Racial profiling, prejudice and bigotry, why the Race Card is maxed out.

Bloomberg, a national publication used the following headline in a story a few days ago; “House Republicans Set to Defy Obama Are Mostly White Men,”.  Which begs the question, why they deemed it relevant to focus on the race and gender of the people in Congress opposing Obama? Is this another of those whistle the left is hearing to proclaim some sort of hidden racism.  Are they implying that those that are opposing the President are only doing so because they are white?  Is Bloomberg racially profiling the Congressmen?

Then there is this a fellow blogger from Australia ask this; Was it racial profiling?  

http://youtu.be/y70tZDW2AqY

Apparently not according to officials but a case of snitching.  The 13-year-old that got the beat down had snitched on one of the 3 for attempting to sell him drugs earlier in the day.  In hindsight someone should have noted that they might ride the bus together and  there could be problems.

A lot talk recently from the President on down about Racial profiling and Racism as a result of the George Zimmerman Not Guilty verdict in the killing of Trayvon Martin.  There have been howl of outrage, calls to replace laws to make it more possible for the prosecution to convict people, for the repeal of the Stand Your Ground laws, though they did not play a part in the case.  Some are calling to make it illegal for private citizens to racially profile as it is for government agents, cops, etc.

So what is racially profiling and it is something that needs our attention to the exclusion of other problems in the US but particularly to the black community?  It racially profiling the same as Racism or worse? Racial profiling at its worst is prejudging a race of people and assigned them a characteristic or group of characteristics that are not exclusive of the every one of that race.  It also used to describe Ethnic profiling as the same.  For example, all Asians are considered to be great at math, which may be true for some but not all Asians.  Another would be to say that all Mexicans are immigrants, or someone who sees a Spanish surname and assumes that you speak Spanish or that English is your second language, the last two being examples of Ethnic profiling.

Most forms of profiling even racial profiling are harmless, but sometimes the prejudice behind the profiling can become such that it becomes bigotry, and it affects how some people react to others, in some cases with disastrous effects.  As it was with slavery  and later the Jim Crow laws or Jews and the Holocaust. There are many other examples of where profiling a people led to great tragedy, most recently Bosnia and Rwanda come to mind.  In the US the issue is the profiling of certain young black males and minorities as dangerous.

Here’s the rub statistics show that this may be the case, certainly not for everyone but for enough to make the prejudice last and stick.  As a father of 2 young black men, this concerns me, which have made me try to ensure that my kids, understand and behave in a manner that is contrary to the stereotype.  I cannot get upset a people for behaving in a way that instinctual, while I don’t do ensure on my part that my kids are acting accordingly.  If I allow my kids to act and behave like thugs, who is to blame if they are seen as thugs.  Racial profiling is not the problem, humans are reacting to what too many young black males are doing.

In France the issue is young Muslim males, in Russia is young disaffected white males, so the issue is not racially profiling but behavior profiling, but those this rise to the level of bigotry or racism?  If you listen to civil rights leaders like Sharpton, Jackson or the NAACP they know so, but from my personal experience that is not the case.  In my estimation people are behaving to this the same way they behave all around the world in the face of young predators.

As modern humans we do not share all the same characteristics as our earlier ancestors. We don’t depend on instinct to make decisions we use observation and reasoning. Sometimes we read books about a subject or activity and depend on the observation and reasoning of others. As social creatures we share information, it is the sharing of this information, much which have been gathered by the observation and reasoning, sometimes of others that have allowed us to survive, to thrive and be the dominant species in this world. That is not to say that the observations and critical thinking have always been right, in fact many have been wrong but with time they have evolved ensuring our survival.

Each day is a struggle for survival, though it may be something that we don’t think about consciously, most  if not all our daily tasks serve the purpose of continuing our survival for another day.  Things we do in the course of a normal day such as eating, drinking, working so that we have money to eat and drink.  Exercising so that our bodies are fit, reading to calm our minds and entertain, bathing to wash away the daily grime and keep microbes in check just about everything we do daily can be tied to our quest for survival.

The night was specially scary for our ancestors as the darkness allow our predators, who were biologically more capable of functioning in the dark, some had better night vision, others had other senses that allowed to take advantage of the dark and would make us an easy prey.  It cause us to become more communal, as there was safety in numbers, we manage to control fire which not only brought us warmth in the cold but also helped to keep the predator away.  As our civilization advanced the tables were turned we not feared the night, and those predators were now our prey.  But with this advancement a new predator appeared, one that was more cunning, resourceful  and worst that any other prey that humans had come up against.

That prey was of course, other humans.  As our civilization progressed the need for communal living and help was abated.  We did not need to move only in groups to ward off predators and prevent becoming dinner.  We could live alone and apart from each other, with the knowledge that except under very rare circumstances there would be no animal predators just lurking to eat us. That worked fine for animal predators but for human ones not so much. We needed new ways to combat the new predator, our homes became impregnable castles in many places, we carry pepper spray, noise makers and guns.  We are told by the police who are tasked with suppressing these predators to travel in groups, use well-traveled routes in essence behave as our ancestors did in other to survive. As our ancestors did in that long bygone era, we have to learn who is safe, who is not, where it is safe to go, where it is not.

We need to know who is the predator and how not become a victim of one. Being able to distinguish friend from foe, and knowing which animals could provide food and which to avoid was something that is ingrained in us.  It is an ability that allowed us survived and build our civilization.  But in today’s civilization were are being asked to forget that which has served us so well, by surrendering to Political Correctness.  

