They never had a case for Murder Two:
Jonathan Good, one of Zimmerman’s neighbors, testified that he saw Martin straddling Zimmerman in a “ground and pound” position and appeared to be punching him as Zimmerman yelled for help.
This isn’t true, though:
But Good also undermined Zimmerman’s claim that Martin pounded his head into the pavement.
“I couldn’t see that,” he said under cross-examination.
He didn’t say it didn’t happen — he just said he couldn’t see it. That’s of evidence against it — it’s just the absence of evidence for it. And his physical injuries are sufficient evidence for it.
This was never anything but a political show trial. And now they’ve established the predicate for the race riots (and perhaps Zimmerman lynching, as so many were threatening on Twitter yesterday) to come.
[Update early evening]
Why, yes. the Zimmerman trial is a racial circus.
The defense has been making an excellent case this week — oh wait, this is the prosecution?!
I think the medical reports verify his head had been beaten ON by something or AGAINST something hard.
A concrete sidewalk / driveway would fit that.
I loved the CSM article and how it described the ‘star’ witness, Rachel Jeantel. “She was hard to understand, mumbled, acted impertinent, annoyed, rude…”, in other words she was a person raised in the U.S., after 1960, and she’s under 40 years old.
This is indeed political. Zimmerman was charged due to political pressure and for no other reason. Hell, they couldn’t even get a grand jury indictment against him (the normal prerequisite for charging someone).
I’m also very puzzled by the tactics I’ve seen from the prosecution (Caveat, I’m not following the case closely). Were it not for the fact that the prosecution has tried multiple dirty tricks (such as witholding evidence, coercing witnesses, etc) I’d be sure they were trying to throw the case, because the prosecution witnesses have so far (with the exception of the girlfriend) backed the defense case strongly.
However… those dirty tricks… that gives grounds for appeal if Zimmerman is convicted, so… are the prosecutors who are actually trying the case trying to throw it? Would an ethical prosecutor do this in the case of a man they believe innocent (and where they can’t dismiss the charges)? I’d like to think that the answer is yes.
RACISS
RACISS
RACISS
A CJ,
the crazy part of the ‘political pressure’ about this travesty is the supposed racial bias component. When the half-Spanish, half-White Zimmermam , is being touted as a racist WHITE guy, while the half-black, half-white POTUS is considered BLACK, then race is not a real problem any more.
Seriously. when a person’s ACTUAL race, the one on his birth certificate [if there even is one, that is…] when that ‘official race’ can be changed, or re-designated by the legal system / MSM / racer baiters / talking heads to fit the ‘situation’, how big an issue is race in the 21st Century? Race is BS now except as a negative thing in a court case or as a pointer to prove how BIG a racist someone is or how deserving that person is, because his gg-grand parents either MIGHT have BEEN or might have OWNED slaves.
That’s pretty effed up, IMHO.
Der Shumpty, I agree.
I find it incomprehensible that Elizabeth Warren can be “Native American” yet Zimmerman, whose great grandfather is black and who is largely of Peruvian Indian decent, is “white”.
If Zimmerman had been playing Martin’s part, and a white neighborhood watch guy had shot him under identical circumstances, then Zimmerman would be “Black Hispanic” or some such.
“Whatever fits the narrative” is the rule of the day.
It all makes perfect sense, because we’ve always been at war with Eastasia.
I think it all hinges on the placement of a hyphen (see Ann Althouse’ comments on this).
Rachel Jeantel testified as to Mr. Martin calling the person following him with both a racial term for a white person and a racial term for a black person.
Some suggested that by shifting a hyphen, the racial term for a white person would be instead a term for a male-on-male sexual predator.
Does anyone give credence to this? Perhaps Mr. Martin identified Mr. Zimmerman not as a white person but as a person of color? And that Mr. Martin thought that he was being shadowed by a person seeking a sexual encounter? And that Mr. Martin confronting Mr. Zimmerman and then allegedly knocking him down was Mr. Martin’s (over)reaction as a hetero male in “defending his honor”? And inasmuch as Mr. Martin took his inference of Mr. Zimmerman’s observation of him, not for Mr. Martin “casing” the apartment/condo complex, but Mr. Zimmerman “looking him over”, that Mr. Martin committed an act of “gay bashing”, that is, a hate crime for his imagined identification of who Mr. Zimmerman is and wanted?
