Does John Good’s Testimony Support Zimmerman’s Story? Nope!

George Zimmerman’s story is simply incredulous even with John Good’s testimony.  Many Zimmerman supporters point to Good’s testimony as somehow confirming Zimmerman’s story that Trayvon Martin without provocation, slammed his head on the cement, hit him in the face repeatedly, grabbed for his gun thereby forcing Zimmerman to shoot him in self-defense. Many conservatives who are critical of Lisa Bloom’s book Suspicious Nation, The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It cite John Good’s testimony as a repudiation of her analysis of the case.  Read: my post: American Thinker vs. Lisa Bloom?

Ironically, it is easier to start with what John Good’s testimony did not include.

1.  He did not see the beginning of the fight.
2.  He did not see the end of the fight.
3.  He did not see Martin hit Zimmerman.
4.  He did not see Martin slam Zimmerman’s head on concrete.
5.  He did not see Martin reach for Zimmerman’s gun.
6.  He could not confirm that the fight took place on the concrete.
7.  He could only “assume” that it was Zimmerman screaming for help.

Well his testimony diminished in its breadth and certainty from his initial statements to law enforcement and what he testified to at trial.  In his initial statement to the police he claimed he saw Martin raining blows down on Zimmerman MMA style (ground and pound) and heard Zimmerman crying for help.  Read John Good’s Statements to Law Enforcement. However, when he testified during the trial, he was much more equivocal and “saw” much less than he claimed in his initial statement.  Some conservative conspiracy theorists have accused Trayvon Martin supporters of intimidated him which is why he changed his story.  African-Americans are violent you know!  They might have gone and shot up his house!

At the trial, he testified that he saw a person he later identified as Martin straddling another person he later identified as Zimmerman.   He stated that he saw Martin’s hands moving up and down but saw no punches thrown.  He could not be sure that it was Zimmerman screaming or yelling for help, but his “logical guess” is it was.  Again, the biggest problem is that Zimmerman’s boo boo’s simply do not match what he claims happened to him.

•Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman’s hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon’s left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidenceJune 27, 2012, Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel and George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense

Who was on top for a moment means nothing.  They rolled around. The injuries were not consistent with a ground-and-pound attack.” 10 Reasons Lawyers Say Florida’s Law Enforcement Threw Away George Zimmerman’s CaseAugust 6, 2013, AlterNetSteven Rosenfeld

John Good’s original statement and his trial testimony, are both contradicted by the physical evidence!  If Trayvon Martin was indeed on top of George Zimmerman, he was not punching him MMA, ground and pound or any other style. (1) If Martin was repeatedly hitting Zimmerman he would have had more severe facial injuries and Martin would have had more damage to his knuckles (2) If Martin was punching but missing Zimmerman and hitting the grass or cement, he would have had more damage to his knuckles.  (3) If Zimmerman was parrying the blows, he would have had defense wounds on his hands.  (4) Zimmerman’s jacket should have been covered with mud and grass if Martin was on top of him! See the images below of Zimmerman’s hands, face, head and jacket which were taken 45 minutes after the deadly encounter. DNA Report does NOT support Zimmerman’s claim that Trayvon Martin caused his injuries,  by cc June 09, 2013, Daily Kos

zimmermanhandszimmermanhands1

Zimmermansbackjacket_zpsf6baa9be

zimmpic

One blogger points out much more severe problems with John Good’s testimony. DOJ SHOULD INVESTIGATE JOHN GOODPosted on August 18, 2013  He points out that several witnesses contradicted Good’s testimony and stated that they say Zimmerman on top of Trayvon, most notably, Jeannee Manalo.  Ms. Manalo also claims she felt that it was Trayvon who was screaming.  So, why is John Good’s testimony to be believed over that of the other witnesses?  He changed his testimony from his original statement, why doesn’t that call his credibility into question?

There is one plausible explanation of what transpired that would accommodate Good’s testimony and the physical evidence.  It is posited in this article:  So Why Didn’t Zimmerman Fight Back?Vyan, July 12, 2013, Daily Kos.  I will paraphrase, Zimmerman grabs Martin because he doesn’t want him to get away.  That is why the lanyard on Martin’s hoodie is pulled all the way to one side.   In response, Martin fires a left hook, hits Zimmerman and knocks him down.  Zimmerman pulls Martin done with him.  Martin ends up on top of Zimmerman and thrashes about trying to get free.  That would look like “ground  and pound” to Good, but he doesn’t see any blows and can’t see hands because Zimmerman is holding onto Martin to keep him from escaping.  Martin finally frees himself and begins to stand.  Zimmerman, with Martin’s weight now off of him, pulls his gun and fires.

It’s conjecture, but then every scenario is and it is more plausible than Zimmerman’s story about Martin slamming his head on the cement 12+ times, hitting him in the face 12+ times, reaching for his gun and Zimmerman being able to draw his gun with Martin’s weight on him. That scenario is contradicted by all the forensic evidence and Good’s testimony doesn’t magically rehabilitate all the contradictions in Zimmerman’s account.

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, Neighborhood Watch, profiling, racism | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

If Zimmerman Win’s His Appeal…He Gets Deposed!

Okay, let us pretend that George Zimmerman wins his appeal and the case is sent back to the trial court.  He could not be deposed or forced to testify in the criminal case because of the 5th Amendment. That does not provide a safe harbor in a civil suit.  Truth is an absolute defense to libel or defamation.  So, if the NBC could show that Zimmerman is a racist with a preponderance of the evidence, which is the standard in a civil lawsuit, they would win.  Even if NBC is be found to have acted maliciously, there will be the issue of the amount of damages that should be assessed, i.e., how much damage did they do to Zimmerman’s reputation, snicker. I would say NBC drilled a hole in a boat that was already sitting on the ocean floor. Anyway, NBC attorneys will be given wide latitude regarding the questions they can ask Zimmerman.  One can believe that NBC has much more competent lawyers than the state prosecutors, who appeared to be in the courtroom just because their clown car took a wrong turn.

During the criminal trial, in closing arguments, Mark O’Mara, indicated that one of the reasons Zimmerman found Martin suspicious was because he was a young, African-American male…just like the perpetrators of the burglaries that had been taking place in the neighborhood.  He stated that “unfortunately”, Martin “matched the description” of those burglars.  That “description” was based solely on his race, age and sex.  That sounds like a form of racial profiling to me.  Read: Mark O’Mara Wants to Have An Honest Dialogue on Race? Cough!

George Zimmerman never testified or was cross-examined in the criminal trial.  The state saved him that inconvenience by putting all his self-serving statements to detectives and Sean Hannity into evidence. The defense simply relied on those to tell Zimmerman’s story. Hannity treated Zimmerman with a reverence befitting of a visiting deity or alien.  The Sanford detectives simply allowed Zimmerman to tell his story with minimum intervention.

The one interrogation where Zimmerman was actually challenged about some of the more incredulous aspects of his story was not videotaped.  Here is the transcript Transcript of 3rd Tape of Investigators Serino and Singleton interviewing Zimmerman.  I highlighted some of the incredulities the detectives challenged in this post:   Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him

In that interview, Zimmerman admitted that he did not immediately return to his vehicle for almost 90 seconds, despite the fact that it was only 30 feet away.  He claimed he was still looking for an address, however, he never gave the dispatcher an address.  The detectives suspected that he was looking for Martin with a flashlight.  They also expressed concern that though Zimmerman claimed that Martin covered his mouth and nose, the screaming on the 911 tapes never stopped as if he were being smothered. Please read the post:   Trayvon Martin’s Killer Trolls for More Dollars by Offering to Sell his Signed Autograph, Frederick Leatherman Law Blog

How credible will George Zimmerman appear testifying and being cross-examined as NBC will most likely have his deposition videotaped?  He will be forced to explain why much of his rendition is in conflict with the evidence.  In addition to questions surrounding Zimmerman’s decision to leave his truck and not immediately return to it, he could be questioned on other aspects of the tragedy. Ironically, this lawsuit could be a proxy for what should have happened in the criminal trial.