There have been much talk about racial profiling, racism and Stand Your Ground laws, SYG for short, all while avoiding why this happens, and nothing really happens in a vacuum.  Many people don’t know this but the word “racism” did not become part of the English Vernacular until at least 1935.  Before then we use a word that is has a more appropriate meaning to what people mean now, when they use the word racist, bigot.  Though the word has a religious origins meaning a religious hypocrite as it is still use in Italian “bigotto”, it became to used to describe someone who is intolerant of someone because of prejudice or bias against that person or group. Racism on the other hand is the belief that one’s race is either superior or inferior to another race which leads to actions in accordance of that belief.

Let’s put that in the context of what the President Obama said in the aftermath of the Zimmerman verdict, and the human instinct that allowed us to survive all this time;

There are very few African-American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

There are probably very few African-American men who haven’t had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me – at least before I was a senator.

There are very few African-Americans who haven’t had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off.
That happens often.

The implication of the President was that these actions were the actions of someone who was racist, but if we examine them they hardly rise to the level of bigotry, much less racism.  Department Stores owners follow people all the time for a variety of reasons, is the President saying that security follows or watches a white person that is prudent but watching a black one is racist.  Having had the experience of Managing a retail establishment, I would like to inform the President that in my experience the shoplifter at retail establishment, those that like to stuff little items in their bags are almost always white, if a black person is followed it is not because of the danger of stolen goods but for other suspicious behavior.  For instances they are tracking customers to pick their pockets.  Putting that aside in those communities were there are few blacks, it is still racism if  a store owner follows someone, it he doing it out of spite and bigotry or because he is trying to protect his business and those customers that come to his establishment?

The clicks on the car doors are they really because you are approaching and their has been a rash of carjacking in the area, by people who looked very much like you, until you became a Senator and started dressing differently,  As for the old woman clutching her purse and holding her breath is this because of racism or someone who is fearful and hoping that she does not become a victim of a predator.  Being in an elevator in a small enclosed spaced is terrifying enough but being along with a large stranger, more so.  But is this racism?  It is even bigotry?  Or it more likely, that it is a self-fulfilling prophesy, of those that see racism in the shadows, and interpret every action as such.

Nothing happens in a vacuum,  if a black shopkeeper follows some young black males is he being a bigot against his people or is he acting prudently to protect his business.  A black woman who clutches her bag under the circumstances described by the President is she also being bigoted, or perhaps someone who knows that she could become a victim at any time.  This is not to say that racism does not exist in the true meaning of the word.  But racist are all colors and not just white or white Hispanic as the PC establishment would have us believe.  It is evident all around us though few recognize for such, because we have been indoctrinated into thinking only white on black.

A few years ago,  Jeremy Lin an Asian American Harvard grad, became a sensation in New York when he became the starting point guard for the team, leading the team to a streak of victories.  What many don’t remember is the many black players and commentators that called him a fluke,  and that there were many black players that did what he did and better but were not getting the same type of publicity.  That is racism, the belief of their race superiority over the Asians ball playing skills.  It is the same with many European basketball players that come to play in the NBA, too often their role is of bench-warmer and they were given little opportunity to fail of succeed over comparable black players who were performing the same.  Sports racism is rampant in the US, though it is not recognized.

Racism exists and it will always be around, because we are all human, thinking and believing that we are superior to others in one way or another is just a way of group identity.  The issue is that most of the problems that are called racism are not, but what a reasonable person would think in a set situation.  Cops in NY, don’t stop and frisk more blacks and minorities for their jollies, they do so because it is an effective way to prevent crime and catch criminals, as it is shown by New York city being the safest large city in the country and the world.

Nothing happens in a vacuum,  people will continue to act in a way that will aid their survival, not because they are racist, or bigoted but because history has shown that being prudent and acting accordingly in the face of the threat of danger, can mean you live another day.  It is why calling every action a form of racism has exhausted the Race Card.   The problem will not be solved by ignoring the cause and people’s attitude and prejudices will not change until the cause is address and change becomes permanent.

Zimmerman Case: Has it ended the Civil Rights Era Giants

As I read an article about Charles Rangel, once the premier political powerhouse of New York politics and his thoughts about retiring I realized that he along with many other Civil Rights Stalwarts are all in the twilight of their years.  Their influence had been waning after all this time and those that are replacing them don’t have the same gravitas of being there during the movement; they are just hanging on trying to remain relevant in out changing society.

Congressman Rangel is a perfect example, the last two elections have not been easy.  In 2010 he had 5 challengers and barely got 50% of the vote.  In 2012 things got even harder as the District was redrawn to include parts of the North Bronx, over his loudest complaints.  His district is now over 45% Hispanic, yet he manage to eke out a victory by little over thousand votes, the next election might be his last.

All of these is happening at time when he trying to live down several scandals, the Dominican villa that he failed to pay taxes on,  the use of rent-stabilized apartment as his office, the use of Congressional stationary to fund raise, leading to censure by Congress and losing his Chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee one of the most powerful in Congress.

Congressman Rangel and others in the Congressional Black Caucus were once fierce opponents to any Amnesty Bill, as they correctly pointed out those that would be amnestied would be in direct competition with blacks, but that stance has been replaced by actively seeking it.  Whether this change is out of political expediency, I don’t know, but many of the CBC members are now in districts that have large Hispanic populations and their support is essential for re-election like Karen Bass CA 37th, Al Green TX-09th, Steven Horsford NV-04th, Sheila Jackson Lee, TX-18, Eddie Bernice Johnson, TX-30th among others.

