Zimmerman: Shooting Was “Life Altering Event”

George Zimmerman has gone public for the first time with a new website, therealgeorgezimmerman.com, and a paypal link to raise funds for his litigation costs. The website is a smart move, but Zimmerman used the occasion to describe the shooting as a “life altering event.” That is manifestly true except for the fact that he was speaking of himself, not Martin.

Zimmerman states “On Sunday February 26th, I was involved in a life altering event which led me to become the subject of intense media coverage. As a result of the incident and subsequent media coverage, I have been forced to leave my home, my school, my employer, my family and ultimately, my entire life. This website’s sole purpose is to ensure my supporters they are receiving my full attention without any intermediaries.” He goes further to warn that he “cannot attest to the validity of these other websites.”

I am a bit surprised that no one looking at this first statement (guaranteed to be picked apart by the media) would pause at the use of the phrase life altering when referring to the shooter rather than the deceased individual. Just for the record, in the next public letter, Zimmerman may want to avoid saying that he hopes to make “a killing in this outreach campaign.”

The motto of the site is the quote from Edmund Burke that “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is that good men do nothing.” The site includes pages on “My Race” and an “album” of photos. In a particularly bizarre addition, the photo album shows graffiti saying “Long Live Zimmerman” — not exactly the most inspiring statement of support.

Lawyers often create litigation blogs and web sites to allow their clients to release documents or facts in support of their claims. However, these sites require careful scrutiny and, as here, may backfire with ill-advised language.

Here is the full statement:

I am the real George Zimmerman,
On Sunday February 26th, I was involved in a life altering event which led me to become the subject of intense media coverage. As a result of the incident and subsequent media coverage, I have been forced to leave my home, my school, my employer, my family and ultimately, my entire life. This website’s sole purpose is to ensure my supporters they are receiving my full attention without any intermediaries.

It has come to my attention that some persons and/or entities have been collecting funds, thinly veiled as my “Defense Fund” or “Legal Fund”. I cannot attest to the validity of these other websites as I have not received any funds collected, intended to support my family and I through this trying, tragic time.
I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received. I reassure you, every donation is appreciated.
George Zimmerman

Source: USA Today

156 thoughts on “Zimmerman: Shooting Was “Life Altering Event”

  1. One thing he has right and it is “life altering” for everyone involved…..self centered he may want to navigate away from…..

  2. I’m so tired of this. Why is it that when black people are the victims, the media expects us to care about the killers motivations and feelings. I’m gonna go throw up now.

  3. Just for the record, in the next public letter, Zimmerman may want to avoid saying that he hopes to make “a killing in this outreach campaign.”

    I can find no record of Zimmerman ever saying what’s quoted.

  4. I bet they didn’t cover this possibility when Z went to conceal carry class there in Florida. Its all well and good that you can stalk your victim, start the fight and then shoot in self-defense. That just means you might not go to jail for the murder you committed but it does not get you off the hook for the collateral damage. You can bet Martins family will file suit and win or lose it will cost this clown many hours of his time, many thousands of his dollars and a lot of sleepless nights.

    Not as high a price as TM paid for the mistake of running down to the 7-11 for some skittles but a pretty high price for a wannabe cop playing tough guy for a night.

  5. ” the media expects us to care about the killers motivations and feelings.”

    It’s a feature, not a bug, as they say.

  6. We have to think how would Jesus handle this? Like a marauding crowded or as as a rationally minded merciful father. The tit for tat perpetuates war. The soul of Zimmerman is on the line, and God Knows it. It is between Zimmerman, and God. God has to know if Zimmerman has repented. If he does his soul will not be extinguished in Gods light when it shines.

  7. I would say that he has waived his right not to testify, or waived the right to keep out of evidence his many statements made thus far at is trial. So, he will have to take the stand. Then he will be cross examined for all of his statements. His statements in life about ill will to minorities can come into evidence on the issue of his racial motivations in shooting Trayvon for self gratification. He said something to the effect that “They always get away.”

    Well you did good her Watch Commander Cody, he didnt get away.
    Oh, and they took the smiling photo of Zimmerman when he was told that the Grand Jury was not going to hear his case. But, for the uninititated: Grand Juries in the South are used to whitewash white crimes against black folk. so, the prosecutor did right here.

  8. This is reminiscent of BP’s CEO, Tony Hayward, who said that he wanted his life back. After ruining the Gulf of Mexico. The narcissism and lack of empathy of some folks is staggering.

  9. Zimmerman has, as I predicted, “out-victimed” everybody. Poor poor George, he was forced to kill somebody when he was just trying to do good, and then, he was forced to act like a hunted animal when he was just trying to explain his do-gooding, and NOW MORE?

    Check out common behavior of sociopaths. Victim — check. Forced to do what people then unkindly criticize (like wife-beating, like child-disciplining, like this, like that) — check. Nobody understands them — check. They were just trying to make everybody act right — check. Check check check gag gag gag.

    One guy in Maryland, few years back, beat up and molested his step-daughter, just trying to be a good guy of course. He got convicted, elocuted, got sentenced to therapy. The therapist freed him from his court-ordered 3 years by saying, after the THIRD session, that he had CRIED so now he was OK. What did he cry about? It turned out that he CRIED because the case had ruined his whole family so now, he had no wife, no step-kids, no nice home, and no visitation, boo hoo hoo.

    In my book, of course, that therapist should have lost her license but nobody’s been reading my book.

    If you check out the DSM-IV-TR, you will find that many of Zimmerman’s traits are set forth in pretty good detail. But who knows? He may benefit from therapy!

  10. Jonathan,
    Jesus is said to have lived in simpler times, and wouldn’t have had to deal with laws that allow morons to pack heat and get away with murder.

    What would Jesus do? If he had any sense, he’d get the hell outta Florida.

    I thought of the grand jury in the same way. A grand jury could be packed with good ol’ folks who don’t think that shooting people like Trayvon is a problem.

    I share your frustration. How difficult is it to see that there should at least be an arrest? Letting the unaccused run about with a loaded gun is a bit irresponsible.
    Is there anything resembling a government in Florida? Is it a ‘failed state,’ like we used to call Somalia?

  11. Despite national media coverage the website shows about 215 visitors. Not exactly a fund raisers dream.

    The webiste motto often attributed to Edmund Burke is curious. He never penned those words. What he did say in Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents was:

    “When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”

    That could quite easily be descriptive of the “associated” public outside his door crying for a trial in this case against the alleged wrongdoing of Zimmerman and officials in Sanford.

    Careful what you wish for and what you cite.

  12. Apparently the 2 photos in his album are from a vandalized black cultural center and a rally by a Koran burner.

  13. “Shots fired at empty Sanford police cruiser”

    Be sure to check the officer’s firearm — just saying

  14. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/10/trayvon-martin-case-georg_n_1416031.html

    Trayvon Martin Case: George Zimmerman’s Attorneys Quit, Said Client ‘Disappeared’

    Posted: 04/10/2012 4:44 pm Updated: 04/10/2012 4:54 pm

    “George Zimmerman’s attorneys said in a press conference this afternoon that they will no longer be representing him, because they have not been able to locate him and because he has rebuffed their counsel.

    The attorneys said that they had “lost contact” with Zimmerman, and said that he reached out to both the special prosecutor in the case and had an off-the-record conversation with Sean Hannity, the Fox News host.

    This is breaking news. Updates to follow.”

  15. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-10/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-press-conference-20120410_1_press-conference-attorney-cnn

    The two attorneys who have been representing George Zimmerman announced at a press conference moments ago that they are withdrawing as his legal counsel.

    “On Sunday, we lost track of George, in that he would not return our calls,” attorney Hal Uhrig said. Said attorney Craig Sonner, “I’ve lost contact with him at this point.”

    Sonner and Uhrig, who have been publicly representing Zimmerman in the media, said that Zimmerman has not been answering their phone calls.

    The lawyers said Zimmerman called Sean Hannity of Fox News without consulting with them. He also called the Special Prosecutor in the case, something the attorneys said they’d never have told him to do.

    Watch a live stream of the press conference here.

    “We were a bit astonished,” Uhrig said. He added that he thinks Zimmerman is going through post-traumatic stress. “He’s largely alone… he’s at least emotionally alone.”

    Sonner said that he’d be willing to represent Zimmerman again in the future, if Zimmerman were to get back in contact with him. Sonner said Zimmerman is still in the United States.

    Both lawyers said that they still believe Zimmerman is innocent. However, they said they can’t represent him without being in communication with him.

    According to Uhrig, Zimmerman had characterized the lawyers working for him as “legal advisors,” not his attorneys.

    “I’m not sure what the distinction is, but in his mind there’s a distinction,” Uhrig said.

    Zimmerman has been in hiding since the shooting. The press conference is scheduled for 4:30 p.m.

  16. I know Hal Uhrig. He is a highly ethical and highly competent defense attorney. Mr. Zimmerman may come to regret having dropped out of sight. Or perhaps he’s receiving enough money from the Make My Day Legal Education and Defense Fund to permanently relocate.

  17. Mike A,

    As I said when I first heard about The new attorney hal…. I was very impressed with his demeanor and credibility….. He appeared very forthcoming…. I am sure he is everything you have stated.. Thanks as AN has said…..

  18. “I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received. I reassure you, every donation is appreciated.”

    And you thought Mrs. Palin’s influence would never spread to legal matters…

  19. I’m sure Mike A is correct but why are these two guys holding a press conference outside of the courthouse to announce they are quitting — and in the process effectively putting Zimmerman’s face on milk cartons? They look to me like two school girls jilted at the prom.

    The clear implication is that Zimmerman is running. Also if these two guys are really his lawyers, where is the contract? So often in these high profile cases criminal lawyers seek any means to represent the media darling. It’s good for business. These two lawyers looked to me like they were re-auditioning for the case.

  20. I think that all of the members of ALEC should also be on trial, this was a crazy stupid law. They should also have to answer why they felt compelled to inact this law in 25 states.

  21. “I think that all of the members of ALEC should also be on trial”.

    I agree Dpfaef.

    And not just for this law either but for their concerted effort to undermine the electoral and usurp the legislative processes of the United States in what can best be described as a fascist coup from within. In a just world, we’d get to see them hanging from the cherry trees along the National Mall. I’d settle for having them stripped of all of their assets and sent to prison for life with no chance of parole.

  22. Update at 8:16 p.m. ET: The special prosecutor, Florida State Attorney Angela Corey, has alerted the media that she “is preparing to release new information” about her investigation within the next 72 hours. Reporters will be alerted three hours before the news conference, which is to be held in either Sanford or Jacksonville.

    Corey’s office says in its news release that media access will be limited “because of safety concerns.”

  23. mespo, I think she just telegraphed what she is going to do. She has more reason to be concerned for safety with all the skinhead and Klan types around than from the black community. Wonder where George is. If he has left the state and does not turn himself in right away, I suspect the judge will be looking very carfully at a bond amount, if he considers bond at all.