Zimmerman claims Martin ambushed him, slammed his head on the concrete 12+ times, saw his gun, reached for it, and only then did he shoot him.  However, the evidence suggests that if Martin struck Zimmerman, it did so once because he saw Zimmerman as a threat, understandably. Remember that Martin had only one abrasion on his finger and Zimmerman had no defense wounds.  Zimmerman’s injuries to his face and back of his head simply do not reflect what he claims Martin did to him.

•Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman’s hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon’s left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidenceJune 27, 2012, Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Moreover, the DNA evidence does not support Zimmerman’s narrative and actually contradicts it.  Additionally, it would have been very difficult for Martin to see Zimmerman’s gun in the dark and the rain.  Zimmerman claims he shot Martin as he was slamming his head on the sidewalk yet Martin’s body was found several feet from the sidewalk.  I have highlighted many of what is incredulous in Zimmerman’s story in many of my posts and why I, and others, do not believe he shot Martin in self-defense. Read my postGeorge Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense and Andrew Branca Has Never Seen a Self-Defense Claim He Did Not Embrace?

Zimmerman’s deposition, should it occur, will force Zimmerman to do more than simply tell his story.  He will also have to defend it and I believe it is indefensible.

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, racism, Self Defense | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Mark O’Mara Wants to Have An Honest Dialogue on Race? Cough!

Closing Arguments Held In Zimmerman Trial

You remember Mark O’Mara, the attorney whose courtroom theatrics and “dog-whistling” skills convinced a 6 member jury that George Zimmerman was not guilty of murder or manslaughter for killing Trayvon Martin.  Yes, the character that gave us the notion that Trayvon Martin was armed because he managed to weaponize the sidewalk. Young black males are like MacGyver that way, they can apparently arm themselves with any commonplace item in their current environment.

Remember his dramatic 4 minutes of silence representing the time Martin had to reach his “home.” Of course, that’s about 2 minutes that Zimmerman had to return to his vehicle, like he told the dispatcher he would and Neighborhood Watch regulations stated he should never have left. What was he doing during that 2 minutes? Looking for a street sign? No, he was looking for Martin, what else would he be doing? Enjoying the rain? Read my post Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him  Why would Martin just lead a menacing stranger to his door? Remember that Zimmerman wouldn’t give the dispatcher his address because he was afraid Martin would overhear it? Of course, it was Trayvon Martin on trial, not George Zimmerman and Martin could not testify!  Zimmerman had seen to that.

strandyourground

Well, Mr. O”Mara thinks “It’s time for an honest discussion about race!” First though, I guess he would like to convince us that Zimmerman’s killing of Martin was so clearly self-defense that he should never have even been charged and that race had nothing to do with the trial or acquittal.  With a much wider audience than 6 naive and confused women in a courtroom that’s going to be problematic.

Yes, he stated that if Zimmerman had been black he would never have been charged.  Attorney Mark O’Mara: ‘If George Zimmerman Was Black, He Would Never Have Been Charged With A Crime’ Mediate, Evan McMurry, July 13th, 2013. I believe if Zimmerman was black, he never would have shot Martin but that’s a story for another post.

Let’s look at one of Mr. O’Mara’s contributions to the subject of race.  O’Mara: Is being young, black in Florida a danger? By Mark O’Mara, special to HLN updated February 26, 2014

I know it may seem disingenuous for me to try to answer this question, as I successfully defended George Zimmerman in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, so let me say this: No one knows the details of the Zimmerman case better than I do, and I’m absolutely convinced the shooting was justifiable self-defense and there were no racial motives at play.

“[I]t may seen disingenuous” is the only undisputed truth in that paragraph.  As long as this is his position, how can he be perceived as genuine when talking about race? The injustice of the “Trayvon Martin verdict” is as emblematic of the problem with race in this century as Emmett Till’s saga was in the last. Trayvon Martin’s Saga Is Not Dead!  I fail to see how anyone who believes in the complete and utter accuracy of that verdict can make enlightening statements on race.

As the attorney who represented George Zimmerman, he is bound by the Rules of Professional Conduct, and, even if he felt differently, he must insist that George Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin was justifiable self-defense.  Is that why he prefaces his statement with the condescending phrase “No one knows the details of the Zimmerman case better than I do…?” He knows this how?  He can read minds?  Is his point, I’m better than you, I know more than you, so defer to my expertise and dismiss any misgivings you have?  Is he trying to tell us that George Zimmerman is not the droid we are looking for?

ohara

Well I, and many others, are confident that George Zimmerman did not kill Trayvon Martin in self-defense and I will not defer to Mr. O’Mara’s conjured superiority or Jedi mind tricks. There are many published articles, posted blogs, and a book written by persons who feel Zimmerman got away with murder, including many of my posts:  George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense and Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It, by Lisa Bloom. Of course, the law in Florida made it that much easier, which is why it is a dangerous place for young blacks, notwithstanding Mr. O’Mara’s commentary.

If Mr. O’Mara’s desire to make a honest contribution to the discussion of race in America is hampered by his continuing obligations as Zimmerman’s legal advocate, his conviction that “there were no racial motives at play” makes a mockery of that desire!  Since he is incapable of admitting the huge role race played in the case, he is certainly not suited to participate in a meaningful discussion of the injustices of the justice system as it relates to African-Americans.

He himself injected race into the trial!  Remember what he said during his closing argument?  He admitted his client may have cursed Trayvon Martin and found him suspicious because “… he did match the description, unfortunately.”  Defense Closing Argument, 42:07 to 42:26. What was the description?  A young African-American male! That’s who had been burglarizing the neighborhood that Zimmerman decided he had been anointed to defend. Race, age and sex is not a description! It is a statistic! So, all young, black males look identical?  That is the problem!  To many non-African-Americans, they do or might as well! Thus, when one engages in criminal behavior, it as if they all did, and they are all tainted accordingly. 

Countless young black males have been wrongfully killed, arrested, convicted, brutalized, harassed, demonized, suspected, because they matched the “description”! Can you imagine a young white male matching the “description?”  Of course not, for at least two reasons (1) you’d need more than that to suspect them of burglary or any criminal act, even if young white males had been burglarizing or even shooting up the neighborhood  (2) the “description” only fits young black males, that is the essence of the “description.”

