The Zimmerman Trial

reply to post by Libertygal



I have been concerned that maybe the reason she has been so biased and refused the acquittal is because she doesn't want to seem lenient. She doesn't want to be targeted by crazy people. Consider the threats against the defense attorneys, Zimmerman, and even "random white people." With all the hostility and ignorant people being free with death threats would you want to be the person that set Zimmerman free (in the eyes of the public)? The Jury has been sequestered, but I have worried that they still probably know the threats they might face when making their decision. I would make the right one at my own risk, but I would be paranoid for a bit.

I have also been concerned, to a lesser extent, that it could be her taking orders.
I try to keep that conspiracy theorist in me constrained, but it's not always so simple. I have considered that she has been told that Zimmerman going free would cause mass riots or random acts of violence. That perhaps he needs to be sentenced while everyone's attention is on the case (then he could be freed on appeal in a much less publicized appeal later). I know.. conspiracy theory and not very likely. Also.. why would the government play it up as they (and the media) did if they DIDN'T want division and violence?

I really do think that fear might be an influencing factor in this case. The judge should be called out regardless of if she is just biased or afraid. I do think that the threats could have a big influence on the case, but it's so obvious he is not guilty that any conviction would be a near impossible sell and most people would know something was up.

Do you guys think the jury, defense attorneys, and judge could be in danger from the nutcases out there that have been making threats on twitter, etc?

Do you guys think the jury, defense attorneys, and judge could be in danger from the nutcases out there that have been making threats on twitter, etc?

Never say never.

The judge can avoid issues toward her by letting the jury make a decision. I think there would be a bigger uproar from the public if the jury didn't get the case. Not that it is necessarily the way a trial should go.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Which is why I have been against the press releasing any info on any criminal trial before it is decided. I have been in this situation, didn't do nothing wrong. I had my community turn against me, I know how it feels. I have had local media run their mouth like I was guilty. It's a bunch of crap. A trial is between the accused and the jury, at least that is how it is supposed to be. Good luck when the media poops on your head.

Also.. why would the government play it up as they (and the media) did if they DIDN'T want division and violence?

Some people allow them selves to be pressured into doing things that they do not want to really do. I think this is the case. Being up for reelection is a big incentive to give in, a self reward of a different kind.

edit:

The whole issue comes about because people have different opinions and pick a side based on it.

reply to post by TKDRL


I agree. I have been avidly opposed to the trial by media since watching Nancy Grace attack Casey Anthony.

I think that was one of the first truly terrible cases. You have a woman in her 20's found not guilty, being called the most hated woman in America. Why? Because one woman ran her mouth and called her guilty and talked in phony sympathy for the victim (trust me it's phony and always is redirected to her own kids). Ironically Nancy Grace has caused at least two young women to kill themselves after she berated them on t.v.

I personally never thought Casey was guilty of murder.

This time it was basically the same thing except it was multiple shows on one station (HLN) coupled with other main stream media actually manipulating evidence in a crime that was under investigation! They know that they have national and international reach and are polluting the jury pool yet they go on.

I think we may have to pass a set of laws that makes it a crime to report anything but unbiased fact on crimes before trial. What purpose does it serve for Nancy Grace to call Casey Anthony or George Zimmerman child killers if not to have people accept their opinion, agree, and then spread it further?

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I can see it from the victim's family point of view too. But damn, if you can't convict a case based on pur facts and not media spin, then there is no real case. I knew a girl that was murdered, and that family got justice without the media running their mouth. I cam close to being tossed into a cage because of the media. I will always default with innocent until proven guilty. And with evidence, not opinion like most cases these days. The media these days are doing nothing but contaminating cases with their opinions.

reply to post by roadgravel


Yeah.. but this was a very strange thing for a president to comment on. Especially the way he did and it definitely seemed rooted race. Very weird for a president to take a side on an issue like this (especially before the facts are in).

I think we may have to pass a set of laws that makes it a crime to report anything but unbiased fact on crimes before trial. What purpose does it serve for Nancy Grace to call Casey Anthony or George Zimmerman child killers if not to have people accept their opinion, agree, and then spread it further?

We don't need laws, we need news reporting like it is meant to be, unbiased and facts. There are almost no large news organizations left now. Just a bunch of opinion for profit organizations.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Not sure why the president felt the need to comment. That was just strange since it did not help both sides of the situation.