  24. Look back at the Turley Blog about the “911 call” Zimmerman placed on 2/26/2012; see? Malisha predicted that there would be no trial because Zimmerman would blow town before charges were drawn, so that a UFAP warrant could not be obtained against him. One way or another, the police and prosecutor (Wolfinger) were going to make sure he got out of this one. Check my prediction; it was made weeks ago. That would also explain the sudden quitting of counsel. None of the lawyers previously screaming about their client’s innocence, and his version of the events of 2/26/2012, wants to be on the spot when that big fan has something hitting it that can spray around on THEM.

  25. Yay, thanks to the search key, I found it: On March 26, 2012 early in the morning I wrote on the other thread:

    “people are “pitching a fit” because they agree it should not be tried in the media, and they want it to be tried in a court of law. But with the cops having conveniently put enough time into it so that Zimmerman could blow town and make it to Mexico (or somewhere) for his plastic surgery so by the time charges are drawn he’ll be unidentifiable, there probably never can be a trial of that particular alleged perp in a court of law in the U.S. What there CAN BE, of course, is a trial of several cops and possibly others under 42 USC 1981 and then, of course, a 42 USC 1983 action against the homeowners’ association, the cops, the cover-up artists, the conspirators, and like that. And with that, a 42 USC 1988 action to pay the lawyers who get the settlements in the 1983 action. This will cost the taxpayers of Florida a lot of money. They might want to think about that. Because the “fit” that is being “pitched” is not going to stop. YOU CAN COUNT ON THAT, Staley: IT * IS * NOT * GOING * TO * STOP.”

    I predicted then that Zimmerman would flee if it became obvious that he was going to be charged with a crime. I predict it now again. I predict that there will be a lot of agonizing, irritating, official fakery and that the lawyers who were putting out “information” on Zimmerman’s behalf in the past, and Joe Oliver who was “in touch with him” through those lawyers, and etc. etc. will all be doing their best impersonations of surprised people and blah blah blah. I remember when I was a kid I accidentally revealed to my mom what my father had bought her for her birthday (slippers) and I was so filled with remorse that I begged her to forget. When she actually got the package and unwrapped it, she did this huge “SURPRISE!” thing to reassure me that my infraction had been forgotten. I remember thinking, “she could NEVER be THAT surprised by slippers because she ASKED FOR THEM!”

    I bet we’ll be treated to an even better SLIPPERS SURPRISE soon…stay tuned…

  26. I don’t understand why the special prosecutor would make an announcement, that she’s going to make an announcement within 72 hours. Why not just make the announcement?
    I this just to increase the media suspense?

  27. That long live Zimmerman graffiti message he has posted there was painted on the night of April 4th, it was discovered on April 5th. April 4th is the day that Martin Luther King was slain. This combined with the fact that the graffiti was on a black cultural center means that the graffiti writer was sending the message, “Long Live Zimmerman, slayer of Blacks”. When Zimmerman decided to put that on his website he was giving the message his stamp of approval.

  28. GeneH,

    You said tp Pete it was a helluva scene, and then ran this by us:
    “In a just world, we’d get to see them hanging from the cherry trees along the National Mall.—–”
    I am confused, although you said you would settle for less.

    I have two “opinions”

    1. It’s just bad acting from two Hollywood actors, but then I didn’t get to hear the wind howl for two hours in the original film.

    2. I would hang them all for aggravated treason, from a gallows, one at a time, every 15 minutes. The corpses to be burned and ashes into the Potomac The choruses would sing, the bands would play, and the WS and congressional condemned would spectate, knowing their turn would come……..in short a great celebration. Great days for the 99%.

    Need I say that the corporations, whose CEOs are condemned for their crimes against humanity and the earth, will provide hamburges made
    without pink slime and Coke without carcinogenic brown coloring, etc.

    Words don’t fail, it could be a great novel, or film, or a historical document.
    “The Second American Revolution”. A true classic. Of, by, and for the people.

  29. Bob Kauten,
    The special prosecutor is negotiating a deal with several networks.
    And is waiting for approval from the judge that she’ll go along with her end of the deals This takes time. So to increase suspense (and her network fee) she’s pumping it up.
    All is simple if you conceive of the worst.

  30. Bob Kauten sez: “I don’t understand why the special prosecutor would make an announcement, that she’s going to make an announcement within 72 hours. Why not just make the announcement?
    I this just to increase the media suspense?”


    Bob, I have decided that everyone involved in this case, with the exception of the Martin family, are meda whores. Looking for speaking fees, book advances and face time on the news channels. Maybe angling to swing a deal with Dateline or even a made for TV movie.

  31. “The lawyers said they stand by their assertions that Zimmerman acted in self-defense when he killed the 17-year-old, who was unarmed, but they acknowledged that they formed their impressions without meeting Zimmerman.”


    They never met Zimmerman.
    Do these lawyers have any evidence on which to base their performances to date – other than what everyone on the Net has?

    If this is so, then these are not lawyers. They are PR flacks.

  32. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/69313367/News/Attorney-Hal-Uhrig-states-case-for-Zimmerman's-innocence#pl-68832490

    Watch this video. Maybe you’ll learn something from it. Pay particular attention to the last 10 seconds.

    Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw) (Turley guest blogger); “It is disgusting that Zimmerman has not been charged as of this date. He is a murderer.”

    What a wonderful statement in regard to American jurisprudence from an attorney held in high regard by Professor Turley.

  33. id707,

    You should 1) look up the word “hyperbole” and 2) realize that perfection, even in justice, is an aspiration.

    As to whatever your problems are with the 2nd Amendment, those appear to be interferring with your ability to understand film. For all of its over violence, Unforgiven is a film with a particularly anti-violence message at its core.

  34. “What a wonderful statement of opinion in regard to American jurisprudence from an attorney held in high regard by Professor Turley” who is a citizen and as free to express his opinion as you are, “LA Producer”. He is not acting in any official capacity surrounding the Zimmerman case. His statements aren’t prejudicial to the pending proceedings. They are protected free speech about an event and a man made a public figure by that event. If you’ve got a problem with that? Well then, that’s your problem and you too are free to opine on it should you so wish.

  35. @ Idealist707: I actually did not understand your post addressed to me. I’m sweet?

    Sound like a judge? Which judge?

    Feminine wiles? WilesR-US!! (wow)

  36. “Attorney General Eric Holder on Wednesday promised a “thorough and independent” investigation by the Justice Department into the death …”

    “If we find evidence of a potential federal criminal civil rights crime, we will take appropriate action,”
    This all seems a bit of theatre to calm down the racial question.
    It doesn’t directly address the question of the police actions at the time.

    Nothing much may come of it as:
    “In order to pursue federal criminal civil rights charges, the Justice Department would have to determine a crime was intentional and also motivated by race.”

    As I see it,
    – Zimmerman didn’t set out to shoot Martin from the get go. He’s just an idiot who got himself into a situation and responded very disproportionately
    – It wasn’t racially motivated. It was moron_fantasising_about_being_Dirty_Harry_but_with_a_real_gun motivated.

    What is needed is indeed “a thorough and independent investigation”, but one that addresses what actually happened – with proper forensic, medical and witness evidence.
    Any opinion on federal civil rights violations has to be a byproduct of the primary investigation.

  37. I hope the feds employ a proper forensic psychiatrist to go over every single tape that Zimmerman made to the police, and to go over every single statement made by the neighbors and witnesses since 2/26/2012, and every single interview of the “neighborhood watch committee” members, and every single document generated by all state, county or local official sources since the beating of the homeless man (Sherman Ware) before they come up with an idea about whose civil rights, if anyone’s, were violated on and since 2/26/2012.

  38. ThinkProgress via Twitter

    BREAKING: Florida prosecutor will file charges against Zimmerman. Announcement at 6PM. (Via @NBCNews)

  39. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/11/462713/report-special-prosecutor-could-charge-george-zimmerman-as-early-as-today-in-death-of-trayvon-martin/

    Report: Special Prosecutor Will Charge George Zimmerman As Early As Today In Death Of Trayvon Martin

    “The Washington Post is reporting that Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey will announce this evening at 6 pm in Jacksonville that she will file charges against George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin on February 26. The news squares with an announcement from Corey last night that she would schedule a press conference within 72 hours for the purposes of making an announcement pertaining to the case. The report, purportedly from an anonymous law enforcement official close to the investigation, makes no mention of what the charges will be.”

  40. “you have the right to remain silent anything you say can and will be used against you’

    Will someone please tell me what of any of the above applies to Sean

    Hannity since Zimmerman shared info with him,that he would not even tell Zimmermans previous attorneys.

  41. “..Sean Hannity since Zimmerman shared info with him,that he would not even tell Zimmermans previous attorneys.”

    Not quite accurate there.. or to put it another way – baseless.
    The attorneys simply said that Hannity would not tell them what Zimmerman said to him. And why should he?

    Perhaps it is possible that Zimmerman rang Hannity to tell him that (1) he deliberately executed Martin because he was a black guy wearing a hoodie and (2) he had 5 black hoodied corpses in his freezer. You know – the kind of stuff that anyone claiming innocence would volunteer to some stranger who just happend to have a TV show.

    So all this hoo-haa about whether or not Hannity should be forced to testify
    is just more circus performance.
    So hand out the popcorn. Drag Hannity’s privilige/limited_privilige right up to SCOTUS. Rage about it for months.

    In the end, Hannity will reveal the details in a special broadcast bracketed and interrupted only by excessive premium advertising…. “He said he was innocent. He was in fear of his life. He was on his way back to his SUV when he was viciously attacked, yadda-yadda”

  42. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/11/462513/experts-hannity-testify-conversation-with-george-zimmerman/

    EXPERTS: Hannity Could Be Required To Testify About His Conversation With George Zimmerman

    By Judd Legum on Apr 11, 2012 at 2:20 pm

    According to several experts in Florida law, Sean Hannity could be compelled to testify about his conversations with George Zimmerman. Tamara Lave, a professor of criminal law at the Universtiy of Miami who also practiced as a public defender for 10 years, told ThinkProgress it’s a “no brainer.”

    Under Florida Law, there is a “qualified privilege” for journalists that protects their conversations with sources. But this priviledge can be overcome, per Florida Evidence Code 90.5015:

    A party seeking to overcome this privilege must make a clear and specific showing that:

    (a) The information is relevant and material to unresolved issues that have been raised in the proceeding for which the information is sought;
    (b) The information cannot be obtained from alternative sources; and
    (c) A compelling interest exists for requiring disclosure of the information.

    Here’s how Hannity described his conversation with George Zimmerman:

    Now yesterday I was contacted by an individual that we in fact believe was George Zimmerman. He reached out to me, we spoke on the phone about his case, and I agreed not to report on the contents of that conversation.

    Lave said that, in her opinion, the qualified privilege could “easily” be overcome under Florida law because Zimmerman’s statements about the incident are “relevant and material to unresolved issues.” Further, there are no “alternative sources” for his statements to Hannity and there is a compelling interest for disclosure in a potential manslaughter case.

