George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #5

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".

The New Black Panthers are a rogue group with their own personal agenda just as the White Supremist are. IIRCC, the Martin family immediately came out and disavowed any support by the NBP.

ETA: I just saw your subsequent post Puzzler and acknowledge you did not mean anything by mentioning the NBP. This case is "this case" IMO because the Sanford Police Department, Wolfinger, and whomever else were sweeping this case under the rug. Mr. Martin was told that GZ had a squeaky clean record, yadda yadda... So of course, what would be the first thing going through your mind as a black man whose young teen has just been killed for doing nothing more than walking home from the store? They did exactly what I would have done - I would have called Sharpton and Jackson. Completely understandable IMO. This is when everyone across the United States and beyond, despite race, became outraged that this man was walking around free under the SYG law. Quiet frankly, I don't think we will ever know the real truth behind why GZ was allowed to go home that night uncharged, but I definitely believe there was something Hinky in the whole decision. But I do believe that ONCE the public became aware that GZ was walking around free as a bird after having killed Trayvon, it did not matter what the color of either party's skin was - it was the fact that GZ had not been charged and a teen was dead for no good reason.

Tamta wrote:

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

Tamtra - TY for the information on Wolfinger - I didn't start following this case until many weeks had passed - other than to listen to snips on TV.

I'm interested in the part above highlighted in blue. Does anyone know what happened to using a grand jury for investigative purposes? Why was that not done?

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.

Nor have the Zimmerman family come out publicly as members or strong supporters of NRA or neocon groups. Yet they are constantly being accused of receiving support from them. It cuts both ways.

If one postulates that the Fulton/ Martins avow no allegiance with the NBP, then why the vitriol against the NRA and neocon groups-- who we do not even know IF they are really contributing to GZ's defense? We KNOW the NBP put out a bounty, but they get a pass. That group is a hate group, plain and simple. There is nothing good or noble or kind or just about what they espouse. Just hate.

I just don't understand any of it. How can a group like the NBP put a VERY public bounty on someone's head and get away with no investigation or prosecution? How is that right, even if they are a fringe group disavowed by the Fulton/ Martin family and their representatives. Why is no one officially incensed about THAT??

Because Special Prosecutor Corey decided she did not need the Grand Jury. A Grand Jury is only required in First Degree Murder charges - lessor charges are discretionary.

CherokeeNative 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".

The New Black Panthers are a rogue group with their own personal agenda just as the White Supremist are. IIRCC, the Martin family immediately came out and disavowed any support by the NBP.

ETA: I just saw your subsequent post Puzzler and acknowledge you did not mean anything by mentioning the NBP. This case is "this case" IMO because the Sanford Police Department, Wolfinger, and whomever else were sweeping this case under the rug. Mr. Martin was told that GZ had a squeaky clean record, yadda yadda... So of course, what would be the first thing going through your mind as a black man whose young teen has just been killed for doing nothing more than walking home from the store? They did exactly what I would have done - I would have called Sharpton and Jackson. Completely understandable IMO. This is when everyone across the United States and beyond, despite race, became outraged that this man was walking around free under the SYG law. Quiet frankly, I don't think we will ever know the real truth behind why GZ was allowed to go home that night uncharged, but I definitely believe there was something Hinky in the whole decision. But I do believe that ONCE the public became aware that GZ was walking around free as a bird after having killed Trayvon, it did not matter what the color of either party's skin was - it was the fact that GZ had not been charged and a teen was dead for no good reason.

As I said before, I'm not trying to link the NBPs to the Martin Family.

I'm pointing out "one" reason of many that has made this case high profile.

It's been all over the news for quite a while.

KZ wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

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.

Nor have the Zimmerman family come out publicly as members or strong supporters of NRA or neocon groups. Yet they are constantly being accused of receiving support from them. It cuts both ways.

If one postulates that the Fulton/ Martins avow no allegiance with the NBP, then why the vitriol against the NRA and neocon groups-- who we do not even know IF they are really contributing to GZ's defense? We KNOW the NBP put out a bounty, but they get a pass. That group is a hate group, plain and simple. There is nothing good or noble or kind or just about what they espouse. Just hate.

I just don't understand any of it. How can a group like the NBP put a VERY public bounty on someone's head and get away with no investigation or prosecution? How is that right, even if they are a fringe group disavowed by the Fulton/ Martin family and their representatives. Why is no one officially incensed about THAT??

KZ - It's not the Zimmerman family that is pandering to the NRA or neocon groups, but MOM certainly is. You only need go onto the Pro-GZ sites to read who is donating and MOM's public statement on his legal defense fund site is clearly a call to those individuals.

CherokeeNative wrote:Because Special Prosecutor Corey decided she did not need the Grand Jury. A Grand Jury is only required in First Degree Murder charges - lessor charges are discretionary.

Cher - TY

Puzzler, regarding the grand jury.

In FL, a grand jury has to be used for first degree murder charges, IIRC. Below that, the prosecutor has discretion to use the GJ, or bring their own charges. AC chose to bring her own charges. Some believe that she would not have been able to achieve an indictment on 2nd degree murder with a GJ. A number of very learned legal minds have opined that they believe that AC has overcharged this case, and manslaughter was the appropriate charge.

I am not a learned legal mind, but I agree with the learned legal minds that 2nd degree is overcharging what can be proven. I believe this is a manslaughter case. With what we know at this point, if I were a juror, I could not vote for 2nd degree murder. I would vote manslaughter.

But this case will not be won or lost on objective evidence, imo. If it goes to a jury, the jury composition will decide the case more than the evidence will, imo. Whichever side "wins" jury selection will win the case, before opening statements are ever delivered.

KZ wrote:Puzzler, regarding the grand jury.

