Skip to main content

Cross posted at Working Man Radio.  Please recommend this diary.

Could Zimmerman be acquitted?  Absolutely.  The evidence of marihuana use is a sterling example of what can go wrong.  Of course the simple solution would be for the state to produce a rebuttal expert to testify that marihuana makes you LESS aggressive.  But the state would have to undermine decades of drug war propaganda, something they may not want to do.

So the defense may have a free hand to use the marihuana evidence anyway they want to, and those who fear a travesty in this case may see their worst fears realized.

Then what?

In 1993, Rodney King's neigbors rioted, and the haters in this case are already predicting as much.  In these days of twitter and facebook, we may hope that such a counterproductive backlash does not occur.  

But something needs to be done -- something more effective than the usual, ineffective protest march.  

I actually came up with an idea, which lo and behold has an historical precedent.  It was called the "March Against Fear."   In 1966, it was led by James Meredith, the first African-American admitted to the University of Mississippi.  He started by himself, walking through Mississippi, but by the end hundreds had joined him.

The version I propose would take place in the most exclusive, wealthiest sections of every city in Florida, simultaneously on the same day.  The idea is to simply dress up in a hoodie, create a big banner that says "We Are Trayvon," and walk en masse where you're "not supposed to be."  One place in particular would be Palm Beach, right by Rush Limbaugh's house.

Make sure the effort is well publicized, and I guarantee the wealthy power structure will take notice.  They might even prevail on their Republican legislators to repeal the more egregious portions of the Stand Your Ground law.

Below is a video discussing the idea.

And don't mis a good, hard hitting audio podcast, check out Working Man Radio.  Available on iTunes.

Originally posted to Conceptual Guerilla on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:01 AM PDT.

Also republished by Trial Watch.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  defense not using pot evidence (20+ / 0-)

    From what I heard they are not using the THC evidence because it may open Zimmerman up to his drug use, he was on adderal a drug that may cause agitation.
    No doubt he will be acquitted, there has always been reasonable doubt. Also crappy police work at the beginning doomed this case. Only hope is they somehow find for a lesser charge, they have many other charges they can find him guilty of.

  •  Georgie should be convicted based on the 911 (11+ / 0-)

    call where the operator tells Zimmerman not to follow Martin.

    Notice: This Comment © 2013 ROGNM

    by ROGNM on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:15:17 AM PDT

    •  Not exactly what GZ was told. (13+ / 0-)

      Operator was not allowed to "give orders" which comes with liability so said "we don't need you to do that" meaning to follow TM.

      •  I believe she asked him to stay in the car (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        historys mysteries, corvo, hnichols

        but she couldn't order him to do so.

        in any case, not being a police officer, it doesn't matter.

        Lots of things don't matter, apparently, including lack of Z's DNA on Martin's hands and clothes.

        Why do I feel like the prosecution hasn't exactly put their back into this?

        Ou sont les neigedens d'antan?

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:30:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No. (7+ / 0-)

          The dispatcher never told him to stay in the car.

          To you, I'm an atheist. To God, I'm the loyal opposition.” ― Woody Allen

          by soros on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:42:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nor does it matter. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            auapplemac, UbuRoi, Be Skeptical

            Zimmerman is on trial for murder. Getting out of a car, even if a 911 operator told you to stay in the car, is not murder. It doesn't even prove you intended to commit murder.

            I think Zimmerman is likely to be acquitted. Has anyone proven Trayvon didn't swing first? Not that I know of. There has been conflicting testimony on whether it was Trayvon or Zimmerman yelling for help in the 911 tape. Sounds like reasonable doubt to me.

            Please don't think I'm in any way praising or excusing Zimmerman. I'm not.

            "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

            by HeyMikey on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 01:48:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  It's a wonder why TM's voice remains silent.... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          hnichols, white blitz, 3goldens, retLT

          ...in the court. I can't imagine why the Prosecution hasn't played a video of TM with his voice so the jury can at least have samples of both voices. The 911 recording doesn't sound at all like the same voice as GZ. If that's TM's voice calling for help it would be the only evidence I can see that would indicate the malevolent intention on the part of GZ and time necessary to have murdered with intent that justifies a conviction.

          GZ is such a pathetic man. The judge will have the opportunity either way to speak for the public who have all had to look at GZ and the misery and senseless loss he has caused for so many people. She needs to call him out for what he is, an irresponsible, stupid, dangerous man from whom communities need to be protected. He's a type. There are plenty of other lethal and irrational GZs out there. And whatever message is given it needs to be clear.

          •  kck - "the judge"? (6+ / 0-)

            The prosecution represents the people and can do what you suggest regarding the state's view of GZ and why he needs to be sent to prison. The judge cannot say anything that could in any way be viewed as prejudicial to the defendant, who is presumed innocent. It would cause an immediate mistrial.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 08:37:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  A terrified screaming person usually (7+ / 0-)

            Sounds nothing like their speaking voice.

            The state likely has no recordings of Trayvon screaming like his life were threatened. Why would they?

            Outgoing voicemail recordings probably sound  like "Heeyy, this is Trayyy.." Or whatever, like most of us record  on our phones probably have a relaxed deep voice that doesn't sound the same at all.

            (That's why it's absolutely absurd that GZ's friends were allowed to testify that they know his terrified screaming voice based on his speaking voice without explaining how they've heard the former.)

