GZ, not so much that they support GZ but possibly some could just be tired of the same grand standing in many cases by the duo & voiced their complaint by donating money, I am just speculating, it doesn't make any difference as to the donations, the bottom line is, the website is not illegal as KZ has stated countless times.

why does every missing child not get the same publicity as Caylee got? imo, the Media drove the sensationalism as well as the defense & family but countless children went missing in Fla. & didn't get coverage BECAUSE the Media was reporting on KC's commissary order. OUTRAGEOUS imo. The Fla. MEDIA machine is keen to the revenues sensational cases bring. Jennifer Kesse's case is one that didn't get reported on but there were many during Caylee's murder/trial. The Media has driven this case, even editing tapes to make some reporting more inflaming, more sensational, imo, it doesn't serve anyone well. In Trayvon's case, the family has 2 to 3 of their attorney's commenting on everything done in the case on IN SESSION & HLN, every document, every hearing, so I am not offended if MOM speaks on anything nor am I offended by anything the attorney's for Trayvon's parent's share, I like to hear all the opinions offered by all sides.

Scott Peterson's family has had a website asking for money for his appeal for years, after all, he is a convicted murderer of 2. Nobody cares about his website, it too is not illegal, GZ hasn't been convicted yet, but Scott has.

Scott Peterson's family, not his lawyer, is soliciting money for his appeal.

Alessandra shared:

Scott Peterson's family, not his lawyer, is soliciting money for his appeal.

Scott can't solicit because he is convicted of murdering 2, his family has to solicit for Scott if he wants donations & he does. Scott is the one that BENEFITS from the donations for an attorney for HIS appeal, he is sitting in jail, not his family. Any monies directly benefit Scott to pay his attorney, the monies don't benefit Scott's family.

It is not illegal for MOM to solicit for donations as has been stated repeatedly, GZ has not been convicted of anything, yet.

Art, I was not speaking specifically of the money aspect of this case, altho it is an anomaly. I was speaking in general about why this case is this case. What is so damn special about it? Like I said, this happens everyday in America. And I don't buy that Sharpton/Jackson caused this to take wings and fly. They are speaking for TM, who was gunned down unnecessarily and unfairly.

First I am of the opinion that YES GZ did profile this poor child. I was born in Louisiana and have heard the word coonazz too many times...even been called one enough...

"Coonass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CoonassCoonass, or Coon-ass, is used in reference to a person of Cajun ethnicity. Many consider it an insult but others consider it a compliment or badge of honor."

George used the hate and derogratory word ...I've heard it enough to recognize it even in a whisper with him possibly running and the wind blowing.

Secondly, Gz has changed stories many times. BUT, remember this..Gz knows enough not to give ANY statements without the advice of legal counsel and he did so over and over. He appears calm and unfazed by the enormity of what he did. He appears as cold with no feelings towards taking a life, much less the life of a teenager. Here's where KZ's expertise is higher than mine. Gz suffers from ADHD and takes some powerful medications. Adderal and Remeron ...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0000995/
copied out of context: You should know that your mental health may change in unexpected ways when you take mirtazapine or other antidepressants even if you are an adult over 24 years of age..............You, your family, or your caregiver should call your doctor right away if you experience any of the following symptoms: new or worsening depression; thinking about harming or killing yourself, or planning or trying to do so; extreme worry; agitation; panic attacks; difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep; aggressive behavior; irritability; acting without thinking; severe restlessness; and frenzied abnormal excitement."

That is a government release about the possible side effects to Remeron listed under WARNING.

You can google adderall. And ADHD.

My point is I think the defense has a lot working for them on this topic.

Thirdly, have you ever had a traumatic or, just an incident that scared the hell out of you? You tell what happened...later on think of something else....then other people questioning, inflicting information into your thought processes....I AM NOT CONDONING OR TAKING UP FOR GZ....I am looking at it from a jurors point of view.

I forget at what point George realizes Trayvon is a teenager.....I heard him on the stand say he did not know he was a teenager, yet in the 911 tape he says plainly Trayvon is in his teens....but, in George's first observations of Trayvon he did not know this, if I remember correctly. Help Ellijay!

