Jump to content

Why the Zimmerman Prosecutors Should Be Disbarred


Recommended Posts

Been away for a while so don't know if anyone posted this, but they should have ...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/why_the_zimmerman_prosecutors_should_be_disbarred.html

Why the Zimmerman Prosecutors Should Be Disbarred

Toward the end of his closing statement on Thursday, Florida Assistant State
Attorney Bernie de la Rionda posted a slide on a screen in a fifth-floor
Seminole County courtroom.

"Which Owner would be more inclined to yell for help?" read the banner on the
top of the slide. The slide was divided in two. On the left was a photo of
George Zimmerman's Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm handgun, and on the right was a can of
Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail. Beneath the photo of the gun was the
question, "Who followed?" Under the can was the question, "Who ran?"

So absurd was de la Rionda's presentation, and the whole case for that matter,
that the can was turned sideways so the label could not be read. Throughout the
trial, prosecutors have called the drink "iced tea" lest the word "watermelon"
be said in court. "F***ing" was okay. De la Rionda said it more times than the
average rapper, but "watermelon," apparently because of its racial connotations,
was not.

Hiding the word "watermelon" was the least of de la Rionda's dishonesties. This
one slide had several built in. As to who ran, Martin had four minutes to run
the 100 or so yards to the house he was visiting. When he attacked Zimmerman,
he was still 70 or so yards from that townhouse. Do the math.

Then, too, from the day the State took over the case, prosecutors knew that
Zimmerman was the one screaming for help. All evidence supported that save for
the dubious identification by Martin's mother. If the State's jobs were to sow
the seeds of reasonable doubt, one could forgive them this deception, but that's
not the State's job. That's the defense's.

The State's job is to make the case for the defendant's guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. Fifty years ago, in Brady v. Maryland, the U.S. Supreme Court
established that a prosecutor's responsibility was "to seek justice fairly, not
merely win convictions by any means." In the case at hand, this meant that the
State of Florida had the responsibility to share promptly all exculpatory
evidence with the defense. It did not.

One substantial block of evidence that it kept to itself until a whistleblower
alerted the defense was the content of Martin's cell phone. On Tuesday night of
this week, phone expert Richard Connor made a detailed presentation. Although
the jury was not present, the respective attorneys were, as were the media.

For dubious and probably reversible reasons, Judge Debra Nelson disallowed
Connor's testimony, but prosecutors have known for many months about the
downward spiral of Martin's life. In the course of his close, de la Rionda
called Martin an "innocent young boy" and made several other allusions to that
effect. He was intentionally deceiving the jury. Martin was neither little nor
innocent.

Consider the following exchange from November 2011, three months before the
shooting. After Martin told a female friend he was "tired and sore" from a
fight, she asked him why he fought. "Bae" is shorthand for "babe."

MARTIN: Cause man dat nigga snitched on me
FRIEND: Bae y you always fightinqq man, you got suspended?
MARTIN: Naw we thumped afta skool in a duckd off spot
FRIEND: Ohh, Well Damee
MARTIN: I lost da 1st round :( but won da 2nd nd 3rd . . . .
FRIEND: Ohhh So It Wass 3 Rounds? Damn well at least yu wonn lol but yuu needa
stop fighting bae Forreal
MARTIN: Nay im not done with fool..... he gone hav 2 see me again
FRIEND: Nooo... Stop, yuu waint gonn bee satisified till yuh suspended again,
huh?
MARTIN: Naw but he aint breed nuff 4 me, only his nose

The fight followed the mixed martial arts (MMA) format. A day later, Martin
would tell a friend that his opponent "got mo hits cause in da 1st round he had
me on da ground nd I couldn't do ntn."

As the girl complained, Martin was "always" fighting. He was also something of
a sadist. His opponent, after all, did not bleed enough. Why might this be
relevant?

Jonathan Good, the closest of the eyewitnesses to the shooting, confirmed last
week the testimony he gave on the night of the shooting, specifically that there
was a "black man in a black hoodie on top of either a white guy ... or an
Hispanic guy in a red sweater on the ground yelling out help," and that black
man on top was "throwing down blows on the guy MMA (mixed martial arts) style."
That is right: "yelling out help."