Which tragically ended in one of the two men’s death, in this case, Mr. Martin’s? Which was a consequence of a neighbor keeping a vicious dog on account of break-ins? Where the police advised Mr. Zimmerman to “carry” as the only adequate defense against the dog?
I refuse to cooperate with the racists when they want to know my race on an official form. I select “other” and write in “human.” It pisses them off but there is only one race and that is human.
I write in “Witch”.
No one has ever even mentioned it, so my response of “Decent from people who fled Salem just after ticking off the chief witchburner – where salic branches were actually burned.” has never been tested.
Not so. Police forensic pathologists regularly classify human remains according to race. There are significant biological differences between each of the three races (today they’re called “continental population groups”). The details are no secret, and even a shallow search for “human biological differences” will yield much of interest to those interested in the facts.
There are differences from a medical perspective, such as variations in response to certain medications, probability of contracting specific illnesses (e.g skin cancer) and the like. However, a male from any racial group can breed with a female from any other racial group and produce a viable child who isn’t sterile. It isn’t like a mule while which is sterile.
I tried something like that once, after being hired on as a contractor. The sh*tstorm that erupted from that comment nearly cost me the assignment, and left me at permanent odds with the HR department. My supervisor kept me on, but when the 6 month renewal time came, they put me out with about 30 minutes notice. HR’s decision, not engineering.
My current assignment had me spend two days on diversity videos, power point presentations, and lectures on the values of diversity. I am keeping a running tally on the amount of time left in this assignment, which is nominally a permanent job. It boils down to this: Don’t talk with co-workers except work related, put nothing personal in cube, and keep to yourself. Anything you say can and will be used against you. Christian bashing is okay, though.
Regarding racism… there actually is a race issue involved, and I don’t mean the obvious one.
The Sanford Police Department (the local police for the issue at hand) has a problem; in 2011 a black homeless man was beaten to death. The police tried to cover it up, because the killer (white) was the son of a Sanford police officer.
A public outcry (fed by video of the killing going viral) forced an investigation, which amongst other things led to the resignation of the police chief for involvement in the cover up.
It was only via the efforts of a few brave citizens that the investigation happened. This involved calling the police on their cover up at public hearings.
It took a very brave man to stand up and do this, as well as call for the cancellation of the police chief’s pension. That’s the kind of thing that makes you enemies, but he did it anyway, in order to see justice done and the killer of the black man punished.
His name? George Zimmerman. The same George Zimmerman the persecution is claiming is a racist. (and in so doing, neatly opens the door to introducing this incident to the trail by the defense).
I think there’s a strong possibility that part of the reason for his persecution is simple payback for exposing the corruption.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/24/black-legal-scholar-says-conflict-of-interest-could-earn-zimmerman-a-new-trial/
I’m not sure I buy the theory here. Sanford Police Department didn’t suggest Zimmerman should be tried. There were early accusations that the Sanford PD had recorded “racist” remarks from Zimmerman, but those reports turned out to be unsubstantiated. Otherwise, Sanford PD, after a reasonable investigation and questioning “back at the station”, handled the situation as self-defense. So did the local DA.
The Sanford police let him go on the night of the shooting, which means they didn’t think he committed a crime. That’s crucial.
So the only justification for the state putting him on trial is if the state thinks the local police are racists who don’t care that a black teenager was killed. If so, then why aren’t they saying it publicly? Why aren’t the police officers being charged with civil rights violations? Why aren’t they on trial?
Another possible response to the race question on forms (why is it relevant?) is “African”. Because we’re all African.
Or “Pangean”.
Close, but no cigar. Although primates (or at least their precursors) existed when there was a Pangea, there was not a genus Homo (and not even a genus Australopithicus) at that time. We can’t even claim to be Laurasians (i.e., after Gondwana departed the scene). So I think we’re stuck with African.
My mistake. Africa was part of Gondwana, but the argument is still correct. We’re Africans, not Pangeans.
How about “Earthling”?
Race: “30-foot refrigerator shuffle. Three silvers, one bronze, one DNF.”