At the famous T. On a very dark night per dozens of reports...rainy...something happened near the T. The cell phone, flash light ect were found near the T right? A jury will hear it was so dark people could not distinguish things.

If you ever saw a real fight happening 2 people are rolling around....one might be trying to get away....but the jury will know that Gz knew when the cops handcuffed him and led him to a car....he was not at the T...He knew where the fight ended...why would he go on a walk through with police and not mention where the fight ended???

Ok, I've about rambled enough :) but one last thought I've had is this. The jury will know George was on bottom from the scratches cuts whatever to the back of his head, the grass stains and wetness of his backside. The young girlfriend reports the phone suddenly was away from the headphones....(if I remember correctly). I do not remember a mention of the headphones except from her...Ellijay?

Did Trayvon have the phone in his left or right hand? Was the phone checked for blood? If there was blood on the phone would it have been wiped off from sliding across wet grass...being rained on?? Did he hit George with the phone in his hand?

As an ER nurse I've seen way too much. And yes the physicians assistant who wrote what Gz told her about the gun....did what all medical professionals do...covered her butt. And we are all taught to put it in the patients words! Legally if someone tells you they killed someone last night....you best be calling the law...(and I would have gotten the hell outta the room...lol).

What I've tried to say is that Gz's way of thinking and acting is not like most people's. I do personally, and just my opinion,...believe he went after Trayvon after being told not to....and Trayvon did knock him on his butt and was beating the crap out of him...BECAUSE TRAYVON FELT HE WAS FIGHTING FOR HIS LIFE!......and wimpy out of shape (did you hear him huffing and puffing on the call with a little exertion....)Gz had the upper hand, so to speak...he wiggled around to get his gun and shot that kid. AND I honestly believe in the seconds it took for Trayvon to die he reflexed upwards and his hands might have moved up as if to surrender or to grasp where the bullit went in... and Trayvon said.....You SHOT me.

My sincere prayers to the family and friends of Trayvon's.

Gz has been enabled all his life....he is used to using others to protect him and cuddle him....these enablers need to stop and realize that it is time Gz learned to fight his own fights and to face the consequences. Hopefully, I am wrong about what will be determined by the jury...... but my faith in the legal system went south with Caylee's murderer and those that enabled the mother who murdered her to get away.

Delete this if inappropriate. I just couldn't bite my tongue any longer

Chickenbutt wrote:We welcome your comments. Most of us here on refugees from THM. RC has been so kind to us. We are glad to have you here, comment away!

I just did but you all might throw me to the chickens after reading it...

art tart wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Hmmmm, I had a post that disappeared....will try again.

I am going to go out on a limb here and try to put my thoughts down on paper....errrr....screen.

Would we even be talking about this case if the roles were reversed and TM had shot GZ and claimed the SYG defense? Would supporters have come out of the woodwork to support TM with their $$? Would MOM have come to defend TM pro bono? Or would people say that TM "had fulfilled his destiny to become a young black thug?"
Would we be discussing this case for hours on end and dissecting every nuance of the evidence?
Murders like this happen every day in this country. What made this one what it is? Why is this case different?
I think that this case would have been a blimp in the news that we read about, shook our heads and moved on.

Why is GZ the poster boy that he is? What, about this case, makes it THIS CASE?

I don't pretend to have any answers to these questions, but I have to wonder, would my child, if put in either position, be treated like GZ or TM? Would he be revered or vilified? Would he get a public defender or a high priced lawyer? Would donations be forthcoming or would I have to mortgage my house. Doesn't seem quite fair to me.