            There are usually good reasons when evidence that you assume is easily available is not introduced: not because it's corrupted or because that side is hiding something but often because it would muddy the waters further.

            The problem for GZ is that he was out giving interviews, so those get to be admitted for different reasons.

            © grover


            So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

            by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:13:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  And that's where it doesn't matter (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dr Swig Mcjigger, auapplemac

              that George says the screaming doesn't sound like himself. (Ok that seems fairly damning). Have you ever heard a recording of yourself? Oh my I sound nothing like I sound to myself. My voice seems so much higher pitched. No wonder people on the phone mistake me for a child. It's very hard for me to believe I really sound like that.

              •  I do think its strange that George wouldnt (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                white blitz

                Know what his Voice on a recording sounds like. I can recognize my recorded voice, even though, as you say, it sounds a lot higher pitched. I've heard my voice recorded enough to recognize it.

                I wonder if George knew he had not been screaming, so why would he think that were himself? Until, of course, the public pressure made the cops actually investigate this case...

                © grover


                So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

                by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:02:41 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  equity (0+ / 0-)

              Of course voices sound different with different emotions, pitches, motivations, etc. If a computer analysis is unattainable an untrained human ear will be unreliable. However, Zimmerman's voice is present for the jury.

              People, maybe the jury, are earnestly trying to glean whatever useful information is in that 911 recording. There is a process of ruling out that's just as important as identifying whose voice it is. Different voices are discreet to different degrees. A woman's voice vs. a man's, an adult vs. a child. Can Zimmerman v. Martin be discerned? Maybe. Probably not. But it at least provides the jury with the same level of familiarity with the two voices rather than Zimmerman's voice and silence.

              •  Maybe. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                kck, auapplemac

                That high pitch voice sounds like a child. I prefer the emptiness of a boy/young msn's voice than filling it with something that might muddle things. If Trayvon had a deeper voice, it's a good call. We don't know.

                It's strategy.

                © grover


                So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

                by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:06:03 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  And that is EXACTLY (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SouthernLiberalinMD, auapplemac

          what my fiance said just yesterday.  It does rather seem that way, as much as I don't want to see it all play out that way.

          I almost don't want the trial to end.  I'm afraid of the outcome should GZ be acquitted.  I am truly frightened about that possibility.

          Let me explain the order of things to you. There's the aristocracy, the upper class, the middle class, working class, dumb animals, waiters, creeping things, head lice, people who eat packet soup, then you. -- Gareth Blackstock, Chef!

          by avamontez on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:33:57 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Me too. (0+ / 0-)

            The idea has been put forth of organizing some action ahead of time in case verdict goes badly.

            I think that might be a good idea. It could channel the anger into constructive things to do, like challenging the court system on a much wider basis (let's face it both our LE and our judiciary is messed up). But I also feel (perhaps wrongly) that white people should not be the ones leading that effort. It feels inappropriate.  More than willing to work on any effort organized however--just tell me where to show up & what you all need.

            Ou sont les neigedens d'antan?

            by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:06:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  You need to focus on the evidence that was (13+ / 0-)

      presented to the jury.  The 911 operator, Sean Noffke, testified early in the trial, called by the prosecution to identify the tape.  He also said two things:

       (1) he did not tell Zimmerman to do anything.  They can't tell people to do anything, because if people do it, and something goes wrong, that can make the 911 dispatch liable.  So, his statement to Zimmerman about following, "We don't need you to do that," was a suggestion.

      (2) He identified the two times he asked Zimmerman where Martin was or what Martin was doing.  He said that he did not mean it as a suggestion that Zimmerman go to see where Martin was or what he was doing, but he can see how Zimmerman might have taken it that way.  

      •  Actually 911 dispatchers tell callers ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        askyron, Tonedevil

        to do things all the time.

        One of the statements contained within Medical Priority Dispatch protocol instructions says 'do it now and come back to me'.

        So that can't tell people what to do is not entirely correct.

        Nothing changes without public pressure: public pressure doesn't happen without dissemination of knowledge and 'true' facts. Bit me FOX.

        by emsprater on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 01:58:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It is "correct" in this case, because that's what (0+ / 0-)

          the expert reported.

          It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

          by auapplemac on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:19:28 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That was not the testimony at trial. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib

          And for purposes of this case, the testimony at trial matters.  The witness  -- Sean Noffke -- was called by the prosecution, so obviously if it were true that he could give directions to people who called, and that they were supposed to follow those directions, the prosecution would have made sure he testified to that.  He did not.  

          Perhaps the difference is that the person who testified at trial was a non-emergency operator?  

          •  Have you ever been in a call center? (0+ / 0-)

            The call takers and dispatchers ( not always interchangeable) all take both 911 and NEN calls.  Only trainees who are not 'cleared' for all calls take only non emergency calls.  Sometimes the person who is dispatching the fire truck or the police car or the ambulance to your home is also actively taking a 911 call.