    Lyrissa Lidsky, an expert in media law at the University of Florida and the author of a book on the First Amendment, said that she also believed the factors in the Florida law would be resolved “in favor of forcing Hannity to disclose the information.”

    Michael Seigel, Director of the Criminal Justice Center at the University of Florida, agreed, stating that Hannity “may very well have opened himself up to subpoena.” Kenneth Nunn, another criminal law professor a the University of Florida, concurred and said he didn’t think the journalist’s privledge could be made successfully by Hannity. (end of article)

  43. This article, dated 3/27/12 from the Miami Herald, poses all the questions I will expect the “Special Prosecutor” to answer either tonight or within the next few days. Charges concerning Zimmerman, of course, but also questions and possible legal consequences (or not) surrounding the actions of the Sanford Police Dept. and the State’s Atty General’s Office within the first week of Martin’s death.


  44. GeneH,

    And don’t sling the Constitution in the face of an ignorant man. Then YOU are bullying me and you know it. Explain to me my obvious lack of knowledge. I never read the Constitution until it was mentioned here amendment by amendment, clause by clause, bit by bit. And yet many parts have not been explored here. Nor by me.

    So show you knowledge. Don’t browbeat with it.

    Don’t come with what could be suspected as snide superiority (superiority I admit, that’s been proven as to logic and law was never a question) and shit on my head.
    Now be nice, and I’ll forgive you.
    Or do you object to my being on a roll of self-egotism today? And writing too much. Just say, be quiet. That is enough, at least I know your point and don’t have to search for it.

    Oh yeah, now I re-read you, you were objecting to my comments on Clintwood et al.
    I haven’t seen the film, know nothing about it, and don’t need it to teach me to hate violence. I shot one deer once. That was the last killing i’ll ever do. Maybe others do need teaching there, but not I. Nor do Swedes.
    Only mentally disturbed or alcohol intoxicated are violent here.

    I have no interest in the film, unless someone feels they would like to inform me as to its impact there, ie to the film’s effect on the American society.

    Your wars, films, TV-games etc speak loudly enough for me of your need for pacification, to bend the meaning and referring to the pacification of VietNam.
    The nations of the world know who the terror threat is. And it is neither Al Quaida, nor Islam. Ugly, yes. Hateful, yes. But world threat, no..
    And as Dredd has said, it is infectious. Fortunately, other countries have centuries of it behind them and are somewhat immune.

    And as long as corporate America and the money elite pay for their ruling privileges, it will remain the same.

    All here seem to agree on that last point. I feel certain you do, as you have spoken most heartily against them all. “A pox on both your houses”, roughly remembered.

  45. Miami Herald: Source Says One Criminal Charge To Be Filed Against Zimmerman

    A source tells the Miami Herald that one criminal charge will be filed against George Zimmerman.

    Via the Herald’s Frances Robles.

  46. id707,

    1) You should practice reading more. Increasing your comprehension will (maybe) stop you from misrepresenting what others say if you actually understand what you read. Learn to differentiate between a general philosopical statement about the nature of justice and a statement of Constitutional law. No one mentioned the Constitution but you, Mr. Passive/Aggressive Straw Men. Be nice? Screw you. You started it. Again. Apparently, old dogs really can’t learn new tricks. Take your “forgiveness” and stick it.

    2) If you haven’t seen the film, then your comment is revealed to be made in total ignorance. How utterly not shocking that youd’ engage your mouth before your brain.

    Up your meds, grandpa.

  47. Malisha,
    I try to be brief and end up incoherent—-

    “@ Idealist707: I actually did not understand your post addressed to me. I’m sweet?

    Sound like a judge? Which judge?

    Feminine wiles? WilesR-US!! (wow)”

    Sweet. Meaning I was touched by the sweet tale (IMO) you shared with usö
    Judge: Any judge. Assuming that instead of you being the young ingenue I pictured, you could be a very serious older “judge” with a bench—-and my “sweet” descriptor could be wildly wrong. Hedging my firstbet in other words.
    Feminine: Not as a sexual slur, but an acknowledgement that the “weaker” sex (in strength) has to develop ways of getting around “strength”.

    OK. Jeez, thank for pointing it out. Better to be revealed for inability to write than suspected for worse social “crimes”.

  48. anon nurse:

    Thanks for the info,I see that Hannity has changed his story a bit today,he must have gotten a call from the legal folks at “FAUX NEWS” and they “pulled his coat” and told him to he may be playing with ,

  49. eniobob,

    “Hannity spoke about the issue on his show. ‘I want to set the record straight,’ [Hannity] said. ‘For a few weeks we have been pursuing an interview with Mr. Zimmerman to give him a chance to tell his side of the story. Now yesterday I was contacted by an individual that we in fact believe was George Zimmerman. He reached out to me, we spoke on the phone about his case, and I agreed not to report on the contents of that conversation. That’s it.'” – Huff Po

  50. The nature of the charges wasn’t immediately known, the official told NBC News Justice Department correspondent Pete Williams, speaking on condition of anonymity. But because Angela Corey — the special prosecutor appointed by Florida Gov. Rick Scott to re-examine the case — previously announced that she wouldn’t take the case to a grand jury, first-degree murder is not an option.

  51. GeneH,
    You said:
    “As to whatever your problems are with the 2nd Amendment, those appear to be interferring with your ability to understand film” (sic)

    I said I don’t know what you are talking about as to the constitution.. That stands. And you deny you mentioned the Constitution. Oh well, you are always right, and besides careful with slurs too.

    You said:
    “For all of its over violence, Unforgiven is a film with a particularly anti-violence message at its core.”

    I replied that I hadn’t seen it and did not need to see it. My stand on violence is far from the internationally perceived American standard. You need such a film as you say yourself. And I’m not criticizing your needs, the country’s needs. nor the films alleged message (unknown to me).
    I simply said: it did not resonate as a great film with me.

    This apparently outraged you so as to cause an attack.

    Again, I question your hypersensitivity and extreme reactivity to criticism of that which you approve of. This is not a jibe, but a point which will likely never occur to you..

    As for hyperbole, which? Mine or eventually yours, if I am allowed to guess as to your intent.

    I simply took yours and upped the ante, ie the ceremony where the American people, the 99 per cent could witness, as at the so-called “Reign of Terror” in Paris, the death of their traitors to humanity.

    No use replying to you, but in respect to myself I will this time.

    To listen further to someone who so readily takes to verbal abuse is of no further use. You have previously demonstrated your abilities therewith and if you wish to continue warning others to not EFF with GeneH. Then go right ahead.

    And if you want to appreciate your approval of something, then I have the freedom as you pointed out above re Rafflaw’s comment and his freedoms therewith, to do the same. Ie, express my opinion counter to yours.
    And if you fly into a rage and vilify me again, then you again demonstrate your character for all here.

    And I will not end as you usually do and did above with a “stuff it ” comment.
    No, I wish you better health, at least mentally. It is needed.


    As for the film to be criticisized based on a short bit. Of course that is too little evidence. It was offered to resonate with those who have seen it in its entirety. I offered , and offer is the right word here, my opinion in much the same way as Swedes often do, which used to irritate me no end.
    That is to say, to offer a colder and less inebriated view which the others’ enthusiasm has perhaps obscured.

    Shan’t go further. Will just say that Eastwood’s imitations of Mount Rushmore have not excited me since “Dirty Harry”. And the lines I could have written in my sleep. Even as a teenager reading pulp westerns, I could have back then. I would guess the script writer took a beating on his gage just to avoid having his name on the credit lines.

    And god knows, the Australian who committed suicide should have played a role in this scene.

    Lastly, let me guess that this was a Clint Eastwood production and he was director as well.

    Just guessing, of course. And as some believe, that is my right to do here. I will so exercise it.

    They say Eastwood was a good mayor. and the town is charming if you got money, which helps anywhere. I bought some excellent rosé there, if served well chilled to increase the sour note lacking.
    And highway one is to be recommended. As yet, I hope, still with all its curves unstraightened.
    Google Maps shows it well. And there is another view taken from the ocean side by a government agency. Got the link still I believe.

    Good night all, Beddy bye. 11:35PM here.

    I can guess you are eating and will watch the special prosecutor’s press conference, and will then return to thrash it out. Good luck with American justice.

  53. George Zimmerman will be charged with second-degree murder in the shooting of unarmed Florida teen Trayvon Martin, the Associated Press reports. Both the AP and NBC News report that Zimmerman is in police custody.

  54. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/11/462994/george-zimmerman-to-be-charged-with-second-degree-murder-is-now-in-custody
    “Under Florida law, second degree murder is defined as “[t]he unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual.”

    That sounds about right for the circumstances as I understand them.
    The severity may hinge on ballistics/forensics to show where Martin was in relation to Zimmerman when the shots were fired.

  55. Interesting Update on the ThinkProgess link in my post above

    “Zimmerman’s new attorney Mark O’Mara conceded in an interview last month that some people have called Florida’s “stand your ground” law a “license to murder” statute “because it doesn’t require actions to avoid the confrontation.” O’Mara will likely be asserting that defense on behalf of Zimmerman in a court of law. Watch it:

  56. Idealist707–

    I hasten to fall all over myself to apologize for expressing myself poorly! WOW! I am one of your fans on this blog and when you called me “sweet” I was smiling ear to ear!

    But now, since you said so much more about what you meant (I really had NOT understood it but had not one molecule of indignation in me when I sought clarification, honest!) I have to FIRST thank you and SECOND, tell you another STORY!

    On March 25, 1987, a Virginia Circuit Court judge (may his name be erased from the Book of Memory, and I will omit his name to protect the guilty, but his initials are F. BRUCE BACH) wrote an order in which he stated that I (me! Sweet Malisha from the Turley Blog!) had no credibility because I had presented myself to the court as a “nice sweet person” but obviously, he went on, I was NOT. I doubt anybody on this blog has ever seen a court order in either a civil or criminal proceeding (and this was BOTH — although under Virginia law there is no such thing) where the judge rules that a person is not nice and/or sweet!

    So I recently got friends of mine to send me letters, which I could show to a journalist if necessary (if one decides to write about this ever) saying: “I know her and she IS NICE AND SWEET!” I have a whole notebook full of such letters! HA HA HA HA HA!!

    I LOVED the part about feminine wiles, and was not at all upset about that, just got the giggles, because I wish I could use them — I’m sorely deficient in that category. Also, I think feminine wiles (like other feminine things) are wonderful, are great, and might have been able to save our planet if we women were not subjected to 4,000 years of patriarchy to the point where nothing EVER works because the ship is too big to turn around!

  57. Idealist707–

    Forgot to mention: I’m not ingenue (giggling again!) but not a judge (now an out and out guffaw!). I have seen 227 judges in action. Lord, Lord, Lord! (Nobody knows the trouble I’ve seen.)