Chickenbutt, imo, this case isn't like any other case because of Jesse Jackson & Al Sharpton. They have had a positive & a negative influence on this case, angering many, other's thought they were appropriate even though Trayvon's family had fine legal representation & they were no longer needed. Sharpton/Jackson made the photo opts, but many thought they were self serving & self promoting, other's loved it.. imo, this behavior could have led some to donate to GZ, not so much that they support GZ but possibly some could just be tired of the same grand standing in many cases by the duo & voiced their complaint by donating money, I am just speculating, it doesn't make any difference as to the donations, the bottom line is, the website is not illegal as KZ has stated countless times.

why does every missing child not get the same publicity as Caylee got? imo, the Media drove the sensationalism as well as the defense & family but countless children went missing in Fla. & didn't get coverage BECAUSE the Media was reporting on KC's commissary order. OUTRAGEOUS imo. The Fla. MEDIA machine is keen to the revenues sensational cases bring. Jennifer Kesse's case is one that didn't get reported on but there were many during Caylee's murder/trial. The Media has driven this case, even editing tapes to make some reporting more inflaming, more sensational, imo, it doesn't serve anyone well. In Trayvon's case, the family has 2 to 3 of their attorney's commenting on everything done in the case on IN SESSION & HLN, every document, every hearing, so I am not offended if MOM speaks on anything nor am I offended by anything the attorney's for Trayvon's parent's share, I like to hear all the opinions offered by all sides.

Scott Peterson's family has had a website asking for money for his appeal for years, after all, he is a convicted murderer of 2. Nobody cares about his website, it too is not illegal, GZ hasn't been convicted yet, but Scott has.

Hi AT - I am not sure why you have selected CB's post to comment under since your comment doesn't really address her ponders. Anywhoooo, to address your comments - IMO, if it were not for Jackson and Sharpton, this case would have most likely been swept under the rug. I believe that is what outraged most people was the fact that the case was being tossed aside as though Trayvon was expendable, not the presence of Jackson and Sharpton.

We all realize that the media sensationalizes certain cases and not others - but that was not what CB was questioning. Her query was what if the tables were turned and it were Trayvon who shot GZ? What if it had been her son who had been shot, or who shot GZ? Would money be donated to help them? And if not, why?

Again, CB's post did not pertain to MOM or the Martin Family's attorneys, or MOM's pandering for legal funds, but now that you bring it up - I think most would have to agree that the Martin Family has been very respectful in the media given the fact that their son was murdered for simply looking suspicious while strolling in the rain. On the other hand, MOM's statement "for all those who would do the same" was a call to racists and extremists IMO. It was tasteless and disgusting. If it were Trayvon asking for funds, or CB's son, what demographic would he be able to call upon?

Hinky Refugee wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:We welcome your comments. Most of us here on refugees from THM. RC has been so kind to us. We are glad to have you here, comment away!

I just did but you all might throw me to the chickens after reading it...

Nope, I am a fun lovin, peaceful chicken. We all have our opinions, no ones are more important than anyone elses. So keep on postin'

Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the media campaign are definitely why this case has risen to national/ international debate. The REAL issue is what was going on with Wolfinger, and the actions of the Sanford PD investigation. That story has been totally overshadowed.

Had the parents chosen a different route to force the investigation, other than Al Sharpton/ Jesse Jackson/ Ben Crump/ Natalie Jackson, there may have been a different outcome-- especially as to how the case was played in the media. Heck-- if they had called Oprah Winfrey the outcome would have been different. The ones they chose to work with are some of the most outrageously controversial (that's the most PC word I can think of) figures in the community of black activists.

There are a lot of people with power and authority that the parents could have called that would have avoided the racial baiting. There are SO many other routes that they could have chosen to pursue the questions about how the case was investigated, and why no charges were brought. For example, had the parents sought an audience with Pam Bondi, or the Governor, or their elected representatives, there could have been a different outcome than the riots, race marches, and the persistent "GZ is a racist" narrative. It is precisely because of WHO they chose to bring the case to prominence that the case immediately was picked up by the media, when "before that time" the media were not interested in covering the case of "why" GZ had not been arrested. And the media was all too happy to twist and mangle the REAL story into something that would capture people's attention and emotions. So they manipulated the story with techniques designed to whip up a frenzy. THAT is the unethical behavior we should be examining more closely, imo-- not some defense atty begging for donations on a website.