On January 6, 2012, Martin got into trouble at school again. When asked why, he
told a friend, "Caus I was watcn a fight nd a teacher say I hit em." Said the
friend, "Idk how u be getting in trouble an sh**." By this time, Martin's
mother had thrown him out of the house for "fightn," and he had moved in with
his aunt and uncle.

Martin's younger half-brother, Demetrius Martin, sent one of the more indicative
messages. Last seen in the media crying as he remembered his brother during a
"March for Peace," Demetrius asked Martin when he was "going to teach me to
fight."

"This defendant didn't give Trayvon Martin a chance," said de la Rionda. No, it
was the State of Florida, the Department of Justice, and even the president that
didn't give Zimmerman a chance. Someone should pay.


Indeed, *someone* should.

The prosecutor and assisting lawyers should be disbarred for malicious prosecution.

Several members of the prosecution should be charged with witness tampering and
obstruction of justice.

The judge should be severely chastised, if not disbarred.

Crump should be disbarred and possibly charged with witness tampering,
obstruction of justice and perjury.

Several of the Martins should be charged with perjury and obstruction of
justice.

The major networks should be sued by Zimmerman for a hundred million dollars it will cost him in security during his life, the loss of his future, for what he and his family have been and will be put through, and to punish the networks for what they've done so they think twice next time.

The police and prosecution should be sued for false imprisonment.

Numerous *leaders* on the left should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

Holder and the DOJ should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

Did I miss anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is how change comes about, questioning authority. Who authors language to rule thoughts being debated? What separates rightn and wrong methods to stay balanced within the moment nothing remains the same added details twice?

 

Axioms or axes? Science fiction or spiritual fantasies? Alphabets, or one periodic table of 118 charactistic elements in 3 states of existing simultainiously and still individual molecular characteristics added into every gender playing society's child saving humanity's mind over matter and selling symbolism over substance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/the_obama_doctrine_of_control_through_dissension.html

Something new to add to the pile of possible lawsuits post-verdict. Trayvon Martin’s parents will likely sue Zimmerman for wrongful death and hope that the lower standard of proof for civil actions beats his claim of self-defense this time.


Go ahead. Show your stupidity again. Because given the evidence I think it's highly unlikely you'd win even a majority vote. Furthermore, ALL the evidence will be presented in a civil suit … including ALL of Trayvon's background. Including the contents of his cell phone. And the part the parents played in Trayvon's downfall. And the defense can put Crump under oath. And Dee Dee's *letter writer* under oath. The the Martin family. And to top it off, if they lose, they'll have to pay Zimmerman's court costs. Bankrupt themselves. So go ahead. Sue Zimmerman. Show your stupidity AGAIN.

 

The feds are pretending that they might prosecute Zimmerman for violating Martin’s civil rights, but they won’t. They probably can’t win and the combination of racial tensions and perceptions of double jeopardy (which is what a federal prosecution would smell like, even though it’s technically not DJ) makes the whole thing too politically risky for O. If he wants to use Zimmerman to galvanize liberals for the midterms, President Above The Fray can have his surrogates pound the table about the Florida verdict. No need to get the DOJ involved.


Don't rule this possibility out. Stupidity knows no bounds. And Obama is Stuck On Stupid. And like they did in Florida, they'll think they can control the outcome. So don't rule this out.

Meanwhile, as Ed noted earlier, Zimmerman himself seems set to proceed with his defamation action against NBC. I’m more skeptical than Ed is about the odds of success: It’s very easy to become a “public figure” for purposes of defamation law, which Zimmerman arguably was even before NBC butchered the tape of his 911 call. NBC’s segment ran on March 27, 2012; as of a week earlier, there were protesters at the courthouse in Sanford and news stories running at CNN about the feds opening an investigation into the incident. He was probably already a public figure at that point. Doesn’t mean he can’t win on defamation, but it’ll be much harder.