    I’m a 65-year-old, uneducated, well read, white woman who really appreciates an intellectual conversation and who feels very personally aggrieved about the fact that American Law has utterly omitted cases that can deal with the all-too-common situations in which the CONSTITUTIONAL LIFE INTEREST is denied “under color of state law.”

    And I’m a story teller. I think if we tell each other our stories, we may be able to get through this vale of tears —

    I thank you for doing your part in that eternal project. Here’s to you:

    Haiku Idealist707

    Warm breeze, light petals,
    glinting as they drifted down–
    Try to remember!

    You were there with me,
    Surely you were there that day,
    when I saw all that!

  58. RE: Constitution

    I concentrate on two parts, in general.

    1 – A person should not be deprived of life, liberty or property w/o due process of law.

    (From those three, LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY, there are also two shadow “interests” that flow. Liberty interest reflects the fact that you can lose your liberty without being jailed. THus, if you are not free to visit your father’s girlfriend in a gated community, although you have not been convicted of any crime preventing you from doing so, you have been deprived of a LIBERTY INTEREST. Property also gives rise to a property interest. Thus, someone doesn’t have to take away your money to deprive you of your property INTEREST. THey can, for instance, fire you from your job for refusing to give your boss sexual favors. Your “interest” in that paycheck was then taken. BUT there is no litigation in this great nation — after more than 200 years of constitutional litigation — about losing your LIFE interest! The life interest is the black hole in American law — and it is a dangerous vacuum sucking into its deadly vortex all our other rights.)

    Don’t get me started.

    2. A person has a right under the First Amendment to Petition their government for redress of wrongs.

    Wow. Just try. Just try. Without a tribe of lawyers (and lawyers, may I say, like TRIBE — from Harvard) you can’t get NEAR this one. And if you do have a tribe of lawyers, they are as likely to TAKE your rights as they are to protect them. HELP! (This is MY VOICE; analyze it.)

  59. Malisha:

    Don’t know how you ran into Judge Bach in Virginia Beach, because he is a retired judge from the Fairfax (VA) Circuit Court not the Virginia Beach Circuit Court (about 4 hours away). Of course, it’s possible he was sitting for a judge that recused himself but it’s not likely. Judge Bach is an ethical man whom I know. Judge Bach is a former prosecutor and Chief Judge of the Fairfax Circuit. He was also Acting Executive Secretary of the Virginia Supreme Court before going onto perform fine work as a mediator. He also serves as the Chairman of the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission. I have no idea what your case was about but I can assure you that Judge Bach is quite well-respected for his intellect and not prone to snap judgments or flip comments.

  60. Zimmerman’s new lawyer is an outbreak of sanity in the matter.
    He seems to be a real pro.
    His performance in this video shows up the previous pair as amateur drama queens by comparison. It’s chalk and cheese – no comparison.
    The entire video is well worth watching.
    This is the kind of guy that I’d want if I were in deep trouble.

    He was keen to protray Zimmerman’s mental state as good (in the current pressing circumstances). One thing he does not need is for his client to be portrayed as unbalanced. Good luck with that. I think George is a wing-nut.

  61. Mespo, I didn’t say Virginia Beach. It was Fairfax and it was Bach. He has made plenty of normal decisions; I have actually seen some of them, AND I have seen him behave normally on the bench too, and I know his full history, and I know that he has been elected one of the 500 best lawyers in America, etc. etc.

    Here are a few facts, though:

    1. He got a case in 1982 because the father, dissatisfied with the custody order entered by the late Lewis Hall Griffith (Judge, Fairfax County Circuit Court) after a full ore tenus hearing, sued Judge Griffith in the Eastern District for $35,000 for discriminating against men by giving custody to a mother, against the father’s wishes.

    2. Griffith recused himself on a pro se motion brought by this irate father, which motion was not brought upon notice, simply marched up to the bench by the pro se father because he was upset that he was before Griffith for contempt, after refusing to pay child support.

    3. The contempt then went a few weeks later to Bach, who threatened the father that if he didn’t pay, he could bring his toothbrush to court at the next hearing. Took it under advisement.

    4. The father was advised from the bench a total of three times (in front of three judges) to stop disobeying the order and if he thought he should have custody, file a petition alleging changed circumstances. He said he would NOT because the circumstances were not CHANGED; the judge had been WRONG. He admitted that he had not appealed the decision because, he said, he was advised he had little chance of winning and appeal and it was expensive.

    5. He then berought a motion to VACATE the order for FRAUD ON THE COURT but he did not allege fraud. Not only did not allege it with specificity, did not even allege extrinsic fraud, PERIOD.

    6. Bach GAVE HIM A WHOLE NEW TRIAL without notice — new custody battle, no notice, no petition pending, etc. etc. But did not enter a written order. Just gave him all kinds of benefits and warned him that if he continued to disobey, he would “take everything away.” In the oral decision from the bench he said he might be making “a heck of a mistake” and that he was thinking of Neville Chamberlain!

    7. This judge then got very upset that he couldn’t get me charged with either contempt or with a crime for disobeying THAT alleged order (which he had not entered so naturally it could not be appealed, and which he refused to enforce even after it was disobeyed in significant ways by the father who had sued Judge Griffith). We didn’t have the Internet then so I couldn’t set up a web-page talking about what Bach had done. Very clearly, my lawyers pointed out that by this time, it had become a real ego issue for Bach. HE HAD DECIDED HE HAD THE SOLUTION TO THE WHOLE PROBLEM AND HE WANTED TO ENFORCE THAT SOLUTION ON ME AND I DIDN’T GO ALONG WITH IT. HECK WITH THE FACT THAT VIRGINIA LAW DID NOT PROVIDE FOR HIS JURISDICTION TO SOLVE THE WORLD’S PROBLEMS ABSENT A LAW TO HANG IT ON.

    8. Ultimately Bach entered an order that was a combined civil/criminal order. Because the father is a vexatious litigant who cares more for his right to try to destroy someone who saw his feet of clay (and other substandard elements — ahem) than for having a good relationship with his only son, this order is still in play and takes up the judicial time and money of judges all over the country AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO AS LONG AS I NEED TO DEFEND MYSELF FROM THIS LUNACY. So although I understand that Bach is still defending HIS honor by saying he never did anything wrong in this case, and although he has used and misused officials in other courts, agencies, and the AG’s office as well to continue to protect HIM by denying my First Amendment Rights to petition my government for redress of wrongs, this case is back in play, and won’t go away.

    I was perfectly satisfied to have written some funny poems about Bach and left it at that until his patron vexatious litigant came back in 2007 and arranged to have my money taken out of a Maryland bank without a valid Maryland order, based on the Virginia order that had never resulted in an enforcement in Fairfax. It’s too complex to expain why the order could not be enforced in Fairfax — it was because, basically, any contempt proceeding there would result in my being able to reactivate a habeas corpus that Bach got a federal judge (friend of his) to delay for 17 months and then declare “moot” — but the bottom line was that the order was unenforceable and the agency, to try to enforce it after my son turned 18 by just doing all sorts of unlawful things with the help of agency personnel (etc.) in and out of Virginia.

    All this happened because Bach thought he was smarter than anybody, thought he could appease rather than rule, and thought that since domestic relations stuff is all loosy goosey, his making a mess of the law would be good enough to work. He had the power to do what he did; he proved that. But does he have the power to keep it from ever getting beyond his ability to control INFORMATION? Maybe not.

    He’s entitled to your good opinion of him. Clearly, he never did anything wrong to you.

    I have paperwork proving what I have said about what he did. Oh, and one little other thing. He withdrew my attorney with an order he made on October 1, 1982. Then, six weeks later, he withdrew that same attorney with a second order withdrawing him. Put a post-it-note on the first one, telling the Clerk, “See me about this.” She accidentally left the post-it-note on the order and I saw it and copied it, much after the fact. And guess why he withdrew him a second time? To make it retroactively legal that the attorney was served with papers on October 10, 1982. See? Stuff like that FILLED the file. Even worse and more ridiculous stuff filled the file of the habeas corpus proceeding in the Eastern District, where a petition was left on the desk 17 months so that it could “go moot” and not have to be decided.

    Vote for Bach again as the Best Lawyer. Considering the competition, that may not even be untrue.

  62. id707,

    I misread one of your earlier posts (on the run), and indeed, I was the one who brought the Constitution into it. So, my bad and my apology. However, outraged? Not in the slightest. You’re the one who started with the verbal attacks in response to an innocuous comment. I simply responed in kind. If you don’t like that? Learn to control yourself. As to an attack? Saying you don’t know factually what you’re talking about when it comes to something isn’t an attack. You attributed a meaning to a flim that was the exact opposite of the film’s rather explicit message. If you don’t like having that pointed out? Stop speaking from ignornace. Whether or not you *think* you’d like a movie or not that you’ve never seen is beside the point. Pointing out you’re wrong isn’t an attack though. It’s pointing out you’re wrong. You’re free to say what you like. I have not tried to silence you in any way. You’re not free from having what you say challegned or criticized though. No one is free from factual challenge and criticism. However, opinon is not fact, nor is fact opinion. You’re entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts. Even about the trival. Your approval is not required. You also mistake me for someone who takes evaluation of their character from random annonymous strangers on the Internet. Unless you’re a personal friend of mine, I really and truly don’t care what you think of my character. That’s an opinion one must earn the privledge to have appreciated. There are a few select people posting here who’s opinion on that matter I would consider. Sorry! You aren’t one of them.

    As to the rest of what you say?

    Yada, yada, yada.

  63. malisha:

    Sorry abut the too quick read of your comment but you’re the first person I’ve met who had anything negative to say about Judge Bach. Sorry for your experience but I tend to believe there was more to the case than what I’ve read so far.

  64. Mespo, I have great respect for you. Please do not take my last line or my indignant tone to mean otherwise.

    There was so much to the case that it would take a lot of your attorney time to make it clear but I will be very glad to prove to you what I have said. Perhaps I AM the first person who has had anything negative to say about Bach, but of course, I am an UNIMPORTANT PERSON whom he felt could NEVER do anything TO HIM and probably the other people you know who also know him are NOT powerless and therefore would NOT have received mistreatment from him. I am not being frivolous with any of my comments and I am not aj person to wrongfully attack someone who has never gone beyond their legal rights.

    My son is my greatest supporter and my best friend. He endured quite a lot of negative treatment at his father’s hands as a result of what Bach did. (He also publicly disowned his father.) If you are ever interested in finding out more about this bizarre and almost unbelievable case, I can make the data available.

    A prominent forensic psychiatrist with a degree in law evaluated me, investigated this case, and BELIEVES ME. He believes that what happened to me is what he describes as “among the most appalling cases I have ever seen in 30 y ears of forensic work.” He has been helping me pro bono.

    Again, you have my respect and if I slighted you, my apology as well.