One thing that has not changed is the utter dislike for republicans and White people. quoting from the article:

House Republicans? Have done more damage to American competitiveness than al Qaeda ever could. “What is happening is sabotage. Terrorists couldn’t do a better job than the Republicans are doing.”

“The Tea Party? Defeat them the same way segregation was beaten. “It is the same group we faced in the South with those whitecrackers and the dogs and the police. They didn’t care about how they looked. It was just fierce indifference to human life that caused America to say enough is enough. ‘I don’t want to see it and I am not a part of it.’ What the hell! If you have to bomb little kids and send dogs out against human beings, give me a break.”

To Rangel and others of that era, fighting against he Tea Party and Republicans is tantamount to opposing the segregationist 50 years ago.  If immigration amnesty is opposed by Republicans then he is going to do the opposite, is about fighting the fight. Is the South over again.

Another civil rights era leader that is still living in the past is the Rev. Jesse Jackson, as James Taranto of the Wall Street Journal observes that the Rev. Jackson is calling Florida the new “Selma of our time”.  This is to compare Florida to Selma, Alabama and the marches led by Dr. Martin Luther King from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama the state’s capital.  But it appears that this is a common refrain for Rev. Jackson as he called Florida Selma back in 2000, when the state was the deciding vote in the Presidential Election.  He also called Houston the new Selma in March to protest the ending of two racial preference programs and few months earlier as was reported by the NY Times he said the same thing about the Decatur, Illinois school system when he was protesting to win more lenient treatment for black students.

Taranto has other examples of Rev. Jackson evoking Selma to make a point, but all it accomplishes is demeaning the accomplishment of those of the era, and demonstrating how fall they have fallen.  From fighting a righteous fight for equality to throwing temper tantrums all around the country if they don’t agree with something.

Listening to the NAACP, Rev. Jesse Jackson, the charlatan Sharpton the impression is that we are still in the 60’s but as the 1st Black President,  2nd in count Bill Clinton,  things are better. A survey of High School blacks students last year 84% of the students thought that race was not a problem, (I have lost the link will post when I find it).

The adoption of the NAACP, Jackson, Sharpton and many others of the Zimmerman Case to raise issues of race, racial profiling, discrimination in the Justice System  and the rabidly persecution after the non-guilty verdict have caused more people to question their relevancy today.   Not only that but the united front that the movement had achieved, primarily has begun to show cracks, more and more  black voices are not toying the line.

CNN’s Don Lemon agreed with Bill O’Reilly about some of the issues in the black community in this video, for which he was called a turncoat MOFO

 

Russell Simmons a man who has become a multimillionaire by promoting the Urban Culture, selling music, magazines and fashion objected to Lemon and wrote a letter

I got a chance to see what you said over the weekend about black America. At first I thought it was Fox News, but then I remembered you’re a CNN dude. I have nothing against Fox News, as Roger Ailes is my man, but the gospel you were preaching sounded like O’Reilly and Hannity were pulling your strings. Thank goodness my political director, Michael Skolnik, was on the show to stand up for African-Americans, because conservatives love when we blame ourselves for the conditions that have destroyed the fabric of the black community. I respect your courage on many other issues, but I can’t accept that you would single out black teenagers as the cause of their own demise because they don’t speak the King’s English or wear belts around their waistbands. Read the rest here:

To Simmons the issues that Lemon talked about were just fashion statements, like bell bottoms and dashikis were in the 70’s and for some kids that is all that it will be, but for too many there are other aspects of the Culture, that promote violence and misogynistic behavior.  He points out that many of those rebellious youths became quite successful as adults, forgetting to mention that at lot of that behavior was conducted in the schools and colleges, today because of the bad behavior they are not finishing HS much less going on to college, comparing the two eras only damages the community.

Ann Althouse had a conversation with Glenn Loury the black progressive professor in Brown University regarding the case and whether it was the right case to become a racial cause celebre? To which he admitted that it was not, though he hedged when asked whether it was proper for the NAACP and Sharpton to adopt cases to make political points.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/08/i-ask-glenn-loury-if-he-thinks-it-was.html

Other black voices have also spoken to express their agreement with the verdict in the case, people like Charles Barkley, hall of fame basketball player and TNT announcer and Stephen A. Smith ESPN commentator.  Smith expressed his dismay at the utter failure of the Media to portray the case fairly, which led to his original amazement at the verdict.

This of course has not stopped the NAACP, Rev. Jackson or Al Sharpton from their stance regarding the verdict or their attack on Stand Your Ground laws that were not involved in the case to begin with.  The same law that is used disproportionately by blacks in Florida and that had the support of both President Obama, when he was a State Legislator in Illinois or Congresswoman Wilson who voted for the law when it was passed in Florida in 2005.  After all the black community suffer disproportionately by the violence in their communities.

So what is going on by all this fuss,  it appears that the old dinosaurs are trying to demonstrate their relevancy.  The have failed their community and the community is noticing.  The attention on SYG grounds distracts from other areas that are more important and have a higher impact on the community.  Crime, unwed motherhood, drop-out rates all of these issues will have a larger and more lasting effect on the community.  A law that has been used on average 28 times a year, almost half of which have been invoked by black defendants in Florida, will not make long-lasting effects on the community, but it sure looks like they are doing something.

Rev. Jackson used to say: “Take a moment and turn it into a cause” but this cause is not getting the attention that they commanded and that is a good sign.    Maybe now we can focus on things that will make a difference in the Black community for the betterment of the whole country.