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by Libertygal

 

I ask you this...... What does this case do to people? For me it makes me less likely to call the cleanup crew cops.... Better off throwing the dead body into the swamp, or woods or whatever. In my case give free lobster bait to the boats. Why bother going through the bother of doing the right thing when you will just be treated like a scumbag criminal? Might as well act like a scumbag criminal and cover your ass than end up bankrupt doing the right thing and needing a lawyer lol.........

Sorry libertygal, meant to hit general reply and hit reply to you by accident.

edit on Sun, 07 Jul 2013 22:19:43 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)

It's ok, obviously I am in a chatty mood, and I have an opinion to offer on this. Just so happens, my husband and I have had this exact coversation, as our son had legal issues of his own. When my daughter was molested, our entire family suffered a massive amount of harrassment, annoyance, ridicule, you name it. All because the wife was a young teacher and they were a young family, just starting out in a new home.

We had many slashed tires, a break in where someone rummaged our personal belongings looking for Lord knows what, persecution from over half the neighborhood of 99 homes/families.

The police were called on us almost every time we went outside. What was left of my childrens' childhood was literally stolen from them as we waited 2 years for the trial, literally locked away in our home. We could no longer use our pool, and even when mowing the lawn, I asked my daughter to dump the clippings in the backyard, which hapoened to butt up against their yard. He called the police again, claiming she was "enticing" him.

Well, he finally entered a plea bargain, yes, after 2 years of torture. He only did it because the police had found 16 other victims. A part of the plea deal was, the D.A. would not tell his wife about the other 16 victims.

Finally, word got out, and the harrassment lessened but took my children growing up and moving out for it to end.

Many times my husband would say he wished he could get away with things like others, rip off people, cheat the system, use people, just in general do what it seems like so many people do.

I simply looked at him and said, "But that would entail lowering yourself to their level. Do you really think you could live with youreself? Could you look in the mirror and like who is looking back? It is not who you, who WE are."

And that's the only way that I can explain it.

Many police agencies are telling their citizens they cannot depend on them to respond quickly, that your safety and self defense is largely up to you.

Learn your laws, and do your best to live right, make real, not superficial friends, and in the end, I relally believe what goes around comes around.

Sadly, most can see George got railroaded. I so understand, because my son did too. He has no Mark O'Mara to come to his rescue, but in the end it will work itself out. I will never give up.

Just because there are some bad apples, no need to cut down the whole tree, but some pruning may be in order.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


I have absolutely considered threats may be involved. I won't go into any detail, but when I said show trial and scripted, I was referring to the part you spoke of concerning convicting him now, overturn later.

That is exactly what I think is a real possibility, due to the race issues and the CRS Agency going to Florida.

I am torn between them convicting to "soothe" the masses, and overturning later, and this being an explanation for the blatant bias, disallowance of evidence, judicial errors, and the mere fact it almost seems the prosecution seems to almost be trying to lose. In other words, scripted and planned. Else, explain CRS knowing how to set the July 9 date at least 2 months ahead of time?

The jurors for now, are anonymous. I think I read they were to be named after the trial. If so, I think that is assinine, because that is endangering their lives if they aquit. However... find him guilty, they are heroes.

It all falls into place, doesn't it?

I know people talk, but, in this instance, I think the flames if racial tension were fanned so much that, there is a real risk to all involved.

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by roadgravel

 

Yeah.. but this was a very strange thing for a president to comment on. Especially the way he did and it definitely seemed rooted race. Very weird for a president to take a side on an issue like this (especially before the facts are in).

I agree, but once again, if you follow the trail I have proven exists, it goes straight from Florida and Al Sharpton et al, to Eric Holder via the media.

On the other side if the coin, you have the fact that Crumo went to the DOJ, because he claims, "I do not trust the Sanford Police Department." Then, of course, the CRS Stealth Agency and theie Federa funding is now coming to Florida.

Obama was involved long bofore he spoke a word. He helped to fan flames, regardless of differing opinion. It sealed the deal, the indictment, and the Federal funding.

Win, win for everyone but George.

We’ll discuss
how manslaughter differs from murder 2, and how such a shift might play out in this trial, in a future post.

reply to post by roadgravel


P.S. I forgot to tell you, in my research, I did find this article, and indeed, thete is no follow up.

I would be interested to know their stance now.

Sorry about leaving that out.

reply to post by roadgravel


I am a libertarian so trust me when I say I prefer avoiding new laws at all cost. That said.. how do you get media to report news as just the facts when they have an agenda, be it profit or political.

I think there should be strict guidelines on what a news station can have. That seems un American, but FOX has had phony "The Onion" like fake news programs, tons of opinion programs that are presented like News programs and so on.