  65. Malisha:

    No,no,no .. I wasn’t slighted in any way, just surprised. I can’t call your opinion false since I don’t know the case. I will say that custody cases are the most difficult ones for judges to decide. They have to favor neither parent’s side in deference to the child’s welfare which is presumed to be a relationship with both estranged parents. Personally I don’t agree with that approach but it’s there. A relationship with some parents is not in the child’s interest sometimes.

    I meant no aspersions on you either, just wondering about the basis for your opinion.

  66. George Zimmerman In Custody, Charged With Second-Degree Murder In Trayvon Martin Case

    According to the article, he plans to plead not guilty. The murder charge indicates prosecutors plan to prove malice without premeditation. A lesser charge of manslaughter would have required prosecutors to prove only that he acted unlawfully and with criminal negligence in shooting Martin. This could be a case of overcharging to force a plea or the DA may actually have enough evidence to make the greater charge stick. We’ll see in court.

  67. Gene H:

    State’s Attorney Corey strikes me as a particularly ethical and conservative prosecutor. Her obvious religiosity concerns me though. She mentioned that when first meeting the Martins her first “official” act was to call a prayer circle. A homage to her deep Episcopalian faith no doubt.

    Tough cases like this are won on evidence and persuasive argument not pious entreaties to a deity who couldn’t care less.

  68. Mespo, thanks for your sur-reply! In 1981 when my custody case was really decided in a properly convened court of law with all the proper things in place (petition, evidence, witnesses, judge who unquestionably had jurisdiction, notice, opportunity to be heard, and best interests, with both sides ably represented), I was awarded permanent sole custody, and yes, I know that it was based upon the law and the proper standards etc. My lawyer in that trial, Sandy Ain, widely recognized as among the very best lawyers in the tri-state metro area, had explained all of that to me, and it was all considered. The stuff that happened later had to do with the official inability to deal with a crazed and angry disgruntled litigant who had been taught by a wacko fringe-group of malcontents how to manipulate the system. He sued all my witnesses, some of them over and over, and he sued the judge and he ended up making it impossible for officials to keep minding the shop — they were too busy trying to either satisfy him or avoid being sued themselves. In those pre-9/11 days, the two things scariest to the ordinary run-of-the-mill public official OR other kind of citizen were AIDS and a lawsuit. So naturally, the case went “into orbit” after my ex sued the judge who awarded me custody. I don’t want to speak ill of the dead but frankly, Judge Griffith was also at fault for being an irresponsible jurist, in recusing without even allowing an answer to the motion. He later actually got on the phone with me (I called him at HOME, respectfully, years later, and asked him about his recusal) and told me that he had recused himself to “avoid liability.” That was bull. He had no liability. He should have denied the motion and continued to do his job for the taxpayers of the Commonwealth, but there’s no going back to do over.

    Ultimately, I think Bach was seduced by his own belief that he could fix something that looked out of control. Since I was the obedient one and my ex was the unruly disobedient wacko, he figured, OK, I’ll give him something to make him stop throwing his fit. Well, see, that’s neither effective nor legal, under the circumstances. But by the time it happened, the case was already chaos and idiocy. (One other judge doubled my ex’s visitation on a Friday motions day without taking evidence! My ex had said the reason he needed more visitation was that I had “constipated baby.” My “baby” was not constipated and the pediatrician had actually written the ex a letter telling him to PLEASE STOP BOTHERING THE CHILD ABOUT HIS BOWEL MOVEMENTS! The case was nuts. My father-in-law had hung himself to death in the basement of our house in Falls Church, and my ex filed papers in the case alleging that the suicide was MY FAULT because I had failed to tell my father-in-law “good morning.”)

    Mespo, the case was nuts, the judge acted wrong, and then when it blew up in his face, he blamed me and punished me. But it didn’t have anything to do with the best interests OR THE LAW. Judge Bach thought then and probably thinks now that I can just be disregarded as a “disgruntled litigant” but I am beginning to think, now, that ultimately, this case and its real facts are going to put a few dents where they might not have otherwise appeared. You see, I can still express myself pretty clearly and I have recently made the decision to do so if it takes the rest of my life, which it probably will.

    My apologies to others on the blog for going way off subject. Someone calling me “sweet” just kind of made me remember that damn fool order, and one thing led to another — I am, in the final analysis, just a story teller and this is, in the final analysis, just another one of my stories.

    Best regards,

  69. About the prosecutor calling on religion while announcing the arrest and charge of Zimmerman strikes me as both worrisome (the authority here should not be a deity — even if that deity is a “caring” one — but the law of the State of Florida) and heckofa clever. This woman knows how to use power! She’s not just facing the law in her state, she’s got her career on the line, and she’s trying to make something work that is dangerous in many subtle and some not so subtle ways. I think the second-degree murder charge is actually probably accurate because it does not rest upon the idea that there was a malice issue or a hatred issue. But the cleverness of her avoiding the grand jury and of her also not trying to drop down to the lesser included(s) shows political savvy and intelligence. Now judging from the comments posted on the FOX sites (quoted above — actually too shocking to have been expected!) there is a serious problem brewing no matter what takes place from here on out. Although from a point of view of “what should and should not be a governmental consideration,” strictly speaking, God should be left out of this situation, on the other hand, this prosecutor is REALLY doing something that is not SIMPLY quasi-judicial, it is irremediably POLITICAL. A little help from the biggest judge she could call upon — to seal the impression (among millions of people in her state and our country) that he is on HER SIDE, is smart. I’ll give her a pass this time.

  70. Mailisha,

    I am truly sorry about your trevails in family court. Many lawyers avoid that area of practice precisely because of the level of drama it invites. As my grandfather used to say, “Enemies are one thing, but when two people used to love each other? One will walk across a mile of broken glass and climb a tree while riding a camel at night for no other reason than they see a mere chance to screw with the other one. Hell hath no fury like a lover scorned.”

    As to the Martin case, you may want to re-read how the Florida charges work. “I think the second-degree murder charge is actually probably accurate because it does not rest upon the idea that there was a malice issue or a hatred issue. ” That would be manslaughter in Florida if the malice component is removed. The charge facing Zimmerman is second degree murder which has a malice component, but not a premeditation component. That’s why I said I suspect either the DA of having iron clad evidence of malice or it’s an overcharge to force a plea.

  71. mespo,

    I agree with both you and raff. Religiousity is a matter of concern in all government officials, but especially those with powers of prosecution. The 1st Amendment and their duty to the Constitution requires they leave God at the Courthouse door.

  72. Gene,

    Ordinarily I would agree, but given that this took place during her initial meeting with a family that had been so traumatized by first the death of their child and the ensuing tribulation that their determination for justice created, the fact that she, a stranger to their grief, was comfortable praying with them is huge.

    That she released the information was, in my opinion, tactically brilliant.

  73. Blouise,

    But huge how? As you note, PR tactical brilliance. You have to pardon me if that doesn’t aleviate my concerns about religiosty in public officals in their public capacities. Just because it may play well in the press doesn’t mean she should have done it just because she could. But then we get back to that whole “can versus should” debate and we both know where that leads.😉 I think on a personal level – since it seems the Martins are religious people and in a time of trouble – I’ll stipulate that it was admirable in a humanist way as well, but if the humanist angle and showing empathy was the key consideration, there was no need for the press to ever hear about it.

  74. Gene H,

    I couldn’t find the place you considered your typing sloppy.

    As to my mistake on the murder/manslaughter thing, I just read too hastily and didn’t take notes — I can only remember significant points when I either take notes or type while hearing speech (yes, I’m fast, though not always accurate).

    I will venture a guess that the reason second-degree murder might work, even WITH malice, is that the forensics of the wound in Martin’s chest shows that there was distance between him and Zim when he was killed. If Zim shot Martin from, say, 6 or more feet away, I’m thinking that would make a BIG BIG difference in how this thing is analyzed.

    The fact that the cops didn’t even care about the forensics when they interviewed Zim and let him go that night is what keeps impressing me (negatively).

    About my experience in the family court, it was not really just about the “hatred of former lovers” issue. Not at all, unfortunately. My ex just got a few of his facts wrong to start with. I did not realize it at the time, but he married me for citizenship and money. The stupid part is that I HAD no money; he just THOUGHT I had money because I was generous and he believed nobody would give away what they had unless they were unbelievably wealthy. This all came out later; I was as stupid as he was, actually. He believed I was rich; I believed he loved me, a prescription for the worst form of crack-up.

    The real problems occurred when judges began to act like incompetent parents, thinking that distracting a child from a temper tantrum by giving him a nice toy was an effective way to stop tantrums. The judges actually created a frankenstein. They should have “just said no,” but no…

    When they realized that the thing was getting REALLY bad they blamed the victim. Typical self-defensive fool behavior — we have seen it in the Trayvon Martin case ad nauseam.

    The real opposite of love is not hatred, I believe, but indifference. Had my son’s father not returned to grab yet more money from me 30 years after I was truly done with him, this whole thing would have simply stayed a joke that we told a bit too often. As it is, it will not be a joke for very long.

    People with whom I discuss the religion-in-government issue often do not realize that religion used to BE government. Civil government is a relatively modern development. I am reminded, however, of a visit to Monticello, and seeing the mass grave for the slaves. There was a marker there that bore some inscription I cannot remember, but it was a Biblical exhortation to obedience, because if the slaves were obedient, they would receive their reward in Heaven, after having served their masters so well all their lives. What a convenient god! Also, he could conveniently provide punishment for those who did not do his will on earth as it was in heaven. OMG, OMG.

    Outside the District Court in Iowa City, Iowa, in the nineties (and perhaps now, I don’t know) there stood a large chiseled stone tablet in the familiar shape with the ten commandments written on it. I ascended the steps to the courthouse with a mother out there trying to defend her custodial rights, and as soon as I saw the stone tablets, I said, “What is THIS?” She looked at me pityingly: “The Ten Commandments from the Bible.” I explained, “Oh I KNOW what it IS, I meant, what is it doing HERE?” She answered, “This is the Courthouse!” as if that explained it. I was stunned. “What does the ACLU have to say about THIS?” I demanded. “Oh, there are no Jews in town,” she declared, and we both proceeded into the courthouse.

  75. Gene,

    “I’ll stipulate that it was admirable in a humanist way as well, but if the humanist angle and showing empathy was the key consideration, there was no need for the press to ever hear about it.”

    Exactly. My opinion is based more on my knowledge pf prosecutors who I know well. They are fairly religious guys, meaning they go to church, pledge, send their kids for confirmation etc., but when they take on their prosecutor role, their eyes harden, their voices become cop-like in tone and, they get all combative and argumentative.

    These guys do work a humanist angle with the victims but it’s calculated … always calculated. They do what it takes to calm the victim, loosen them up, reassure them that justice will be sought, etc.

    That’s what I think she did. I think it was huge in that it was calculated. And I think it was calculated because she released the info to the press.

  76. “I couldn’t find the place you considered your typing sloppy.”

    I misspelled your name in the header.😀 Sorry.