This case can never be separated from the dirty media campaign, and dirty social campaign that produced the rise to high-profile prominence. Dirty is a strong word, but there is nothing about the way that has played out that I admire or respect, nor do I admire the tactics of the ones who exploited the parent's grief, confusion, and outrage. I do strongly believe they (and Trayvon) were exploited for political and social causes that were not their own-- and they quickly became willing participants in that exploitation. Do I blame them for becoming willing participants? No, their teenage son was shot dead. Who knows what any of us might do in their shoes.

But exploitation goes both ways. GZ will have his "corporate" exploitative supporters (groups such as the NRA, ultraconservatives, etc.), just as Trayvon's family has their supporters (groups like the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and New Black Panthers, etc.). The wheels that were set in motion making this case into a "social cause" have produced what we see now-- political and social posturing that have really nothing to do with what the case originally was about. And the posturing goes further than the families of the victim and the defendant-- it's no accident Angela Corey (out of all of the choices) was selected as special prosecutor. She has a TON of social and political baggage related to how she has prosecuted black defendants.

I know many here will disagree with my thoughts and opinions, but I hope we can agree to disagree, and continue respectful discussion. It's okay for us all not to agree all the time. It is because I respect all of you, and respect the caliber of our discussions past and present, that I choose to "carefully" share my dissenting opinions here.

Otherwise, you'd all think I'm a troll, lol!

No complaints from me KZ - I always enjoy reading your perspective, even when I disagree, which is far and few between.

I'm fine too.....if we can't disagree, what fun is it?

KZ wrote:Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the media campaign are definitely why this case has risen to national/ international debate. The REAL issue is what was going on with Wolfinger, and the actions of the Sanford PD investigation. That story has been totally overshadowed.

Had the parents chosen a different route to force the investigation, other than Al Sharpton/ Jesse Jackson/ Ben Crump/ Natalie Jackson, there may have been a different outcome-- especially as to how the case was played in the media. Heck-- if they had called Oprah Winfrey the outcome would have been different. The ones they chose to work with are some of the most outrageously controversial (that's the most PC word I can think of) figures in the community of black activists.

There are a lot of people with power and authority that the parents could have called that would have avoided the racial baiting. There are SO many other routes that they could have chosen to pursue the questions about how the case was investigated, and why no charges were brought. For example, had the parents sought an audience with Pam Bondi, or the Governor, or their elected representatives, there could have been a different outcome than the riots, race marches, and the persistent "GZ is a racist" narrative. It is precisely because of WHO they chose to bring the case to prominence that the case immediately was picked up by the media, when "before that time" the media were not interested in covering the case of "why" GZ had not been arrested. And the media was all too happy to twist and mangle the REAL story into something that would capture people's attention and emotions. So they manipulated the story with techniques designed to whip up a frenzy. THAT is the unethical behavior we should be examining more closely, imo-- not some defense atty begging for donations on a website.

This case can never be separated from the dirty media campaign, and dirty social campaign that produced the rise to high-profile prominence. Dirty is a strong word, but there is nothing about the way that has played out that I admire or respect, nor do I admire the tactics of the ones who exploited the parent's grief, confusion, and outrage. I do strongly believe they (and Trayvon) were exploited for political and social causes that were not their own-- and they quickly became willing participants in that exploitation. Do I blame them for becoming willing participants? No, their teenage son was shot dead. Who knows what any of us might do in their shoes.

But exploitation goes both ways. GZ will have his "corporate" exploitative supporters (groups such as the NRA, ultraconservatives, etc.), just as Trayvon's family has their supporters (groups like the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and New Black Panthers, etc.). The wheels that were set in motion making this case into a "social cause" have produced what we see now-- political and social posturing that have really nothing to do with what the case originally was about. And the posturing goes further than the families of the victim and the defendant-- it's no accident Angela Corey (out of all of the choices) was selected as special prosecutor. She has a TON of social and political baggage related to how she has prosecuted black defendants.

I know many here will disagree with my thoughts and opinions, but I hope we can agree to disagree, and continue respectful discussion. It's okay for us all not to agree all the time. It is because I respect all of you, and respect the caliber of our discussions past and present, that I choose to "carefully" share my dissenting opinions here.