Zimmerman Case, The Prosecution’s Case

The case of the State of Florida against George Zimmerman is fast approaching.  Jury summons have been mailed, subpoenas for witnesses are being mailed, all moving towards what seems like an unavoidable very public trial. As I mentioned in a previous post, the prosecution is trying to line up its ducks to prepare for its case, the guys at Rumpole’s site decided to do a little exercise on what sort of case the prosecution has and how they would have it presented. H/T to John Galt and Chip Bennet.

John Galt, presented the prosecution’s case, Chip Bennet did the rebuttal, my comments are in red.

John Galt-BDLR’s anticipated story:orl-bernie-de-la-rionda-20130305

GZ Background: Neighborhood Watch, prior calls to police about youth burglars, Neighborhood Watch meeting, training, not supposed to pursue or carry gun, GZ lives in neighborhood, familiar with neighborhood and streets. GZ criminal justice training. Knows the law. Implication: GZ knows how to conform his story to requirements of law.  While I agree that BDLR will attempt to introduce prior calls by GZ  to the SPD, he had to be careful with this, as it opens the door for the Defense to introduce evidence of the over 400 calls made to 911, for a variety of issues in the neighborhood.   It also bears saying that GZ did not call 911 but the Non-Emergengy number, the distinction being that if GZ truly “profiled” TM as a criminal he would have called 911 for a faster response.  In other words he saw something suspicious, rather than confront, he wanted the police to handle it.

NEN call: GZ profiled TM as a criminal because he was walking in the rain with a hoodie: fuarking punk, azzholes always get away. GZ followed, even after dispatcher told him not to follow. Looking for an address excuse is BS, GZ was still pursuing TM. BDLR will reference NEN call as containing running and wind noise from running. BDLR will reference GZ’s prior calls to cops, purchase of gun as demonstrating GZ’s evolution into crazed vigilante who wants to stop azzhole fuarking punk from always getting away. The Prosecution has made a lot of hay out of 2 ‘off the cuff’ statements, trying to prove malice in GZ, IMO this is the prosecution reaching, if the call is listened to objectively, the frustration and resignation in GZ’s voice is evident, not as the prosecution projects.  I believe BDLR will try to use the call to suggest at least stalking by GZ, and that he was following TM, I don’t doubt that he will try to imply that GZ disregarded the police (though the dispatcher is not a LEO) was reckless and an escalation. This is a reason the wording use is important like the use of the word “profiling” without any context makes it look as a crime. If the prosecution used the words GZ determined that TM was suspicious,  it loses the intent, and it makes the jury think, why would GZ determine that TM was suspicious.  The word profile puts the onus on GZ, and removes TM from the equation. The Defense picked up on this at the 1st bond hearing and grilled Investigator Gilbreath about it. They need to continue.     

TM returning from 7-11: This is a big problem. I think W8 would get shredded. Chad might fold and his story is inconsistent with purchase of a single WMFJC(Arizona Watermelon Fruit Cocktail) and a bag of skittles. Not two drinks and no snack for TM. There is also the half time basketball game problem and why Chad didn’t hear shooting and sirens and other commotion. The 7-11 video shows a scary hooded, pants sagging thug. 3 stooges drug deal might surface. So if I were BDLR, I would be inclined to skip the 7-11 trip and have cop testify about what was found at scene of the shooting: WMFJC and candy. Not really pertinent where or why he bought items. No drugs, burglary tools, stolen property, no bag for carrying burglary tools or stolen property and no weapons. Just simple facts: We found the dead kid with WMFJC, skittles, lighter, a small amount of money (no drugs or big drug dealer cash), headphones, cell phone, button. No gang tattoos, has his momma’s name on his arm. Nothing consistent with any intention to commit a crime. Dead kid was staying with father and girlfriend in the neighborhood. [That simple little last part might be a problem, maybe just have cop testify that he subsequently located TM father staying in neighborhood and looking for missing kid. Don’t want to open the door into why TM was staying in the neighborhood. Maybe Nelson helps out by banning mention of anything bad about TM.] I agree with JG in this regard, the prosecution will have to thread carefully with this area.  As the motions filed by the State prove they want to conceal as much of TM past as the Judge will allow.  How did TM get to Sanford if he does not live there? Where did the WMFJC and skittles come from?  Both of the prosecution’s witnesses in this regard are problematic,  Chad, may have to answer questions that the State does not want to answer and W8 has other issues that we have address in other posts.   I believe that BDLR will call W8 and not Chad.  She can establish that TM went to the 7-11 and could alibi TM for the length of time it took him to get back as well (was raining, they were talking, etc.)  Chad can open a can of worms the State does not want and for that reason I don’t think he will be called to testify.

Timeline: If GZ was returning to his truck after NEN call, he would have been at his truck. GZ had no intention of returning to his truck as evidenced by telling dispatcher to have the cops call him upon arrival, rather than meet him at his truck. “have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at” GZ was hunting TM, didn’t want “fuarking azzhole punk to always get away” If I was BDLR, I would make that my mantra. Try to say it as many times as possible. GZ evolved into an obsessed gun-toting Neighborhood Watch vigilante, falsely profiled TM as a criminal, and consistently pursued him to keep “the fuarking azzhole punk from always getting away.” Depraved state of mind. I also think that the State will try to get as much traction from this as possible.  Speculation aside, the timeline does provide enough time to GZ to return, not that he was doing anything illegal by him slowly walking back or just standing at the point he last saw TM, but the prosecution will attempt to paint this as reckless, and demonstrative of GZ lack of fear or concern about TM.  It is not much but it is all the State has and needs to make the most out of it.