That is the biggest problems with race in America, the fact that young black males are considered suspicious simply because of their race. That notion has had deadly consequences!  That is one of the reasons Trayvon Martin is dead…unfortunately.  Read also What the Zimmerman Trial Was About, by , July 12, 2012, New Yorker,  George Zimmerman trial all about raceRoger Simon|Politico 7/16/13 4:59 AM EDT and IMPLICIT RACIAL BIAS, THE ZIMMERMAN TRIAL, THE VERDICT, Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity

Mr. O’Mara called Olivia Bertalan as a witness in George Zimmerman’s defense.  Why? Did she know Trayvon Martin?  Nope!  Had she seen him skulking around the neighborhood? Maybe…she wouldn’t know. She testified that her home was burglarized while she hid upstairs, obviously terrified.  Did she offer a description of the perpetrators? Yes, she did! They were young black males … That’s it.  Nothing about height, weight, shape of nose, mouth, teeth, eyes, ears, face, or length of hair, or presence of tattoos or scars. That is the “description” every young black male matches, including Trayvon Martin…unfortunately. So George Zimmerman’s motivation for finding him suspicious was perfectly reasonable, even responsible. Likewise, it was perfectly reasonable for Mr. O’Mara to have the audacity to suggest to Martin’s mother that her son had contributed to his own death. After all, he matched the “description”…unfortunately.  Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It, by Lisa Bloom

IMG_1412.JPG

Now, Mr. O’Mara wants to have an honest dialogue about race in America? Well he is part of the problem and until he can recognize that, he cannot be part of the solution…unfortunately.

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, Gun control, Neighborhood Watch, profiling, racism, Self Defense, Stalking, Stand Your Groud, Trayvon Martin, Vigillante | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments

Trayvon Martin’s Saga Is Not Dead!

20140717-235625-86185124.jpg

It is always entertaining to read right wing blogs and how they skew, ignore or simply manufacture facts.  This post is a classic example. Why O.J.’s Saga Lives and Trayvon’s Died, American Thinker, June 13, 2014, By Jack Cashill.

It starts with the unequivocal announcement that O.J. Simpson killed his ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ron Goldman.  Of course, the criminal jury found O.J. Simpson not guilty! Sooo, I guess criminal jury verdicts mean nothing since they can be so summarily dismissed.  It is good to know, that according to Mr. Cashill, the not guilty verdict in the George Zimmerman case does not interfere with the reasonable conclusion that he was guilty.  Glad that that is cleared up.

Mr. Cashill ultimately concludes, as the title of the post indicates, that Trayvon Martin’s saga is dead. One of the criteria he considers is that there are only two books he is aware of on the Trayvon Martin tragedy, and no “long form” essays in any major magazine.  There are actually more books than that, but no need to quibble over that oversight. He cites his own book and Lisa Bloom’s seminal Suspicion Nation: The Inside Story of the Trayvon Martin Injustice and Why We Continue to Repeat It which he claims didn’t get “any attention.”  He doesn’t cite statistics such as how many copies of the book were sold nor does he explain how he concluded it was “painfully orthodox” and how that characterization impacts the book’s message – that George Zimmerman was guilty!

Here is a list of articles written on the tragedy right after the verdict.  Roundup of commentary on the George Zimmerman ‘not guilty’ verdict, Anika Myers Palm, July 14, 2013  I would think that the New YorkerThe NationThe Atlantic, Time qualify as major “magazines” and they each featured long, in-depth essays.  There is also another long form essay posted by the Reuters news service.

Mr. Cashill believes that the African-American community is so naive and pliable as to be incapable of forming their own opinions and are totally dependent on the “sinister media.” However, the author, and other right wing pundits can think for themselves. Consequently, their insights are superior to blacks who cannot break free from the evil maw of the “sinister media.”  The media as “sinister”, “octopusic” bogey man” is a prevailing right wing theme and is reprised in the Zimmerman case.

A classic example can be found here:  George Zimmerman Should Be Rich By Now, The Conservative Pundit.net, by Carl Jackson  Mr. Jackson is “a Christian Conservative American That Happens To Be Black” @carljacksonshow  I will not bother with some of his more outrageous claims, i.e., that Democrats used the Trayvon Martin tragedy to further their political interests.  He provides no source for this silly allegation, so fittingly, I presume it’s his.  Mr. Jackson claims listening to the “defamatory” NBC broadcasts stirred him into a frenzy since they implied that Zimmerman found Martin suspicious solely because he was black.  Mr. Jackson even had flashbacks to the Rodney King beating inspired Los Angeles riots.  

Sometime after though, he managed to recover from the media imposed mass hypnosis which still shrouds the view of the entire black community.  This was accomplished because, though he is black, he is also a conservative, and thereby, became privy to the real facts of the Zimmerman case.  Those would be the ones that elude the rest of the African-American and liberal population who are, presumably, tethered to the sinister media’s massive teat, and cannot form their own independent opinions.

Ironically enough, Zimmerman did find Martin suspicious because he was black and simply waited for the dispatcher to ask what race he was. Naturally, Zimmerman claims he’s not a racist.  He even claims to have mentored black youth yet he didn’t bother to simply talk to Martin or identify himself.  I guess those black youth he mentored must have really scared him!

Why he found Martin suspicious would not have mattered had he let the police decide if he was or not.  It turns out Martin, despite being black and wearing a hoodie, was not engaged in any criminal activity, including burglary.  The tragedy happened because Zimmerman was so sure that (1) Martin was a burglar and (2) he might “escape”, that he left his vehicle, followed him (“stalked”) and scared him.  Even Detective Serino pointed this out in his report.  Yeah, the one who testified that he believed that Zimmerman was telling the truth, but that’s a story for another post.  Why wouldn’t a teen be concerned about a stranger following him on a dark night?  Please read my post: Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him and Trayvon Martin’s Killer Trolls for More Dollars by Offering to Sell his Signed Autograph, Frederick Leatherman Law Blog and George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting, Chris Francescani, April 25, 2012, Reuters

Now Zimmerman denies he chased Martin, and contends he only followed him though Neighborhood Watch regulations strictly forbid such behavior.  He also states that Martin viciously attacked him, for no reason, as he returned to his vehicle (over two minutes after the dispatcher advised him to stop “following” Martin.)  He claims Martin sucker punched him, knocked him down, then slammed his head on the concrete over 12 times.  Then somehow saw his concealed gun in the dark and rain and grabbed it. Only, then did he shot him.

Mr. Cashill not only concludes that the Trayvon Martin’s saga is dead but tells us why….its because George Zimmerman is innocent:

“After the Zimmerman verdict, however, writers and producers have shied from exploring the subject in depth because the facts all lead in the opposite direction, the direction that the media rejected from the beginning, that of Zimmerman’s innocence.”

That’s an absolutely ludicrous statement, not only because it complete ignores Ms. Bloom’s book that “explored the subject in depth”, but because even a cursory examination of the facts plainly leads to Zimmerman’s guilt, as Ms. Bloom concluded.

That’s the problem! That’s precisely why the African-American, civil rights community and anyone who is concerned about fairness is angry at Zimmerman’s acquittal.  They have seen this situation happen before, many times. A white or white Hispanic or Hispanic man kills a black man or teen and contrives a perfectly ridiculous story and a jury of his peers i.e., other non-African-American people, gobble it up regardless of its absurdity! That’s the problem!  A white man’s life and word are worth much more than a black man’s (or boys!).  For example, read Zimmerman acquittal reignites passions over race, justice and the South July 15, 2013

20140717-234838-85718444.jpg

What physical evidence is there to support Zimmerman’s story?  None.  The only physical evidence contradicts his story!

•Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman’s hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon’s left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidence6:22 p.m. EST, June 27, 2012By Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

I, other bloggers and journalists have gone over this extensively in numerous previous posts and articles, most of my posts deal with it, most notably George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense.  I’ll still offer an overview.

