Posted on 07/01/2013 6:51:09 PM PDT by IChing
There’s a new Johnnie Cochran in town. But this time he’s a good guy, and he’s white. His name is Mark O’Mara.
O’Mara’s cross-examination of two police witnesses who took the stand for the prosecution in the George Zimmerman trial today is being praised as masterful and devastatingly effective by even the dubious talking heads on CNN.
Both investigators who testified today, Doris Singleton and Chris Serino, were excellent, credible witnesses–for the side that didn’t call them!
The only thing I can say negatively about Singleton’s testimony is that–reminiscent of Rachel Jeantel from last week–she had a very hard time reading, to the court, Zimmerman’s reasonably legible cursive from his hand-written statement made on the night of the incident.
The prosecution, as they did all last week, again put up witnesses who ostensibly were to there help put George Zimmerman away for murder, but instead wound up giving defense counsel O’Mara and Don West everything they needed to even further drive the stake through the corrupt, dark heart of a malicious miscarriage of justice–the state’s racially-driven railroading of an innocent neighborhood watchman.
Neither police witness supported the idea that Zimmerman acted with the state of mind nor any specific elements of conduct required to consider anything he did that night a crime. When repeatedly asked if they found Zimmerman’s story unreliable or dishonest in the slightest, both cops stated firmly that there was nothing beyond insignificant discrepancies in anything Zimmerman said.
There simply was no probable cause to arrest and charge Zimmerman. There never was, and still isn’t.
Back in February of 2012, Zimmerman had given his account of the evening’s unfolding events multiple times to each detective, together and separately, without a lawyer, immediately following the shooting of Trayvon Martin and recorded on all kinds of tape, devices, and even his own handwriting. He even went with a third investigator back to the scene of the crime the day after the shooting, and was recorded on video describing and re-enacting the words & movements as they took place.
Zimmerman took a huge legal risk immediately after the shooting by discussing the incident so freely and openly without counsel, but the jury today saw the real George Zimmerman in those videos and on audiotape–rather meek, mild-mannered, much slimmer by about 120 lbs., sincere, candid, and determined to help detectives get to the bottom of what happened.
The problem for the prosecution, as I’ve said all along, is that they don’t have a case at all. We all know the score by now, why this case came to the fore; propelled by rabid race-hustlers and easily-duped liberals on Change.org, and fueled by the words of a former acolyte of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and of professor Derrick Bell who occupied the White House in an election year and put his thumb on the scales.
State’s attorney Angela Corey, by the way, who brought the bogus charge of second-degree murder against Zimmerman on behalf of the prosecution, was re-elected unopposed 5 days after she filed the preposterous, hollow charging affidavit.
The jury today heard Zimmerman in his own words firmly and repeatedly describe the logistical timeline and circumstances that led to his leaving his vehicle to better position himself to try to observe the suspiciously-acting Martin and to obtain an exact address for police, then being abruptly accosted & attacked by the re-appearing Trayvon Martin, and then how he desperately struggled underneath Martin’s vicious onslaught and screamed for help.
Zimmerman’s gestures and voice at the scene of the videotaped re-enactment the following day are those of an earnest, convincing neighbor who was alone, being beaten savagely by a strapping, towering thug, and begging for help from someone nearby who refused to come to his aid, instead saying he’d just call police as he stood outside his unit’s rear sliding glass door and watched, yelling at Trayvon to stop his attack.
Jurors heard again and again, from Zimmerman himself, how Martin first verbally confronted him, then violently smashed Zimmerman’s nose with a sucker-punch and pounced on top of him as he was laid-out on his back. Jurors listened to him again and again describe the process of Martin bashing Zimmerman’s head into the pavement, then smothering his mouth and nose while he writhed and squirmed desperately.
Jurors heard Zimmerman repeatedly describe Martin finally grabbing for Zimmerman’s previously concealed gun when it became exposed by his outer garments riding up his torso, telling Zimmerman, “you’re gonna die tonight, motherf*****!!”