Confrontation / Fight: TM body and phone 30 or 40 feet away from T where GZ alleges he was attacked. GZ chased TM down the T. Witness heard confrontation moving in that direction. GZ advancing, chasing fuarking azzhole punk to prevent him from always getting away. TM retreating. No GZ blood found in vicinity of T. TM has only one tiny cut on his knuckle (autopsy actually calls it an abrasion, which is more consistent with a fight). Inconsistent with administering MMA beating. GZ has minor scrapes on head, inconsistent with beating head repeatedly against sidewalk. GZ sustained broken nose after he chased TM down and attempted to keep him from getting away. GZ started the fight. Sybrina & Cutcher – TM was screaming for help. Poor little boy was screaming for help. [I think Nelson would be doing BDLR a favor if she banned the flaky voice experts. Cross-ex and rebuttal would be extremely ugly, and would make it appear that BDLR is engaged in a desperate attempt to BS the jury. Don’t put Tracy on the stand for voice ID. Just Sybrina and Cutcher.] I would also call W 6 so that the jury won’t be surprised later, dark, not sure who was screaming for help, guy in red was on the bottom, but didn’t see or hear blows struck, didn’t hear head hitting sidewalk. Austin saw somebody on the ground, doesn’t know anything else, didn’t see anybody on top throwing blows, didn’t hear blows or head hitting sidewalk. I agree that the State will try play up the distance as proof of a chase.  40 feet without context sounds like a long distance but if you say that the body was 13 yards or 15 steps from the T it suddenly does not look as bad.  Even though there is a debris trail that leads down the path from the T to the location of the body, the defense will try to claim the fight started at or near the final location, giving the appearance of a least following by GZ. I believe BDLR will try to claim the screams came from TM, the voice analysis is inconclusive, in fact one report asserts that GZ was making the screams that really transfixed the nation, the other report hinges  who has the younger sounding voice; anyone that has heard GZ will have doubts as them not coming from GZ.  If the voice experts are allowed to testify their testimony will be more confusing than probative.  Sybrina saying it is her son may help in the matter but only to some extent and it would open the door for the Defense to argue that Tracy did not think it was TM.   W6 and Austin (boy walking dog) have limited value in this regard and could actually help GZ, so I would be careful with their testimony.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

Medical / Gunshot: Kid is dead, shot in the heart by Z’s gun. Shot placement intended to kill, not merely disable or stop attack. GZ shot to kill. Pretty straight forward stuff here, as GZ has admitted to shooting TM, only interesting aspect will be if the State will try to present testimony that the angle of the wound somehow  show malicious intent on the part of GZ.  Make absolutely no mention of the toxicology report or get an expert to testify that it was not a factor.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

Aftermath: GZ astride TM, holding his hands apart, down, still trying to prevent the fuarking, azzhole punk from trying to get away. GZ still obsessed, depraved: keep fuarking azzhole punk from trying to get away. Depraved Neighborhood Watch vigilante gone wild. Not trying to help TM, not lying or sitting on ground as if he had a serious head injury or had sustained repeated blows to the head. GZ lucid and nonchalant, tells neighbor to call wife and tell her he just shot somebody, tells cop he shot the kid. No big deal, not agitated or distraught or dazed or confused. [BDLR has already filed motion to exclude GZ’s “I was screaming but nobody would help.” as a self-serving statement. This is a very important motion, imho.] GZ declined medical treatment beyond cleaning up blood from superficial abrasions. Definitely, bringing up the injuries and what are perceived as minor abrasions will be part of the State case, the law is clear that this is not a consideration but to some jurors it might give them a pause.  Combined with the attempt by the prosecution of suppressing statements by GZ, give the indication that this is part of their argument.  GZ actions will be analysed thoroughly and this is one area that will be examined.

Then rest and see if defense puts GZ on the stand. Cross GZ with inconsistent statements if he testifies. Make him look absurd. You’ve lived in the neighborhood for how long? You are Neighborhood Watch and regularly patrol neighborhood. You have previously called police numerous times, yet you still don’t know the names of the streets? Serious injury? Fear for your life? You thought you were sustaining life threatening blows to the head, but you refused to go to the hospital. Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was a “fuarking punk” ? Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was an “azzhole who always gets away” ? Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was a criminal intending to commit a crime in the neighborhood? Isn’t it true that you called the police because you believed in your mind that TM was a criminal intending to commit a crime in the neighborhood? My belief is that the whole prosecution’s strategy is to force GZ to testify on the stand.  I feel that is the prosecution’s best scenario for obtaining a guilty verdict.  Disallowing or at the very least inserting enough doubt into GZ story of self-defense so that either their theory or one of the included lesser charges are considered is their goal.  I don’t see how they can outright prove the charges with the evidence they have presented.

List of witnesses for the State:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Gun dealer employee(s) where Z bought gun, took class
Custodian of records from GZ criminal justice school
Woman at SPD that exchanged emails about Neighborhood Watch program
Cop that made neighborhood watch presentation
Custodian of records at SPD regarding Z’s prior calls
NEN and 911 call dispatchers & custodian of records to authenticate recordings
cops responding to TM shooting scene
cops that examined, mapped, photographed scene and collected evidence
EMT responding to TM shooting scene
W6, I would add W8
Cutcher
Austin
other 911 caller that heard confrontation moving down from T.
witness at scene that GZ told to call his wife
Sybrina
Medical Examiner & gunshot expert


John Galt’s counter argument is brief but to the point:

The counter argument is that there is no evidence that GZ started the physical conflict and that the location of the physical evidence corroborates GZ’s statement that he was attacked by TM at the T while returning to his vehicle. Following TM to attempt to maintain visual observation (as arguably requested by NEN dispatcher) is not a crime. Self-defense does not require actually suffering serious physical injury, but rather reasonable belief of imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. Basically the position taken by the SPD from the outset: GZ should not have been charged in the absence of probable cause.