But he can win if they LIED and it harmed him. And he clearly can prove both. Put me on the jury. I'd be happy to tell MSNBC what I think of them. And he only needs a majority. :)

Now, via the Right Scoop, here comes potential lawsuit number four: What if Zimmerman sues Angela Corey and the state? Watch the clip and you’ll find Mark O’Mara hinting at “compensation.” I wasn’t sure offhand what he meant by that, but a little educated googling revealed a few possibilities. One: He could sue the state on federal grounds (a “Section 1983 action”), claiming that the prosecution was mishandled in a way that violated his right to due process presumably because some evidence wasn’t turned over during discovery. Actions like that are exceedingly hard to win against prosecutors, though. Two years ago, the Supreme Court vacated a judgment awarding a man $14 million in damages after a prosecutor withheld exculpatory evidence during his trial and he ended up on death row. To win damages, you need to show that the prosecution engaged in a pattern of behavior. Maybe Corey’s office is guilty of that, but if not, Zimmerman will have trouble.


From what I've seen so far, they ARE guilty of that. Clearly.

The other option is to skip the federal claim and sue Corey for “malicious prosecution” under Florida law. This summary seems fairly comprehensive.

… snip …

Maybe you can infer malice somehow from the political tensions that informed the case plus the fact that he was obviously overcharged with second-degree murder, but how do you show that there was no probable cause to commence the proceeding? Granted, the cops didn’t arrest him initially, but the trial judge thought the evidence was strong enough to go to the jury


First of all, Corey's affidavit to the judge was definitely malicious. It kept the judge in the dark about many extenuating facts. It was outright dishonest. I don't agree with the author here.

 

Again, just put me on the jury …

and the jury itself thought it was strong enough to deliberate for more than 12 hours. “Malicious prosecution,” I would think, is something you’d see where the trial court issues a directed verdict of acquittal because the evidence is so flimsy that there’s no reason to even let it go to the jury. That’s not what happened here.


That's not what happened because the judge was part of the plot. This is in fact evidence of that, not exculpatory.

 

And the jury deliberated 12 hours because it was made up of women and they like to talk (now that's bound to get me in trouble ;)).

 

No, really, it took 12 hours because the state threw in that manslaughter garbage at the end and they had to consider that in detail.

 

And because if they'd tossed this out after five minutes of deliberation (like they should have been able to do), they'd know their own lives would now be at risk and we'd probably already have riots.

 

They took 12 hours to maintain a fiction, just like the DOJ is now perhaps *pretending*.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the prosecutors had no case they knew they had no case the only reason this case ever went to trial is the pressure put on Sanford by the radical n*ggers like al sharpton, naacp, black panthers, etc.

 

there was NEVER a case here. Sanford PD had it right from day 1 which is why they never arrested Zimmerman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away for a while so don't know if anyone posted this, but they should have ...

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/why_the_zimmerman_prosecutors_should_be_disbarred.html

 

 

Indeed, *someone* should.

 

The prosecutor and assisting lawyers should be disbarred for malicious prosecution.

 

Several members of the prosecution should be charged with witness tampering and

obstruction of justice.

 

The judge should be severely chastised, if not disbarred.

 

Crump should be disbarred and possibly charged with witness tampering,

obstruction of justice and perjury.

 

Several of the Martins should be charged with perjury and obstruction of

justice.

 

The major networks should be sued by Zimmerman for a hundred million dollars it will cost him in security during his life, the loss of his future, for what he and his family have been and will be put through, and to punish the networks for what they've done so they think twice next time.

 

The police and prosecution should be sued for false imprisonment.

 

Numerous *leaders* on the left should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

 

Holder and the DOJ should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

 

Did I miss anyone?

exactly right

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The racist Eric Holder, who let off the new black panthers, will now make a decision about going after Zimmerman. The great racist divider O Blame'o will make the final decision. Still under investigation: Libya debacle. Zimmerman decision will come before investigation in Libya is completed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-07-16/story/fired-it-director-who-testified-george-zimmerman-trial-will-sue-state#ixzz2ZJaarCXV

 

Fired IT director who testified in George Zimmerman trial will sue State Attorney's Office, lawyer says

Ben Kruidbos testified last month that prosecutors did not turn over all information to George Zimmerman’s defense team in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Last week, State Attorney Angela Corey fired Kruidbos. Now, his attorney says he plans on filing a lawsuit within 30 days.

… snip …

The same day prosecutors finished their closing arguments, one of Corey’s investigators went to Ben Kruidbos’ home about 7:30 a.m. to hand-deliver a letter that said Kruidbos “can never again be trusted to step foot in this office.”