Otherwise, you'd all think I'm a troll, lol!

How do you know that Al Sharpton did not genuinely think that an injustice had been done and took the cause up for that reason? How do you know that Pam Bondi would have even been interested in getting involved? Please never associate Al Sharpton with the Black Panthers and the former is a very respected member of our community whereas the latter is a fringe group which s widely frowned upon.
It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback back but turning the clock back, we had a dead black kid a Sanford Police department who appeared to stonewall the parents efforts to find the truth. Recall they refused to even release the 911 tapes until Sharpton and Crump threatened to sue and I certainly do not think that Pam Bondi was going to stick her neck out for the Martin's.

You will note that once Shaprton accomplished his goal of facilitating an arrest, that he promptly bowed out of the limelight ( which defeats any argument that his involvement was self serving).

Lastly, as a community we must do what we need to do to ensure justice an not worry so much about what the backlash might be. As it stands, those who are pouring money into this fund tend to dislike us anyway.

KZ wrote:Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the media campaign are definitely why this case has risen to national/ international debate. The REAL issue is what was going on with Wolfinger, and the actions of the Sanford PD investigation. That story has been totally overshadowed.

Had the parents chosen a different route to force the investigation, other than Al Sharpton/ Jesse Jackson/ Ben Crump/ Natalie Jackson, there may have been a different outcome-- especially as to how the case was played in the media. Heck-- if they had called Oprah Winfrey the outcome would have been different. The ones they chose to work with are some of the most outrageously controversial (that's the most PC word I can think of) figures in the community of black activists.

There are a lot of people with power and authority that the parents could have called that would have avoided the racial baiting. There are SO many other routes that they could have chosen to pursue the questions about how the case was investigated, and why no charges were brought. For example, had the parents sought an audience with Pam Bondi, or the Governor, or their elected representatives, there could have been a different outcome than the riots, race marches, and the persistent "GZ is a racist" narrative. It is precisely because of WHO they chose to bring the case to prominence that the case immediately was picked up by the media, when "before that time" the media were not interested in covering the case of "why" GZ had not been arrested. And the media was all too happy to twist and mangle the REAL story into something that would capture people's attention and emotions. So they manipulated the story with techniques designed to whip up a frenzy. THAT is the unethical behavior we should be examining more closely, imo-- not some defense atty begging for donations on a website.

This case can never be separated from the dirty media campaign, and dirty social campaign that produced the rise to high-profile prominence. Dirty is a strong word, but there is nothing about the way that has played out that I admire or respect, nor do I admire the tactics of the ones who exploited the parent's grief, confusion, and outrage. I do strongly believe they (and Trayvon) were exploited for political and social causes that were not their own-- and they quickly became willing participants in that exploitation. Do I blame them for becoming willing participants? No, their teenage son was shot dead. Who knows what any of us might do in their shoes.

But exploitation goes both ways. GZ will have his "corporate" exploitative supporters (groups such as the NRA, ultraconservatives, etc.), just as Trayvon's family has their supporters (groups like the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and New Black Panthers, etc.). The wheels that were set in motion making this case into a "social cause" have produced what we see now-- political and social posturing that have really nothing to do with what the case originally was about. And the posturing goes further than the families of the victim and the defendant-- it's no accident Angela Corey (out of all of the choices) was selected as special prosecutor. She has a TON of social and political baggage related to how she has prosecuted black defendants.

I know many here will disagree with my thoughts and opinions, but I hope we can agree to disagree, and continue respectful discussion. It's okay for us all not to agree all the time. It is because I respect all of you, and respect the caliber of our discussions past and present, that I choose to "carefully" share my dissenting opinions here.

Otherwise, you'd all think I'm a troll, lol!

BBM
Snipped

-ABC News reported Tuesday that, after questioning Zimmerman at the Sanford police station, homicide investigator Chris Serino filed an affidavit February 26th stating that he did not believe Zimmerman’s account of the shooting. He recommended charging the 28-year-old with manslaughter, but was advised by Wolfinger’s office that there wasn’t enough evidence to secure a conviction. Zimmerman was subsequently released.