In FL, a grand jury has to be used for first degree murder charges, IIRC. Below that, the prosecutor has discretion to use the GJ, or bring their own charges. AC chose to bring her own charges. Some believe that she would not have been able to achieve an indictment on 2nd degree murder with a GJ. A number of very learned legal minds have opined that they believe that AC has overcharged this case, and manslaughter was the appropriate charge.

I am not a learned legal mind, but I agree with the learned legal minds that 2nd degree is overcharging what can be proven. I believe this is a manslaughter case. With what we know at this point, if I were a juror, I could not vote for 2nd degree murder. I would vote manslaughter.

But this case will not be won or lost on objective evidence, imo. If it goes to a jury, the jury composition will decide the case more than the evidence will, imo. Whichever side "wins" jury selection will win the case, before opening statements are ever delivered.

KZ - TY

So, while Wolfinger was going to use a grand jury, that all changed when Angela Corey was appointed Special Prosecutor and she decided not to use a grand jury.

I agree - that the jury selection will be huge in this case.

Puzzler wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

The New Black Panthers are a rogue group with their own personal agenda just as the White Supremist are. IIRCC, the Martin family immediately came out and disavowed any support by the NBP.

ETA: I just saw your subsequent post Puzzler and acknowledge you did not mean anything by mentioning the NBP. This case is "this case" IMO because the Sanford Police Department, Wolfinger, and whomever else were sweeping this case under the rug. Mr. Martin was told that GZ had a squeaky clean record, yadda yadda... So of course, what would be the first thing going through your mind as a black man whose young teen has just been killed for doing nothing more than walking home from the store? They did exactly what I would have done - I would have called Sharpton and Jackson. Completely understandable IMO. This is when everyone across the United States and beyond, despite race, became outraged that this man was walking around free under the SYG law. Quiet frankly, I don't think we will ever know the real truth behind why GZ was allowed to go home that night uncharged, but I definitely believe there was something Hinky in the whole decision. But I do believe that ONCE the public became aware that GZ was walking around free as a bird after having killed Trayvon, it did not matter what the color of either party's skin was - it was the fact that GZ had not been charged and a teen was dead for no good reason.

As I said before, I'm not trying to link the NBPs to the Martin Family.

I'm pointing out "one" reason of many that has made this case high profile.

It's been all over the news for quite a while.

This case became a high profile case because of the organized protests across the nation against the Sanford Police Department, and the Seminole County State Attorney, for their lack of action in the shooting of a black unarmed teenager. The massive demonstrations started in the City of Sanford and swept across the nation, the public outrage garnered national and international media attention. This is a legal case that become a social cause.

KZ wrote:Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and the media campaign are definitely why this case has risen to national/ international debate. ...

Well, FWIW, I for one disagree. I am a white person in the northwest of this country and never saw or heard either Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, both of whom I respect, ever talking about this case - what I heard was the 911 tape and that a teenager was dead - shot - about 4 minutes after the end of that call, and I came to my own conclusions. The profiling aspect on the part of GZ, and specifically what sounded to me like a racial profiling, seemed obvious just from the tape. Later when I realized that either corruption at the PD level or higher, or something else that I did not grasp (SYG?) or just what I see as power imbalance had resulted in the shooter walking free, I was encouraged by the massive turnout at demonstrations calling for justice.

ETA: oh and before someone jumps on me and mentions that the media had altered the 911 tape (I'll beat ya to it here LOL) --- my reaction was not to the part where GZ said specifically "he's black" which had been taken out of context and moved otgether without the dispatcher's question in between - it was to GZ's comment "THESE ASSHOLES _ THEY ALWAYS GET AWAY" - and what I discerned as GZ's self-appointment as a vigilante, which I believe even more now after seeing the videotapes last week and his comments to Singleton was it - the woman officer in the room with him on 2/27.

CherokeeNative wrote:

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.

--ughhhh..i had such a long response and it went *poof*--------suffice to say i agree completely with you Cher.

---@ snowbird-----LOVE the new avatar!!! beautiful!

I understand asking for donations, but entering those "for those who..." kind of statements made my stomach turn.

Mr O'Mara, we get it, you have dollar signs on your eyes right now, but you can milk this case without getting that low.

Yes, O'Mara crossed the line and how some cannot see this is beyond me. O'Mara is doing nothing but showing that he is in GREED mode and could care less about anything else. "for those who thinks it was justified"? That statement alone shows what O'Mara is made up of.

I read somewhere on here that if Oprah had stepped in instead of Sharpton and Jackson it would have had more of an effect. NO matter who stepped in, I doubt that this would have changed O'Mara wanting to gain big time from this case.

Had Sharpton and Jackson not stepped in, this case would have been swept under the rug. They are the ones that brought about the investigation. Where else could this family have gotten the response that they did? Their son was murdered in cold blood for no other reason then for beeing black while walking down the street. Had that been my son, I would have went to hell and back to get justice, as would anyone of us (including the ones who are donating). But it wasn't their son and the teenager was black, therefore the "warped" justification for Zimmerman comes to play. I never cared for Al Sharpton either, but if he was able to bring justice for Trayvon, I applaud him.

These doner's are nothing more than wannbe killers themselves, but don't have guts to do it themselves (thank God for that) and by donating they feel as though they took part in pulling that trigger.

Trayvons parents did what they had to do, they knew no one would listen to them but they sure as hell would listen to Sharpton and Jackson. Also if it wasn't for Sharpton and Jackson Trayvons parents would have not received the donations that they did and they would have to be going thru this without any funds. The family did not expect to have to lose their son in this horific manner.

O'Mara is asking for donations for the killer while Sharpton asked and got donations for the victim, there is a big difference here. Sharpton is an activist, what else would be expected of him then to fight for justice for a wrong doing?

