[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Just heard the ABC radio news blurb about this. Wow did they slant it to make it sound like the audio of the scream clearly undercut Zimmerman’s case and that the defense dodged a bullet here. When in fact what happened is the judge spared the prosecution the embarrassment of their lame “experts” getting picked apart by real experts. Very obvious whose side ABC is on, not that it’s a surprise or anything.

Absolutely, Yard.

IMHO the judge can easily defend her decision to the street by summarizing it as saying you might as well trust a "lie detector" as to trust those “experts.”

People talk about the likelihood of riots if Zimmerman isn’t convicted; OTOH sometimes people riot if their team wins the big game. And associated journalism has been selling the trope of Zimmerman being white, and being a big meanie. My question is, “Who should be, who is, making a TV documentary promoting the idea that the jury rightly found Zimmerman innocent?” Because if the jury does, public safety will be well served if that documentary is already in the can - and if the governor of any state which faces threats of rioting is able to, and has the courage to, demand and force the TV channels to air such a video.

Such a video would report on the fact that Zimmerman had fought the police department over the issue of police brutality to a homeless black a few years ago. And the fact that Martin was on suspension from high school - all the stuff that the judge is keeping from the jury would be on it. And it would conclude with the reaction of the jurors to all that info that the judge suppressed. And it would compare the news coverage of the case to the reality of the case. It would IOW be something that the broadcasters would never voluntarily report.

Just the knowledge that such a video was in work might even have a salutary effect on news coverage of the trial now. I wonder if Fox News might not do it?Maybe they could do it, and just go ahead and broadcast it while the jury was deliberating? Actually, now that the jury is sequestered, they could broadcast it now.

Not sure they have the courage to do that . . .

In any case someone make such a video to sell the jury’s verdict, whatever it be. And it’s clear enough that there is no need to try to induce the broadcasters to do so on the convict side. Getting them to do it for the acquit side, tho, might just be pulling teeth.

[Yardstick]

Right, there’s so much out there that runs directly against the standard narrative that I think such a video would, if nothing else, be fascinating to a lot of people who have only been getting their info from the news. I think they might even be a little miffed at what they haven’t been told. So it would serve the dual purpose of getting the whole story out there plus revealing how manipulative the media is being.