What was not stated was that, on the night of the killing, Wolfinger may have traveled to either the scene of the shooting or the police station to discuss the case with Lee and O’Connor, who was briefly named interim “co-chief” with the current acting chief, Darren Scott, when Lee announced he would step down temporarily last week.

In this case, the source says investigators spoke to the on-duty assistant state attorney — an unidentified woman — who did not come to the scene, but that Wolfinger did.

- A lead investigator into the shooting of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin wanted to charge neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman with manslaughter, according to a report from ABC News.

The news agency said they confirmed the information from 'multiple sources.'
The state attorney's office, headed by Norman Wolfinger, told investigator Chris Serino that there was not enough evidence to press charges.

Serino filed an affidavit on Feb. 26, the night Martin was shot and killed by Zimmerman, saying he did not believe Zimmerman's version of events.

The City of Sanford later issued an alert to "clarify a statement made related to the police report."


-State Attorney Norm Wolfinger won't seek re-election
5:11 p.m. EST, April 20, 2012|
Wolfinger made the decision early in his current term, his office said.

-Statement from State Attorney Norm Wolfinger:

I share in the desire of the family and the community to accurately collect and evaluate all the facts surrounding the tragic death of Trayvon Martin. That is why I directed the expeditious review of the investigation which was delivered by the Sanford Police Department one week ago today; areas for further investigation have been identified; and, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement has agreed to assist and has been working hard with my office since Friday March 16th. I will also be utilizing the investigative resources of the Seminole County Grand Jury which will be called to session on Tuesday, April 10, 2012.

I respectfully request that the public remain patient as this process continues forward. We are a country based upon law, and as the State Attorney for the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit I am sworn to uphold those laws. As I have previously stated, the public is entitled to no less than a thorough, deliberate, and just review of the facts. We intend to honor that commitment.

Norm Wolfinger


http://thegrio.com/2012/03/28/source-sanford-police-chief-state-attorney-made-zimmerman-no-charge-call-in-person/#46882946

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/state/report--lead-investigator-wanted-to-arrest-zimmerman-for-shooting-unarmed-teen

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-20/news/os-norm-wolfinger-no-reelection-bid-20120420_1_staffs-state-attorney-norm-wolfinger-special-prosecutor

-http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-20/news/os-trayvon-martin-_1_statement-investigation-law-enforcement

Porky-
I agree with both you and KZ. She makes valid points regarding the media attention WOULD have been different IF different spokespersons were there for Trayvon AND for GZ. While I don't like Sharpton as he gets people riled up and divided, this is a case where ALL the people NEEDED a kick in the pants to get the case moving forward for justice. Perhaps, looking at it from that perspective, yes, it was time to toss in a hand grenade and get this moving along. And sometimes, pea shooters just don't do the job.

I hope the case remains focused on legality--- justice--- and does not melt into a racial situation. Some valid points were made: GZ did not know if the person in the hoodie was male or female--- did he know the race of the person even? Would he still have gone after them if they were Iranian or Chinese or Mexican? IMO, GZ WOULD have! He wanted his kill that night. And would Sharpton have spoken out for that victim? I sure hope so! Otherwise, if he can only speak of injustices to one and not all, he has to be biased.

(I think he would have stopped if the person was female but under the pulled up hoodie? Could he tell?)

Freckles wrote:Porky-
I agree with both you and KZ. She makes valid points regarding the media attention WOULD have been different IF different spokespersons were there for Trayvon AND for GZ. While I don't like Sharpton as he gets people riled up and divided, this is a case where ALL the people NEEDED a kick in the pants to get the case moving forward for justice. Perhaps, looking at it from that perspective, yes, it was time to toss in a hand grenade and get this moving along. And sometimes, pea shooters just don't do the job.

I hope the case remains focused on legality--- justice--- and does not melt into a racial situation. Some valid points were made: GZ did not know if the person in the hoodie was male or female--- did he know the race of the person even? Would he still have gone after them if they were Iranian or Chinese or Mexican? IMO, GZ WOULD have! He wanted his kill that night. And would Sharpton have spoken out for that victim? I sure hope so! Otherwise, if he can only speak of injustices to one and not all, he has to be biased.