Nancy Grace is not a liked person, but if she managed to get funding for a family of a murdered child we wouldn't be downing her for it.

I don't care if Trayvon was suspended from school for smoking pot, we have had presidents that owned up to have smoked pot when they were back in school. In reality, the suspension to a 17 year old shows that he was a GOOD student and was just being punished for his actions. IF HE HAD NOT BEEN A GOOD STUDENT, he would have been kicked out of school completely at 17. But the school obvioulsy thought it was just a bad choice of this particular student. Once a child hits 16 and they are doing nothing in school but causing trouble and not trying to learn and distracting outher students from learning, they get kicked out.....Trayvon was 17 and nearing graduation so he couldn't have been a bad student.

They couldn't find anything worse then that on Trayvon so these supporters ar running away with this suspension. What about George's arrest, what about the order of protection against George, what about his blogs that indicate that his "home boys took a rap for him" (his OWN words)? George cannot even remember the words that were spoken that night between Trayvon and himself, his story has changed numerous times. But he hadn't contemplated that Trayvons phone was open at the initial contact (by the ONLY witness who heard this and phone records to prove she was infact on the phone with Trayvon). The OTHER records prove that Zimmerman was the one persuing Trayvon, that Zimmerman did NOT go back to his car as instructed, that Zimmerman had a gun while on citizens patrol and acting like LE, this is what the other records show.

Combine the fact that Zimmerman was profiling Trayvon, that Zimmerman was chasing Trayvon, that Trayvon ends up shot to death by this person who was persuing him, then lies to LE over and over again, it's going to be pretty hard for the defense to turn this case around and make Trayvon the aggressor, especially that all Trayvon had on him was a cell, skittles and an ice tea. Oh and forty (40) dollars, while Zimmerman claimed to be going to Target and only had two quarters on him and nor wallet (to my understanding).

All we have to worry about is the jury selection. I hope that each and every juror is investigated fully to make sure that they weren't involved with donating to Zimmermans defense. Or that the jurors don't feel that this killing was justified before entering that in the jury selection. All that is needed is ONE racists and George will walk.

BUT, if that should happen and this Zimmerman walks, I hope he knows he will live a life like Casey Anthony, then I want to see his "so called" supporters take care of him and his wife for the rest of their lives because neither one will be able to ever get a job and live a normal life. So there is a little lite at the end of the tunnel in the event he is found "not guilty".

Zimmerman rode on his name as not to appear like a minority and now his name will be his worst enemy because it will make him stand out from anyone else who carries that name. He will stick out like a sore thumb.

KZ wrote:Puzzler, regarding the grand jury.

In FL, a grand jury has to be used for first degree murder charges, IIRC. Below that, the prosecutor has discretion to use the GJ, or bring their own charges. AC chose to bring her own charges. Some believe that she would not have been able to achieve an indictment on 2nd degree murder with a GJ. A number of very learned legal minds have opined that they believe that AC has overcharged this case, and manslaughter was the appropriate charge.

I am not a learned legal mind, but I agree with the learned legal minds that 2nd degree is overcharging what can be proven. I believe this is a manslaughter case. With what we know at this point, if I were a juror, I could not vote for 2nd degree murder. I would vote manslaughter.

But this case will not be won or lost on objective evidence, imo. If it goes to a jury, the jury composition will decide the case more than the evidence will, imo. Whichever side "wins" jury selection will win the case, before opening statements are ever delivered.

IMO the real criticism of how high profile cases are handled by the media is that a considerable amount of evidence that will not be admissible in trial gets released to the public- and influences the jury pool.

This category of 'evidence' made public but not ruled as relevant to the case could undermine justice for both sides.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-07/news/os-george-zimmerman-sanford-police-lied-20120707_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-chief-bill-lee-arrest-warrant
Sanford police took one position on Trayvon shooting in public, another in paperwork to prosecutors

--snipped--
At 4 p.m. March 12, Sanford police Chief Bill Lee Jr. stood in City Hall plaza in front of a hostile crowd and dozens of reporters and insisted his agency could not arrest Zimmerman because investigators had failed to establish probable cause, the minimal standard of evidence to justify filing a criminal case.

The next day, however, his agency sent prosecutors paperwork saying it did have probable cause and asked that they charge Zimmerman with manslaughter.

It was signed by lead Investigator Chris Serino and his boss, then-Sgt. Randy Smith, but it was the department's official position and had the support of Lee, said Capt. Bob O'Connor, who oversees the department's major-crimes division and also was part of the investigation.



http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2012/07/george-zimmerman-his-attorney-is-ultimate-professional.html
George Zimmerman: His attorney is ‘ultimate professional’

--snipped--
This weekend’s “Central Florida Spotlight” offered unusual perspectives on the George Zimmerman case.

Bill Sheaffer said the defense team was “very clever” at a recent bond hearing by conceding that Zimmerman’s wife lied earlier about donations but quickly shifting the focus to evidence. Zimmerman was released on Friday after posting a $1 million bond.

Defense attorney Mark O’Mara’s first responsibility is to his client, Sheaffer said. But Sheaffer added that O’Mara is “the ultimate professional” who realizes “there are far-reaching consequences to the questions in this case and to a jury’s verdict. Certainly, if there’s ever been a case that transparency is demanded, it has to be this case.”

The reason? Everyone has to look at this verdict and say everyone got a fair shake, Sheaffer said.

