Posted on 07/08/2013 3:14:10 AM PDT by Biggirl
I drew a legal conclusion on "Good Morning America" Saturday that would have surprised the Dan Abrams who covered the George Zimmerman case leading up to, and shortly after, his arrest.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Here’s the real reason: He’s NOT GUILTY!
Related but different article at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3040143/posts
Not surprised, slow news time.
Uh Oh! It is cover your ass time at all the major networks who “tried and convicted” Zimmerman before any evidence was presented with NBC being the biggest culprit when they aired a doctored/edited audio between Zimmerman and the 911 operator.
The question I have is, why the big deal made about the number of threads?
Dan Abrams ought to know better than to keep putting that myth out there (or maybe that's the idea). It was a civilian, non-emergency dispatcher who said "you don't need to do that." And he said it after Zimmerman had already exited his truck, not before.
Wow — that’s the first time I read that article — today.
Does that mean that he hasn’t changed his mind ...yet???
Obviously Zimmerman did need to follow, since Martin was ready to pounce on an innocent person and repeatedly slam their head to the ground.
What does that have to do with anything?
The media, the carnival barkers, the politicans, the plantation owners (naacp, congressional black caucus), the low information voters (the hands out crew) are all trying to justify and legalize thier ability to committ crimes whatever they are including murder and prevent you from protecting yourself and your family.
Although I believe without any doubt whatsoever that Zimmerman is not guilty of either charge, and should walk, all of the tv legal pundits have their opinions influenced by one thing that the jurors in the case do not: the pundits have seen facts that have been prohibited to be presented to the jury.
So I’m skeptical whether Zimmerman will be found not guilty in this case by this jury. It will depend on whether the jury believes his attorneys are honest, or are just trying to do do all they can to provide a strong defense to a “guilty” man.
Of course Zimmermann is innocent, just as OJ was guilty....it all depends on the jury.....and one can never predict the outcome.
That and the fact that the asshat in the WH declared Martin to be his virtual son , should make for grounds for appeal in the event Zimmerman is not found guilty.
I think the reason is to provide a single location for comments and thought, rather than have the discussion spread over more than one thread.
I'm indifferent about it, so just provided links to the other discussion threads, for the convenience of anybody who wanted to read all of the discussion and might otherwise be unaware of the existence of multiple threads.
Sorry: that should read is found guilty
http://statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/
For FReepers who haven’t yet discovered them: these sites are doing excellent analysis on the Zimmerman case.
The other error, and it’s a bigger one, is failing to describe the extent of “following,” and the fact that there is no evidence to support a conclusion that Zimmerman disregarded the suggestion to not “follow.” “Continued to follow” is false. Zimmerman said “okay” to the dispatcher, and his activity vis a vis Martin was to attempt to obtain visual contact of a person that had disappeared into the darkness.
Some people are just natural kibitzers and can't help themselves, I guess. Oh, and there's also that "bandwidth" hysteria....
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.