(I think he would have stopped if the person was female but under the pulled up hoodie? Could he tell?)

George Zimmerman knew that "the person in the hoodie" was a male.

Zimmerman 911 Call Transcript:

Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman:

He looks black.

Freckles wrote:Porky-
I agree with both you and KZ. She makes valid points regarding the media attention WOULD have been different IF different spokespersons were there for Trayvon AND for GZ. While I don't like Sharpton as he gets people riled up and divided, this is a case where ALL the people NEEDED a kick in the pants to get the case moving forward for justice. Perhaps, looking at it from that perspective, yes, it was time to toss in a hand grenade and get this moving along. And sometimes, pea shooters just don't do the job.

I hope the case remains focused on legality--- justice--- and does not melt into a racial situation. Some valid points were made: GZ did not know if the person in the hoodie was male or female--- did he know the race of the person even? Would he still have gone after them if they were Iranian or Chinese or Mexican? IMO, GZ WOULD have! He wanted his kill that night. And would Sharpton have spoken out for that victim? I sure hope so! Otherwise, if he can only speak of injustices to one and not all, he has to be biased.

(I think he would have stopped if the person was female but under the pulled up hoodie? Could he tell?)

Well I won't wander too far off topic but ask your self this before blaming Sharpton for anything. Sanford an the surrounding Orlando areas has some pretty large white churches. Did you see any of them speaking up as this unfolded? Sharton is a civil rights person and he in this case got the ball rolling while the very people who should have been upset sat in noticeable silence.

Chickenbutt wrote:Art, I was not speaking specifically of the money aspect of this case, altho it is an anomaly. I was speaking in general about why this case is this case. What is so damn special about it? Like I said, this happens everyday in America. And I don't buy that Sharpton/Jackson caused this to take wings and fly. They are speaking for TM, who was gunned down unnecessarily and unfairly.

There also the $10,000 Reward for the capture of GZ by the New Black Panthers. That's one thing that makes this case "this case".

Puzzler wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Art, I was not speaking specifically of the money aspect of this case, altho it is an anomaly. I was speaking in general about why this case is this case. What is so damn special about it? Like I said, this happens everyday in America. And I don't buy that Sharpton/Jackson caused this to take wings and fly. They are speaking for TM, who was gunned down unnecessarily and unfairly.

There also the $10,000 Reward for the capture of GZ by the New Black Panthers. That's one thing that makes this case "this case".

That group is not associated in any way, shape or form, with any of the persons who offered their support to Trayvon's family, as a matter of fact, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton publicly spoke against the so called New Black Panthers and repudiated the idea.

Puzzler wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Art, I was not speaking specifically of the money aspect of this case, altho it is an anomaly. I was speaking in general about why this case is this case. What is so damn special about it? Like I said, this happens everyday in America. And I don't buy that Sharpton/Jackson caused this to take wings and fly. They are speaking for TM, who was gunned down unnecessarily and unfairly.

There also the $10,000 Reward for the capture of GZ by the New Black Panthers. That's one thing that makes this case "this case".

(Yes, Sharpton/ Jackson caused this to take wings and fly- jmo.)

And, if I'm not mistaken, there has been NO official investigation into the NBP bounty: no arrests, no FBI plans to file hate crimes under Shepard/ Byrd, no....."nothing"......

Poor little NBP's....they were just....."upset". Such nice people they are. Social Activists! Woo hoo!

Now, everyone, just look the other way. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

Puzzler wrote:

There also the $10,000 Reward for the capture of GZ by the New Black Panthers. That's one thing that makes this case "this case".

That group is not associated in any way, shape or form, with any of the persons who offered their support to Trayvon's family, as a matter of fact, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton publicly spoke against the so called New Black Panthers and repudiated the idea.

I'm not saying they are - I was responding to a question of what makes this case "this case". There are a number of things that have been in the media that adds to the reason this case is high profile.