            Nothing changes without public pressure: public pressure doesn't happen without dissemination of knowledge and 'true' facts. Bit me FOX.

            by emsprater on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:27:35 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Wasn't it an NEN number Zimmerman called? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coffeetalk, VClib

          Dammit Jim, I'm a lawyer, not a grammarian. So sue me.

          by Pi Li on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:23:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Yeah I think you are right (7+ / 0-)

    i think I heard the defense was not going to use the THC report because they would be opening a can of worms. I would be shocked if Zimmerman is convicted. I have been on a jury and the evidence is pretty crappy, not enough to convict.
    Hopefully they will feel Zimmerman did wrong and needs to be convicted of something. I think manslaughter may be possible but the police bungled the case from day 1.

  •  Public action mourning the danger young black men (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    historys mysteries, carver

    ...are subjected to focusing not on Zimmerman but instead on the tragic, senseless loss of Trayvon Martin could be more useful.

    It might be more productive to use the occasion of shared public pain to bond in support of positive goals like to embrace and not demonize our young back men and to raise up the specter of threat to our communities by unstable and irresponsible people walking around with guns.  

  •  Did you notice a couple of days ago... (5+ / 0-)

    ...that a talking head showed up on TV, pushing the idea that 'low doses' of pot actually make people more aggressive?

    How convenient.

    It ain't called paranoia - when they're really out to get you. 6 points.

    by Jaime Frontero on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:26:32 AM PDT

  •  Wow, rec'd for a good action idea, proposed (6+ / 0-)

    ahead of time.

    I fear if Z. is acquitted, things are going to get very bad very fast.

    It won't be as bad if he's simply convicted of manslaughter instead of murder II.

    Ou sont les neigedens d'antan?

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:29:02 AM PDT

  •  What should they do?? (8+ / 0-)

    Easy - get out and vote out all Republicans starting with Rick Scott and Bondi.  Republicans do not value African-Americans, the poor, the downtrodden, anyone except themselves.

  •  He WILL be acquitted (12+ / 0-)

    I'll come right out and predict it now. We've all complained about the job the prosecution is doing, but even if they'd done a bang-up job, it's clear at this point that they have a weak case that never should have been brought to trial, at least not for second-degree murder.

    And just so I'm clear, I myself believe that George Zimmerman flat-out murdered Trayvon Martin, and that the state of Florida is an accomplice to that murder. But that doesn't change the fact that there's reasonable doubt all over the place, and I don't see how any jury could come back with a finding of guilty.

  •  It's impossible to tell from the coverage... (7+ / 0-)

    but if you think about it logically, it's virtually impossible for the screaming to have been coming from Zimmerman because it is silenced immediately by the gunshot. With the screaming then coming from Trayvon, Zimmerman, with his gun, was in control of the situation and not in fear of his life or great bodily injury so self defense can't be claimed.

    Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

    by Ian S on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:31:33 AM PDT

    •  Virtually impossible? (5+ / 0-)

      or just lack of imagination?

      To you, I'm an atheist. To God, I'm the loyal opposition.” ― Woody Allen

      by soros on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:44:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ian - it's not only not impossible (11+ / 0-)

      It's logical that Zimmerman would stop screaming after the shot. The threat is over and the physical shock of the gun blast would startle the shooter.

      Under Florida law Zimmerman can claim self-defense based on the evidence presented at the trial. The jury may not agree, but he is certainly allowed a self-defense claim.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:54:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Disagree (4+ / 0-)

      Zimmerman was NOT in control of the situation.  He was on the ground with Trayvon on top and being attacked (according to testimony/presented evidence).  Is it a stretch to believe that he would be screaming for help or in fear in that situation?  No.

      If Zimmerman pulled his gun while being attacked and fired quickly, the blows would have stopped, and his screaming for help/in fear/in pain would have stopped as well.  The act of pulling the trigger and having the gun firing is a big changing point, and Zimmerman would be reacting to that.  That seems to be just as logically possible as the other way around: that Trayvon stopped screaming because he was shot.

      It all depends on whether or not you believe that Zimmerman was screaming for help and then drew his gun and fired, or that he drew his gun, Trayvon kept screaming out in fear, and then Zimemrman finally shot him.  That is the crux of the case and nobody really knows what happened except Zimmerman.  There seems to be no direct, conclusive evidence either way.

      The one thing that makes me think it was Zimmerman screaming and not Trayvon is because the screaming went on for about 40 seconds.  Is 40 seconds of screaming more consistent with someone being pinned down and attacked? Or with someone having a gun pointed at them after a fight?  With all the people already alerted by the noise from the fight including one neighbor (John Good) who said he went out and actually exchanged words with them, it's really hard for me to believe that Zimmerman would let Trayvon scream out for 40 seconds and then shoot him point blank in the heart.  I just can't think of a realistic scenario of how that happens.  Can you?

      •  Zimmerman was on the ground, on his back, (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, a2nite, emsprater, amsterdam

        With Trayvon on top of him, attacking him... But George pulled out his gun holstered on his waistband at the small of his back and shot Trayvon?

        Oh, ok, sure. Gotcha.

        Except Physics.

        © grover


        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:28:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It wasn't at the small of his back (3+ / 0-)

          The normal position--and the one that Zimmerman demonstrated in his recreation--of that kind of holster is in your waistband to one side and slightly towards your back.  Slightly behind your hip.

          If someone was on top of you it would be an awkward reach, but hardly impossible.  Try it right now yourself: tuck something about the length of a handgun into your waistband just behind one hip, lie on your back, and try to pull it out.  Awkward, but not really that difficult unless you're wearing your pants up past your navel.