I just don’t think that adding a bunch of absurd easily rebuttable BS (W8 and voice experts) strengthens the state’s case.

This is Chip Bennet”s response, point by point in blue.omara
BDLR’s anticipated story:GZ Background: Neighborhood Watch, prior calls to police about youth burglars, Neighborhood Watch meeting, training, not supposed to pursue or carry gun, GZ lives in neighborhood, familiar with neighborhood and streets. GZ criminal justice training. Knows the law. Implication: GZ knows how to conform his story to requirements of law.

I assume that the defense would object to the relevance of any of this information? Background does not help prove the instant charge, does it?
Also: Florida CCW law preempt any law, statute, regulation, or rule prohibiting concealed carry. Zimmerman’s knowledge of neighborhood and its streets is pure speculation. The defense may object but some background will ultimately be admitted about GZ  in this regard.  The NW information should be irrelevant unless the State can prove he was on duty at the time.  As for addresses, I agree pure speculation.

Quote:
NEN call: GZ profiled TM as a criminal…

Speculation. Zimmerman said that he “looked like he was up to no good”, and that he was just “wandering about”, and “looked like he was on drugs or something“. Insert toxicology report here. If Nelson prohibits it, one more obvious point for appeal. Again this is more about the prosecution setting GZ state of mind than actual evidence of anything. 

Quote:

…because he was walking in the rain with a hoodie: fuarking punk, azzholes always get away.

Give BDLR some extremely minor points for motive. I am not conceding any points to BDLR, that is his assertion, GZ saw a suspicious figure and wanted the LE’s to respond.

Quote:
GZ followed, even after dispatcher told him not to follow.

Evidence? Without evidence, this is speculation, and I assume the defense will object on grounds of arguing facts not in evidence, or speculation. The most the NEN call can prove is that GZ kept within eyesight of TM until he lost him once TM turned on the dog path down the T.  W8 testimony is at best confusing, but only give the indication of  GZ following, not anything else.

Quote:
Looking for an address excuse is BS, GZ was still pursuing TM.

Speculation. No evidence. Since GZ was unable to communicate with LE’s afterwards due to the incident, BDLR can assert this, but can’t prove it.

Quote:
BDLR will reference NEN call as containing running and wind noise from running.

More speculation. No evidence of the cause/nature of the wind noise. And most importantly: even if it is evidence of Zimmerman running (moving quickly – defense will argue that he was in poor health/bad back, wearing work boots, and thus incapable of running), the wind noise stopped a few seconds after the “We don’t need you to do that,” “Okay” exchange. Another issue where the prosecution will assert something but has no proof.

Quote:
BDLR will reference GZ’s prior calls to cops, purchase of gun as demonstrating GZ’s evolution into crazed vigilante who wants to stop azzhole fuarking punk from always getting away.

More speculation, and arguing facts not in evidence. Zimmerman purchased his handgun in December 2009 (after obtaining his CCW in November), in response to a menacing dog in the community, and at the specific advice of the police officer who responded to Zimmerman’s report about the menacing dog“Don’t use pepper spray,” [the police officer] told the Zimmermans, according to a friend. “It’ll take two or three seconds to take effect, but a quarter-second for the dog to jump you. Get a gun..   The defense will have to get someone to testify to this.  Once that is done this point will be nullified.

Quote:

TM returning from 7-11: This is a big problem. I think W8 would get shredded. Chad might fold and his story is inconsistent with purchase of a single WMFJC and a bag of skittles. Not two drinks and no snack for TM. There is also the half time basketball game problem and why Chad didn’t hear shooting and sirens and other commotion. The 7-11 video shows a scary hooded, pants sagging thug. 3 stooges drug deal might surface. So if I were BDLR, I would be inclined to skip the 7-11 trip and have cop testify about what was found at scene of shooting: WMFJC and candy. Not really pertinent where or why he bought items. No drugs, burglary tools, stolen property, no bag for carrying burglary tools or stolen property and no weapons. Just simple facts: We found the dead kid with WMFJC, skittles, lighter, a small amount of money (no drugs or big drug dealer cash), headphones, cell phone, button. No gang tattoos, has his momma’s name on his arm. Nothing consistent with any intention to commit a crime. Dead kid was staying with father and girlfriend in the neighborhood. [That simple little last part might be a problem, maybe just have cop testify that he subsequently located TM father staying in neighborhood and looking for missing kid. Don’t want to open the door into why TM was staying in the neighborhood. Maybe Nelson helps out by banning mention of anything bad about TM.]

And all of it is irrelevant to the matter at hand: what happened to instigate and escalate the physical altercation between Zimmerman and Martin. I agree that Witness 8 has already served her complete purpose, and will never grace the inside of a courtroom. I am going to disagree slightly, I think the prosecution will call W8 and roll the dice. 

Quote:

Timeline: If GZ was returning to his truck after NEN call, he would have been at his truck.