MSNBC and CNN and others have had lots of opinion programs.

HLN is only opinion programs.

There should be requirements in order to call yourself a News station. I think Canada has something like that. Maybe massive fines each time they violate.

I really don't know though. There are probably a few respectable media sources, but they don't make the money. And if they do there is always the concern that some CEO will start pushing an agenda.

reply to post by Libertygal


So expect the trial to end on the 9th or 10th haha?


That would be wild wouldn't it? Still with the internet it would be hard to cover up the appeal and if it went viral it would have very similar delayed effects, but then again likely nothing like what could happen if you have a couple million people watching and then taking to the streets as they hear "not guilty" all at once. It would be sparse and people would voice their opinions as they heard the info.

Seems like if they could go that far with it, it would be easier to go to these channels like HLN and be like "Hey, start talking about the case realistically instead of continuing the biased stuff that is inflaming people everyday." They could use the media to slowly turn the people's minds to "well maybe Trayvon was in the wrong."

I don't know, at the very least it is an interesting novel idea.

I have personally had two friends delete me from Facebook (not close friends, mind you) because I ripped on that article that compared Rachel Jeantel to Harriet Tubman and Sojourner Truth. If you haven't read it try to find it. It's just a ridiculous piece of melodrama. I couldn't understand why the black woman that wrote it would compare two incredibly notable historical black women to this girl that ended up in a trial because she lied. It insulted their memory. It insulted them for me and what I learned about them in school and I am a 27 year old white man. I even defended Jeantel and said in her defense I think Crump and the Martin's used her to get the settlement and she didn't want to be where she was. The two people that read the article said it was "powerful" and made on of them cry. Both middle class white kids near my age (one in his early to mid 30s). I just thought it was ridiculous.
Edit: found the article: HERE


And why is Jamie Foxx telling people to riot?

reply to post by Libertygal


Oh I knew Al Sharpton had his fingers in it somewhere.
Anywhere I can read about this stealth agency thing you have mentioned?

reply to post by TKDRL


The thing is the media can screw you, but you have a better chance at appeal if your story is heard and people on the side of justice stick around. Look at the West Memphis 3.

My friend went riding on motorcycles with two of his other friends (and actually invited my brother who didn't go thankfully). At a gas station a guy that was either drunk, on drugs, or just stupid started trying to pick a fight. The three guys were straddling their bikes trying to leave and the guy pulled a knife and started towards them. The friend of my friend pulled his gun and warned the guy. The guy continued forward and yelled "shoot me." After showing no sign of stopping the friend of my friend shot him. It took 3 shots (9mm) to stop him. The cops found the knife under his body and his hysterical girlfriend was there and had watched it go down. (I imagine it must have been horrible to have to shoot someone and then watch their girlfriend cry over their body while you wait for the cops.)

So he was charged with murder, it went to trial, the prosecution tried to paint them as a biker gang (three 21/22 year olds that are some of the nicest guys you could meet) and tried to say it was premeditated despite them never having seen the guy until he pulled in the gas station and tried to fight them. Luckily the guys girlfriend was honest and told that he did in fact yell for the young man to shoot and did come after him with a knife. He was let go, but not before he was publicized widely with a murder charge and had his name smeared by the prosecution. I can send you the story if you like, but I don't want to post his name in an online forum.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by roadgravel

 

I am a libertarian so trust me when I say I prefer avoiding new laws at all cost. That said.. how do you get media to report news as just the facts when they have an agenda, be it profit or political.

I think there should be strict guidelines on what a news station can have. That seems un American, but FOX has had phony "The Onion" like fake news programs, tons of opinion programs that are presented like News programs and so on.

MSNBC and CNN and others have had lots of opinion programs.

HLN is only opinion programs.

There should be requirements in order to call yourself a News station. I think Canada has something like that. Maybe massive fines each time they violate.

I really don't know though. There are probably a few respectable media sources, but they don't make the money. And if they do there is always the concern that some CEO will start pushing an agenda.

News is no longer "news"...

Its "News Entertainment Television". We are being entertained as well as programmed whenever we watch "the news".

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

So expect the trial to end on the 9th or 10th haha?

No, no. I was saying that the trial had to contunue to at least the 9th or 10th, to fit the CRS Federal visit. At least some days after that, as well. I had previously speculated the judge may drop or teduce charges, realizing they had to attempt to move for a manslaughter conviction, but that was what brought up the confusion over the ability/inability to do that.