          Perhaps that's even why Zimmerman (allegedly) got attacked for so long: he couldn't easily reach his gun initially, and only after a while did an opportunity arise for him to get his arm slightly under his side so he could draw his gun.

          If it was really that hard for Zimmerman to draw his gun I am sure that the Prosecution would have used a gun expert to say so.

      •  I believe that once GZ's hand reached... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil

        the gun, he would have stopped screaming because he would have had to focus on manipulating the gun, some kind of aiming and pulling the trigger all of which would have been severely hampered by continuing to scream. I simply don't believe the screaming would have continued until the gunshot. Conversely, if Trayvon was the one screaming, then you would expect him to continue to do so right up until the shot was fired and the trauma inflicted would silence him immediately.

        Just another faggity fag socialist fuckstick homosinner!

        by Ian S on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:20:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We don't know how long it took... (0+ / 0-)

          ...for him to draw and fire.  There seems to only be a very brief moment between the last "help!" and the gunshot.

          Try something yourself: imagine yourself being attacked, holding one arm over your face to try to ward off blows and squirming around your head/upper body as if to avoid blows.  Yell out help at short intervals like on the tape, and then also reach for where the gun would be (around your hip) and mock fire it at the attacker.  Now does it seem reasonable that someone in Zimmerman's alleged circumstances could or would yell a final "help" while pulling out his gun and then firing?  After I tried it myself, yes it did seem pretty reasonable.

          I really don't know if that is how it happened, but it seems like a more reasonable explanation to me than Zimmerman pointing the gun at Trayvon that long while Trayvon screamed for help.  I don't think it necessarily matches the part where Zimmerman says that Trayvon saw/reached for the gun, but that overall version seems more plausible to me and is one of the things that helped me to change my mind on this case.

      •  I can't help but wonder if GZ was polygraphed. (0+ / 0-)

        Police often do them, as do defense attorneys.  But if the State (or defense) refused to stipulate that the results would be admissible, we won't know until the trial has concluded.

        "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

        by Neuroptimalian on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:02:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't put much stock in polygraphs (0+ / 0-)

          Not only can you get false positives and false negatives, in a case like this you could have someone like Zimemrman insisting on something that he believes but that may not be factual.

      •  You need to get the number of seconds right. n/t (0+ / 0-)

        "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

        by rubyr on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:53:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  If an adult black male (17+ / 0-)

    had shot and killed a seventeen year old white kid in Fla. he'd already be on death row no matter the evidence.

    I hope to God he doesn't walk...assault with a deadly weapon... negligent homicide...something...anything.

    "Fascism is attracting the dregs of humanity- people with a slovenly biography - sadists, mental freaks, traitors." - ILYA EHRENBURG

    by durrati on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 07:45:40 AM PDT

    •  nonsense. (6+ / 0-)

      If the case against your alternate universe person were as weak as this one, he'd walk, too.

      •  Yeah.... (16+ / 0-)

        I'd love to see an armed grown Black man try to assert self defense after angrily chasing down an unarmed white kid with skittles and shooting him at point blank range.

        What America do you live in?

        Money doesn't talk it swears.

        by Coss on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 08:43:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Weak? Z goes hunting and kills a kid. THAT (7+ / 0-)

        is the case to most human beings

        •  Not if you've watched the trial. (7+ / 0-)

          The only thing that matters is (1) Florida law, and (2) the evidence in that courtroom.

          The central question is whether Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his head against the sidewalk when Zimmerman shot him. If that happened, "most human beings" would consider that self-defense, and if that happened, Florida law considers it self-defense.  That's why the trial is about what happened between the two in the moments before the shot.  See my other comments, where I provide links to the applicable law.  

          •  And why couldn't it have been that Martin was (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            tobendaro, vmm918, durrati

            "standing is ground" and trying to keep Zimmerman from shooting him?  There is absolutely no evidence that Zimmerman's head was being "slammed" onto concrete.  

            Zimmerman's whole defense is one of the most cowardly, shameful and offensive one I've ever witnessed.  Capping it off, he has co-opted Trayvon's screams before he died for his own.

            Utterly shameful.

            If the plutocrats begin the program, we will end it. -- Eugene Debs.

            by livjack on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:23:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  livjack - It could have been Martin (4+ / 0-)

              The jury has to apply the evidence presented and apply it to the current Florida law. I don't think I have heard the prosecution state their view of the case, consistent with the evidence yet. I imagine they will try to paint a picture in their closing argument. To date it seems that they have focused on punching holes in Zimmerman's statements, a strategy that is difficult to fashion into a guilty verdict. It's the prosecution that has the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

              "let's talk about that"

              by VClib on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 12:06:31 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  You forgot the other thing that REALLY matters: (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            amsterdam, a2nite

            a dead unarmed teenager.

            Nothing changes without public pressure: public pressure doesn't happen without dissemination of knowledge and 'true' facts. Bit me FOX.

            by emsprater on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:03:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, that matters. and the question is, (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Pi Li, auapplemac, freegeorge, VClib

              before he was shot, was Martin doing something (beating Zimmerman's head against concrete is what the defense alleges) that led Zimmerman to the reasonable belief that he needed to use deadly force to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm?  If so, then -- tragic as the death of any person, especially a young person, is -- Zimmerman was justified under basic laws of self-defense in using deadly force.  If Martin was not doing that, Zimmerman is guilty of either murder 2 or manslaughter, depending on what the jury concludes  about his state of mind.  

