Posted on 05/21/2012 10:53:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The release of evidence in George Zimmermans murder trial quickly made a mockery of his second-degree murder charges, and threw a further layer of shame upon media and political opportunists who misrepresented a tragic, but fairly straightforward, case of lethal force employed in self-defense.
It is remarkable to take stock of this evidence and realize that it supports every single aspect of Zimmermans statement to the police. His injuries are consistent with his account of physical assault by Trayvon Martin. Martins gunshot wound occurred at the very short range described by Zimmerman, demolishing fantasies about a racist mall-cop wannabe stalking and murdering an innocent black kid for no reason.
The Smoking Gun highlighted this bit of eyewitness testimony released to the public by the Sanford police only a few days ago, but known to the prosecution when Zimmerman was charged tendered to the police only 90 minutes after the shooting occurred, by a resident of Zimmermans community who heard the altercation and decided to investigate:
The man recalled seeing a black male, wearing a dark colored hoodie on top of a white or Hispanic male who was yelling for help. The black male, he added, was mounted on the white or Hispanic male and throwing punches MMA (mixed martial arts) style.'
The witness--who was in his living room and about 30 feet away from the confrontation-- said he called out to the two men that he was dialing 911. He then heard a pop, police reported, and saw the black male laid out on the grass.
Jim Hoft at Gateway Pundit relates the discovery of video from Trayvon Martins YouTube account, removed at some point during the last month, that shows he was actually involved in some sort of underground fight club.
Also fatal to the prosecutions case is the discovery that Martin had THC in his system he had apparently been smoking pot that night. As related by the local CBS News affiliate:
According to the autopsy report made public record by the Office of the Medial Examiner, the blood from Martins chest contained 1.5 ng/ML of THC, a drug commonly found in marijuana. There was about 7.3ng/mL of THC carboxy, the by-product of the bodys metabolism of THC.
Depending on the amount of THC consumed and the frequency in which it is consumed, THC carboxy can stay in a persons system from somewhere between two weeks to a month, according to WBTV. THC itself can stay in the body for as long as four hours.
This is important because the charging document clearly, and without evidence, accuses Zimmerman of racially profiling Martin. On the other hand, Zimmerman told the 911 dispatcher that Martin caught his eye because this guy looks like hes up to no good, or hes on drugs or something its raining and hes just walking around, looking about. Only then did the dispatcher specifically ask about Martins race, and request a description of his clothing.
Despite the prosecutions awareness of the autopsy reports and eyewitness testimony, they included none of it in their affidavit against Zimmerman. Criminal lawyer and Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, who has been beside himself ever since the Zimmerman charges were filed, writes in the New York Daily News that its time to drop the charges, but doubts State Attorney Angela Corey will do the right thing, because until now, her actions have been anything but ethical, lawful, and professional.
As Dershowitz points out, the evidence released in this case means Floridas Stand Your Ground law isnt even a factor in Zimmermans defense. Much political hay has been made out of this law, but if Zimmerman was on the ground getting beaten to a pulp, withdrawal from the encounter was physically impossible for him. A defendant, under Florida law, loses his stand your ground defense if he provoked the encounter, observes Dershowitz, but he retains traditional self-defense if he reasonably believed his life was in danger and his only recourse was to employ deadly force.
For that matter, as Dershowitz notes, there is not one shred of evidence to support the prosecutors contention that Zimmerman provoked the encounter. Neighborhood Watch patrols are not illegal. There is no evidence that Zimmerman shouted any fighting words at Martin.
Dershowitz also mentions a suspicion Ive harbored since the weird, circus-like press conference at which Corey announced the charges: theyre a political instrument designed to buy time for everyone to cool down, leading to a long trial that dismantles some of the hysteria built up around the Trayvon Martin case. If true, the strategy is understandable but utterly outrageous. The United States does not do show trials. The justice system is not a safety valve for releasing unhealthy levels of political tension. Individual citizens are not pawns to be shoved around in media games by gun-control advocates, race hustlers, or opportunistic politicians. The purpose of law enforcement is to protect the public, not appease certain segments of it.