CherokeeNative....I need to clarify something from the other night ....re the Revrand / Trayvons Father txt ...That made both GZ an M O M nervous when brought up dureing the first bail bond hearing....I dont think it was taken of his phone dureing his initial questioning on the night of the shooting or even the next few days...Trayvons Parents had not been on tv or in the Media at that point..My instincts are that GZ had his phone returned to him that night.Maybe L E done that thing where they can clone it an then keep track of everything ocouring on that phone as part of there ongoing investigation..More likely though is that when GZ was arrested after the 40 odd days an placed in custody on 2nd degree murder charges.His phone was again scrutinised by LE to see what he had been up to an if anything incriminating re the offence was mentioned.This is when I M O THE derogatery an possably raceist comments ie Trayvons Father an a as yet unidentified Revrant were disscovered an handed over to the prosecution ,,The prosecution has that info an possably a lot lot more taken from his an Wifes phone also since her Arrest..When GZ Made his appolagy at the first bail hearing the propsecuter wanted to read certain portions of nasty things said by GZ via txt dureing that time period of forty odd days before his arrest..When TM Parents an both Rev Sharpton / Jackson regulary apeared on TV...Although my gut instinct was that he used Rev Martin Luther King as he shared the name Martin with Trayvons family....The way GZ eyes nearly popped out his head as he said he had no memory of any txt concerning Revrant an Trayvons Father indicates it was realy bad...The Judge also appeared to be privvy to the contents an the inflamitory nature of them as he shut down them being read out in court for the time being..All of the above is just speculation on my part an also M O O.............

ecossie possie wrote:CherokeeNative....I need to clarify something from the other night ....re the Revrand / Trayvons Father txt ...That made both GZ an M O M nervous when brought up dureing the first bail bond hearing....I dont think it was taken of his phone dureing his initial questioning on the night of the shooting or even the next few days...Trayvons Parents had not been on tv or in the Media at that point..My instincts are that GZ had his phone returned to him that night.Maybe L E done that thing where they can clone it an then keep track of everything ocouring on that phone as part of there ongoing investigation..More likely though is that when GZ was arrested after the 40 odd days an placed in custody on 2nd degree murder charges.His phone was again scrutinised by LE to see what he had been up to an if anything incriminating re the offence was mentioned.This is when I M O THE derogatery an possably raceist comments ie Trayvons Father an a as yet unidentified Revrant were disscovered an handed over to the prosecution ,,The prosecution has that info an possably a lot lot more taken from his an Wifes phone also since her Arrest..When GZ Made his appolagy at the first bail hearing the propsecuter wanted to read certain portions of nasty things said by GZ via txt dureing that time period of forty odd days before his arrest..When TM Parents an both Rev Sharpton / Jackson regulary apeared on TV...Although my gut instinct was that he used Rev Martin Luther King as he shared the name Martin with Trayvons family....The way GZ eyes nearly popped out his head as he said he had no memory of any txt concerning Revrant an Trayvons Father indicates it was realy bad...The Judge also appeared to be privvy to the contents an the inflamitory nature of them as he shut down them being read out in court for the time being..All of the above is just speculation on my part an also M O O.............

I think your opinion may very well be right. I am sure that since he was investigated for the shooting that they had a warrent to do what ever they do to phones. George thinks he is smarter than anyone like with the jail house call and him using his code words to move money around and talk about his peter pan. I would think this is all they are going to use when he takes the stand.

KZ wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

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.

Nor have the Zimmerman family come out publicly as members or strong supporters of NRA or neocon groups. Yet they are constantly being accused of receiving support from them. It cuts both ways.

If one postulates that the Fulton/ Martins avow no allegiance with the NBP, then why the vitriol against the NRA and neocon groups-- who we do not even know IF they are really contributing to GZ's defense? We KNOW the NBP put out a bounty, but they get a pass. That group is a hate group, plain and simple. There is nothing good or noble or kind or just about what they espouse. Just hate.

I just don't understand any of it. How can a group like the NBP put a VERY public bounty on someone's head and get away with no investigation or prosecution? How is that right, even if they are a fringe group disavowed by the Fulton/ Martin family and their representatives. Why is no one officially incensed about THAT??

You don't know that the FBI did not investigate the NBP. They are entitled to free speech do I do not fin anything criminal about their *claim* to offer a bounty. Had someone actually accosted Zimmerman to follow through, a crime would have been committed at *that* point. That said, I do not see the wisdom in the teacher Johnny got away with this approach as the NPB is a pretty laughable organization.

Porky wrote:

KZ wrote:

Nor have the Zimmerman family come out publicly as members or strong supporters of NRA or neocon groups. Yet they are constantly being accused of receiving support from them. It cuts both ways.

If one postulates that the Fulton/ Martins avow no allegiance with the NBP, then why the vitriol against the NRA and neocon groups-- who we do not even know IF they are really contributing to GZ's defense? We KNOW the NBP put out a bounty, but they get a pass. That group is a hate group, plain and simple. There is nothing good or noble or kind or just about what they espouse. Just hate.

I just don't understand any of it. How can a group like the NBP put a VERY public bounty on someone's head and get away with no investigation or prosecution? How is that right, even if they are a fringe group disavowed by the Fulton/ Martin family and their representatives. Why is no one officially incensed about THAT??

You don't know that the FBI did not investigate the NBP. They are entitled to free speech do I do not fin anything criminal about their *claim* to offer a bounty. Had someone actually accosted Zimmerman to follow through, a crime would have been committed at *that* point. That said, I do not see the wisdom in the teacher Johnny got away with this approach as the NPB is a pretty laughable organization.

I don't know if I agree with that they did do anything wrong. If you make a threat on someone life that is an assault. Nothing happen to George but another family was harassed because they had the same name. If I remember correctly they had to leave their house. Just because they are an organization that uses strong langue doesn't mean they should and someone did take them up on the offer when the were harassing the other family. When you are in public figure then words go a long way.