              Every death is a tragedy.  Not every death is a crime.  The trial is not about whether there was a death, or a tragedy -- there clearly was.  The trial is about whether there was a crime.  And to reach that conclusion, under our justice system, the prosecution must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that, when he was shot, Martin was not doing anything that put Zimmerman in reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm.  If the jury determines that the prosecution has proved that beyond a reasonable doubt, then this death and tragedy is also a crime.  If the jury is not convinced of that beyond a reasonable doubt, it remains a death and a tragedy, but not a crime under our justice system.  

              •  What bothers folks it the glib use of legalese ... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                amsterdam, a2nite, durrati

                to gloss over the fact that an unarmed teenager who was minding his own business in his father's girlfriend's neighborhood was followed and an interaction caused him to be shot by the armed , trained to carry, MMA trained, trained in police style statements yet oh so 'soft' armed neighborhood watch volunteer who had already said on tape  'these ----- always get away' while not once, not one time, speaking in any positive terms of the victim, or the rights of the victim.

                No that 'doesn't matter' to folks only interested in the ways to contort the legal system for a desire outcome, but it does bother people who actually want justice for a dead kid.

                Nothing changes without public pressure: public pressure doesn't happen without dissemination of knowledge and 'true' facts. Bit me FOX.

                by emsprater on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:34:40 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Justice in this country is based on our legal (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib

                  system. It is the prosecution's job to prove within a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty.

                  Remember, in this country you are innocent until proven guilty.

                  It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

                  by auapplemac on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:56:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  What I am interested in here, as in any criminal (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Pi Li, Be Skeptical, VClib

                  trial, is for the legal system to operate in accordance with the Constitution and our laws.  If that happens, then regardless of the outcome, both the defendant and the victim will have justice.  

                  If the legal system does not operate in accordance with our Constitution and laws, regardless of the outcome, neither the defendant nor the victim will have justice.  

                  That's what I mean by justice.  What, in your mind, is justice for the victim, if it is something other than our legal system operating in accordance with our Constitution and laws?  

      •  In Central Florida, Johnny? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        pico, Tonedevil, vmm918

        Yeah, I'm not quite as confident as you.

        © grover


        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:30:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yeesh, I largely agree with you on the merits of (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, VClib, emsprater, a2nite

        case, but would that any level of our justice system were as color blind as this.  Everything from the initial police response to the jury selection would have gone differently for a black defendant.  

        I don't think one has to be a bleeding-heart to suspect this, given the enormous and known disparities in everything from police behavior around black suspects to application of sentencing guidelines for black convicts.  These are well-documented issues, and there's a good reason - not just naivete or ignorance - that people are up in arms about the way this trial has proceeded.

        Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce

        by pico on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:33:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I have tried to avoid saying this throughout (0+ / 0-)

        your thousands of empty-headed comments, but this one takes the cake. Are you crazy? You seriously need to study both history and present day statistics regarding crime.

        nonsense.
        If the case against your alternate universe person were as weak as this one, he'd walk, too.
        You have GOT to be kidding. Really.

        "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

        by rubyr on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:57:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  GZ is not white. He is brown. Usually we like to (0+ / 0-)

      take up the cause of brown people. So now  it appears we're setting different levels of concern based on race?

      It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 02:46:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  What if the 17 yr old kid was Hispanic (0+ / 0-)

      like George is?

  •  I doubt (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    white blitz, auapplemac

    I doubt if Zimmerman will be convicted of 2nd degree murder.  Simply put, the state failed to prove its case.  There is too much reasonable doubt.  

    However, I think Zimmerman will be convicted of a lesser charge if only jay walking.  I doubt if he will walk scot free.  

  •  That'll show 'em! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Victor Ward
  •  If you want credibility in criticizing any verdict (16+ / 0-)

    you need to be conversant in the applicable laws of the state of Florida as well as the evidence presented to the jury in trial (not what you've heard or read about the case).

    If Zimmerman is acquitted, it means that, under the laws of Florida, the prosecution has not disproved his self-defense claim beyond a reasonable doubt.  

    Under the laws of Florida, if Martin was on top of Zimmerman beating his head against the sidewalk, Zimmerman had a right to use deadly force to stop that.  Of course, there is a question as to whether that happened.  But the defense, through the testimony of John Good and Dr. DiMao (even aside from Zimmerman's statements) provided evidence to support that theory.  So, under Florida law, the prosecution, must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this scenario -- Martin on top of Zimmerman beating his head against the sidewalk -- did not happen.  The jury will be instructed as to that. See section 3.6(f) of this pdf.

    Even if Zimmerman was originally the aggressor in the situation, which (according to Louisiana law, means that the prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was the first one to use actual physical force), he STILL can claim self-defense under Florida law if, at the time he shot Martin, he had a reasonable belief that deadly force was necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm and at the time he shot Martin, he had no reasonable means of escaping that beating.  Again, the prosecution bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  Again, John Good's testimony, as well as the testimony of Dr. DiMao, provide evidence to support that.  The defense need not PROVE self-defense.  They simply need to provide evidence, and then the prosecution must DISPROVE it beyond a reasonable doubt.  If there is conflicting evidence, and any doubt about what happened, that means the jury should find not guilty.

