Showing posts with label george zimmerman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label george zimmerman. Show all posts

Saturday, July 13, 2013

People's Exhibit Zero

File Under:  Clear and Present Danger


As the world waits for the jury to determine George Zimmerman's fate in the death of Trayvon Martin, we must realize what is actually on trial here.  With the mainstream media and the Department of Justice firmly entrenched in the camp of the prosecution, we know this is more than just a simple murder trial: this is a partisan battle with far-reaching political implications.  What we are really waiting on is not just the exoneration or condemnation of George Zimmerman, but also the decision that will play heavily into the fate of Stand Your Ground as a doctrine and the Second Amendment itself.

At this point, I do not believe any reasonable person would, no matter what George Zimmerman did or said, argue against the facts of the case:
  1. Trayvon Martin struck George Zimmerman first;
  2. A scuffle ensued in which George Zimmerman fell to the ground; and
  3. Shortly before being shot, Trayvon Martin was leaning over or straddling George Zimmerman.
We do not, with sufficient certainty, know anymore than that, but more than that is not necessary to know.  The jury must only decide did George Zimmerman have good reason to fear that he could be seriously injured or killed if he did not use force against his attacker.

Critics of George Zimmerman's defense site the age/weight disparity, the severity of Zimmerman's wounds, and the fact that Zimmerman was armed while Martin was not as evidence against Zimmerman plausibly believing he could be seriously harmed or killed.  If you can get beyond the arrogance of trying to assume what someone actually felt in a crisis situation, and examine the situation objectively you see those arguments make no sense.  Age, weight, gender, the intensity of a fight, even being armed are not reliable predictors of how severe injury or likely death could be in a real world close combat scenario.  I turn to the internet to prove the point.

Man vs. Child

Were that a sanctioned fight, a referee would have called it after the first punch.  Age disparity meant nothing.  The younger man proved himself more than a threat.


David vs. Goliath

Size disparity does not mean you are invulnerable, nor that you are able to use size to your advantage.  A smaller fighter is more than capable of causing a problem for a larger opponent.  Back-pedaling in the darkness and the rain, it is perfectly possible to lose your footing and your attacker is upon you in an instant, raining down blows.


Old vs Young

Wrestling is a young man's game, not an old man's game, right?  Wrong.  Someone you wouldn't expect to get the better of you can, if for no other reason that a mistake on your part and good fortune on their's.


Tony Doesn't Want Any Part of Mom

It looks like Tony had reason to fear he was in danger of serious bodily harm if he pressed this issue with this young man's mother.


No, This Is Over

NOTE: Sarcasm warning, proceed with caution.  When I began watching this I knew the burly, aggressive guy was going to win.  I bet you did too.


"Insignificant" External Injuries

The last two videos were included purely for their comedic value.  But this next one is serious.  Deadly serious.


Notice the man conversing, not bleeding at all, get up, and walk away, only to die moments later from apparently very significant injuries.  Still not convinced?  Well, if you still believe a man has nothing to fear from a boy attacking him, I leave you with this:


That was the family of 46 year-old Ricardo Portillo.  He is dead now.  The 17 year-old "boy" who killed him has been charged with homicide.  The "child" literally punched him to death.  The family sobbing in this video could have just as easily been George Zimmerman's.  I think George Zimmerman has a low-opinion of the kind of people he thought Trayvon Martin was.  He is book smart, but not very intelligent.  He is an over-zealous failure, who has to rely on the good graces of others to bail him out of problem situations. Though I would not have made the same choices he made, the choices he made were not illegal, reckless, malicious, or negligible.  I don't have any reason to dislike him beyond the fact that Trayvon Martin is no longer alive, able to learn and grow into a good man.  The investigation into his death was sluggish and bungled, yes, but ultimately Trayvon Martin is dead and gone and his death was no crime.   There is nothing we can do for Trayvon Martin or his family at this point.  But we can end the cycle of tragedy and bitterness.  We can find George Zimmerman not guilty.


Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Martyrs and Pawns

File Under:  The Law Is Not Mocked


This is a spillover of two separate conversations.  In the first conversation, I erroneously stated Zimmerman was charged with first-degree murder.  In response to a photograph highlighting the testimony of the doctor during the trial, which noted Zimmerman's injuries on the night of Trayvon's death were "insignificant," I asked, "how significant George Zimmerman's wounds would have been if he had not shot Trayvon Martin?"  Here is the my two cents on George Zimmerman's second-degree murder trial:

We know who killed Trayvon Martin, why he was killed, with what he was killed, and when his death occurred? What we do not know is how the altercation that lead to Trayvon's death was precipitated?  So who committed a crime first?  Zimmerman certainly committed the first mistake, but did he commit a crime? Following someone is not a crime, asking someone a question also is not a crime, and not listening to a 911 operator is not a crime. 911 operators are not authority figures, they cannot tell you what to do. If Zimmerman stopped Martin and prevented him from leaving or gave him the impression that he could not leave, that would be a crime: false imprisonment.  However, if Martin stopped of his own free will, then no crime was committed.  Approaching someone in a public place is not a crime either. The jury must decide who assaulted whom first.

If George Zimmerman had stayed in his car, Trayvon Martin probably would not have doubled-back to confront him and Trayvon would likely still be alive.  If Trayvon Martin had kept walking, he would definitely be alive today. If Trayvon Martin had called 911 instead of his girlfriend, he might still be dead but at least we would have a reliable record of what happened. As someone else pointed out: "they both did something stupid." The question is who committed a crime first.  Zimmerman is facing a minimum of 25 years.l even manslaughter is a minimum of nine and a quarter. Given the evidence, I think it would be a mistake to convict Zimmerman of murder. That would be a miscarriage of justice.

What is on trial here is not really George Zimmerman: Trayvon attacked Zimmerman - case closed. What is on trial is the handling of the investigation, the racial profiling of Martin by Zimmerman and the police, and the validity of stand your ground laws. If Martin had killed Zimmerman he would have went to jail that night and been held or no bond or a bond of ridiculous proportions. The shooter not the victim would have been subjected to a toxicology screening. If the media covered the story at all, the media would have spread images of Trayvon that portrayed him as the violence-loving, rebellious, drug-using wannabe thug that he was.  Trayvon has been made a false martyr and Zimmerman, should Zimmerman be convicted, will become the sacrificial pawn that helps someone else jockey for position to execute their political checkmate.

"Hurricane" by Bob Dylan from Desire released 1975 on Columbia