Though, Zimmerman claimed he was punched in the face repeatedly, all he had was a bloody nose (not a broken nose) and some slight swelling. He also had no defensive wounds on his hands. Though he claimed his head was slammed on the concrete over 12 times, he had only 2 slight scrapes on the back of his head, no loss of consciousness or fractured skull. He was perfectly lucid after this “ordeal” and didn’t even require a trip to a doctor. He claimed he only shot Martin because as he was pounding his head on the sidewalk Martin somehow saw and grabbed for his gun (though it was dark and his gun was “concealed”). However, Martin’s body was found several feet from the sidewalk.

The DNA evidence does not support Zimmerman’s story.  With all that punching Martin supposedly did, he had none of Zimmerman’s DNA or blood on his hand or under his fingernails and had only a slight abrasion on one knuckle.  None of Martin’s fingerprints or DNA are on the gun.  Of the 47 stains on Zimmerman’s jacket only two could possibly be attributed to Martin.  Remember Zimmerman claimed Martin fell on top of him after he was shot and he had to push him off.  Read:  George Zimmerman’s DNA problem, Jonathan Capehart, Washington Post,09/30/2012, FLE DNA Report

The biggest problem with the faulty comparison of the O.J. Simpson and Trayvon Martin cases is obvious; how can you compare the aftermath of a case which is 20 years old to one that is only 1 year old?  Absurd, huh?   However, there is a striking similarity between the two, that the author ignores.

The O.J. Simpson jury was composed of a majority of “minority” inhabitants of the inner city, who very suspicious of law enforcement due to many negative interactions with them. When the prosecution made tactical errors (1) requesting that Simpson try on the gloves which did not fit (2) having Det. Furman testify that he had never used the “N” word only to have it shown he had used it many times. The jury seized upon these missteps to conclude (as they were predisposed to believe) that law enforcement planted all the physical evidence of O.J. Simpsons’ guilt. They ignored the substantial circumstantial evidence suggesting Simpson’s guilt and decided he was not guilty, not that he was innocent,  just that the prosecution had not met their burden of proving that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  

The George Zimmerman jury was half the size but was dominated by 5 white, female inhabitants of suburban enclaves, who had no experience with black persons and considered them suspicious.  Remember the foreperson referring to Trayvon Martin as a “boy of color”.  To her that was his most distinguishing characteristic!  She also wrongfully believed that there had been riots, i.e., blacks are violent! The case was made more difficult by the decision to charge Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder instead of manslaughter. The prosecution was completely inept, and made at least three glaring tactical mistakes (1) putting Zimmerman’s self-serving statements to police and Sean Hannity in evidence thus allowing him to escape cross-examination (2) allowing the defense to use race, i.e. since prior burglars and home invaders were black and Martin was black, it was perfectly reasonable for Zimmerman to suspect him and (3) allowing Det. Serino to get away with “vouching” for Zimmerman’s credibility when he had been very skeptical of his story and had wanted to charge him, first with 2nd Degree Murder and then with Manslaughter.

The jury thus sympathized with George Zimmerman’s concern for his neighborhood and believed the wild notion that a black teenager simply returning from a run to the store, would suddenly and viciously attack and try to murder a stranger who outweighed him by 50 lbs.  Ironically, one of the bedrocks of American and British jurisprudence is that life is valued over property! The jury ignored the contradicting DNA evidence, Zimmerman’s total lack of injuries matching his story, and the testimony of Rachel Jeantel, mainly because she was black.  All this showed that Zimmerman was lying and was never in fear of his life.  You don’t get to kill someone just because they hit you once especially when you provoked the conflict! The George Zimmerman Trial For Dummies, Dr. Kristine Randall, July 10, 2013. They jury found Zimmerman not guilty, which again is not innocent!  Also, please read my post: So Zimmerman Was Found Not Guilty, Juries Can Be “Wrong!” and The prosecution concealed police corruption in Zimmerman trial, Frederick Leatherman Law Blog, Saturday, July 20, 2013

My conclusion is, the ethnic makeup and collected experiences of each of these juries was more instrumental in their not guilty verdicts, than the actual evidence presented.  It’s not shocking!  It’s why there is voir dire and jury consultants are highly paid!

George Zimmerman, was found not guilty, just like O.J. Simpson.  Nobody believes that O.J. Simpson is innocent, yet conservative pundits keep saying that Zimmerman is innocent despite all the evidence that strongly suggests he is not.  They parrot his incredulous story word for word as if it were gospel…as if they were there!  They take great pains to rationalize the many holes in it.

Conservatives and George Zimmerman worshipers can blame the media, but it is they who are attempting to mislead, not the “media”, well at least not the “sinister media”, aka the liberal media.  Black people are not stupid! They saw the trial and the evidence and can easily conclude Zimmerman was guilty notwithstanding the media, conservative or liberal. The jury finding of not guilty?  Well, as Mr. Cashill and American Thinker point out, juries can be wrong!

Trayvon Martin saga is no more dead than Emmett Till’s, which still resonates.

20140717-235656-86216624.jpg

Posted in George Zimmerman, profiling, racism, Self Defense, Stalking, Stand Your Groud, Trayvon Martin | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

Racist Bigots and Thugs Are Clairvoyant

Demonstrators-supporting-George-Zimmerman-in-Houston-TX-KHOU-TV

Xena’s post illustrates the eagerness of George Zimmerman worshipers to put Trayvon Martin on trial and assume that he somehow caused his death regardless of what George Zimmerman did!  Read my posts: The Framing of Trayvon Martin and You Might Be a George Zimmerman Worshiper If?

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

The following are comments posted on the internet by George Zimmerman (GZ) fans:

“It is shameful what we are doing to this man. He took out a thug before the thug could kill him, AND prevented all the future crimes (rape, assault, drug dealing) that Trayvon would have done in his life. George deserves our thanks for helping to keep us safe!”

“The only good black is a dead black just like trayvon.”

“He was black, wearing a hoodie, and his name was Trayvon. HE WAS A FELONY WAITING TO HAPPEN.” 

“The stupid baboon chimped out, circled back, stalked and followed Zimmerman as he was walking back to his vehicle, then combatively and belligerently confronting Zimmerman, then brutally attacking Zimmerman. Furthermore, Zimmerman demonstrated restraint by only firing once and only after being viciously and brutally attacked by the chimped out wild uncivilized monkey. “

These types of comments are common among…

View original post 775 more words

Posted in George Zimmerman, Neighborhood Watch, profiling, racism, Self Defense, Trayvon Martin | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Andrew Branca Says George Zimmerman Complied With NW Instructions?

20140702-015210-6730861.jpg

“Yep, according to Judge Nelson, Zimmerman became a limited public figure unable to pursue a clear case of libel because, while doing nothing whatever unlawful himself, and conducting himself precisely as instructed by the police who managed the Neighborhood Watch Program in which he participated, became the victim of a vicious, life-threatening attack by Trayvon Martin.”  (Emphasis Added)

The above statement was  made by Mr. Branca in  Zimmerman Libel Suit Against NBC Thrown Out, Posted by , Monday, June 30, 2014 at 12:30 p.m.  Legal Insurrection

It is at best puzzling, at worst, completely dumbfounding. Here is the Sanford Neighborhood Watch Program Handbook which was entered into evidence in the Zimmerman criminal trial.  On page 15 (pages are not numbered), paragraph 10 states:

10.  Remember always that your responsibility is to report crime. Do not take any risks to prevent a crime or try to make an arrest. The responsibility for apprehending criminals belongs to the police department. (Emphasis in original).