    As to religous iconograhpy in courthouses, I used to be a lot more tolerant to that practice because as you note, religious laws are part of the history of law. Most governments throughout history used some form of religous based doctrine as the foundation for their laws. What we now know as civil law in the West was really invented by the Romans/Byzantines and in fact the Code of Justinian is the foundation upon which all Western civil law is built. However, there is a problem in the form of theocrats who often resort to such things as “evidence” that America is allegedly a Christian country when in fact (and specifically according to both Jefferson and Madison as well as the plain languge of the Constitution) we were founded as a secular pluralistic nation. Since educating a theocrat about history isn’t going to change their complaint (they tend to be irrational and evidence proof), I’m now for removing all such mention from public buildings.

  77. Blouise,

    My objection isn’t rooted in the humanist angle or even in its calculated use, but rather that it creates an impression of legally systemic propriety where there is none.

  78. Gene,

    I don’t disagree with that assertion. If she keeps it up, your concern is justified. If it’s a one shot deal, I consider it well played.

    Somebody up thread mentioned she was Episcopalian. If that is so, and I don’t know if it is, they aren’t, as a rule, inclined to “prayer circles”.

  79. GeneH.
    Top of the morning to you. And ya-da to you too.

    To help me with my halting understanding, could you please point out which “innocuous comment” from you was replied to in an uncourteous manner. Seeing ones own position as it is perceived by another is not always easy.
    Will look up the second amendment to enlighten myself. Secondly, I posed what I thought had been the cause of your comment on hyperbole, but have received no clarification from you. It was expressed as a question, not rebuttal or attack. Read it again if doubtful. Can you clarify there too please?

    And as soon as you stop attacking my mental capabilities and my senility; then I might be inclined to question less your character of using insults as a form of “discussion”. Tit for tat; I think you once called it.

  80. I think I’m about done holding your hand, id707, but this one last time I will:

    “And don’t sling the Constitution in the face of an ignorant man. Then YOU are bullying me and you know it. Explain to me my obvious lack of knowledge. I never read the Constitution until it was mentioned here amendment by amendment, clause by clause, bit by bit. And yet many parts have not been explored here. Nor by me.

    So show you knowledge. Don’t browbeat with it.

    Don’t come with what could be suspected as snide superiority (superiority I admit, that’s been proven as to logic and law was never a question) and shit on my head.
    Now be nice, and I’ll forgive you.”

    If you don’t understand something, it helps you get a response you might like if you ask nicely instead. If you don’t like my responses – especially when prompted in such freindly terms as the above – ask somebody else. Again, you act with hostility to me, you’ll likely get hostility in return. I don’t cater to the passive/aggressive behavior. If you don’t understand what I mean by that, let me clarify in advance.


    You haven’t exhibited all of these behavoirs, but meeting arguably/demonstrably four of the DSM-IV criteria and 6 out of 12 symptoms listed in addition is a pretty good indication that describing you as passive-aggressive isn’t unreasonable or unfair.

    Consider this being put on notice about an intentional blind spot in my generally humanitarian and compassionate nature. There are certain mental disorders I don’t cater to and passive-aggressive behavior is one of them. Take your meds and/or get some therapy, if you’re trying to help yourself I’m likely to be a little more patient and sympathetic, however if you think I’m going to act as your unecessary bullshit recepticle under any circumstances without push back, you’d be sorrily mistaken.

    In the future, if you want clarification about something I’ve said, ask me nicely or screw you.

    Is that clear enough and easy to understand?

    I sincerily hope so.

  81. Suggested addition to DSM-V-TR text: Intermittent Blogger Acute Irritation Syndrome (IBAIS) (not to be confused with Blogger Illumination Assumption Syndrome, a/k/a BIAS). x

    Five or more of the following symptoms over a period of three or more months.

    Blogger identifies three (3) or more co-bloggers as Nazi, Communist, or Mongolian.

    Blogger quotes Neville Chamberlain, Madame Chiang KaiChek, Pablo Neruda or Idi Amin out of context more than four (4) times in any one week;

    Blogger prescribes medications for co-blogger without including a link where they can be purchased in Mexico;

    Blogger breaks the rule “if the theorum is true, the contrapositive is true”;

    Blogger uses the word “suck” more than three times in any one day;

    Blogger cites World Book Encyclopedia to substantiate claims on more than two (2) occasions;

    Blogger accidentally says two whole consecutive sentences previouly said verbatim by Newt Gingrich, and thus incites charges of plagiarism unintentionally; and/or

    Blogger uses “cut and paste” function to transfer 400 pages of Washington, DC parking code into comment on blog.

  82. Woosty,
    Don’t feel bad. If you thumb through DSM-IV, you will likely come away feeling you are afflicted by a bunch of them.
    Did you note the following in Wikipedia?:
    “The passive-aggressive concept was developed by the US military to describe soldiers who would not obey instructions happily. Its use as a diagnosis has also been questioned in clinical and social terms.”

    Further GeneH cites 12 symptoms (good eye Gene, Wiki said 11 in the text).
    What he did not say is that they are from a book, not from DSM.

    And if you look at the DSM list, you can wonder how anyone can make a decision based on them as criteria, particularly a lawyer who is so insistent on evidence. You might as well accuse me of loitering when waiting at an intersection waiting for the green man. Or accuse me for malingering when taking a cigarette pause with the other EMs.

    That he uses the above to lend weight to character assassinate a person in a forum speaks ill of him. And that is my opinion.

    Further for you, Woosty, even tho’ you were joking of course.

    All such diagnoses are based on obverved benaviour and speech.
    Judgements/diagnoses are a very subjective matter, which is the underlying weakness of the whole DSM or psychiatric business, That is an assertion, my own conclusion, which won’t waste time on proving. Take it or leave it.

    Putting a label, psychiatric or otherwise, solves nothing, it only allows you to conveniently added one more person to a stack, and be off with him in convenient way. It is only bureaucratic. But legally accepted.

    We see the same thing daily. Yesterday, it was an American scientist who claimed to be able to diagnose autism by an on-line series of less than ten questions. All such behavioral diagnostics have been clinically proven deficient in both diagnosis and degree of affliction. An English scientist has instead demonstrated over 4 years ago the superiority of brain-scanning to gove a reliable and better diagnosis.

    But the psychologists don’t want to lose this money-maker, nor do the drug companies.

    I will only say that I seek to find myself, partly through contacts here, and at the same time éxpress my concern for the fate of us all. Sounds over-noble.
    Perhaps, but the latter is true for me.

    GeneH took my criticism of a film clip as though it were a criticism of him, informing me of its great and generally acknowledged importance.
    What it has for effect on others is not relevant. I was expressing an opinion, which carries all the weight of a fart here, and shall be judged thereafter.
    It is regrettable that it was the cause of his outbreak.

    He has no understanding that he is not the center of the world.
    He can not realize that I can see this clip with completely other reference points of all kinds; moral, visual, artistic, dramatic, cultural. etc.
    And my review was not addressed to him, so in no way was it a challenge to others opinions—-which I wrote to Pete separately to reassure him of that.
    Could he realize that then his reply at best would have been: “That’s interesting that you see if otherwise. Please tell me more, ”
    Or simply: “I don’t agree.” That I dissed it in a way which may awaken ire, is still my privilege—as it is that of other reviewers. That is why we have them. And in art forms the review is alway subjective, even tho’ if you are pro you have many other ref points to mind.

    Using its reception in the USA as a reference point seems peculiar.
    Someone, oh yes, Michael Murry, perhaps, said that our seeing the world as an extension of ourselves, or our nation, not only is dangerous for us but for the world. And the world understands our egocentric (it’s more than ego of course) distorted view’s existence. I had hoped there would be more here who understand this problem for the world.

    Wishing to go on to more useful things than arguing with GeneH, I will hope he can go on without rancor, as that is a sore thorn to bear in ones heart. I can. No sweat. There is in all critiique some kernel of truth, and I try to sift from them, and digest them. Don’t always succeed of course. Contrite? NOT IN THE LEAST. On the contrary, quite proud.

    I make no claims to always be right, as some do. Just a general observation of course. Inasmuch as that is a type of cryptic comment I abhor, particularly from AY, I will say it was offered in the sense of it being meant, but wish to avoid personal challenges.

    And now a bit of poetry:
    If I am aggressive, then it is on the horse of true human natural justice.
    If I am passive, in the first hand it is hopefully in the manner of Joseph Welch, who defended the US Army against the attacks of Coen and McCarthy at their hearings.


  83. 😀 Quotes Idi Amin out of context. lol

    Hey Mike and OS! I think Malisha has some interesting proposed diagnostic criteria here. As the resident psych pros, I’d love to know what you guys think about IBAIS.

  84. Dear Malisha,

    I am sad that my “sweet” awakened such a torrent of outrage and remembered bitterness. But it was your decision to tell me how “sweet” had been previously used to abuse you. The results, as of course you understand, are of your decision. My assuming responsibility would derive you of being responsible for yourself, which you demonstrate you can—-perhaps too well. But mondaymorning reviews are meaningless for the games outcome. Your match is over, only wish it is worth your energies.

    I am glad you got challenged, well-intended, as it gave you a chance to briefly review the torment of many decades, both personal´, judicial, and bureaucratic, It greatly added to your stature in my eyes.

    I can not judge the content of what happened, but on the face of it it sounds like a great injustice came into being and became
    a boo-boo which no one would touch and right.

    I don’t feel it wise to go further other than to say you have my heart’s support.

    And, speaking of hearts, your previous praise touched mine.
    I was thinking of proposing marriage, but in view of my age and diminished virility, realize you must have better. That is one joke of course,
    Another would be that you would quickly tire of me; that I had a brilliant one for 27 years was one miracle, more can’t be expected.

    You arose from an illusion I had of the young girl who leads with her heart, to become a fully-armed Amazon, bearing books of law in one hand as a shield and a very sharp sword in the other.

    This is a short inadequate paean of praise. Matching you is not possible.

    Nice feelings you engender.

    And a bit ironic that words carry such weight, both negative and positive. Particularly here at Zimmernan’s thread.

  85. idealist your issues w/Gene are between the 2 of you….but this ‘Putting a label, psychiatric or otherwise, solves nothing, it only allows you to conveniently added one more person to a stack, and be off with him in convenient way. It is only bureaucratic. But legally accepted.” is upsetting . You are right in the respect that people are too blase about applying labels for thier own ends….and doing great harm, sometimes, in the process. Labels are easily applied, and they can stick longer and do more damage than any ‘fact’ which can be corrected or behavior which can be relearned. There is a lot of talk right now about race and police brutality and legal malfeasance but I am looking forward to the discussion about being responsible where medical and legal labels are applied…..I don’t think they are simple or simply bureaucratic….they are more like a weapon and a stigmatizing force.

  86. id707,

    “That he uses the above to lend weight to character assassinate a person in a forum speaks ill of him. And that is my opinion.”