I see what you are saying Snowbird but they are still protected by free speech. The FBI has the same problem with the KKK in that they are free to make incendiary speech as long as no one is actually physically injured.

ellejay wrote:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-07-07/news/os-george-zimmerman-sanford-police-lied-20120707_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-chief-bill-lee-arrest-warrant
Sanford police took one position on Trayvon shooting in public, another in paperwork to prosecutors

--snipped--
At 4 p.m. March 12, Sanford police Chief Bill Lee Jr. stood in City Hall plaza in front of a hostile crowd and dozens of reporters and insisted his agency could not arrest Zimmerman because investigators had failed to establish probable cause, the minimal standard of evidence to justify filing a criminal case.

The next day, however, his agency sent prosecutors paperwork saying it did have probable cause and asked that they charge Zimmerman with manslaughter.

It was signed by lead Investigator Chris Serino and his boss, then-Sgt. Randy Smith, but it was the department's official position and had the support of Lee, said Capt. Bob O'Connor, who oversees the department's major-crimes division and also was part of the investigation.



http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/entertainment_tv_tvblog/2012/07/george-zimmerman-his-attorney-is-ultimate-professional.html
George Zimmerman: His attorney is ‘ultimate professional’

--snipped--
This weekend’s “Central Florida Spotlight” offered unusual perspectives on the George Zimmerman case.

Bill Sheaffer said the defense team was “very clever” at a recent bond hearing by conceding that Zimmerman’s wife lied earlier about donations but quickly shifting the focus to evidence. Zimmerman was released on Friday after posting a $1 million bond.

Defense attorney Mark O’Mara’s first responsibility is to his client, Sheaffer said. But Sheaffer added that O’Mara is “the ultimate professional” who realizes “there are far-reaching consequences to the questions in this case and to a jury’s verdict. Certainly, if there’s ever been a case that transparency is demanded, it has to be this case.”

The reason? Everyone has to look at this verdict and say everyone got a fair shake, Sheaffer said.

CBM.

Great post.

A majority of my 'concerns' with this case lay within the timeframe of these events.

KZ I think it's important to note that everyone on the Martins side - including Sharptin- has stressed the need for peaceful protest and non viloence.
The NBP is a fringe group- comparable to any white power group supporting GZ. The NBPs actions were roundly condemned by Sharpton and Teayvons parents.
Why isn't that enough?

What about GZ putting that hate speech image from vandals on his web site? Does he not recognize hate speech when he sees it? He actually promoted their threatening actions. And now his lawyers are pandering to people who believe they would also chase down and shoot kids for "looking suspicious".
Sharpton is absolutely correct in saying that Trayvons family has been talking the high road.

--team omara press release:


http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/37-george-zimmerman-out-on-bond-in-safehouse
George Zimmerman Out on Bond, In Safehouse ---on 08 July 2012.

George Zimmerman is currently in a safehouse provided by his security team located in Seminole County. He left the Seminole County Jail Friday at 2:50 PM after posting bond. In addition to the $15,000 Mr. Zimmerman paid for his previous bond, $85,000 was paid from the George Zimmerman Legal Defense Fund to reach the 10% of the $1,000,000 required. The legal defense team was able to arrange terms sufficient to satisfy collateral requirements on the balance of the bond.

Thanks to the outpouring of support from supporters, at the time of Mr. Zimmerman’s release, more than $36,000 has been added to the George Zimmerman Legal Defense Fund. These donations have helped begin to offset the expense of the new increased bond, but it will require sustained support to fund what Mr. Zimmerman’s legal defense.

Mr. Zimmerman’s involvement will prove critical for building his case, and his current bond status will allow him to be an active participant in his defense. The defense team maintains that Mr. Zimmerman has a strong self-defense claims, and that is what we will be focusing on in the months ahead.

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!

KZ, you are exactly correct, & yes, your comment may not be popular with some but clearly you have spoken the facts & you remain objective, thank you for stating reality, clearly you have laid out exactly why this case has gotten where it is. Sharpton is again making appearances w/Trayvon's mother, why? It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage. Calling for "peace" by Sharpton/the family/Jesse Jackson have proven to be ineffective as the beatings continue. Of course, they know that.

art tart wrote:

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!

KZ, you are exactly correct, & yes, your comment may not be popular with some but clearly you have spoken the facts & you remain objective, thank you for stating reality, clearly you have laid out exactly why this case has gotten where it is. Sharpton is again making appearances w/Trayvon's mother, why? It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage. Calling for "peace" by Sharpton/the family/Jesse Jackson have proven to be ineffective as the beatings continue. Of course, they know that.

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Tamta wrote:

KZ wrote:Puzzler, regarding the grand jury.

In FL, a grand jury has to be used for first degree murder charges, IIRC. Below that, the prosecutor has discretion to use the GJ, or bring their own charges. AC chose to bring her own charges. Some believe that she would not have been able to achieve an indictment on 2nd degree murder with a GJ. A number of very learned legal minds have opined that they believe that AC has overcharged this case, and manslaughter was the appropriate charge.

I am not a learned legal mind, but I agree with the learned legal minds that 2nd degree is overcharging what can be proven. I believe this is a manslaughter case. With what we know at this point, if I were a juror, I could not vote for 2nd degree murder. I would vote manslaughter.

But this case will not be won or lost on objective evidence, imo. If it goes to a jury, the jury composition will decide the case more than the evidence will, imo. Whichever side "wins" jury selection will win the case, before opening statements are ever delivered.

IMO the real criticism of how high profile cases are handled by the media is that a considerable amount of evidence that will not be admissible in trial gets released to the public- and influences the jury pool.

This category of 'evidence' made public but not ruled as relevant to the case could undermine justice for both sides.