On Tuesday, White said he will file a whistleblower lawsuit on Kruidbos’ behalf in Florida’s Fourth Judicial District Circuit against the State Attorney’s Office.


Corey and several others in her office need to be disbarred.

And this man should get a few million, at least, to punish the state for it's conduct and ensure it's future behavior.

 

It would be even better if they could take the millions out of the pocket of Corey and her legal team.

 

I doubt they'd even miss that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the prosecutors had no case they knew they had no case the only reason this case ever went to trial is the pressure put on Sanford by the radical n*ggers like al sharpton, naacp, black panthers, etc.

 

there was NEVER a case here. Sanford PD had it right from day 1 which is why they never arrested Zimmerman.

OJ all over again
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OJ all over again

I didnt know nicole attacked OJ

 

you clueless lying loser

 

 

 

blaming SYG when it had nothing to do with the case is just another example of the libloons agenda to create a safe workplace for violent criminals...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cory should go.

 

The others were just carrying her water under orders.

It's Corey.

 

And you don't know that the rest are just following orders.

 

I think many are true believers.

 

Or at least too easily manipulated.

 

No, I think a complete fumigation is in order.

 

Florida needs to clean house or nothing will improve.

 

But then you don't want anything to change, do you? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the jury deliberated 12 hours because it was made up of women and they like to talk (now that's bound to get me in trouble ;)).

 

I figured the jury deliberated about 45 seconds Friday afternoon - and the judge directed them not to deliver their verdict till Saturday evening when the crowds had cleared from around the courtyard somewhat & most folks would be going to church the next morning ----- in order to reduce the possibilities for any civil unrest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/the_nifonging_of_george_zimmerman.html

The Nifonging of George Zimmerman

There is an aphorism to the effect that there is only a small difference between police and criminals, just as there is only a small difference between sheep dogs and wolves. It is that small difference, however, that distinguishes heroes from enemies of society. Sheep dogs and wolves are members of the same species, and both are physically and temperamentally capable of killing other animals. The key difference is, of course, that sheep dogs never harm the sheep they protect from the wolves. A police officer must, like the violent criminals he or she arrests, be similarly capable of handling a physical confrontation if he or she is to protect innocent people.

No civilized society can tolerate a sheep dog that turns on the sheep, or a police officer or prosecutor who uses his or her authority against innocent people for personal or political gain. This is why, for example, the U.S. Code includes a provision for "color of law" violations of civil rights. As stated excellently by the FBI:

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies -- authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.


This is why proven rogue prosecutors like Mike Nifong (Duke Lacrosse), and alleged rogue prosecutors Scott Harshbarger (Amiraults), Janet Reno (Grant Snowden), and Florida State Attorney Angela Corey (George Zimmerman), are far more dangerous to society than all but the most vicious criminals.

Let's start with law professor Alan Dershowitz's statement that Angela Corey should be disbarred.

She submitted an affidavit that was, if not perjurious, completely misleading. She violated all kinds of rules of the profession, and her conduct bordered on criminal conduct. She, by the way, has a horrible reputation in Florida. She's known for overcharging [criminal charges, as opposed to attorney's fees], she's known for being highly political. And in this case, of course she overcharged. Halfway through the trial she realized she wasn't going to get a second degree murder verdict, so she asked for a compromised verdict, for manslaughter. And then, she went even further and said that she was going to charge him with child abuse and felony murder. That was such a stretch that it goes beyond anything professionally responsible.


A false accusation that somebody is unfit to practice his or her profession is automatically libelous, and Dershowitz said Corey "violated all kinds of rules of the profession." Dershowitz would, therefore, have never made an accusation of this nature if he did not believe that the preponderance of evidence was on his side. Judge Jeanine Pirro also suggests that Corey filed charges for political reasons. That would constitute unprofessional conduct at best.

Worse is to come. It is alleged that Angela Corey fired her office's information technology director for testifying that he thought the prosecutor's office failed to turn over exculpatory evidence to Zimmerman's defense team.

The hearing Thursday will feature testimony by Ben Kruidbos, the information technology director. His attorney said Kruidbos is prepared to testify he recovered deleted photos and messages from Martin's cellphone data, and that Kruidbos told Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda about that information in January.


