It has been a long, long road for me -from deeply held pro-civil rights
beliefs
to deeply held civil rights beliefs with deep contempt for black political
leadership
in the United States.
Trayvon Martin, whatever else one may say, despite the fact that the trial
judge
disallowed tons of evidence indicating that the young man was a teenage
thug
who valorized violence and criminality, was no martyr for a cause. He was,
the evidence suggests, a punk with an attitude, of whom I have met up with
more than one or two in life, in each case wishing they did not exist.
Was Zimmerman a hero? Not hardly, and he seems to have pressed things
further than he needed to, to make his neighborhood watchman's point.
But it does seem that he acted in self-defense and that the violent teen
who was in the process of beating him up was asking for trouble,
more trouble than he could have anticipated, but rough justice
nonetheless. I would have preferred a Chuck Norris ending;
we got a Charles Bronson ending. But this was not my decision
to make and what happened, happened.
How any of this makes Trayvon Martin a hero, however, escapes me entirely.
This is not how most black political leaders see it, and not how the white
Left
sees it, either. What little respect I still had for the political "hard
Left"
has now disappeared. Those people are fanatics, reverse racists,
and irrational ideologues.
In all of this it also is notable how black interests were seen by the Left
as the only conceivable legitimate interests. We can now see what
the Left thinks of Hispanics: They don't count, not when a choice
must be made between black and tan. This is the age of political worship
of blackness, no matter how unfitting for any such thing a black "hero"
may be, in Trayvon's case a complete farce as a 'hero' figure.
There decidedly are black people who deserve recognition for achievement.
But to extol a teen punk hardly qualifies for anything but some sort of
stupidity prize. Yet the black culture of perpetual victimization has
prevailed again. And the white Left has, also yet again, made sure
that their black political allies play the victimization role to the
maximum.
There simply is no objectivity whatsoever on the farther Left.
Meanwhile, on the Right, there is the usual total lack of comprehension
of much of anything. There is no moral issue because this is not about
abortion, there is no political issue because there is no economic
advantage to be gained anywhere, and, when all is said -a stereotype
but all too true- the Right is all about the economic interests
of the well-to-do; end of story.
What does the Right think of how badly an Hispanic man was treated
by the Obama-inspired criminal justice system? Uhhh, is the Right,
like, supposed to care?
Disgusted in Oregon
Billy
============================
Criminal Defense Blog
Sunday, July 14, 2013
The Embarrassment Of The George Zimmerman Verdict
The result of a verdict today in a criminal trial is that everyone with a
twitter or Facebook account gets to let the world know how ignorant they
are of the criminal justice system. I know, First Amendment. But your
ignorance shows again when you mention that. The First Amendment protects you
from
the government, it doesn't protect you on twitter or Facebook from people
calling you out for your ignorance.
@_A1Black__ (https://hootsuite.com/dashboard#) : RT @__surlySprite_
(https://hootsuite.com/dashboard#) : They need to APPEAL THIS VERDICT AND GO
TO
THE SUPREME COURT âââ Don't Stop until Justice is Served for TâĤ
@_34thwarrior_ (https://hootsuite.com/dashboard#) : Trayvon parents should
appeal this to the next level
@__CharNae_ (https://hootsuite.com/dashboard#) : Trayvon Martin parents
better appeal this case! I would NOT let nobody off for killing my child!
HELL TF NO!
@__shVn_ (https://hootsuite.com/dashboard#) : Trayvon's parents can appeal
this verdict and try to get justice again! Lets pray they do and it turns
out right this time! Rip
Some background before you start beating on your keyboard:
1. I'm a criminal defense lawyer in Florida since 1995.
2. I watched the trial. Had it on at home, in my office, in the car. I
didn't watch it through updates from the morons on HLN or CNN, most of whom
should be fired (more on that later).
3. I know the lawyers, on both sides, including the civil lawyers for the
Martin family.
4. I did some commentary, and declined commentary on media outlets that
were only trying to enrage the public.