Zimmerman left his vehicle and pursued Martin in direct contravention of the clear, unambiguous and emphasized Sanford Neighborhood Watch instructions.  So how was he “conducting himself precisely as instructed by the police”?   Read also Trayvon Martin would be alive if Neighborhood Watch rules followed, March 14, 2012, Beth Kassab, Orlando Sentinel  Is this a Twilight Zone episode or something?

nabewatch

Part of a Powerpoint lesson on neighborhood watch programs by the Sanford, Fla., police department: (City of Sanford)

Now Zimmerman claimed he only left his vehicle to find a street sign since he couldn’t remember what street he was on….in a development that only had three streets.   Read the transcript of the interview between Sanford investigators and Zimmerman contained in my post:  Zimmerman Killed Martin Because All Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him  Please also read:  Trayvon Martin’s Killer Trolls for More Dollars by Offering to Sell his Signed Autograph, Frederick Leatherman’s Law Blog

It is clear Zimmerman left his vehicle to chase Martin.  When the dispatcher advised Zimmerman, who felt the dispatcher’s advise was an order, not to follow Martin, he continued to do so and made no effort to return to his vehicle.  How exactly is that complying with the instructions of Neighborhood Watch or the police?  I, for one, am baffled.

In the same paragraph above, Mr. Branca states that Zimmerman “became the victim of a vicious, life-threatening attack by Trayvon Martin”?  (Excuse me whilst I try suppress a cough!) I ventured into just how tenuous the evidence supporting that assertion is already in my posts. Andrew Branca Has Never Seen a Self-Defense Claim He Didn’t Embrace?  and George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense  However, I will expound further.

•Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman’s hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon’s left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidence, June 27, 2012, Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Zimmerman’s minor injuries do not even being to match a “life-threatening attack” As I stated above, Zimmerman pursued Martin in violation of Neighborhood Watch regulations and never identified himself though he had several opportunities to do so.  If Martin hit Zimmerman, he most likely only did it once.  Martin had a single abrasion on his knuckle and Zimmerman had a bloody nose and slight abrasions on the back of his head when he probably fell against a sign, the ground or even the sidewalk.

If Martin did hit him, he arguably felt threatened or was possibly verbally or physically provoked, i.e. Zimmerman grabbed his clothing and knocked his ear piece out as Rachel Jentell testified.   Most conveniently, many Zimmerman supporters reject this part of her testimony but choose to believe the part where she said she urged Martin to run and he was reluctant to do so.

Why didn’t Martin run home?  Zimmerman supporters have many nefarious theories regarding that question.  Read: Racist Bigots and Thugs Are Clairvoyant  However, there is a more innocent and probable reason.  Remember Zimmerman refused to give his address to the dispatcher because he was concerned that Martin would hear it and know where he lived? Well Martin could have had the same concern and chose to hide instead of leading a stranger to his home where he was alone with only a younger relative.

As I have stated before in some of my posts on this subject, why wouldn’t a 17 year old see a strange man who was stalking him as a threat?  The Sanford investigators who interviewed Zimmerman pointed out the same thing!  According to Zimmerman’s statement, Martin asked him why he was following him.   Zimmerman did not identify himself and instead reached into his pocket for his phone.  Why wouldn’t Martin hit Zimmerman at that point?  How could Martin know that Zimmerman was reaching for a phone if that is even true.

Now, as Mr. Branca and the law will tell you, you can’t just shot some one in “self-defense” because they punched you in the nose and knocked you down.  Read  Andrew Branca’s Embarrasing Wager Contradicts His Book where there is a link to a Stand Your Ground “debate” at UC Berkeley, where Mr. Branca sets out the criteria for a successful legal self defense defense.

Now its true that you don’t have to have injuries to claim self defense.  That point is frequently spouted by Zimmerman supporters.   If you are threatened with great bodily injury or death you could use deadly force.   However, Zimmerman didn’t tell Sanford investigators or Sean Hannity that he shot Martin because he punched him once and knocked him down or that he threatened to slam his head on the concrete.  He told them that Martin slammed his head on the concrete at least 12+ times.  Yet he only had minor, insignificant injuries which needed no doctor visit and he returned to work the next day? Well that’s just ridiculous!  Alice in Wonderland material!

More significantly, Zimmerman stated that Martin was straddling him and slamming his head on the concrete (I guess for the 12th or more times) just before he shot him.  He stated that Martin fell forward on top of him.  He didn’t say that Martin jumped up and did a dance or rolled around first!  Well Martin’s head is some distance from the sidewalk.  This is clear in pictures which can be seen in my post: George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense  If what Zimmerman claims was true, Martin’s head would be right next to the sidewalk!   Compound that with the absurdity of Zimmerman supposedly getting his head slammed on concrete 12+ times and only having a few scratches and the reasonable conclusion is Zimmerman is not being truthful, i.e. misrepresenting the facts, otherwise known as lying!

We don’t even have to get into the improbability of Martin somehow seeing Zimmerman’s gun in the dark where it was behind his hip and reaching for it.  We don’t have to get into the fact that though Martin supposedly “viciously attacked” Zimmerman and fell on top of him when he was shot, the DNA evidence does not support Zimmerman’s statements.  George Zimmerman’s DNA problem, Washington Post, 09/30/2012, FLE DNA Report  This post proposes is a more probable scenario  So why didn’t Zimmerman Fight Back?, Vyan, Fri. Jul. 12, 2013, Daily Kos

There is amble evidence that Zimmerman was not “conducting himself precisely as instructed by the police who managed the Neighborhood Watch Program” and there is no evidence, none, besides Zimmerman’s statements, that he was the victim of a “vicious, life-threatening attack by Trayvon Martin”.

Posted in George Zimmerman, Neighborhood Watch, racism, Self Defense, Stalking, Stand Your Groud, Trayvon Martin, Vigillante | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Andrew Branca Has Never Seen a Self-Defense Claim He Did Not Embrace?

images

So pro-Zimmerman blogs and websites are excoriating Judge Nelson’s granting of summary judgment against Zimmerman in his defamation lawsuit against NBC.  One however, stands out: Zimmerman Libel Suit Against NBC Thrown Out, Posted by Andrew Branca, Monday, June 30, 2014, Legal Insurrection

Mr. Branca opines “In my nearly 20 years of focusing my legal practice exclusively on self-defense cases, Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin is by far the cleanest, legally speaking, self-defense shooting I have ever seen brought to trial.”

That is an astonishing statement considering just how feeble George Zimmerman’s self-defense claim was.  What kinds of self-defense cases Mr. Branca has experienced if this is the cleanest one he’s seen? Let’s look at the evidence that supports Zimmerman’s version of what happened!

1.  George Zimmerman’s un-cross-examined statements to Sanford police detectives & his friendly interview with Sean Hannity.

2.  John Good’s testimony that he believes he saw Trayvon Martin on top of George Zimmerman with his hands moving up and down.

3.  Zimmerman had some abrasions on the back of his head and a bloody nose.

4. Dr. Vincent Di Maio’s expert opinion that George Zimmerman injuries were caused by concrete and that Martin was leaning over him when he shot him. 

Did I leave something out?  This is the “cleanest, legally speaking, self-defense shooting?” Mr. Branca has ever seen?

There is a great deal of evidence that contradicts Zimmerman’s self-defense claim, much more than supports it!  My post George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense lays out much of this.  I don’t want to be redundant so, I’ll attempt to highlight some of the more blatant absurdities contained in Zimmerman’s “story.”

1.  Zimmerman claims that Martin viciously attacked him punching in the face and slamming his head on the concrete over 12+ times.