The fact that a rogue sheep dog is far more dangerous to society than a wolf is a strong argument for making the knowing and willful withholding of exculpatory evidence a felony, and in the same class as perjury.

Next we come to Al Sharpton, the same individual who was equally sure that the Duke Lacrosse players had raped a black woman, and who falsely accused several men in Wappingers Falls of raping Tawana Brawley. Sharpton's literally inflammatory rhetoric also played a role in the fatal arson of Freddy's Fashion Mart in 1995.

Sharpton is now equally sure that Zimmerman is guilty (despite the verdict to the contrary), so it is past time to remind the entire country that Sharpton is nothing more than David Duke in blackface: a racist, an anti-Semite, and a race-hustler who makes a living by appealing to the dregs of his society. It is also necessary to remind Mr. Sharpton, and NAACP head Benjamin Todd Jealous, how certain elements of Caucasian society once handled matters when they felt that the justice system had not worked properly (e.g., by acquitting a black man for raping a white woman). I am sure this is how the KKK would have handled the O.J. Simpson "not guilty" verdict -- with which I agreed because of loss of chain of custody of a key piece of evidence -- had it been in a position to do so.

MoveOn.org joined the NAACP in petitioning for double jeopardy for Zimmerman, which comes as little surprise given its past record of promoting hatred for Jews, Catholics, Evangelical Christians, and others. The same goes for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), who also wants Eric Holder's so-called Justice Department to trump up federal charges against Zimmerman.

Eric Holder is the same individual who was found in contempt of Congress for refusing to provide evidence related to the more than two thousand gun felonies that his Justice Department orchestrated in Operation Fast and Furious. Now it is credibly alleged that the Justice Department misappropriated federal money to orchestrate public demonstrations and quasi-lynch mobs against Mr. Zimmerman. This misuse of government resources against a private citizen reinforces the statement that a rogue sheep dog is far more dangerous to any civilized society than a wolf.

Conclusion: Rogue Sheep Dogs Are a Clear and Present Danger to Our Society

Rogue sheep dogs cannot, in the long run, continue to operate without society's support. The surest way to cut that support is to expose them for what they are in every conceivable media outlet. We can legitimately equate the likes of Al Sharpton, MoveOn.org, and the NAACP to Ku Klux Klansmen who lynched black people and Jews (e.g., Leo Frank) when a court of law wouldn't deliver the verdict they wanted. Sharpton's track record speaks for itself, and it is past time that he is called out publicly for what he is: a racist black counterpart of any Klan Kleagle or Grand Wizard.

We need to remind the public, at every opportunity, that Eric Holder's Justice Department orchestrated more than 2,000 gun felonies at the cost of 150 Mexican lives, along with that of U.S. law enforcement officer Brian Terry. The former could conceivably be construed as an act of war against a moderately friendly country. Barack Obama's "national conversation" about guns came to an abrupt end when he invoked Nixonian executive privilege to keep Holder out of jail for contempt of Congress with respect to Operation Fast and Furious. There also needs to be official scrutiny of Angela Corey's role in the Zimmerman prosecution, and disciplinary action if the allegations against her are proven.

 


The clock is ticking ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2369592/Justice-Department-places-hold-Trayvon-Martin-trial-evidence-including-George-Zimmermans-gun--Florida-law-says-returned-him.html

Justice Department places 'hold' on Trayvon Martin trial evidence, including George Zimmerman's gun - which Florida law says must be returned to him


Zimmerman should now sue Holder and the DOJ.

This is an infringement of Zimmerman's Civil and Constitutional Rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2369592/Justice-Department-places-hold-Trayvon-Martin-trial-evidence-including-George-Zimmermans-gun--Florida-law-says-returned-him.html

 

 

Zimmerman should now sue Holder and the DOJ.

 

This is an infringement of Zimmerman's Civil and Constitutional Rights.