Since that is now settled, we know it cannot happen. It will be guilty, not guilty, or aquit.

I had also speculated she may move to approve the motion for aquittal, but not only is it rare, it would have ended the trial before CRS arrived.

Now, the trial will go on to completion. Mark O'Mara had asked for an extension, due to discovery of new evidence, but was denied, so they have been working in a frenzy all weekend. I am feeling the new evidence is re: DeDe/Rachael, but we have to wait and see.

Some media has, in fact, started talking about Geoege being found not guilty or aquitted. Someone even posted an articke from ABC, I believe, referring to it as 'liberal media'. I have honestly been more involved in research, and only heard snippets of the media.

I have heard enough to know they stil improperly misrepresent the facts, they still show Trayvon at 12, but then, I have heard some remarks about possible aquittal, the toxicology report, etc. Right now, it is mixed, but still inflamatory, ie: Jamie Foxx.

I did not read the article, but heard murmerings, and was upset by just that. Comments like that have no place in the media, and Rachael is no hero. Eapecially when the media is totally aware of the twitterverse, and the threats happening there.

She may in fact, not even be the real ear-witness. Either way, that remains to be seen, but people say foolish things all the time.

I appreciate the link to the article, I will take the time to read it.

I have been wondering if the Crump deposition happened, and who will be called first to testify Monday morning. The best parts have yet to happen, I hope people have popcorn ready!

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Libertygal

 

Oh I knew Al Sharpton had his fingers in it somewhere.
Anywhere I can read about this stealth agency thing you have mentioned?

Absolutely! I posted about it here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here are the pertinent links:


www.miamiherald.com...

TRAYVONMARTIN CASE
Federal mediator Thomas Battles serve as
peacemaker in Sanford

The federal mediator works for the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service (CRS), a
stealth federal operation that works to defuse community anger hardening along the fault lines of race,
color and national origin.

This is the media release, it has a typo in the date, in case anyone asks. Not sure if that was intentional or...
Posting the full text in case it disappers. Seems the typo was fixed, as well.

ETA Yes, why is blank.

www.co.miami-dade.fl.us...

For Immediate Release:
July 03, 2013

Community briefing on the Trayvon Martin trial

(Miami-Dade County, FL) – The Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board (CRB) and the
Miami-Dade Youth Commission will brief the community regarding legal issues in the trial of
George Zimmerman for the killing of Miami-Dade teenager Trayvon Martin. Information will
also be shared about activities being planned around Miami-Dade county both before and after
a verdict is announced. The briefing will take place Tuesday, July 9, 2013 from 6 to 8 p.m. at the
North Dade Regional Library, 2455 N.W. 183rd Street, Miami, FL 33145.

Representatives of the CRB and the Wilkie D. Ferguson Bar Association will be part of a panel
describing the legal issues and procedures. They will also answer questions from community

Miami-Dade faith leaders, advocates and law enforcement members regarding the trial.


representatives have also committed to sharing information about other events and activities
that are being planned to engage the public as the trial nears conclusion and once a verdict is
announced. The shooting of the unarmed Miami Gardens teenager by a man in Sanford, Florida
in February 2012, sparked an outpouring of public comment and large demonstrations across
the nation. Tens of thousands of Miami-Dade teenagers took part in rallies and marches
around 31 senior and middle schools in the community.

“The tragic death of 17-year-old high school student Trayvon Martin has raised many
questions and concerns among young people in the community where he lived,” said Dr. Walter
T. Richardson, CRB Chair. “The ongoing legal proceedings against the man accused of killing
Trayvon Martin has re-focused back public attention on the case and issues of intense concern
to this community. The briefing on the trial will keep our youth and community informed.”

The CRB works to prevent and reduce community tensions and build bridges of mutual
understanding, cooperation and respect among our diverse populations. The CRB and Youth
Commission are working to promote non-violent responses to the killing of Trayvon Martin and
are engaging key organizations and leaders to empower and protect our communities,
particularly the youth.


The Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board



Who:


The Miami-Dade Youth Commission

What: Community briefing on the Trayvon Martin Murder Trial

June 09, 2013, 6:00 p.m.- 8:00 p.m.



When:



Where: North Dade Regional Library
2455 N.W. 183rd Street,
Miami, FL 33145

Why:

# # #

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY COMMISSIONER REBECA SOSA DISTRICT 6
Stephen P. Clark Center
111 NW 1st Street, Suite 220 Miami, Florida 33128
(305) 375-5696