    I really think that people who want to criticize whatever verdict comes down, need to be conversant in these laws -- which govern the trial -- as well as the evidence presented at trial.  If there's a guilty verdict, and you disagree, you ought to be able to articulate why, based on the law and the evidence at trial, you think there was reasonable doubt about self-defense.  If there's an acquittal, and you disagree, you ought to be able to articulate why the prosecution disproved the evidence of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.  

    Simply because a verdict does not come down the way you want is not grounds for protest, in my view.  Protest is applicable when the justice system does not operate as it is supposed to, resulting in injustice.  

    The only way, in this case, to evaluate the outcome of this case -- whether the justice system operated as it was supposed to -- is to evaluate the evidence actually presented to the jury in light of the applicable law of the State of Florida.  

    Now, if you think the laws of the State of Florida should be changed, that's completely legitimate.  But it is not grounds for criticizing this verdict, because this jury must operate under the laws of the State of Florida as they exist today.  And so, any criticism of the verdict of this jury -- either way -- needs to be grounded in the laws of the State of Florida as they exist today.  

  •  "What if..." (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Coss, emsprater

    Five white jurors and one Latino, in a state that passed 'stand your ground' in the first place. The daily court room proceedings may make "good" TV, but they have no bearing on the outcome the trial. The case was over with jury selection. The most the prosecution can hope for is a hung jury.
    Stand your ground was passed to maintain white supremacy, and it is working as intended. Once Zimmerman is "proven innocent." it will be open season on non-whites.

    •  This is an illegitimate rant. (11+ / 0-)
      Stand your ground was passed to maintain white supremacy, and it is working as intended. Once Zimmerman is "proven innocent." it will be open season on non-whites.
      First and most importantly, this case has nothing to do with Stand Your Ground principles.  "Stand Your Ground" means you have no duty to retreat when faced with force.  Zimmerman's defense is NOT Stand Your Ground, but general principles of self-defense that are applicable in every state in the country.  Basically, every state says that if someone is using force against you, and as a result, you are in reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, you can use deadly force to defend yourself.  That is the basis of Zimmerman's defense.  You would know that if you watched the trial -- the "daily courtroom proceedings."  And at the end of the "daily courtroom proceedings," when the judge instructs the jury, you will hear the law on self-defense.

      And yes, the "daily courtroom proceedings" do have "a bearing on the outcome of the trial."  Under our system of justice, a jury is supposed to make a decision based on two things:  (1) the law of that State, as explained by the judge in jury instructions; and (2) application of the law to the facts as the jury finds them, based on the evidence presented to them at trial.  

      Our system of justice is not perfect, and we have often acknowledged that, because of the burden of proof being on the prosecution, people who actually did what they are accused of sometimes go free.  But that is the price we pay for our constitutional guarantees of due process.  If you have a better system in mind, you should let us know.  

      If you want to criticize this verdict, you should tell us how, under Florida law, the prosecution met its burden of demonstrating, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the self defense scenario presented to the jury in the testimony of Good and Dr. DiMao could not have happened.  When people do that, when people criticize this case on the basis of Florida law and the evidence presented to the jury, their criticism of the verdict IS legitimate, and I completely respect that.  That's why we have trials.    But just saying, "A law that's not even applicable to this case is racist, and this jury is so racist that what is presented in court won't matter," as your comment does, is completely illegitimate.  

    •  GZ is non-white. Why can't many of you (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      freegeorge

      acknowledge this.?

      The other day I was in a restaurant and saw a man who looked like GZ's twin. He was with his family and they were all Latino.

      It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 03:07:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Zimmerman's drug use should also be admitted (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a2nite

    he uses many drugs I remember hearing and if one guy is on adderall and the other is stoned, the adderall guy is going to win the fight

  •  There will be reasonable doubt. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Victor Ward, prishannah, auapplemac

    So yes, he will be acquitted.

    Warren/3-D Print of Warren in 2016!

    by dov12348 on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:05:22 AM PDT

  •  I'm not sure how I feel about doing this (0+ / 0-)

    only because it would scare the fucking shit out of Republicans.  That could be a good thing, or not.

    Let me explain the order of things to you. There's the aristocracy, the upper class, the middle class, working class, dumb animals, waiters, creeping things, head lice, people who eat packet soup, then you. -- Gareth Blackstock, Chef!

    by avamontez on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:19:18 AM PDT

  •  Seriously, why is rioting a bad response (0+ / 0-)

    Most often governments are not moved by peaceful protest. Certainly we have few examples of it in recent years. But, the government responds to violent protest because it scares the business owners and the middle class.

    The race riots of the late 60s and early 70s were NECESSARY to affect change.

    The Rodney King riots were necessary to force change.

    It is not pretty and I'd not want to be in the middle of it, but if it happens, so be it.

    I'd personally like to see Americans far more riled up. Arresting a few hundred is no issue to power. Arresting thousands or facing millions is another dynamic.

    May the Conservative Supremes share Paula Deen's heart-stopping culinary tastes as much as they share her cultural ones.

    by pajoly on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:37:43 AM PDT

    •  You're freaking kidding me!?!? (8+ / 0-)
      The Rodney King riots were necessary to force change.
      Do you KNOW anyone injured or who lost their business or whose homes were damaged?