DOJ probably can't let this slide- ever spend any time in FL? The fix can easily be put in; just like in TX...... every single law student in the US knows this= why don't you guys??? Selective cognition, perhaps? :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DOJ probably can't let this slide- ever spend any time in FL? The fix can easily be put in; just like in TX...... every single law student in the US knows this= why don't you guys??? Selective cognition, perhaps? :wacko:

 

Ah, another Stuck On Stupid joins the forum. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/conscience-realist/2013/jul/22/angela-coreys-team-reportedly-destroyed-evidence-z/

Angela Corey's team reportedly destroyed evidence in Zimmerman trial

FLORIDA, July 22, 2013 — During George Zimmerman’s trial for second-degree murder, and later manslaughter, computer analyst Richard Connor was called to testify for the defense.

His testimony was eventually stricken from the record by Judge Debra Nelson, but has nonetheless allowed for some startling discoveries. Chief among these is that Trayvon Martin’s cellular phone belonged to an account owned by his mother, Sybrina Fulton.

The Conservative Tree House, a popular blog which has provided detailed coverage of the Martin shooting’s aftermath, uncovered some troubling information related to this.

Citing a video recording from the trial, blogger Sundance declares that “it was not, as previously stated by the (Martin family lawyers), Tracy Martin accessing his own phone records on 3/17/12 which could have revealed “Dee Dee”. Another BIG lie.

“It is also important to note who is making this assertion. The State. They are doing this to cloud the phone ownership, even though their own case is resting on the reliability of the phone records as it relates to Rachel Jeantel.”

He goes on to remark that “the account ownership begs perhaps the bigger question: When Benjamin Crump passed out partial phone records to the media on 3/20/12, they included the name of the account owner as Tracy Martin. How is this possible on the printed detail if the phone was actually under the account of Sybrina Fulton?”

Sundance states that “(i)f you listen closely to the Richard Conner testimony you realize what he has found. The phone deletions were made around all of the attributes which would have affected the considerations in this case about character and reputation.”

This does not include pornographic images located on Martin’s phone. They were hidden so well that a special computer program would be necessary to find them.
Sundance later tells that “Conner is outlining a very specific educated thesis that the phone was scrubbed of damning evidence after death. Meaning somehow a person intentionally removed, “deleted”, the data.

“Obviously, (Mantei) objects when Conner is going there with his explanations – but the implication is crystal clear. If the state of Florida retained custody of that phone – then someone from FDLE, or in association with the chain of evidence, deleted the data.”

This is an extremely serious allegation. What Sundance says next is even more serious, though: The deleted data was “missing in the State’s discovery to the defense until June 4th. And even after that time, the essential summary of data, which was included in a written report, was devoid of mention to this specific data file of deleted evidence.

“What does this mean? It lends to only one Occam’s Razor explanation: The STATE prosecutorial team intentionally deleted, the data, then delivered a partial file with the non-deleted data, then at the last minute before trial delivered the full data set, but omitted the deleted data from the written report summarizing the entire “bin” file.”


Corey and Crump should be prosecuted.

Do ANY liberals disagree?

And if so, on what basis?

Now don't be shy … :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been away for a while so don't know if anyone posted this, but they should have ...

 

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/why_the_zimmerman_prosecutors_should_be_disbarred.html

 

 

Indeed, *someone* should.

 

The prosecutor and assisting lawyers should be disbarred for malicious prosecution.

 

 

On what grounds? Murder is a serious crime (except when your a con), and Zimmy admitted firing the gun (probable cause).

 

 

Several members of the prosecution should be charged with witness tampering and

obstruction of justice.

 

The judge should be severely chastised, if not disbarred.

 

Crump should be disbarred and possibly charged with witness tampering,

obstruction of justice and perjury.

 

Several of the Martins should be charged with perjury and obstruction of

justice.

 

The major networks should be sued by Zimmerman for a hundred million dollars it will cost him in security during his life, the loss of his future, for what he and his family have been and will be put through, and to punish the networks for what they've done so they think twice next time.

 

The police and prosecution should be sued for false imprisonment.

 

Numerous *leaders* on the left should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

 

Holder and the DOJ should be charge with inciting a riot (should one occur).

 

Did I miss anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the prosecutors had no case they knew they had no case the only reason this case ever went to trial is the pressure put on Sanford by the radical n*ggers like al sharpton, naacp, black panthers, etc.

 

there was NEVER a case here. Sanford PD had it right from day 1 which is why they never arrested Zimmerman.

Ahhh, whats the use!!! :rolleyes:

 

Some people are just Stuck On Stupid ... shintao.