•Zimmerman had injuries but not ones that matched the severity of the attack he described, according to Serino. If Trayvon had been banging Zimmerman’s head on the sidewalk, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer should have had skull fractures, not just cuts, Serino said.

•There were no defensive wounds on Zimmerman’s hands and just one small scrape on a finger of Trayvon’s left hand, Serino said — little evidence of life-and-death struggle.

Zimmerman changes details, makes claims inconsistent with other evidenceJune 27, 2012, By ene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

Zimmerman’s injuries did not even begin to reflect what he claimed happened to him, not even close!  His own attorney in closing argument admitted that he had exaggerated  what had happened.  Another word for exaggerated is “lied.” So Zimmerman’s credibility is so low it might scare earthworms who would wonder what that thing is moving among them! That is a problem when his story is the “best” evidence of what happened!

2.  Zimmerman claimed that he only shot Martin because he was pounding his head on the cement and saw and was reaching for his gun, thus he feared death or great bodily injury.  He said once he shot Martin, Martin fell forward on top of him.

As can plainly be seen in photos of Martin’s body, his head’s final resting place was several feet from the concrete.  That contradicts Zimmerman’s claim that he shot Martin as he was pounding his head on the cement.  Martin was killed instantly and Zimmerman claims he fell forward on top of him.   So, Martin’s head would have been right next to the sidewalk. Well it’s not even close.

It is very hard to imagine how Martin could have seen Zimmerman’s gun in the dark and rain, when it was behind his hip.  Remember neither Martin’s fingerprints nor DNA were found on the gun and only two stains on Zimmerman’s jacket could be attributed to Martin.

3.  Zimmerman claimed that he only left his vehicle to get an address to give an address to the dispatcher. 

Zimmerman left his vehicle as soon as Martin ran, pursued him and did not return to his car for about 2 minutes.  He arguably initiated the confrontation.  This action of course completely violated the principles laid out in Mr. Branca’s book Law of Self-Defense however that means nothing to him.  Read my post:  Andrew Branca’s Embarrassing Wager Contradicts His Book. Moreover it completely violated the Neighborhood Watch regulations against being armed and chasing suspects.  One would think that would cause some “legal” considerations especially since Zimmerman did not identify himself and legally speaking could be seen as the aggressor. Read: Zimmerman Killed Martin Because All Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him  Cops: Zimmerman had 2 chances to talk to Trayvon, June 27, 2012,Rene Stutzman and Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

4.  Rachel Jeantel testified that Martin was frighted about Zimmerman and Zimmerman initiated the confrontation. 

Now, you don’t have to believe her testimony but it surely called Zimmerman’s self-defense claim into question and also Mr. Branca’s superlative that it was the best he’d ever seen!

5.  Dr. Vincent Di Maio’s is an expert witness who simply offered an expert opinion which could be rejected or accepted.  Keep in mind that his expert opinions have been rejected in two high-profile cases.   Read: Is Dr. Vincent Di Maio’s Expert Opinion Fact? No!

6.  John Good said that he saw Trayvon Martin on top of George Zimmerman.

Well his testimony diminished in its breadth from his initial statements to law enforcement and what he testified to at trial.  In his initial statement to the police he claimed he saw Martin raining blows down on Zimmerman MMA style and heard Zimmerman crying for help.  Read John Good’s Statements to Law Enforcement.  However, during the trial he said he saw Martin’s hands moving up and down but could not be sure he was striking Zimmerman.  He also could not say that they were on the concrete.  He did not see the beginning or the end of the fight.  He could not say for certain that it was Zimmerman screaming  for help.  If Martin had been raining blows down on Zimmerman, Zimmerman would have much more serious injuries!  Remember, Martin had one abrasion on his knuckle and Zimmerman had no defensive or other wounds on his hands.  Additionally, other witnesses claimed they saw Zimmerman on top of Martin.  Read my post: Does John Good’s Testimony Support Zimmerman’s Story? Nope!

The point here is not to relitigate the Zimmerman case.  It is to appraise Mr. Branca’s claim that Zimmerman’s self-defense case was “by far the cleanest, legally speaking, self-defense shooting [he] [has] ever seen brought to trial.” That is a ludicrous.  He must not have seen many self-defense claims or he has a gift for hyperbole!   His total embrace of Zimmerman’s self-defense claim is breathtaking in its certitude when one considers just how tenuous that claim was!

20140701-000124-84555.jpg

No, you do not need to have injuries to make a SD claim but George Zimmerman volunteered that his head was viciously slammed on the concrete 12+ times.  Does it not matter that there is no evidence for this but Mr. Zimmerman’s story?  That’s good enough for Mr. Branca who is not high on critical or dispassionate thinking!

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, Stalking, Stand your Ground | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

George Zimmerman Files Financial Affidavit in Divorce Case

George Zimmerman! The champion of the right! Don’t they have a problem with poor people? Normally!

We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident

According to a financial affidavit that George Zimmerman filed with the court in his divorce case, his legal defense fund has a current balance of $300, and he has $650 in his bank account.

George has no job, no health insurance, spends $350 a month for medical care, $200 a month on mental health counseling, and $100 on vacations.

George’s girlfriend Samantha, picked a winner.

Read the full story on the Orlando Sentinel.

View original post

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Why NBC Shouldn’t Be Liable to Zimmerman for Millions or Anything

20140629-231358-83638595.jpg

The complaint against NBC completely ignores the fact that George Zimmerman killed the unarmed Trayvon Martin not because he might be a racist, but because he arrogantly and recklessly ignored Neighborhood Watch regulations and the advisory from the police dispatcher.  He chased and confronted Martin, regardless of what he claims. Read my post: Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him which includes the transcript of the investigators playing Zimmerman’s “911 call”, Transcript of 3rd Tape of Investigators Serino and Singleton interviewing Zimmerman

Additionally, Zimmerman’s claim that he shot Martin in self-defense is flimsy at best, and quite unbelievable at worst.  Read my postGeorge Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense

So many in the public believe, with good reasons, not related to the NBC broadcasts, thought that Zimmerman chased and provoked an innocent, unarmed minor into a fight, and then falsely claimed that he was in fear of his life to excuse shooting him.  This was completely unnecessary and had the police been allowed to handle it, Martin would still be alive.

Thus, if Zimmerman is one of the most hated men in America, one could easily argue it is the result of his vigilantism and not NBC’s broadcast allegedly portraying him as a racist! Zimmerman’s own actions are what “detracted from [his] respect and effectiveness as a leader in the community.”

Wantonly disregarding the very regulations that govern his position as a neighborhood watch person and as a result shooting an innocent visitor obviously would imperil anyone’s view of his leadership abilities!  He could shoot your kid next, if he happened not to know him.  He is irresponsible!  Someone who ignores regulations is not someone who you would entrust with authority.  In fact, his actions resulted in the HOA’s insurers paying out a multi-million dollar settlement to Martin’s parents which potentially raised everyone’s HOA fees.

Those who believe that Zimmerman lawsuit against NBC is a slam dunk appear to assume several things, or more importantly discount others!  Even if Zimmerman can prove that NBC defamed him:

1.  Was NBC’s broadcasts the only reason why Zimmerman is thought of as a racist?
2.  If Zimmerman so reviled only because he is believed to be a racist?
3.  Is NBC’s broadcasts the only reason why Zimmerman is reviled?  

The answer to all these questions is no!  The cause of the tragedy was not George Zimmerman’s being a racist or even racially profiling Trayvon Martin, it was his irresponsible and reckless vigilantism.  Once he decided that Martin was a criminal, even if his suspicious were the result of him racially profiling Martin, nothing would have happened if he had let the police handle the situation which NW regulations clearly dictated he do!