    Oh, it’s not character assassination, Mr. Again Plays The Role Of Victim After Attacking. It’s an accurate description of your behavior that has nothing to do with your character.

    “GeneH took my criticism of a film clip as though it were a criticism of him,”

    Straw man. I took your criticism of a film clip to be factually incorrect and spoken from ignorance. It had nothing to do with me. I didn’t make the movie. If you don’t like that I pointed that out? Too bad. No one said you had to like the film, only that your statements about the theme and message of the movie were factually wrong.

    Again, whenever you act with hostility toward me, you’re going to get in back. That has been demonstrated multiple times now. Your previously quoted “question” is filled with rancor.

    If you don’t want rancor?

    Don’t give it.

    I don’t care if you’re contrite or not.

    It’s really that simple.

    You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Or as I already said, “In the future, if you want clarification about something I’ve said, ask me nicely or screw you.” My treatement of you is based on your treatement of me. The Golden Rule. It’s reciprocal.

  87. I should also point out that your very first salvo from the past involved you calling me delusional – a psychiatric term. If you don’t like the armchair psychiatrics? You should have thought of that when you first went on the attack, id707. Remember, you get what you give.

  88. Woosty,
    Agree. One hundred percent. Thank goodness my shrink does not believe in labels. And works as you summarized.
    But revising the power structure is a work of centuries. Good luck with your bit.

  89. GeneH
    You say:
    “No one said you had to like the film, only that your statements about the theme and message of the movie were factually wrong.”

    I made no alllusions to the theme or message.

  90. GeneH,
    Call it character assassination, call it diagonosis, call it behaviour.
    It still amount to pointing to a DSM diagnosis criteria and a books list to paint me with them all.
    And where do you show the facts backing up you accusations?
    You who attack others for their lack of evidence.
    Why don’t you provide the proof which supports your accusations?

    Are you blind to what you do? Surely not I hope.

  91. Idealist707–

    Re: “Your match is over when you decide it is” — that only works when it works. If the match is entirely in the control of someone else, it cannot be over until THEY decide it is. What if Trayvon had simply said, at minute 2-1/2 of the Zimmerman encounter, “OK, stranger, I’m done with this, I’m going home to my dad’s friend’s house now”…would that have worked?

    So politely, I will ask you to consider my situation here. I left the “match” alone long ago. Then one day (August 23, 2007 to be exact) my bank account was emptied. I called them and asked why. “Foreign court order,” they said, “check with the court; we can’t tell you.”

    On that day two checks bounced, and my account went into something they call “negative forced post deposit” and the match became NOT OVER all over again —

    Of course, there are other ways to make the matches get “OVER” and on late lonely nights I have thought of them, but they are for literature, not for life. Probably, in fact, more for the kinds of movies SOTB recommends than for the kinds of short stories I try to write.

    I’m sorry to hear about your wife, you have my condolences. If I think of what would have been worse than having the ex I have and his having continued to live (with all the problems he causes in my and my son’s life, and all the corruption he inspires in governments, and all the damage he does to his adopted country) all these years, I think what would have been worse would be having had a wonderful beloved spouse who then died.

    Another blogger on this thread had a similar experience recently. I feel for you.

    Poem for the Whales on St. Patrick’s Day, 2011

    One of you is gone,
    I can feel the hole in the ocean!
    GONE: Your distant clicks and booms,
    your muscled rising and diving,
    the vigor of tailsplash and finwave,
    the beach sorting thump from salt,
    the tickled curve of the horizon’s shape,
    oh — how I miss you!

  92. Woosty, what you say is very important. In the 90s I attended a conference at which a psychiatrist (from NJ) said that science had finally discovered the etiology of borderline personality disorder in women: “Get into a custody battle. That causes BPD, according to 78% of all experts who charge more than $100/hour.”

    He was referring, of course, to the trick of “diagnosing” a mother with BPD if she complained of the behavior of the man she was divorcing, particularly with respect to his treatment of the children over whom the spouses were disputing custody. In the high ticket cases, expert after expert after expert attributed a mother’s allegations (regardless of the factual basis for them or how they developed) against a father as a symptom of BPD, and it was circular reasoning. It went like this: She has BPD BECAUSE she has complained about his behavior; therefore he has not exhibited the behavior because it was borderline personality disorder that caused the allegation to arise in the first place; thus, the mother’s allegation itself disproved the truth of the allegation. I have read perhaps 30-40 dizzying transcripts where exactly this kind of analysis prevailed.

    It would be like:

    Trayvon Martin’s people have accused Zimmerman of racism;
    Those accusers are just infected with anti-white (or profit-motivated) attitudes;
    Those attitudes are evident from their accusations;
    Therefore, since they are making false accusations of racism, they lack credibility;
    Therefore all allegations of racism against Zimmerman are untrue;
    Therefore he is not racist;
    Therefore they are making false accusations.
    Q E D

    Neat, huh?

    So basically, a mental illness can be identified to help a patient or to destroy someone’s credibility or for many other reasons.

    Story: In about 1992, I was on the phone with a social services investigator from NJ. I had been appointed a visitation supervisor by a court and I supervised visits between a non-abusing mother and her four-year-old boy. The boy arrived at her home with bruises on both sides of his neck in the shape of thumbs! I noted it down so that she would not be blamed. (We didn’t have cell phone cameras then.) I phoned the SS worker and told him on the following Monday. He said the mother had previously made four allegations that her child was being physically abused at the father’s house (custodial father with resident step-mother) and they had all been UNFOUNDED so he wouldn’t record another claim. I said, “Well I did see those bruises and [he] did tell me that he got them when he was ‘bad’ at Daddy’s house.” The guy told me, “The real problem here is that the father hates the mother and the mother hates the father.” I asked, “How does that put bruises on [his] neck?” Then he got very angry and yelled at me, “You have NO CreDIBILITY here; I don’t have to believe YOU!”

    I said, “Mr. [name], let us presume for argument’s sake that I have zero credibility and I am in fact psychotic. Let us further presume that I hold up a candle and say to you, ‘if you put your finger in the flame, you will get a burn.’ So since I said it, and I have zero credibility, is it therefore safe for you to put your finger in the flame?”

    He hung up on me. No investigation was done.

  93. GeneH.
    you say:
    “I should also point out that your very first salvo from the past involved you calling me delusional – a psychiatric term. If you don’t like the armchair psychiatrics? You should have thought of that when you first went on the attack, id707. Remember, you get what you give.”

    You can not leave past hurts behind. It must therefore have hurt you.
    Apologies for that, in which case, And don’t say I’m backing down, just trying to see your side—-for my sake. I am still fighting my old experienced defeats in my dreams.

    Agreed that my “first salvo” was a poorly chosen one, perhaps hiding behind concern, you felt. At least so it appeared to you to be so.
    In fact, I truely believed that you did not seem to be the usual GeneH, in several posts you made. So my motivation originally was good, but people should be left alone. It simply was none of my business. But I admit delusional was meant to inspire ire. There I have much to learn about handling my own hypersensitivity..
    It is perhaps better to say: You pissed me off, than to come with dirty digs. Ehhh?

    I should just be satisfied that you are as you are, with the best of you, which is very fine. You fight ferociouly and well for our side. And a good warrior is hard to find these days.
    Is that an apology. No, just letting reality steer me for once, and not old lost battles.

    Let us turn our energies elsewhere.

  94. id707,

    “Why don’t you provide the proof which supports your accusations?”

    Because I’m not going to dig back through the record of symptoms evidenced by the history of your posts to make a summary restatement just to please you. It’s all there in your previous posts.

    I know exactly what I do. I treat others as they treat me. You, on the other hand, apparently lack such awareness of your actions.

    I feel sorry for you and I understand the underlying attention seeking behavior you’re engaging in probably much better than you realize, but I’m not going to take any shit off you either no matter who comes to your defense. My treatement of you is based on your treatement of me. The Golden Rule is reciprocal. When you’ve acted courtesouly, you’ve been treated courtesously. When you’ve acted like an ass, I’ve treated you like you’re acting like an ass. Do the math.

  95. Malisha,
    I intended only to say that the decisions was yours—-I had mistakenly and unintentionedly written that the match was over and could not be replayed.

    You make clear you have a deranged man to contend with, who is a masterfull player of the system, and is intent on destroying you. The match is not blown over as long as he is alive.
    Again I am guessing only. Blowing the whistle and leaving it behind is not an option it seems.

    You are be congratulated on your strength. Yee gods, the evil that people can achieve.

    Thanks for the repeat of the poem. I had missed it. Particularly the parallel with whales speaks to me.

  96. Malisha,
    “Your match is over when you decide it is” — that only works when it works. If the match is entirely in the control of someone else, it cannot be over until THEY decide it is”

    In that case it is not a ‘match’ at all. It is a ‘hunt’ or a predation..or a violence….because when people who deal with other people take ALL the control in a situation, when they do not let you speak…or do not, deliberately do not, hear, when they use your name, and most especially without knowledge or consent or truth..when what they do benefits themselves at your expense…..it can never be considered a ‘match’.

    Have you seen the Stoning of Soraya M. ?
    The oldest profession is not prostitution…it is murder. Which when accomplished by the American taliban can take forms more akin to social death but is no less Sharia and also, not very nice…

  97. “You can not leave past hurts behind. It must therefore have hurt you.”

    There is a difference between forgiving and forgetting. I know a raft full of doctors who’ll say I’m not delusional and as I said, I don’t really care about the opinions of annonymous strangers on the Internet. Your unwarrented attack(s) are what draw my ire. I was nothing but nice and welcoming to you as others here tried to attack you upon your initial appearance and how do you repay that courtesy? By calling me delusional and then going on a series of random attacks (sometimes about things I didn’t even say but what others misrepresented me as saying) and playing the victim when I didn’t put up with your nonsense. If you want to move on and maintain a better footing, next time you feel the urge to lash out at me? No matter what your motivation is?

    Simply don’t.

    If you have a question or need a clarification? Ask nicely. You’ll get a nicely worded answer. You may or may not like the answer itself, but that is another issue entirely.

  98. Malisha,
    “Woosty, what you say is very important. In the 90s I attended a conference at which a psychiatrist (from NJ) said that science had finally discovered the etiology of borderline personality disorder in women: “Get into a custody battle. That causes BPD, according to 78% of all experts who charge more than $100/hour.” ”

    yes, I was accused of depression and all kinds of things by the lawyers who did not want to lose thier case….which was manufactured and only a ploy to drain $$$$. And I was stupid. I had never been to court before and it did not even cross my mind that they would lie or that the Judge would use something not even as high as his shoulders as a compass…..

  99. Woosty,
    I tried to end a complex issue with too few words, I hope you know that.

    It is in fact all-encompassing. It is but one manifestation of the I-you, We-they, us-them, etc. Calling them Huns helped us then to kill them Calling them Nazis later. The name calling, which is a form of labelling, is particularly pernicious (one fuzzy word in my understanding will do as well as another common one) and deleterious.
    Food stamp people, welfare moms, communists, evangelists, and on and on.