I see you admit you are a ignorant fool just making another trolling thread with no fking idea of what you are talking about. God damn you are dumb boy!! Your momma didn't hit you with a ignorant branch, she hit you with the whole fking tree.

 

 

Now answer the question you dumb mother fker!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/07/26/did-abc-news-deceptively-edit-zimmerman-jurors-controversial-interview-an-unlikely-source-is-calling-them-out/#

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.

… snip video …

Here’s his case (emphasis added):

ABC News hasn’t posted a full unedited video or transcript of the interview. The video that has been broadcast—on World News Tonight, Nightline, and Good Morning America—has been cut and spliced in different ways, often so artfully that the transitions appear continuous. So beware what you’re seeing. But the video that’s available already shows, on closer inspection, that Maddy has been manipulated and misrepresented. Here are the key points.

(…)


The phrase “got away with murder” was put in her mouth. Nightline shows ABC interviewer Robin Roberts asking Maddy: “Some people have said, ‘George Zimmerman got away with murder. How do you respond to those people who say that?’ ” Maddy appears to reply promptly and confidently: “George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.” But that’s not quite how the exchange happened. In the unedited video, Roberts’ question is longer, with words that have been trimmed from the Nightline version, and Maddy pauses twice, for several seconds, as she struggles to answer it. “… George Zimmerman … That’s—George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.”

You have to watch her, not just read her words, to pick up her meaning. As she struggles to answer, she looks as though she’s trying to reconcile the sentiment that’s been quoted to her—that Zimmerman “got away with murder”—with her own perspective. So she repeats the quote and adds words of her own, to convey what she thinks: that there’s a justice higher than the law, which Zimmerman will have to face. She thinks he’s morally culpable, not legally guilty.

Anti-Zimmerman media personalities, like Al Sharpton and essentially anyone else at MSNBC, have pointed to the interview as proof that Zimmerman actually got away with murder — even the juror is admitting it! One MSNBC guest even personally attacked the juror, yelling “shame on you!” while reacting to the ABC interview.

Saletan goes on to note a number of other key portions of Juror B29′s much-talked about sit-down with ABC. His points include:

She stands by the verdict: “ABC’s online story about the interview ends with Maddy asking, “Did I go the right way? Did I go the wrong way?” But that’s not the whole quote. In the unedited video, she continues: “I know I went the right way, because by the law and the way it was followed is the way I went. But if I would have used my heart, I probably would have (gone for) a hung jury.”

Saletan also explains that the juror making the distinction that Zimmerman was guilty of “killing” Trayvon Martin, but that’s not the same thing as murder or manslaughter, which requires evidence proving it was malicious and/or intentional.

She thinks the case should have never gone to trial: At one point, Roberts asked the juror “whether the case should have gone to trial,” she replied, “I don’t think so. … I felt like this was a publicity stunt.”

Race wasn’t discussed, and she didn’t focus on it: “When the verdict was announced and she was released from sequestration, she was dismayed to discover the national outrage. ‘I didn’t know how much importance’ was attached to the trial, she says, ‘because I never looked at color. And I still don’t look at color.’”

Saletan goes on to debate the “value of colorblindness,” but correctly concludes that the juror stayed focused on the evidence in the case, not on what race and other factors meant to the general public.

Saletan makes several other interesting points on why he feels “Juror B29 is being framed.” To be clear, the Slate writer does not appear to take a position defending Zimmerman or supporting the anti-Zimmerman position in his analysis.

The full, unedited video or transcript of the Juror B29 interview had yet to be released on Friday afternoon, Slate notes. Here is the most complete version available.

… snip video …


Zimmerman should sue ABC for this … for deliberately inciting death threats against him and his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maddy appears to reply promptly and confidently: “George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.” But that’s not quite how the exchange happened. In the unedited video, Roberts’ question is longer, with words that have been trimmed from the Nightline version, and Maddy pauses twice, for several seconds, as she struggles to answer it. “… George Zimmerman … That’s—George Zimmerman got away with murder. But you can’t get away from God.”

 

Oh yea, like there is a difference. Keep trying. Nobody is getting sued to support that fat azz murderer. That is, nobody is going to succeed in suing anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...