The facts behind the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida continue to slowly emerge. I have previously stated that I view critical facts as murky for a prosecution — even though I believe that there was sufficient evidence to arrest George Zimmerman at the scene. While we have still not seen some of the forensic evidence, a new report indicates that police may have based their initial decisions in part on the statement of a witness. We have been discussing the maddening gap in witness testimony at the critical moment of the confrontation. Now a new report suggests that there may have been a witness to the struggle and that witness reportedly told police that it was Martin who was on top of Zimmerman before the fatal shot was fired.
FOX 35 in Orlando says that it has spoken to the witness. The witness reportedly said that
“The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: ‘help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911.” Martin was wearing a hoodie that night and Zimmerman was wearing a red shirt or sweater. A friend of Zimmerman has also come forward to say that Zimmerman looked like a mess after the fight and that he recognized Zimmerman as the voice on the 911 call asking people to help him.
An obvious defense case is emerging for a classic self-defense claim. Zimmerman on the 911 tape admits to have shadowed Martin but says it was Martin who was checking him out and moving toward him a threatening fashion. Zimmerman claims that he was attacked when he was returning to his SUV. Police and counsel reported that Zimmerman had cuts on his face and head and appeared to have been in a struggle. Zimmerman was lawfully carrying a handgun was allowed to use the weapon if he was in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death. This includes the possible use of the gun in a struggle of control of the weapon.
While the case has been treated as racially motivated, the Zimmerman family has strongly denied such a motivation — noting that he is a hispanic with many African-American friends. Frankly, Zimmerman does closely resemble an alternative profile — that of a defendant in “Castle Doctrine” or “Stand Your Ground” cases. In these controversies, we often see people who are obsessed with crime and in some cases inclined to use lethal force. That does not mean that race did not play a role here. However, it is possible that Zimmerman was motivated by his well-documented obsession with crime as opposed to race. While I understand the sensitivity to the race issue and have my own suspicions concerning the role of race, I believe it is premature to label this a racially motivated crime without more evidence of such a motive. None of this means that Zimmerman should not be charged, but rather than there remain murky elements to the case. We simply need to know more about such motivations. In terms of the state law, we also need more information (particularly forensic evidence) to better gauge the chances of a conviction in the case. I still find the fact that Zimmerman was armed and outweighed Martin to be the most significant. However, this case is still in its earliest stage in terms of development of the evidence and witnesses. Among other things, if a charge is brought, such evidence could push prosecutors toward a manslaughter claim with a lower likely sentence than second or first degree murder. Even with manslaughter, the prosecutors would have to establish the element beyond a reasonable doubt, including the claim of self-defense. Of course, the mere fact that Martin may have gotten the better of Zimmerman in dominating fight at one point does not mean that Zimmerman was not the original aggressor. It will depend on the full range of witness testimony and, again, the missing forensic evidence.
I was asked last week to sign an online petition demanding the prosecution of Zimmerman. As I have noted, I believe that there is sufficient evidence for an indictment. However, I have never support such public campaigns for indictments. I do not believe in prosecution by plebiscite. Whether there are 100 or 100,000 people demanding an indictment, a prosecutor should not be influenced by such popular outcries. We saw how distortive and corrupting such campaigns can be on prosecutors like Michael Nifong. Prosecutors must based their decisions on the weight of the evidence not the weight of public opinion. Regardless of my views about a possible indictment, I would not want a prosecutor influenced by any petition supporting those views. There is a line between the visceral and the legal and such petitions fall on the wrong side of that line.
Source: Daily Mail
Does not look like he has even a scratch.
Sling,
Bush’s “youthful” indiscretions were excusable because he was white and rich and came from a “good” family.
Sling, Elaine, yep. (:
Elaine M.:
“When he was 30, he was arrested and found guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol. His driving license was suspended for two years”
VenganceNow:
“Those were just youthful indiscretions.”
30-year-old youth 🙂
So that’s why he he didn’t serve in Nam. He was too young.
Let’s hope that Mr Bush will grow up some day.
At least before he becomes middle-aged – at 90
Sure now, You are AT&T reaching out and trying to touch someone. Ouch, I am hurt.
leejcarroll,
Poor VenganceNow “jest” doesn’t know how to spell his chosen Internet persona.
Mespo, Elaine,
I’d like to hear nals take on the “Daily Texan”….. They generally allow the students to run it lock stock and barrel….. One of the few student run newspapers with that type of freedom…
Elaine M:
I see bigotry is alive and well at UT. Hook ’em, indeed.
Here’s my comment to the Daily Texan:
I anxiously await your broad-minded approach to cartoons glorifying murderous tyrants, child molesters, and Aggie football fans. After all, yours is just to present any old idea that some unsophisticated yet bigoted undergrad can reduce to pen and ink and “start the discussion.” I suggest that while the “artist” has the right to create such racist drivel, you have an obligation not to be her enabler lest you be lumped in with her. Just because someone puts out the trash doesn’t mean you have to wallow in it in deference to the First Amendment.