Here’s the crux of the case, based on my decades of training and experience. 14 years ago, I had a co-worker who was not indicted by a grand jury’s review after an almost identical incident. A ghetto thug was highly annoyed (criminally annoyed, you could say) at my uniformed, armed co-worker for writing down his license plate after the thug was trespassing and told to leave a certain area. Instead of driving away, the thug suddenly stopped and exited his vehicle and came after my co-worker on foot, in full attack mode. My co-worker was already on foot. The two wound up on the ground, and my co-worker’s story was that the thug went for my co-worker’s holstered gun.
I have no idea whether the thug in that incident actually did grab for my co-worker’s gun, and I will never know for certain. But the story given to the gran jury by my co-worker was that the two grappled for the gun and the thug wound up with a bullet entering his brain via underneath his chin, my co-worker having gotten off the shot that perhaps saved his own life.
The jury had no choice but to assume my co-worker told the truth about how it happened, because there was absolutely nothing, no evidence whatsoever, to overcome any reasonable doubt that it didn’t.
In the death of Trayvon Martin, all of the facts, evidence, and circumstances support the idea that however the incident developed, nothing George Zimmerman did can remotely be said to rise to the level of a criminal act.
Zimmerman’s story holds up, according to solid testimony of several credible witnesses. Nobody can prove that he was not in fact profiled, stalked, attacked, and almost murdered by Trayvon Martin, whose gangsta-rap hero listed on his social media profile was the “recording artist” known as “C-Murder,” who is currently in prison for–you guessed it–murder.
No one except George Zimmerman really knows for certain if there really was a grab by Trayvon for Zimmerman’s gun, and a spoken intent to kill him. But that is the crucial aspect which, if true, means he really had no other choice but to get the gun first and fire into Martin’s vital areas.
The jury has to decide whether Trayvon grabbed for Zimmerman’s gun. Nothing can prove whether he did or not. Even if they don’t believe he did, deadly force can be reasonably argued if they believe Martin was bashing Zimmerman’s head against the sidewalk. For that matter, people are beaten to death with mere fists every day in this country.
Presumption of innocence in our legal system means if you can’t prove a crime has occurred, you must decide as if the actor was operating in good faith.
Without irrefutable proof otherwise, jurors might as well accept the idea that Trayvon did grab for the gun. The law says they have to.
They must acquit.
Mmmm. He was closer than I thought.
How is the prosecution gonna ‘splain that?
Could it be that poor little Trayvon instigated the confrontation?
“We all know the score by now, why this case came to the fore; propelled by rabid race-hustlers and easily-duped liberals...”
Does that include the President of the United States?
If you live near a Martin L. King Blvd...I’d move...about 30 miles away...or further.
you know - that thought crossed my mind as i’ve read some of the descriptions of the prosecutions performance.
Din’tcha read the very next words after the comma in the same sentence??
My understanding was that Singleton said she had not brought her reading glasses. Given that she was all formalled up, this isn't implausible...and reading without reading glasses is difficult if you need them.
We’ll see. It’s an all-woman jury.
So you’re saying the defense lawyer has recovered somewhat from the knock-knock joke he started out with?
oohh-hoo nice...thnx
Crazy Holder may indeed charge him with a Federal crime to put him on trial again.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3033705/posts?page=82#82
It is all female, but it has some other interesting characteristics as well. The Female political slant often alluded to is accounted for by unmarried single mothers. Married mothers lean slightly the other way. Most of these jurors are married with children and with real jobs. See link.
Dat whut comen censs sayed him dided!
That would not surprise me at all. I even expect it if he is acquitted.
How to survive a riot: http://www.wikihow.com/Survive-a-Riot
After the Girls of Zimmerman are Gone (my column from last week):
http://clashdaily.com/2013/06/after-the-girls-of-zimmerman-are-gone/
Oh yes, Don West was the anti-Jeantel last week!
It’s my understanding that at least one of the women is a CCW permit holder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.