Zimmerman was under no obligation to go directly to his truck, Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200. Obvious rebuttals:
– Zimmerman’s stated timeline, including walking to the front side of the building, looking for a sign, and then walking back, fits entirely with the timeline of events
– The timeline, which includes 2 1/2 minutes from Zimmerman hanging up with NEN to the first witness 911 call connecting, does not provide sufficient time for Zimmerman to traverse 380 feet to Brandi Green’s home, to chase Martin 380 feet back to the sidewalk T, engage in a verbal confrontation, and then engage in a physical altercation.
– If Martin was attempting to return home, he had more than ample time to do so, before Zimmerman ever ended his NEN call.
On its own, this point proves nothing – and there is GPS/ping evidence that will show, to some degree of detail/resolution, the relative paths of both Zimmerman and Martin.
We are missing a part of the puzzle, which I hope the GPS/ping logs would clarify, but baring evidence to the contrary if GZ choose to stand at the T, he has every right to do so.  Ascribing thoughts or intentions without proof is wrong and discriminatory.

Quote:

GZ had no intention of returning to his truck as evidenced by telling dispatcher to have the cops call him upon arrival, rather than meet him at his truck.

Speculation. BDLR is not clairvoyant, and cannot state as fact anything regarding Zimmerman’s intent. Claiming the fact that he eventually shot Martin as evidence of Zimmerman’s intent is logical fallacy, begging the question.
More assertions without facts or merit.

Quote:
…”have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at” GZ was hunting TM, didn’t want “fuarking azzhole punk to always get away”

More speculation. More arguing facts not in evidence, specifically: “hunting”. Agreed.

Quote:

If I was BDLR, I would make that my mantra. Try to say it as many times as possible. GZ evolved into an obsessed gun-toting Neighborhood Watch vigilante…

I would expect the defense to object every time BDLR attempts to do so. Such statements are speculative, represent facts not in evidence. 

While BDLR will not probably use those words, he imo, will attempt to portray GZ as such

Quote:
…falsely profiled TM as a criminal…

Speculation. Facts not in evidence.  Also: Zimmerman indicated that Martin “looked like he was on drugs”. Toxicology report confirms that suspicion. That confirmation corroborates Zimmerman’s suspicion, and corroborates his state of mind/contradicts depravity of mind.
I mentioned the word profile before, I hope the Defense addresses it, further.

Quote:
…and consistently pursued him…

Facts not in evidence. Where are the GPS/ping location maps?

Quote:

…to keep “the fuarking azzhole punk from always getting away.” Depraved state of mind.

Prior police/incident reports will corroborate that fear/concern regarding “punks always getting away” is perfectly justified.
Great point.

Quote:
Confrontation / Fight: TM body and phone 30 or 40 feet away from T where GZ alleges he was attacked. GZ chased TM down the T.

Evidence of chase? None so far.
Rebuttals:
– 30-40 feet during an assault is nothing, and easily fits Zimmerman’s statements
– Martin disappeared around the side of the building several minutes before the altercation took place. How/why was he anywhere near 30-40 feet from the sidewalk T?
– Debris field corroborates that the altercation started AT the sidewalk T
– The timeline does not provide sufficient time for a chase
– The dog walk path/area between the houses would have been dark, due to lack of lighting, and particularly so, given the weather. Zimmerman’s sight distance would have been no more than a few feet (as corroborated by Witness 6 testimony)
– Zimmerman indicates that he lost sight of Martin before he ever exited his vehicle, and when standing in the vicinity of the sidewalk T, told the NEN operator, “I don’t know where this kid is”

Quote:
Witness heard confrontation moving in that direction.

More evidence that the altercation started in the vicinity of the sidewalk T – direct contradiction to the pursued/chased/hunted speculation.

Quote:
GZ advancing, chasing fuarking azzhole punk to prevent him from always getting away.

Speculation. Facts not in evidence. Where are the GPS/ping location maps?

Quote:
TM retreating.

Speculation. Facts not in evidence. Where are the GPS/ping location maps?

Quote:
No GZ blood found in vicinity of T.

Irrelevant. Proves nothing. Why should there be any of Zimmerman’s blood in the vicinity of the sidewalk T? He could have been sucker-punched in the nose by Evander Holyfield, and he probably would not have bled (much less, sprayed blood to the extent that any would be found at the location of the punch) immediately at the sidewalk T. 
Did everyone forget it was raining that night?  Any blood diluted by the rain would easily wash off, same applies to clothing with water-resistant coating which GZ  was wearing.

Quote:
TM has only one tiny cut on his knuckle. Inconsistent with administering MMA beating.

Plenty of witnesses corroborate that Martin was on top of Zimmerman. Witness 6 testimony refutes speculation regarding inconsistency.

Quote:
GZ has minor scrapes on head, inconsistent with beating head repeatedly against sidewalk.

More speculation. Also, mis-characterization. The wounds were lacerations, not “minor scrapes”. Blunt force trauma (such as head banging the ground/sidewalk) can present as either internal or external injuries. Mere existence of head injuries corroborates claim that Martin was aggressor and Zimmerman was victim.

Quote:
GZ sustained broken nose…

Prima facie evidence that Martin was the initial physical aggressor.

Quote:

…after he chased TM down…

Speculation. Facts not in evidence. Where are the GPS/ping location maps?
See bottom 

Quote:

..and attempted to keep him from getting away.

Speculation. Facts not in evidence.
Further: no evidence that Martin reasonably feared that Zimmerman would imminently use unlawful force against Martin; thus, no evidence that the broken nose was a justifiable use of force in self-defense.
This is an important point, as even the testimony of W8 disproves that TM felt afraid of  GZ. In fact one gets the notion that he was annoyed.