Vengeancenow, surely you jest.
Now we’re cutting down the greatest president we have ever known. Those were just youthful indiscretions.
Clear the Air
Martin Bashir
3/28/12
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42359297/
It’s now time to clear the air and to compound the tragedy of Trayvon Martin, it feels as though some people are trying to do to him in death, what George Zimmerman apparently did to him in life – attributing to this young man a character and a personality that they could not possibly know.
And yet, they persist in imposing upon his slight young frame, an identity that implies criminality, juvenile delinquency and the all round characteristics of a troublemaker.
This is not only deeply offensive to his family but also a gross form of character assassination upon a child, a dead child.
Stories are now being carefully fed to certain sections of the media – that he was suspended from school after his bag was found to contain marijuana residue. That he once wrote graffiti on school grounds…wow! And, to top it all, the greatest act of social criminality for a kid of color – that he may have had a gold tooth. Wow! Call the police.
Even if these petty incidents were true, what on Earth do they have to do with the fact that George Zimmerman chose to kill him?
But let’s compare Trayvon Martin with the history of another man; only this one committed some real offenses and all of them after this 17th birthday.
When this individual was 20, he was arrested for disorderly conduct after he got drunk and stole a Christmas wreath from a hotel. So that’s drunk, disorderly and theft.
When he was 26, he took his 16-year-old brother on an underage drinking spree. He lost control of his car, hitting a garbage can but continued driving.
When he was 30, he was arrested and found guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol. His driving license was suspended for two years, even though his friends tried to say that it was just for 30 days.
Does this brief history make him a social wretch; a criminal with no regard for other road users; a drunk, a disgraceful influence upon young people, including his own 16-year-old brother?
What do you want to call him? Scum of the Earth; hoodlum; criminal?
In fact, America ended up calling him the 43rd President of the United States – George W. Bush.
So, while you may be tempted to divert your attention from what really happened to Trayvon Martin, here are the only three facts that really matter:
First: A man with a gun chose to pursue an unarmed teenager who had done nothing wrong.
Second: The man with the gun chose to initiate a confrontation with the teenager, after he was advised not to.
Third: As a result of the confrontation, the man with the gun shot the teenager to death. And when you focus on the facts, it’s not the color of his teeth that keep coming back to haunt you, it’s the color of his skin.
So what is your point Creationist666?
Could Obama have reminded us of Cosby, and gained from that subconscious influence?
Blouise,
I was so proud of America when Bill Cosby’s show ran here in Swedish TV.
That was, or was it just a chimera of, a different America.
Now all the kids in Miami, interviewed in the midst of their walkout supporting Trayvon, were the only encouraging things I’ve seen lately.
Did you see my tip on Eric Dibbs and Booker’s Guitar album?
Maybe you don’t dig blues.
Puffing on a slinky?
attributed to Bill Cosby
The Sanford Police’s alleged, initial, clumsy efforts to “cover-up” their own questionable behavior was certainly not worse than the crime but may, eventually, become part of the crime.
To all Police Departments across this nation who are used to doing such things … Heads up for you never know when the spotlight will come to your town … “A word to the wise ain’t necessary, it’s the stupid ones who need the advice.”
The Daily Texan Publishes Cartoon Calling Trayvon Martin ‘Colored Boy’
By Adam Peck on Mar 28, 2012
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/03/28/453866/daily-texan-cartoon-trayvon/
The Daily Texan, the student newspaper at the University of Texas-Austin, is facing charges of racial insensitivity after running a bigoted cartoon in their daily paper yesterday. The cartoon, seen below, calls Trayvon Martin a “colored boy,” and labels the news media’s coverage of the story “yellow journalism.”
Some conservatives have been waging a smear campaign against Trayvon Martin for the last week, hoping to distract from the fact that an unarmed black teenager was shot by a community volunteer with a history of violence who remains a free man thanks to Florida’s controversial “Stand Your Ground” law that was supported by conservative groups like ALEC.
As Campus Progress reports, The Daily Texan’s editorial staff has responded to the uproar by distancing itself from the cartoonist. The statement from the campus paper:
A controversial editorial cartoon on the Trayvon Martin shooting was published Tuesday on the Opinion page of The Daily Texan. The Daily Texan Editorial Board recognizes the sensitive nature of the cartoon’s subject matter.
The views expressed in the cartoon are not those of the editorial board. They are those of the artist. It is the policy of the editorial board to publish the views of our columnists and cartoonists, even if we disagree with them.
*****
You can see the cartoon at the link I posted above.
Shanon,
Greetings from liberal Tucson. She did not know Tucson was liberal.
Said to ask if you know of the film festival in early August. She and family will be visiting for the first time Prescott for the festival. Looking forward to the cool mountains, and a last fling before school starts in the beginning of August. Has old friends there.