Furthermore, even if George Zimmerman is not a racist per se, it is clear that once he realized Martin was a young AA male, it strengthened his conviction that he was a burglar, because the other burglaries had been committed by young male AAs.  That is one of the reasons he followed him to ensure that he didn’t “escape.”

So again, the reasons George Zimmerman is so reviled are not as simple as NBC allegedly maliciously manipulating the transcript of his “911” call to portray him as a racist. NBC’s attorneys has made a compelling case that Zimmerman was a public figure for purposes of the lawsuit.  Zimmerman and his surrogates made every effort to mold public opinion in his favor and that effort continues now.

So, even if Zimmerman can overcome the heavy burden of proving that what NBC did was willful and malicious, much of the opprobrium heaped upon him, i.e., his damages, can be attributable to his own actions!  So what portion of the Zimmerman’s “damage to his reputation” are attributable to NBC’s broadcasts instead of his own actions?

I think its absurd to believe that Zimmerman’s reputation is in taters simply because of a series of four or five NBC broadcasts when the full tape of the call had been released and was available from other sources. The proposition presumes that people at large, and the black community specifically, are so stupid as to duped by a few broadcasts from one network. They wouldn’t read or listen to any other news source regarding one of the most controversial events of the century? That’s ridiculous!

Moreover, how stellar was his reputation anyway?  He had a criminal record, was not paying his rent, and was a junior college dropout!

If you are going to clam substantial damages, it would help if you had something that was in reasonable condition before it was allegedly damaged!

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, Gun control, profiling, racism, Self Defense | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Andrew Branca’s Embarrasing Wager Contradicts His Book

photo

I am manually reblogging Danny Warrior’s excellent post since there was no automatic option to do so.  He as brought up some great points.  Andrew Branca aka “@LawSelfDefense” has wholly embraced George Zimmerman’s absurd self-defense claim, despite its incredulity and the fact that it spits in the face of his book, Law of Self-Defense, not to mention common sense.  Danny pointed out that Zimmerman violated one of the tenants of Mr. Branca’s book concerning staying out of trouble.  I’m going to go further and point out that Zimmerman self-defense claim was based on an obvious lie.

There was no evidence that Trayvon Martin, was doing anything illegal but Zimmerman called the police on him because he deemed him suspicious.  Of course, the “incident” happened only because Zimmerman chased Martin despite: (a) Neighborhood Watch regulations which state he should not follow “suspects”, (b) NW regulations that state that he should not carry a weapon and (c) yes, the police dispatcher’s advice that he not follow Martin.

No, none of those are laws, but these were are regulations and advise given by law enforcement for good reasons!  If Zimmerman, does not leave his car and chase Martin, which law enforcement, in three different instances, advised him not to do, nothing happens!  Read my post: Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him which references the transcript of the third interrogation of Zimmerman. Zimmerman felt his own personal and unfounded suspicions were more important than law enforcement’s regulations and directives!  The situation should have been left to law enforcement, which is their job, not Zimmerman’s.  Instead, Zimmerman chased and confronted Martin, without identifying himself, though he had several opportunities to do so and then killed him under unknown circumstances.

There was no evidence presented that Martin attacked Zimmerman unprovoked or suddenly.  According to Zimmerman’s own statement, Martin asked him why he was following him and Zimmerman, instead of simply identifying himself as a member of NW, quickly reached into his pocket.  Martin allegedly hit him at that point, and if he did, why shouldn’t he?  Why wouldn’t Martin be concerned about a stranger who had followed him for no reason he could possibly fathom, on a dark, rainy night.  Why wouldn’t he be concerned when he asked the stranger for an explanation and the stranger suddenly reached into his pocket?

Now, we wouldn’t even have to venture into the flimsiness of Zimmerman’s self-defense claim if he simply stays in his car.  Well he didn’t, so let’s look at how absurd it was. The basis for Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense was his allegation that Martin was on top of him pounding his head into the cement (over a dozen times) and this is why Zimmerman shot him.  This is demonstrably false as Martin’s dead body was located far from the sidewalk which is where Zimmerman shot him.  Could his body have been moved after he died?  Not likely, Zimmerman testified that Martin was straddling him and after he shot him, he fell forward, on top of him.  He further “testified” that he turned Martin’s body over and nothing else.  Read my post: George Zimmerman Did Not Kill Trayvon Martin In Self-Defense  Below is an image of the location of Martin’s body interposed with Zimmerman’s “testimony.”

20140411-083211.jpg

So, Zimmerman’s statement that Martin was pounding Zimmerman’s head on concrete when Zimmerman shot him is demonstrably false.  Considering how insignificant Zimmerman’s injuries were, it is doubtful that Martin ever pounded his head on the cement at all, however that is not even relevant.

Still Mr. Branca has hugged Zimmerman, and his flawed case of self-defense, to his breast like a suckling infant.  Let’s look at what Mr. Branca has to say about self-defense.

“Shoot to Wound” vs. “Shoot to Stop” vs. “Shoot to Kill.” Posted by Andrew Branca on February 15, 2014 at 8:51 pm on Bearing Arms. 

It’s simply the self-defense law element of proportionality–a person is allowed to use only as much force as is necessary to neutralize the threat, and no more than that. Proportionality has both an intensity and a temporal (or time) dimension.

In terms of intensity, one can meet a non-deadly attack only using non-deadly means, and a deadly force attack with deadly means (also, of course, non-deadly means).

I have embedded a Facebook page containing another quote from Mr. Branca.

Martin never presented a reasonable of death or great bodily harm to Zimmerman, even if he had banged Zimmerman’s head on the concrete at some time during the encounter, when Zimmerman shot Martin, they were both on the grass and there was no threat of Zimmerman having his head banged on concrete.

At the debate, Bianca claimed there are essentially 5 elements of self-defense

1. Innocence – You must not have been the aggressor.

As I have set forth already,  Zimmerman was the aggressor.  He left his car and chased Martin, never identifying himself and then reached into his pocket suddenly.  Note that when he agreed with the dispatcher that he should return to this car, 84 seconds passed and he did not walk the 30 feet to return to his vehicle! Again read my post: Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him

2. Imminence

You have to be facing a threat of death or great bodily harm that is about to happen right now.

When Zimmerman shot Martin, at best, Martin was on top of him, on the grass!  He faced no threat of death or great bodily harm!

3. Proportionality

The amount of force you use in self-defense has to be no greater than necessary.

Shooting a Martin because he was allegedly on top of him on grass, is certainly not a proportionate amount of force.  Martin was unarmed and not even armed with a block of concrete at that point.

4. Reasonableness

Your conduct has to be both subjectively and objectively reasonable.

As already indicated above, Zimmerman’s conduct was certainly not objectionably reasonable.

5. Avoidance. If you have a path of safe retreat you have a legal duty to take it.

The Stand Your Ground laws removed the last requirement.   However, avoidance would obviously have applied to Zimmerman who could have simply stayed in his car, returned to his car or not confronted Martin, all of which were completely unnecessary and would have avoided Martin’s death!  The authors of the Stand Your Ground Law are in agreement as they felt the law didn’t apply to George Zimmerman once he ignored the police dispatcher. Author of “stand your ground” law: George Zimmerman should probably be arrested for killing Trayvon MartinBy Julia Dahl, CBS News July 12, 2013,

Still Andrew Branca champions Zimmerman as a self-defense exemplar! This does a disservice to his entire treatise on Self-Defense.  Zimmerman’s encounter with Martin is the antithesis of self-defense, and it lowers the credibility of everyone, especially Mr. Branca, who champions it. His foolish wager with Sunny Hostin further puts him in an unflattering position, not to mention his internet harping on it!  True, the nature of law is a dependence on fine and minute points.  Technically the dispatcher did not “order” Zimmerman not to “follow”, i.e. “chase” Zimmerman, even though Zimmerman felt it was an order, which he ignored.  You can see Zimmerman’s statement below.