Quote:
GZ started the fight.

Speculation. Facts not in evidence.

Quote:

Sybrina & Cutcher – TM was screaming for help. Poor little boy was screaming for help.

Cutcher impeached herself. No “little boy” was present.
Sybrina: on cross, will be forced to admit that she has never heard Trayvon scream bloody murder as recorded on the 911 call, and thus cannot reliably state that the voice was her son’s.
Rebuttal: eye-witnesses. Tracy Martin’s admission (as witnessed by 3 SPD officers)

Quote:
[I think Nelson would be doing BDLR a favor if she banned the flaky voice experts. Cross-ex and rebuttal would be extremely ugly, and would make it appear that BDLR is engaged in a desperate attempt to BS the jury. Don’t put Tracy on the stand for voice ID. Just Sybrina and Cutcher.]

If the voice experts are allowed: another point for appeal. Also, I agree that they will be detrimental to the State’s case.
Quote:

I would also call W 6 so that the jury won’t be surprised later, dark, not sure who was screaming for help, guy in red was on the bottom, but didn’t see or hear blows struck, didn’t hear head hitting sidewalk.

Witness 6 corroborates Martin’s use of force against Zimmerman, and disparity of force (full MMA low mount, punching/knocking to the ground, forcibly restraining) that would itself justify reasonable fear of imminent risk to life or great bodily harm.

Quote:
Austin saw somebody on the ground, doesn’t know anything else, didn’t see anybody on top throwing blows, didn’t hear blows or head hitting sidewalk.

I’m not sure Austin gets called. His recanted testimony would open up doors that the State/Scheme Team would not want opened.
Agreed.

Quote:
Medical / Gunshot: Kid is dead, shot in the heart by Z’s gun. Shot placement intended to kill, not merely disable or stop attack. GZ shot to kill.

Use of a gun is inherently deadly force. Shot placement does not make the use of the gun any more or less deadly, statutory.

Quote:
Aftermath: GZ astride TM, holding his hands apart, down, still trying to prevent the fuarking, azzhole punk from trying to get away. GZ still obsessed, depraved: keep fuarking azzhole punk from trying to get away. Depraved Neighborhood Watch vigilante gone wild. Not trying to help TM, not lying or sitting on ground as if he had a serious head injury or had sustained repeated blows to the head. GZ lucid and nonchalant, tells neighbor to call wife and tell her he just shot somebody, tells cop he shot the kid. No big deal, not agitated or distraught or dazed or confused.

Lots of more speculation, facts not in evidence. Neighbor eye-witness testimony, EMT statements, responding police officer statements all support Zimmerman’s self-defense claim, and refute such attempted nonsense speculation.
W6 who was closed to the scene was unable to clearly see the incident, but someone at twice the distance was able to make out GZ activities around the body?

Quote:
[BDLR has already filed motion to exclude GZ’s “I was screaming but nobody would help.” as a self-serving statement. This is a very important motion, imo.]

How could this possibly be inadmissible? More grounds for appeal.

Quote:
GZ declined medical treatment beyond cleaning up blood from superficial abrasions.

Not relevant. Justifiable use of deadly force in self-defense does not require a severity-of-injury threshold. (Insert anecdote about the Utah soccer referee here. )

Quote:

Then rest…

If this is all the State presents – speculation, theory, and no evidence – then I would expect the defense to file a motion to dismiss/acquit due to lack of evidence.

Quote:

…and see if defense puts GZ on the stand. Cross GZ with inconsistent statements if he testifies. Make him look absurd. You’ve lived in the neighborhood for how long? You are Neighborhood Watch and regularly patrol neighborhood. You have previously called police numerous times, yet you still don’t know the names of the streets? Serious injury? Fear for your life? You thought you were sustaining life threatening blows to the head, but you refused to go to the hospital. Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was a “fuarking punk” ? Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was an “azzhole who always gets away” ? Isn’t it true that you had determined in your mind that TM was a criminal intending to commit a crime in the neighborhood? Isn’t it true that you called the police because you believed in your mind that TM was a criminal intending to commit a crime in the neighborhood?

There’s almost no chance that O’Mara/West let BDLR attempt his argumentative, witness-badgering, leading/compound question, pit bull routine with Zimmerman on the stand.donwest

Basic conclusion, as illustrated by this exercise in which we tried to use the discovery to convict GZ.  In order to do so the prosecution has to make jumps. speculate on things and avoid certain facts of the incident.  For the prosecution to make a case it has to ignore distances, completely ignore conditions and assume malice on GZ’s part based on 2 phrases.  For instead the State cannot prove a chase, as there was none, the distances and timeline preclude that.  Some of the witness testimony is suspect because of the conditions of that night.  It was raining, very dark and visibility only a few yards.  This further complicates the implication of a chase as unless GZ was within a few yards of TM he would have lost him, and not have caught 15 steps from the T as some on TM’s camp have asserted.  The voice testimony from the prosecution is contradictory at best, exculpatory at worst. W8 testimony obfuscate a large portion of time that may not be to the State’s benefit to get into.  Attempts to demonize GZ have failed, and they now concede that GZ did not have a Felony record, this is a clear indication that after further investigation the State was unable to prove a history of violence as many claim. Right now the prosecution imo is reduced to trying to force GZ to testify in order to make something out of nothing.

This travesty is set to go on trial June 10th help the Defense Fund if your able.