    Why is America so full of good people and so full of hate?

  100. Malisha,
    I missed your IBAIS criteria. You are far too kind. Few would qualify here (?). Had they been more reality based you might get more snorts and harumphs. Or worse, depending on which IBAISer was awake at the time.

    If that is really yours, then I am stunned in admiration. And that is not a slick, but a well motivated compliment.

    When do we get to read your poem.? Or was the “whale” yours?
    Particularly the evocation of the ocean striking the beach and the horizon was wonderful. My words detract and take away the magic. Draw a line over them, and take them as an example of not capturing poesy with prose.

  101. woosty and malisha,
    just read woosty’s post on her experience with malicious justice.

    If you are thinking of living, don’t. If you must, then avoid justice, that is newspeak for injustice. lawyer is just another word for liar, and judge is just another word for corruption on two legs.

    Written with tongue in cheek to bite back bitter tales, and with poetic license.
    Hope the honest lawyers take no offence. I have been saved by more than one on occasions. All of them had more wisdom and compassion than any other pro group in my life. So three cheers and a good beer all around.

  102. There are more honest lawyers and judges than not….but every roue gets thier day I suppose. The ‘liar’ in my case was mostly behind the scenes….hiding behind a probably talented but in this case terrified fresh out of school and angry at the position kid. I am appalled that lawyers are set on the public so fresh out of school….really should be more like medical interns and do NOTHING for years without close supervision.

    and I’m off to see the wizard…ttyl!

  103. woosty

    as bad as the stoning video is, i can’t help but wonder about sky/fox/murdoch’s airing it.

    hear the war drums?

  104. Malisha,
    Forgot to thank you for the haiku. In Kyoto saw many such sights.
    I hope you are acquainted with the cherry blossom traditions there. Someone was there. It could have been you. The first time alone, looking out the large window at the white cherry blossoms falling slowly to the shadowy ground. One of the pleasant journeys I take at times. I should take others like it more often. Instead of revisiting old defeats, not necessarily by others , rather the self-inflicted ones are visited most.

    Am a 75 year old and rather healthy, spry and until this birthday in September unmarked by my years. Today, a new face greets me most mornings in the mirror.
    Nothing to parade with except a rootless life looking for the love lacking since the cradle. BSEE NCSU ’59, oddly read. Not being outstanding but wishing to be, I chose to be oddly read, a master of odd things, a besserwisser, a lecturer unasked, sitting on a piedestal, unable to make contact.. My first sailboat was a catamaran. My first jeans were wheat colored, mailed to me and the only ones in town.

    Fully realizing a few weeks ago that contact would only come if I stood on the same level as others, I had to ask myself who AM I. And what I find is not too impressive, but am gettiing more used to standing on “my” feet looking into the other’s eyes without a poseur’s mien. And now, I can for the most feel that it is “I” who merits the response.

    How do I ask for more whale poems?. Whales are one of the deep mysteries to me. There are so many others. “All the world loves the fig tree” was such a TV-film that left one full of the spirit of nature. I should google it.
    Another was of a female chimp asking with soft, pleading gesture to borrow a nut-crushing stone from a large male. The filmers, being chimp experts, said it was never seen before. He left the stone and went away, leaving it to her.

    I once atttempted a haiku, three actually. The spirit rather than the formula was most important to me. The best was about swans migrating and arriving at dusk to a lake’s nightstop.

    Bedtime. 00:40AM. bye for now. you give me more to look forward to.
    I shan’t stalk you nor plead for attention. Admiration of yoú from a distance is also nourishing to the spirit. Thank you again for baring your tale.
    You, achieved today, what in the short time I’ve been here, only one other has achieved. But over the years there may have been many.

    Helping us get through the day, some say—–and through the night I would add, particularly when you wake up at 3AM.

  105. Idealist707, wow, thanks!

    You know what, get onto “www.hushmail.com” and get yourself a free account, and if your handle is recognizable to me, I’ll start speaking with you on that web-page and send you what poetry I can still find. My problem is that I have been uprooted a lot and a lot of my written stuff is missing. Recently a youngster I love a lot (12 years old, unrelated to me) accidentally erased my thumb-drive full of stuff, so how many of the whale poems have survived? I don’t know.

    Remember, make your handle recognizable to me, OK? I’m MalishaGarcia@hushmail.com so you will recognize me without trouble.

    I’ve never been to Japan. I have no passport, thanks to the wacko ex husband, a few corrupt courts and my inability to hire an entire law firm to work for me for a year undoing the harm stupid and malicious people can do with a combination of negligence and laziness. So it looks like petals will have to be homegrown for the foreseeable future.

    I could probably escape paperless to Mexico and live there as an illegal alien, though…after all, Garcia-Marquez spends a lot of time in Mexico City and I hear they have great hair-dressers there too!

    Be well.

  106. I have registered at Hushmail.com and sent you an email from there.
    I assume the email will reveal my address there.

    Have very little knowledge of Mexico City, although was there a week on business. Was immediately warned by my greeter/fetcher not to visit the parks for walks/jogs. The police were known to prefer them for robbing folks. True? Didn’t test it except to watch Davis Cup doubles, BTIAS, ie but that is another story. Ended with thrown cushions protesting the rude and unfair tactics as seen by the Mexicans. Shall we guess John McEnroe was involved. Oh yes, was taken to nice restaurant with only rich mexicans to enjoy suckling pig (cochinilla pibil???). Not a VIP. Our sales manager there wanted details on whether our system worked or not. .
    But you have so many foreign and good restaurants in America.

    I suspect GCM’s fortune would help survive and have a good one there.
    But you were assumedly joking. I recognize poorly other’s irony.

  107. pete1, April 12, 2012 at 6:43 pm
    pete, sorry I didn’t see this sooner….when I hear drums it usually signals joyful nekkid dancing round a happily tended fyre…..when war breaks out I’m frequently caught w/my clothes hanging on a bush, just out of reach….

    I’m so lucky I don’t live in parts shariafar!

  108. Woosty thank you thank you!

    Love ALL the Tom Lehrer stuff. I can’t decide which ones are my favorites. Do you know the Lizzie Borden one?

    This is making me wish I could find some of my old stuff, the “Bad Judge Rap,” the “Constipational Rap,” the “Miz DeShaney, now don’t you make a fuss” (“For there’s no special-relationship tween Joshua and US!”)

  109. Re: psychopaths in high places.

    I think we have rather more psychopaths in high government positions than the proportion of them in the general population. In the general population, I think the current estimate is three (3%) percent. In government, from top to bottom of government, federal, state, local, even municipal, I think the proportion is higher, and is bound to be higher and is getting higher and higher, too. Why? Because the real defining characteristic of a psychopath is that he has no conscience. (Notice to all: In the masculine pronoun I am including the feminine and in the singular I am including the plural.) Since he has no conscience, he does not suffer from guilt. If he does something that would make another person suffer from guilt, the other person has a harder time doing similar things back to him because the other person, not being a psychopath, does suffer from guilt, even if he justifies in his own mind the fact that he needed to do the deed in question. So psychopaths automatically have a slight edge in every transaction that has to do with people acquiring and using power. This slight edge will propel a psychopath to a higher hierarchical position than the next guy, and will do so pretty predictably. Things as they are today, many little deeds involving hurting others who do not deserve it can lead to great success in either the corporate world or government.

    I know a forensic psychiatrist who worked on contracts once to evaluate people who applied for jobs with some Nuclear Power installations. Naturally, they wanted their applicants screened to rule out lunatic “PUSH THE BUTTON QUICK” types such as, say, perhaps, George Zimmerman. And I am not at liberty to find out what KINDS of people they would screen out after his evaluations were performed. But I wonder: Are psychopaths not peculiarly suited to certain jobs?

    The only person I have really ever had responsibility for is my son. He says I did great, but I always go back over stuff from his childhood and feel guilty about not having done something differently. So how would I be, say, as the state official in charge of running the day-care centers? Too much conscience can be a problem.

    Funny Story: My kid and I were in Oregon visiting friends and he was about 10. I was paying attention to a friend I hadn’t seen in years and she and I were sitting in the room (where my kid would be sleeping that night) that had some construction ongoing in the walk-in closet. My kid came in and tried to get my attention and I said, “Honey, I’m going to speak with Jan for a while and I’ll see you in about a half hour, OK?” He walked over to the carpet-less, cold, unwelcoming closet, lay down on the floor, and said, “It’s OK Mom, you go ahead and chat as long as you like, I’ll just wait here.” For a second or two I was disoriented and then I said, “Honey, it’s the Jewish MOTHER who gets to do the guilt thing, not the KID!” He went out to play.

  110. Wonderful beat ! I would like to apprentice while you amend your web site, how could i subscribe for a blog website? The account aided me a acceptable deal. I had been tiny bit acquainted of this your broadcast offered bright clear concept

  111. O’Mara’s motion to recuse Judge Lester is very telling, and it makes me feel just brilliant that I was predicting that this was going to be ALL ABOUT GEORGE’S CREDIBILITY, PERIOD, when it came down to the SYG thing. If O’Mara can risk putting George on the stand, he can make that defense, and it’s still not a very good one. If he can’t even risk putting George on the stand (as in, “if he’s cross-examined we’re dead meat”), he has NOTHING going for him. So having recused the first judge who was on the case, and now saying that a judge who has made unassailable rulings in the case until now is “prejudiced” because he considers George’s credibility low AFTER O’MARA HAD TO ADMIT THAT GEORGE DID NOT TELL THE TRUTH, this does not look good for George.

    As an aside, since Shellie is accused of perjury, why haven’t there been search warrants executed for the homes and vehicles AND COMPUTERS of George and Shelli Zimmerman, at least — if not Taaffe as well?

  112. There’s another way the shooting was life-altering. Whereas before the shooting, anything Zimmerman did could be talked away, lied away, covered up, disregarded, and officially “undone,” that appears to no longer be the case. It appears that nowadays, if he says something and later “doesn’t mean it,” that counts against him. Nowadays, if he lies about something and the lie is thin and unbelievable, that comes back to bite him. New deal.

  113. HO HO the “Battle of the Petitions.”

    Supporters of George Zimmerman from the “Conservative Treehouse” started a petition to the White House to have various people investigated for having violated George Zimmerman’s Constitutional rights. His civil rights. Apparently, charging him for a crime after he killed an unarmed, innocent kid was not a good excuse for an unprovoked attack on the poor guy’s civil rights. So they were having problems getting signatures.

    You can see it here:


    Some of the signatures are prank-signatures, like “zimmermanlies” & such….


    Suddenly a guy from an opposing website put up a petition to the White House to investigate GEORGE for violating Trayvon Martin’s civil rights. It’s found here:



    I invite folks to sign one or the other. I think it’s hilarious and after all, the First Amendment gives us the right to petition our government for redress of wrongs!

Comments are closed.