The basic prerequisites of admissibility are relevance, materiality, and competence. In general, if evidence is shown to be relevant, material, and competent, and is not barred by an exclusionary rule, it is admissible. Fed. Rules Evid. 402. Thurgood Marshall, writing for the Court, looked back to Marshall v. US, (citations omitted) and noted, a juror's prior exposure alone is insufficient to allow the court to conclude, preemptively, that the defendant was deprived of due process. Murphy v. Florida, 421 US 794, 795 (1975). In Nebraska Press Assoc. v. Stuart, 427 US 539, 543-544 (1976), Justice Burger noted that even "pervasive, adverse [pretrial] publicity...does not invariably lead to an unfair trial," as juries have the opportunity to place publicity in the proper perspective. Jurors with some extrajudicial knowledge of a case are necessarily capable of being impartial. Under Murphy, a defendant must prove that there was unconstitutional prejudice of an individual juror resulting from pretrial publicity, or prejudice of the overall community against the defendant.

I would hate to think that our country would even begin to consider resorting to squelching our First Amendment rights for fear that we, the people, could not use the common sense to place publicity in the proper perspective, be impartial and follow the court's jury instructions when seated as a juror.

Porky wrote:

art tart wrote:

KZ, you are exactly correct, & yes, your comment may not be popular with some but clearly you have spoken the facts & you remain objective, thank you for stating reality, clearly you have laid out exactly why this case has gotten where it is. Sharpton is again making appearances w/Trayvon's mother, why? It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage. Calling for "peace" by Sharpton/the family/Jesse Jackson have proven to be ineffective as the beatings continue. Of course, they know that.

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Snipped.

-Sharpton arrived in Sanford and attended a news conference held by Martin's parents late Thursday afternoon.
"Arrest Zimmerman now!" shouted Sharpton.

-Martin's parents met with U.S. Justice Department officials before the rally.

-His parents, along with Sharpton met with the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the deputy assistant attorney general of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

Tamta wrote:

Porky wrote:

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Snipped.

-Sharpton arrived in Sanford and attended a news conference held by Martin's parents late Thursday afternoon.
"Arrest Zimmerman now!" shouted Sharpton.

-Martin's parents met with U.S. Justice Department officials before the rally.

-His parents, along with Sharpton met with the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the deputy assistant attorney general of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

I see that I need to clarify. Re any beatings that may have occurred as Art suggested, it is the job of the *police* to met out justice and deal with those perpetrators. To say that Al Sharpton should be out focusing on them instead of the Trayvon issue is a bit ludicrous.

"It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage."

No matter what the case, someone will always find wrong in something when someone is trying to demand a right. Sharpton did just what he was supposed to do in regards to the Trayvon Martin case. Whatever ensued due to Trayvon being shot down in cold blood is to be expected in this society. People anger when an injustice is done.

The ONLY person that is responsible for anything that occured after this senseless shooting of a 17 year old was due to ZIMMERMAN. Why aren't people blaming him instead of blaming someone that just wants justice.

Zimmerman is the one that created this entire scenerio, yet some want to blame Trayvon, Trayvon's parents, a hoodie, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, and whatever other lame excuse for a killer that there is.

Zimmerman did this, Zimmerman profiled a teenager just because he was black and wearing a hoodie. Zimmerman chased this teenager down and shot him dead. Anyone that can find justification in what took place needs to really look over the situation and pretend that Trayvon was white and see if you would come up with the same justification.

This is not a case where some like Zimmerman, it seems that the hatred for Trayvon is the only thing that counts to them. If Jeffrey Dalma had killed Trayvon, we would be hearing the same ludicrous comments about Trayvon and Sharpton and Jackson and Trayvons parents etc., etc.

Very well said Gizmo

art tart wrote:

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!

KZ, you are exactly correct, & yes, your comment may not be popular with some but clearly you have spoken the facts & you remain objective, thank you for stating reality, clearly you have laid out exactly why this case has gotten where it is. Sharpton is again making appearances w/Trayvon's mother, why? It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage. Calling for "peace" by Sharpton/the family/Jesse Jackson have proven to be ineffective as the beatings continue. Of course, they know that.

I have chosen this post to comment off of because it contains the most "in group" discussions on this issue. I fail to understand why we are bringing Sharpton, the Martin family, the Zimmerman family and anyone else out there in the universe that may have been affected by this case, into what started out as a discussion of whether MOM's statement "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" was ethical and professional. What the Martins choose to do since their son was unnecessarily killed or what the Zimmerman family does in response to their son being arrested for that crime, or what other crazed individuals across the U.S. do based upon their stupidity and supposedly in the name of Trayvon, has absolutely nothing to do with this case. I for one am looking at the way the prosecution is handling their case against GZ and the way that the defense is handling its case. That is what Iam focusing on - the facts, the evidence and the parties. When the prosecution steps out of line or the defense, I will be the first to comment - but what the non-parties do, I could care less.

As for MOM's statement, it has nothing to do with seeking donations - it has everything to do with the demographics and the phrasing of his request to obtain those donations.

Gizmo thats the funny thing not funny ha ha but funny screwed up....The majority of the people supporting GZ an dissing the child victim...Would if GZ had shot an killed a white teen /youth /. Be Asking for his head on a plate calling him a spick halfbreed mongrell............

Tamta wrote:

Porky wrote:

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Snipped.

-Sharpton arrived in Sanford and attended a news conference held by Martin's parents late Thursday afternoon.
"Arrest Zimmerman now!" shouted Sharpton.

-Martin's parents met with U.S. Justice Department officials before the rally.

-His parents, along with Sharpton met with the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the deputy assistant attorney general of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

It is not a secret that Trayvon's parents and their supporters were calling for Zimmerman's arrest, the goal of the campaign that they started was to bring the shooter of their son to justice.

