Posted on 07/26/2013 3:57:58 PM PDT by Ben Mugged
ABC News is being accused of deceptively editing, or at least misrepresenting (intentionally or not), some of the comments made by Juror B29, the lone “nonwhite” juror in the George Zimmerman murder trial. Further, the media as a whole are being accused of manipulating some of her statements.
These allegations come not from a conservative news source, but rather from Slate.com.
The key phrase latched onto by most media outlets, due to its sensational nature, was “George Zimmerman got away with murder” — words that were, in fact, said by Juror B29. But the full unedited video of the comment, in context, tells a different story, claims Slate’s William Saletan.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
-PJ
Never ever talk to the MSM. They are the enemies of freedom. The MSM stopped reporting the news many years ago. Now it is all propaganda 100 % of the time.
“I shot the clerk?”
36 y/o mother of eight, living on a nursing assistant wage?
Can you say Welfare Queen?
How much did ABC pay her for the interview?
I hear George Zimmerman is writing a book about his ordeal, to be titled “White Like Me.”
The MSM is trying to keep the pot boiling; hoping to get some crackpot stirred up to do something nasty to GZ. GZ was found NOT GUILTY in a court of law. I pray for him & his family. - We see what we’re up against with the Lamestream Media crowd, which is the repository for ignorance.
The dingy broad did initially vote guilty for murder II. Is this the Chicago plant that only recently moved to FL ?
Leading questions are allowed in cross-examination, and also when dealing with a hostile witness. The main reason leading questions are forbidden is because it may be hard for some witnesses to distinguish their own observations from things that have been suggested to them. If a witness is asked "Did you see the defendant hitting the deceased with a sledge hammer", the witness may picture the defendant striking the deceased with such an implement even if he never actually saw such a thing, and it may be hard to ascertain whether the witness actually did see such a thing. By contrast, if the witness is asked "what did you see?" and says "I saw Mr. Smith pick up a big hammer and swing it repeatedly at Mr. Jones", it's far more likely that the witness actually did see that.
The reason leading questions are allowed on cross-examination is that they can be useful for tripping up people who are lying. To be sure, they may also trip up those who are being truthful, but a jury may be able to distinguish truthful people who get flummoxed from those who are trying to lie but get caught.
The woman understands the distinction between killing and murder. I’m impressed. in spite of what the media wants to portray. i’d like to hear the whole transcript.
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.