As for the case, I think it's terrible that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon
Martin. That's a tragedy. I don't think he had to shoot him, and had one or
two things been different (he didn't get out of his car, didn't have a
gun, on and on), we wouldn't be here. I keep hearing Trayvon Martin would have
killed George Zimmerman, I don't think so, but I wasn't there.
You weren't there either. You don't know what happened, exactly. As much
as you want to believe you were there and know what happened, exactly, you
weren't, and you don't.
Not knowing exactly what happened requires a not guilty verdict, no matter
how angry or outraged you are. The jury didn't free Zimmerman because they
thought he was a good guy or because they weren't sad that a young boy was
killed (jurors were rumored to be crying during the state's rebuttal),
they found him not guilty because the facts and the law required them to do
so.
The state had a crappy case, they knew they had a crappy case. This is why
they assigned 3 career prosecutors with a combined stat of probably over
500 trials. Their first problem was no witnesses to the event. You would
agree, wouldn't you, that witnesses help prove cases? Their second problem was
a tape that no one could agree on. You know whose voice was on that tape?
I don't. The state never laid out, point by point, what happened. If I'm
being asked to convict someone of a crime, and I know the state has the
burden of proof, the state is required to tell me what happened, not just ask
questions and tell me "you decide" over and over again.
Juries don't make decisions because they are mad, sad, angry, or feel bad
for someone's parents.
George Zimmerman is not guilty because the law says he's not guilty. You
don't think it's right that he killed Trayvon Martin, but that's not what
the law says in Florida where we like guns more than we like people. You have
a problem with that, do something to change the law other than complain on
social media. I know, you're busy, you won't. That's for others to do.
Five things I want to say in closing:
1. Your cries for an appeal are hurting my eyes. There is no appeal. Stop
letting the world know how ignorant you are. If you don't know criminal law
or procedure, shut up. Ask someone before you display your stupidity to
the world.
2. If you didn't see the trial, stop criticizing the verdict, it just
makes you look stupid.
3. HLN, get rid of Nancy Grace and Jane Velez-Mitchell. They are not legal
commentators helping the public understand our important, essential, and
treasured criminal justice system. Neither are many of their guests who
should never be asked back. There are 95,000 lawyers in Florida, there is no
reason a lawyer from another state who doesn't know Florida law needs to be
on daily telling everyone "I don't practice in Florida, I don't know Florida
law" just because they can yell. Their daily display of drama may be what
you believe to be the "First Amendment," but it is also pathetic, and
making people dumber and angrier.
4. CNN needs to send Sonny Hostin and Gloria Allred packing. First of all
Piers Morgan, this is a criminal trial in Florida. Why is the only guest
you continue to have on is someone from California that doesn't practice
criminal law and is known for representing, at press conferences, women
victims? What could she possibly have to offer about this case?
And CNN, especially Anderson Cooper, get rid of Sonny Hostin. This woman
was a prosecution shill from the beginning of this trial, struggling to say
anything positive about the defense. Last night, after the verdict, she
said "justice took the day off." She wasn't there to provide commentary, she
was shilling for the state. She should have disclosed from the begining that
she desperately wanted a conviction, that way it would have been easier to
listen to her biased commentary. She's terrible and should never be asked
to appear in the media again when there is an important trial.
5. The media, especially TV, needs to start vetting their guests. I know
these are lawyers with agents, but they've never been in a criminal
courtroom, or at least not since they spent a year as a prosecutor in 1978.
Can you
not find lawyers that actually know what they are talking about? Piers
Morgan is asking Gloria Allred what she would do in opening in the Zimmerman
case? I have a better question, Gloria, when is the last time you gave an
opening statement, in any case?
That's all I want to say, for now.
Brian Tannebaum is a criminal and Bar Defense lawyer in Miami, Florida
practicing in state and federal court, and the author of _The Truth About
Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer._
(http://www.scribd.com/doc/6123526/The-Truth-About-Hiring-a-Criminal-Defense-Lawyer)
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