20140512-003741.jpg

Is Mr. Branca’s position that Zimmerman was right to chase Martin?  He is certainly capable of making such an indefensible argument. Maybe that’s assume why he made so much of an asinine wager, even though even if he won, it was a “technical” victory, not a meritorious one!

Self-defense (and Stand Your Ground laws) were never designed to support vigilantes which is precisely what Zimmerman was.  It is obvious, that Zimmerman did not leave his car to get directions for the police dispatcher, but to chase Martin.  Moreover, he perceived the police dispatcher’s “directive” as an order. Note that in his statement he claims that Martin attacked him on his way back to his car.   He never really headed back to his car as he was busy chasing Martin. Again, read my previous post: Zimmerman Ultimately Killed Martin Because Unknown Young Black Males Were Burglars To Him

What validity and merit self-defense laws, including “stand your ground”, might have is frittered away by attempting to use them as a shield for George Zimmerman’s irresponsible vigilantism.

Mr. Branca’s iconization of George Zimmerman is boundless and only trumped by his intemperance.  He ignores not only the precepts set forth in his own book but those of the rules of evidence.  There was no evidence admitted in the trial that states Martin was a thug, however, he tosses aside the calling of his profession to join the rabble, George Zimmerman worshipers, who claim that, the rightfully excluded hearsay evidence in Martin’s social media, somehow makes Martin a thug.  Read my post: The Framing of Trayvon Martin

photo

ANDREW BRANCA´S EMBARASSING WAGER CONTRADICTS HIS BOOK

Massachusetts attorney and author of Law of Self Defense Andrew Branca was a debater on a panel at UC Berkeley. The hashing out was proudly provided by Branca himself. Can be found here:http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/04/cnn-analyst-welches-on-bet-after-andrew-branca-wins-stand-your-ground-debate/ I highly suggest you read prior to going further. Even if you hate the guy.  The “expert” drank 2 gallons of water during the debate. Prolly to keep the steam from coming out his ears. He knew he had to “act” professional which is kinda hard for Branca on social media. His pro SYG stance “won” the debate. The debate win ended up being based on which stance could change the minds of those who reported they were undecided on SYG laws prior to the debate, although I can not imagine why one would attend had they not already had a solid stance to begin with. The numbers however, remained relatively high on those who oppose SYG as it currently stands. Instead of answering the question concerning the debate Branca wagered $100 bet that he can prove Zimmerman was not told to stay in his car. This is typical Zimmerman support semantics when it comes to self-defense debating. I hope to outline why arguing this point as a non fact is inconsequential. Sunny Hostin CNN legal analyst which was also a debater opposing Branca took the wager. Branca said he would provide the audio once he returned home. The always attention seeking, book pushing, Zimmerman supporting, self defense “expert” Branca held true to his word and still as I write this post continues to heckle Hostin via social media. She isn´t biting, and it disappoints Branca and his clan of followers. If this was the highlight of the debate for Branca he needs I feel sorry for him. With that being said.

Despite the fact the operator had not told Zimmerman to stay in his car, arguing whether or not Zimmerman was told to or not by the operator does little to prove SYG or self-defense in context of the debate. Actually, Brancas own advice in his book is to AVOID confrontation.

Here is an excerpt from his book
To guide the crafting of a legally sound self-defense strategy, I offer five basic rules:
Keep out of trouble in the first place
Minimize your legal exposure if trouble does start
Foster the confidence to act decisively when necessary
Diminish your perceived legal vulnerability
Facilitate acceptance of events
I know what you’re thinking: what’s with that first rule about “keeping out of trouble in the first place”? I don’t need to be told that, I’m the good guy, I don’t go getting into trouble. Unfortunately, the vast majority of cases I see where an otherwise law-abiding armed citizen finds himself in legal trouble for having used force against another person, it is precisely because they failed to simply keep out of trouble in the 1st place. In talking with such folks I always ask, “looking back, were there any warning signals early on, that if you’d heeded them might have allowed you avoid the fight entirely?” The almost invariable answer, is “yes.”

Branca is in direct conflict with his own advice on RULE #1 every time he hoots and hollers about MSM or talking heads getting that detail wrong in the Zimmerman case. Even had an operator not told Zimmerman to stay in the car the fact still stands that had he STAYED in the car on his own vocation the entire event was avoidable. Which coincides with “keeping out of trouble in the first place” and also rule # 2! And, the fact Zimmerman had left his vehicle reveals he was not a well-trained gun owner and he certainly placed himself in a position of HAVING to use force whether he was told to stay in the safety of his vehicle or not. HE decided to get out regardless of purpose and intent. Zimmerman leaving his car also reveals he had little if any respect to follow the reasonable instructions in the watchman´s handbook, or had he had decent training as a neighborhood watchman, he would have remained in his vehicle. The other factor is that Zimmerman had walked back just about every detail he was claiming about Trayvon while on the phone with the operator.
Self defense laws do not protect anyone who instigates, or provokes an altercation. From the very first time both viewed each other Trayvon spent his time moving away from Zimmerman. While Zimmerman spent his time moving closer to Trayvon. Were it not for the actions George took either of them would’ve been hit, or shot.
As for Branca, he does make good legal argument for self defense laws when he can contain himself. His behavior is inconsistent. He appears desperate most times to stay relevant which is a turn off and embarrassment for anyone who has cited him. He is making a buck,and plugs himself when he can to feed his family. So I understand. He reminds me of people who sell stuff on an infomercial. “Not sold in stores” type of product. Which is fine but he tries too hard. He is no John Lott! He utilizes and over does the semantics (ie;a bet on publicly already hashed out info to make a buck & win a debate) and the what if´s involved in self defense are nothing more then scare tactics. Facts only which courts can consider when someone claims self defense. Good arguments for the need, but tactically unsound and obviously biasedly applied.
I tried to find any legal case Branca had a self defense client in the court of law. I have not found even one. If anyone can point me in the direction so I can read the case please do. He himself has never noted any cases he has tried or won.
I digress…..What Branca is missing is the argument in the Zimmerman case for the public which clearly was/is whether or not Zimmerman was an INNOCENT victim who HAD NO CHOICE but to self defend through use of deadly force. Branca appears in his book to be saying self defense starts with AVOIDANCE. Zimmerman was not interested in avoidance. Zimmerman broke every rule in Branca´s book. Mr. Branca has to admit Zimmerman broke Rule #1 when he left his vehicle be it against direction of an operator or on his own vocation. If Branca refuses to acknowledge this tidbit, he should return the money to everyone who EVER bought his book. That is my wager! I have said this numerous times, the Zimmerman case is not a good example of pro–SYG or self defense. It is a GREAT example in showing how low some are willing to go in an attempt to cover–up their biases, and stereotyped mentality.

 

Posted in Florida, George Zimmerman, Gun control, Gun Show, Neighborhood Watch, profiling, racism, Self Defense, Stalking, Stand Your Groud, Trayvon Martin, Vigillante | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment