Sorry Jackson, you are the one that is continually wrong here. Justice in a 
court room is not determined by *ideas* as you suggest, it's determined by 
facts. There is no evidence that law enforcement didn't care about Martin, 
especially because of his race. There has to be evidence, enough to convict, in 
order to prosecute a case. The original investigators came to the conclusion 
there wasn't enough to charge Zimmerman. Due to political pressure, charges 
were filed and the trial proved there wasn't anything close to having 
sufficient evidence for a conviction. Zimmerman now has an excellent case 
against the state of Florida for an illegal prosecution. Alan Dershowitz of 
Harvard Law says there was incredible prosecutorial misconduct involved as 
well, which was the attempted withholding of exculpatory evidence by the 
prosecution. The defense had to prove nothing! The state had to prove guilt. 
Remember, *innocent until proven guilty*? The defense bent
 over backward and proved Zimmerman's innocence, something they weren't 
obligated to do. All the prosecution had were theories and ideas of what *may* 
have happened. The defense was able to take the  key testimony of many, if not 
most of the prosecution's witnesses, to prove Zimmerman's innocence. Now all 
you hear on MSNBC et al is how the prosecution blew it. They should have done 
this or they should have done that. They had nothing to work with!


 From: Michael Jackson <>
To: "" <> 
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The George Zimmerman case: Steyn nails it.
wrong again - you discount the idea that the local law enforcement didn't give 
a shit about Martin because of his color - my step father was a cop in a small 
Southern town in SC and I know from him the level of prejudice that existed and 
still exists today in many Southern towns - it happens, don't doubt that.


 From: Seraphita <>
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2013 9:23 PM
Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: The George Zimmerman case: Steyn nails it.
Yes, I've a lot of sympathy for your point here Ann - but then here in the UK 
we have some of the strictest gun-control laws in the world! You're not even 
allowed to carry pepper spray as a deterrent as you can in France, for example.

The bottom-line in this Zimmerman case is probably that it should never have 
been a "case" at all as there was always insufficient evidence to take it to 

--- In, "Ann"  wrote:> That is the crux right 
there, a very good reason why guns have no business in the hands of any member 
of the public. The threat of a broken jaw, a few stitches is not worth taking 
the life of another for. Level playing fields are not created by putting guns 
in the hands of those scared enough or angry enough to use them against others 
without a gun. Violence happens, people get threatened, injured, killed all the 
time. Add guns into the mix and you exponentially increase the bloodletting. No 
one will ever be able to convince me that guns are a right I should exercise or 
fight for. I didn't want to get into this topic but I guess I have now.> >      

Reply via email to