Trayvon Martin parents call for shooter's arrest

March 22, 2012 6:17 PM

~Snipped~

Trayvon's parents, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton, told hundreds of supporters at a rally Thursday that they want George Zimmerman arrested in the shooting death of their son, Trayvon Martin.

"We want an arrest, we want a conviction for the murder of our son," said his father, Tracy Martin.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57402811/trayvon-martin-parents-call-for-shooters-arrest/

Look there are violent people RIGHT we on thease crime sites know that better than most....There are thugs of all races an creeds..........But they are thankfully a minority in any race i m o.......Now I dont give a flying duck about Rev Sharpton or J Jackson......Or that al Far?? guy the leader of Blaccl Muslins is it Farakhan....An the new B P are cowards ,,,There alleged death threat cant be prosecuted as its done anon......TAHE I R A Issued threats to the British people for decades..Not only threats but actions.They would boast we are comeing to age waar on the mainland .An then they would blow up targets on the mainland hard or soft they didnt care .But the uk couldnt arrest them or stop them..I dont see any name on those wanted poters offering the 10 grand reward APART from GZ name,,The only way you could arrest a black panther is go the Zoo...But those thugs beating up prople are thugs beating up people whom would engage in those kind of activitys anyway..People all over the world have had it with banks authority goverments .We are all effing broke apperently econamy gone to hell in a handbasket..An certain underclass criminal elements can use the swelling of recently poor unemplowed or in the UK never even had a JOB ..To riot over any excuse,,Its not like they genuinely empathise with the un armed young man in London shot by the police..They just used that as a trigger..People in Eygypt brought down a 50 yr dictator Tunisia the cradle of the Arab Spring that was genuine revelution ,An useing txts facebook social media the youth in countrys have show they can litterlly kick off with mass co ordination / comunication an bring goverments down..In the UK we already got Democray of a sort .So our rioters just looted an destroyed property on masse,,,,I dont realy think the majority of rioters after the not guilty verdicts inRodney Kings case were politicaly motivated or more greed opertunisim free stuff motivated...They assaulted people in there own areas white truck drivers ? Not LE or rich people but poor working joes.Turned there own areas in to no go areas an burnt down an looted there own neigherhood .Same as the uk rioters did,If people are kicking of no blame can be laid at Trayvons death.Or mimilise the atrocity aflicted up on a young inocent child.

Calling for justice is NOT calling for violence.
And the popular sentiment - nation wide- is that an arrest was called for. Most Americans would like to see the case go foreward with the evidence weighed by a jury.

But I take it you'd prefer this killing in Sanford be swept under the rug? I'm not sure what other conclusion could be drawn from your post.
Why would you prefer no investigation or arrest?

Tamta wrote:

Porky wrote:

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Snipped.

-Sharpton arrived in Sanford and attended a news conference held by Martin's parents late Thursday afternoon.
"Arrest Zimmerman now!" shouted Sharpton.

-Martin's parents met with U.S. Justice Department officials before the rally.

-His parents, along with Sharpton met with the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the deputy assistant attorney general of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

Calling for justice is NOT calling for violence.
And the popular sentiment - nation wide- is that an arrest was called for. Most Americans would like to see the case go foreward with the evidence weighed by a jury.

But I take it you'd prefer this killing in Sanford be swept under the rug? I'm not sure what other conclusion could be drawn from your post.
Why would you prefer no investigation or arrest?

Tamta wrote:

Porky wrote:

Art with all due. I think that you have Al Sharpton's role confused with the police.

Snipped.

-Sharpton arrived in Sanford and attended a news conference held by Martin's parents late Thursday afternoon.
"Arrest Zimmerman now!" shouted Sharpton.

-Martin's parents met with U.S. Justice Department officials before the rally.

-His parents, along with Sharpton met with the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida and the deputy assistant attorney general of the Civil Rights Division.


http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-readies-travon-martin-rally-council-votes-/nLZZk/

I think we are getting way off track and losing sight of what this thread is about - the prosecution of GZ for the murder of Trayvon. Maybe we should refocus and regroup by changing topics.

I'm shocked that MOMs dispicable comments trying to normalize this tragic mistake GZ made (shout out to everyone who ALSO would love to shoot their neighbors kids and NOT face arrest or held accountable!!) are equated with those of activists trykng to ensure this incident is handled with proper due process.
I have seen Sharptons recent appearances- and he is correct to say that appealing to other "would be shooters" is totally disgraceful.
I have yet to see anyone on these boards pin anything Sharpton has said or done regarding this incident that comes even close to that hateful thought.

I'm sorry but GZ didn't stop a crime in progress, or do anything at all to be proud of.
I'm being generous to say he might have had good intentions but effed up so royally as to end an innocent life. Anyone who can or does relate to the tragic scenario he created or looks upon it as somehow heroic needs to have their head examined.


[quote="art tart"]

KZ wrote:
KZ, you are exactly correct, & yes, your comment may not be popular with some but clearly you have spoken the facts & you remain objective, thank you for stating reality, clearly you have laid out exactly why this case has gotten where it is. Sharpton is again making appearances w/Trayvon's mother, why? It makes me wonder why those brutally beaten across America by young black men in the name of Trayvon have barely made any coverage. Calling for "peace" by Sharpton/the family/Jesse Jackson have proven to be ineffective as the beatings continue. Of course, they know that.

You're right Cher!
But I think it's dubious to hold Sharpton to the same standard as Zimmermans legal team. He has truly and repeatedly called for peace and it's ludicrous to hold him accountable for fringe elements or random thugs across the nation.

No one blamed GZ for that intimidating racist garbage defacing the wall of a college student center- even though he (unwittingly,id guess) gave it his endorsement by putting it up on his web site.