State attorney Angela Corey responded by saying, What the general public has to remember, and the media has to remember, is that there is a lot we cannot release by law. Zimmermans lawyer also cautiously conceded that more evidence may be in prosecutorial hands, as yet unreleased to either him or the public.
That doesnt change the virtually indisputable fact that Corey deliberately suppressed evidence helpful to Zimmerman when her affidavit was written. At best, thats very sloppy work. ABC News discusses the sort of cards Corey might be holding:
One key to the case is which of the two men instigated the clash that left Martin dead. The prosecution says Zimmerman initiated the altercation when he "profiled" Martin that night, and then got out of his car to follow him. In the newly released documents, lead homicide officer on the case, Chris Serino of the Sanford Police Department, called the shooting "avoidable" had Zimmerman remained in his vehicle.
What has yet to be seen are two main pieces of evidence: Zimmerman's statement on the night of the incident, and his reenactment of the events of that night, which could prove vital when and if the case is heard in court.
Its difficult to see how any of that might convince a jury to hand down a guilty verdict to Murder Two charges. How does that stay in your car principle work? Do you have to stay in your car when you see anyone acting suspiciously in your neighborhood, or do the age, sex, and racial background of the subject matter? Does everyone have to stay in their cars, or only members of certain age, sex, and racial groups?
Or is it simpler for the law to assert that beating someone into the ground and administering an MMA-style thrashing is wrong, even if they looked at you funny?
Looking bad for DA
Good news.
She’s done a great job of nifonging herself! Looking forward to her trial and conviction!
While all of this is ture, it is important to remember that O.J. Simpson walked free.
Our legal justice system is biased, crooked and corrupt.
In spite of the obvious facts, Zimmerman could be convicted.
In spite of the obvious facts, Zimmerman could be convicted.
___________________________________________________________
No way. All it takes is one juror to hold out for “Not Guilty”.
My only questions is why would she fall on her own sword? Is she doing it for Obama?
In spite of the obvious facts, Zimmerman could be convicted.
___________________________________________________________
No way. All it takes is one juror to hold out for “Not Guilty”.
Granted it might not be the wisest thing in the world to approach an oddly behaving person (worst case scenario for Messrs. Z and T) and ask him what the heck he is doing, but this is by no means counter to any law.
It ought to be over when the jury here (or judge, if Mr. Z opts for bench trial) barfs back at the prosecution after fifteen minutes; but sadly the ever political Obama, for all his bleeding heart liberalism not really caring about any individual person but only about faceless classes, has more dogs to sic on Mr. Z. The half?-black has it in for the quadroon.
I find it particularly disingenous that Cerino thinks that citizens just should close their eyes and just abdicate all responsibility for individual and neighborhood safety to the police.
Well, that’s what citizens did for years, Detective Cerino, and now the once pround urban areas of the US are filled with ghettos where productive people used to live. PC told them don’t profile, don’t take a stand in their neighborhoods, and NOW, NOW, the police are urging people who don’t give a rat’s patoot about their neighborhoods, to take them back.
A little damn late and they are speaking to the wrong crowd.
She traded a short term MSM problem for an even bigger one.
What is this person’s political aspirations? What favors might she owe?
Police may feel it’s job security if citizens are ever-chicken about such matters.
“....and threw a further layer of shame upon media and political opportunists....”
.
They are totally devoid of any sense of shame — deceptive opportunism is in their DNA.
Too many damn police as it is. And that’s coming from a police officer who has seen some of the bums that are being allowed in the field these days.
But yeah, let’s keep the War on Drugs/Citizens going and taxing hell out of people for driving.
Was she set up by a rival?
” I find it particularly disingenous that Cerino thinks that citizens just should close their eyes and just abdicate all responsibility for individual and neighborhood safety to the police.
Well, thats what citizens did for years, Detective Cerino, and now the once pround urban areas of the US are filled with ghettos where productive people used to live. PC told them dont profile, dont take a stand in their neighborhoods, and NOW, NOW, the police are urging people who dont give a rats patoot about their neighborhoods, to take them back.”
The irony did not escape me.
Interesting. I hadn't heard about this.
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.