      Did you see the damage firsthand? Or was this just a  news story on your TV?

      It is not pretty and I'd not want to be in the middle of it, but if it happens, so be it.
      I'd personally like to see Americans far more riled up.
      Holy Flipping Moly. I've read it all now.

      Yes, I'm sure you were far away while black, Korean, Latino and a handful of really unlucky white citizens suffered through those riots.

      But yes, they were  "necessary. "

      I've read a lot of callous ignorant things at this site over the years. But this one really takes the cake.

      © grover


      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 09:55:01 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I lived just miles from the riots when they occurr (0+ / 0-)

        It was awful, but in the end it purged the LASD of Sheriff Gates and underwent a house cleaning. It awakened a national conscience to racial profiling. It showed the power of personal video, now a critical tool and the front line on the battle between law enforcement and the public's right to know.

        Here's CNN blog on the topic a while back: http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/...

        Good things can rise from the ashes of terrible tragedies. The riots are wounds our culture self-inflicts upon itself, a consequence of hate and corruption.

        The Right is laying the groundwork for a new generation of it.

        May the Conservative Supremes share Paula Deen's heart-stopping culinary tastes as much as they share her cultural ones.

        by pajoly on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:26:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Grover (0+ / 0-)

        "I've read a lot of callous ignorant things at this site over the years. But this one really takes the cake."

        I don't say it flippantly, but you need a stronger stomach. Most of society is not highly evolved enough to avoid violent conflict. I wish it were true.

        Just like today's zealots on the Right aren't interested in reasoned debate, fairness, decency or even costs. They have a Christofascist agenda and will stop at literally nothing. They'll spend any amount of tax money advancing it. They'll approve any war in support of it. They'll step over your dead body without a care if it gets them what they want.

        One day you'll need to take sides and there will be 3 of them:
        1. The Christofascists and their enablers (ALEC, etc.)
        2. The Appeasers who'll look the other way until they are carted away.
        3. People who will defend against the American Taliban with their bodies if they have to.

        May the Conservative Supremes share Paula Deen's heart-stopping culinary tastes as much as they share her cultural ones.

        by pajoly on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:36:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, (6+ / 0-)

          Well, maybe you need to stand in the burned ruins of business/home of an immigrant who asks you over and over, with tears in her eyes "why do they hate us?"

          And there are no answers because she, her husband and children lost everything because of stupid angry violence turned inward by a community that knows it can't really fight the forces that oppress it.

          I chose sides every day. How dare you say otherwise. I refuse to ignore crying shopkeepers, or accept hurting citizens or step over dead bodies, the same dead bodies that result from riots that you think are such a fine idea.

          If getting a "stronger stomach" means I'm willing to indifferent to --and even welcoming of suffering of others as you have said you are -- then no thanks.

          And living a "few miles" away in Los Angeles can mean living worlds apart. You and I both know that.  So I understand your answer.

          © grover


          So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

          by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 10:52:39 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Gardena, CA, north of Rosecrans (0+ / 0-)

            to be more precise.

            I'm not indifferent to the tragedy. But I place most of the blame on society. I sympathize with the helpless rage, but don't cheer its misdirected violence on the innocent. We are all culpable for that crying immigrant and for the rage. Just as we are as a society equally culpable for birthing terrorists in Yemen out of American callous indifference to the murder of women and children by our government.

            Even in the face of such murder -- which you may know may be triggered COMPLETELY on the utterly callous and shallow basis of a mathematical algorithm -- people here will still support this President because he's a Democrat. Hey, he's only killing kids whose faces we don't know, names we don't speak, not our kids after all. The deaths of those innocents don't bother the American voter one iota.

            The same for any rage resulting from the acquittal of Zimmerman. Just maybe we'll care about victims in own backyards.

            May the Conservative Supremes share Paula Deen's heart-stopping culinary tastes as much as they share her cultural ones.

            by pajoly on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 11:37:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Pico and Fairfax (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              grover

              Initially, there were any residents on the streets--white, black, Latin--protesting the verdict, which was seen as unjust and outrageous by most people.  Then, images on TV of people being brutally assaulted for being the wrong color in the wrong neighborhood at the wrong time, soon local Asian-owned businesses and restaurants were being torched, no power for 3 days, enormous roving bands of looters with no law enforcement action, the sky darkened with smoke and then glowing orange with flames at night.  Dozens killed, hundreds of millions in damage, entire areas burned.  Race relations in LA devastated.

              Yeah, that was useful...

          •  Why do "they" hate us? Why have black people (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            grover, a2nite

            been hated for over 300 years?   Given our history of oppression, we are the most non-violent people on the planet.....

            "Fear is the Mind Killer"--Frank Herbert

            by vmm918 on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 01:49:59 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't think she was referring to anyone in (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              WakeUpNeo, a2nite

              particular.

              She was pretty distraught. I certainly didn't feel that she was making any statements about any particular people or particular races.

              There was a lot of black on black crime that night too.

              That's the thing about riots. The people who are oppressing are virtually never harmed.  

              © grover


              So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

              by grover on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 04:09:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  I'm asking this because I honestly don't know: (0+ / 0-)

      what changes were brought about because of the Rodney King riots?