WeeBonnie wrote:I'm shocked that MOMs dispicable comments trying to normalize this tragic mistake GZ made (shout out to everyone who ALSO would live to shoot their neighbors kids and NOT face arrest!) are equated with those of activists trykng to ensure this incident is handled with proper due process.
I have seen Sharptons recent appearances- and he is correct to say that appealing to other would be shooters is disgraceful.
I have yet to see anyone on these boards pin anything Sharpton has said or done regarding this incident that comes even close to that hateful thought.

I'm sorry but GZ didn't stop a crime in progress, or do anything at all to be proud of.
I'm being generous to say he might have had good intentions but effed up so royally as to end an innocent life. Anyone who can or does relate to the tragic scenario he created or looks upon it as somehow heroic needs to have their head examined.

art tart wrote:

STATEMENT OF THE DAY

I am done for the day - I'll come back when the topic is changed.

This case is not about Jackson/Sharpton/Martins/ or anyone else other than GZ and TM. All this other stuff are just red herrings to inflame the public and skew the views of the potential jurors. People need to focus on the facts and the facts alone and let all these extraneous distractions go.

Please be willing to agree to disagree without getting snarky. There are many factors that caused this case to be high profile and there's no need to attack people for pointing out what some of these factors were since the question was raised. It happens in the missing cases all the time too. The Anthony case got all the coverage in the world while Adji Desir and countless others barely received any coverage.

I think you're right. But MOMs outrageous pleas to people who'd like to shoot and not be asked questions are a valid concern.
MOM has been playing a bigger PR game than anyone out their post arrest.
I understand if he is loathe to admit what a tragic eff-up his client is.
But to try to get an average person to relate to being that kind of messed up scenario- without deeply regretting it- is positively frightening.

It's deeply disturbing to think concealed carriers should be looking to GZ for affirmation. His statements will be viewed dimly by anyone with a healthy respect for human life, and or personal responsibility.
Obviously his research shows that many of GZs strongest supporters have neither of those things.

Chickenbutt wrote:This case is not about Jackson/Sharpton/Martins/ or anyone else other than GZ and TM. All this other stuff are just red herrings to inflame the public and skew the views of the potential jurors. People need to focus on the facts and the facts alone and let all these extraneous distractions go.

ellejay wrote:--team omara press release:


http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/37-george-zimmerman-out-on-bond-in-safehouse
George Zimmerman Out on Bond, In Safehouse ---on 08 July 2012.
The defense team maintains that Mr. Zimmerman has a strong self-defense claims, and that is what we will be focusing on in the months ahead.

From this quote it sounds to me like the defense is going for self-defense vs SYG?
Is the self-defense different from a SYG?

I honestly read 2 sites.... Blink and here.... now that the HM is gone. So call me confused lol. And the use of claimS...vs claim.

Porky wrote:I see what you are saying Snowbird but they are still protected by free speech. The FBI has the same problem with the KKK in that they are free to make incendiary speech as long as no one is actually physically injured.

I don't get that because a know a guy who tried that (free speech) after making a threat, the police did see as free speech and the courts didn't see it as free speech. So I don't know how either groups can get away with that kind of threat.

A cornerstone of this country's law is: innocent until proven guilty.

As far as I know, all of the 'evidence' has not even been released.

Also, as far as I know, it's against the law to threaten another person's life.

Hinky Refugee wrote:

ellejay wrote:--team omara press release:


http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/37-george-zimmerman-out-on-bond-in-safehouse
George Zimmerman Out on Bond, In Safehouse ---on 08 July 2012.
The defense team maintains that Mr. Zimmerman has a strong self-defense claims, and that is what we will be focusing on in the months ahead.

From this quote it sounds to me like the defense is going for self-defense vs SYG?
Is the self-defense different from a SYG?

I honestly read 2 sites.... Blink and here.... now that the HM is gone. So call me confused lol. And the use of claimS...vs claim.

SYG - is before the judge "only"
self-defense is before a "jury"

In Session ‏@InSession
Tomorrow on In Session, hear what ‪#TrayvonMartin‬'s family has to say about ‪#GeorgeZimmerman‬ bonding out of jail Friday.

https://twitter.com/InSession

Source: Twitter - RC Multi-Media Updates

Puzzler wrote:

Hinky Refugee wrote:

From this quote it sounds to me like the defense is going for self-defense vs SYG?
Is the self-defense different from a SYG?

I honestly read 2 sites.... Blink and here.... now that the HM is gone. So call me confused lol. And the use of claimS...vs claim.

SYG - is before the judge "only"
self-defense is before a "jury"

Self defense is an affirmative defense to the crime of homicide. It has the effect of legally excusing the defendant from an act that would otherwise be a crime.

Stand your ground is not a defense, but an immunity statute, providing immunity from criminal prosecution. It is a bar to prosecution (and yes, arrest.)

A defendant charged with a crime who wants to raise Stand your Ground files a motion to dismiss claiming stand your ground immunizes him from prosecution.

A hearing is held before trial. The burden is on the defendant to prove by a preponderance of evidence that stand your ground immunity applies.

The judge weighs the facts. If the judge agrees the defendant has shown stand your ground immunity applies by a preponderance of evidence, the charges are dismissed. The defendant can't be prosecuted.

If the judge finds the defendant hasn't met his burden, (including if the disputed evidence is so equal on both sides the judge can't decide one way or the other) the case goes to trial to be decided by the jury. At trial, the defendant can still argue both self-defense and stand your ground immunity -- he only has to establish some evidence of his theory, which can be just his own testimony, that he acted in self-defense.

The prosecution must prove his guilt at the jury trial beyond a reasonable doubt. Which means, if the defendant raises self-defense or stand your ground at trial and gets the jury instruction, the state, which has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, must disprove self-defense. If the jury has a doubt, the defendant must be acquitted.