  •  I think that every single second, dollar, and (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SanFernandoValleyMom, auapplemac

    action henceforth should be a united, concerted effort to educate all demographics on how to meet and defeat GOP efforts to suppress the votes of the poor, young, old,  minorities, women, LGBT, and middle class workers. Joining en masse is the only way to defeat these monsters.  Every person who wants to vote should be ready, willing, and able to at the polls.  We've got to make every person WANT to exercise that right and nimbly jump through whatever hoops we have to in order to do so.

    It's time for our super-rich Dems (entrepreneurs, Hollywood, athletes, music stars, et al) to step up to the plate and give back to their communities by investing  some of their time and money in helping people afford the ridiculous fees and fines they will encounter when trying to meet new GOP voting requirements.  It's not right or fair, but it is what it is.  No one should lose their right to vote because they don't have the money, transportation, mobility, or other means to obtain the newly required "IDs" (snort).

    The GOP's rich donors have poured in mega-tons of $$$ to make their dreams of oppression a reality.  I know they are not the only ones in the world who have money.  There ARE rich Dems, too.

    IMO, any marches that do not focus on empowering those who are powerless, by teaching them what they need to do to vote these haters out of power, is a far less effective use of time.  To prevent more murders like Trayvon Martin's, we need to vote in people who will change laws like "Stand Your Ground" and unbridled gun ownership by any and every nut jot in every state.  If we want to wear hoodies while we GOTV, fine.  People will understand what those symbols represent.

  •  Reported to 'Trial Watch' nt (0+ / 0-)

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 01:03:15 PM PDT

  •  Forgive this... (0+ / 0-)

    ...if it's been addressed already and I missed it but...if I was to shoot a person who was on TOP of me at point blank range I'd expect investigators to find blood all the fuck over me. Is that unreasonable? So, having missed the entire trial, was there ever any evidence of the dead boy's blood on the accused?

    •  It might be.. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Neuroptimalian, auapplemac

      unreasonable...I imagine that gunshot wounds are not like they appear in some Sam Peckinpah movie. With big explosions of blood and gore necessary to get  "blood all over you"

      Honesty may be the best policy, but it's important to remember that apparently, by elimination, dishonesty is the second-best policy.

      by fauxrs on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 01:23:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, it was addressed. One medical expert said (0+ / 0-)

      that because TM was so thin, the bullet entered his heart very quickly. Since there was little muscle, etc. it's possible there may not have been a lot of blood.

      It’s the Supreme Court, stupid! Followed by: It's always the Supreme Court! Progressives will win only when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 03:30:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  No there wasn't (0+ / 0-)

      this trial has been spun by people who hardly watched it. The fact is, that jury is going back to the jury room with 1, written statement, 4 recorded interviews, one interview with Hannity and one video with a reenactment from GZ. All of them with material changes, lies, and physical impossible explanations.

      There is the testimony by Rachel Jeantel who was on the phone with Trayvon until the beginning of the altercation. She said that GZ first followed Trayvon in his car then got out of his car and followed him on foot, and after Trayvon thought he'd lost him, GZ was behind him and following him again.

      GZ got of the phone with the police at 7:13:41, the phonecall with Rachel got disconnected after the phone had fallen to the ground at 7:15:43. According to his story, it took him 2 minutes to walk 50 ft. That's what you have to believe for his story to be true.
      Trayvon was killed about 40 ft south of where GZ claims Trayvon knocked him down with one punch and jumped on top of him.

      Trayvon just turned 17, was 5 ft 11 and weighed 158 lbs. He had no training in any one of the martial arts.
      GZ was 28, 5 ft 8, 204 lbs, and had been training grappling, boxing and mma for more than a year. He trained 3 hours a
      a day, 3 days a week.

      Trayvon was unarmed, GZ carried a gun.

      No DNA or blood from GZ was found on the cuffs and lower sleeves of both Trayvon's sweaters, no DNA belonging to GZ was found under Trayvon's fingernails.

      GZ claimed he got his gun out of the holster, which he carried inside the waistband on the back of his right hip, while Trayvon was sitting on his belly button, with his knees against GZ's side.

      GZ's injuries were so minor, that they didn't need any stitches at all.

      The defense didn't offer any evidence to explain all this evidence away.

  •  The Jury (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Be Skeptical

    I hope nobody blames the jury.  It seems to me and most legal scholars that the prosecution has not come near to proving their case.  In this jury’s situation, sequestered, they have only seen the evidence presented to them.  I hope people respect the job they had to do, and don’t blame them in any way.

    I worry that people will forget the evidence presented at trial and lay the blame on a mostly white “racist” jury.  

    Focusing blame on an “outrageous” verdict is the only way I can see those who want to, being able to incite violence.

    If we all realize that their is just not enough evidence to know beyond a reasonable what happened, the better off we will be.  

  •  Evil man murders teen & walks, nothing to see (0+ / 0-)

    Here, move along.

    nosotros no somos estúpidos

    by a2nite on Wed Jul 10, 2013 at 04:55:30 PM PDT

  •  So happy to see yet another diary where (0+ / 0-)

    you can't get a comment in edgewise or read the diary without being absolutely overwhelmed by coffeetalk and his/her excessive, repeated, brainwashing blather.

    "Southern nights have you ever felt a southern night?" Allen Toussaint ~~Remember the Gulf of Mexico~~

    by rubyr on Thu Jul 11, 2013 at 07:59:57 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site