July 11, 2013

Prosecutor sums up: Zimmerman hasn't proven his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt

From the NYT:
In Closing, Zimmerman Prosecutor Focuses on Inconsistencies

Okay, but isn't that what the defense normally does -- point out inconsistencies in the prosecutor's story to try to raise the possibility that the prosecution hasn't proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt? Isn't this whole trial taking place in Mirror Land?
SANFORD, Fla. — In a murder case of chain reactions, the chief prosecutor, Bernie de la Rionda, began with the very first link when he delivered his closing statement on Thursday in the George Zimmerman trial.

Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager carrying nothing but snacks, died of a gunshot to the heart for one reason, he said: Mr. Zimmerman saw himself as a cop and Mr. Martin as a hoodie-clad criminal. 

"For one reason"?
“He went over the line,” Mr. de la Rionda told the jury. “He assumed things that weren’t true and, instead of waiting for the police to come and do their job, he did not. He, the defendant, wanted to make sure that Trayvon Martin didn’t get out of the neighborhood.” 
“In this defendant’s mind he automatically assumed that Trayvon Martin was a criminal,” Mr. de la Rionda added. “And that’s why we’re here.”

Profiling!

Fortunately, in his retirement, Michael Bloomberg probably won't end up in a condo complex in Nowheresville, Florida, so he's safe.
Mr. Zimmerman, 29, a neighborhood watch volunteer who said he shot Mr. Martin in self-defense, is charged with second-degree murder in the Feb. 26, 2012, death of Mr. Martin, who was 17. If convicted, he could face life in prison. On Thursday, the judge, Debra S. Nelson, said the jury would also be able to consider manslaughter as a lesser charge. This charge is typically included in Florida murder cases if either side requests it. Manslaughter with a firearm carries a sentence of up to 30 years in prison.

The judge should order a directed verdict of not guilty on the absurd Murder 2 charge, which would make it harder for the jury to decide to just split the difference and go with the manslaughter charge as a compromise that would bring them the least criticism.

61 comments:

Aaron Gross said...

"Split-the-difference" seems like more of a possibility with an all-woman jury, just according to my sexist intuition. Any data backing that up?

I haven't seen many predictions of the media reaction to a not-guilty verdict (which I still think is the most likely outcome). Here's my prediction, from MSNBC etc.: George Zimmerman was not a racist, he didn't wear a KKK hood. He just made certain assumptions about a black teenager out at night, assumptions that all of us tend to make because of our unconscious biases and white privilege. No matter what was happening at the instant when Trayvon was killed, the fact is that none of this tragic story would have occurred if white Americans had a better understanding of the reality of blacks like Trayvon Martin and Rachel Jeantel. This is a wake-up call to white Americans: it's time to start understanding the reality of being black in America, before it's too late.

Anonymous said...

Zimmerman didn't initate the confrontation, Martin doubled back. So many people don't know this because they *choose* not to. But the jury will.

That makes it transparently self-defense.

Horace Staccato said...

The judge is a hideous Left-wing gargoyle who appears to be determined to do her best impression of a Stalinist show trial. All the Leftist traitors and cowards are straining every nerve to redefine a Hispanic/Black as a White so they can illegally imprison him in order to encourage the actual Whites. It is so utterly disgusting and illegal. Our "government" no longer has any legitimacy at all.

Judge in Zimmerman case pressured by Obama?

countenance said...

The crux of the "case" against GZ is that he "profiled," and of course profiling is wronger than wrongy wrongenstein.

Yet:

http://fox2now.com/2013/07/11/almost-200-arrested-after-federal-bi-state-crime-crackdown/

All of the areas and neighborhoods that were targeted in this massive Federal-Local dragnet are either entirely black or heavily black. Which means when the ATF came to town looking for "gun crimes" to crack down upon, strangely, they "profiled" black neighborhoods.

TGGP said...

I find Zimmerman's account plausible, but the charge isn't on-its-face absurd. I did hear the judge threw out a charge of murder three for child abuse or something, and that was rather silly.

Bran said...

Does anyone know how many burglaries have happened in that neighborhood since the incident?

John said...

Roxanne Jones from CNN wrote this piece of garbage

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/09/opinion/jones-zimmerman-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7


It is telling that everyone in the black community, from top to bottom, all standing on the side of Trayvon. I supposed if you ask Obama about OJ, he would also say that if his father were alive today, he would look like OJ.

Does the West have any future? We are marching inevitably towards Barzil.

ben tillman said...

“He went over the line,” Mr. de la Rionda told the jury. “He assumed things that weren’t true....

No, he assumed things that were true, but the defense wasn't allowed to present evidence that these assumptions were correct. The prosecution's argument pretty much rules out the notion of harmless error.

Trayvon was a burglar. He was using drugs. He was a violent thug.

Anonymous said...

the statement from the White House when the verdict is delivered.

Assuming Zimmerman is found not guilty (a big if, because I agree with those who think the defense blundered by accepting an all-female jury), what's Obama's reaction?

Does he urge Americans to accept the verdict, even if they don't like it?
Have one of his lackeys announce Zimmerman's going to be tried for violating Trayvon Martin's civil rights?
Just stay quiet, in case riots actually do break out and he looks to be out of touch with his constituents in the 'hood?

I think we should consider setting up a pool...

Anonymous said...

He's toast. There's no way these females aren't going to convict him. His defense lawyer lost the game at jury selection.

Again, all this started because of the wide-spread, institutionally racist policy of purposely mis-identifying Hispanic and certain other suspects and convicted criminals as white in official documents with the goal of deflating the non-white crime stats in order to sell open borders and dispossession to the white public.

Anonymous said...

That makes it transparently self-defense.

Nothing is transparent in the "post-racial" USA.

Mr Lomez said...

"I haven't seen many predictions of the media reaction to a not-guilty verdict (which I still think is the most likely outcome). Here's my prediction, from MSNBC etc....

Nothing. Crickets. This thing will get swept under the rug the day GZ walks. It's a blight on the Lefty-Diversity-Media Complex and cannot be spun. This trial can't end soon enough. Mainstream SWPLs have already turned and without their support, Crump, Sharpton, and co. lose all credibility.

Remember how quickly we moved on from Oberlin?

It's the initial hysteria that counts, not the sober conclusion.

Anonymous said...

Zimmerman is toast sadly. An all female jury. Judge Judy? Toast.

Whiskey

Aaron Gross said...

Mr Lomez, that's what I thought, too, until I saw how much coverage the trial is getting on MSNBC. I'd have thought they'd ignore it as much as possible, but they're not.

Maybe I just missed this, but I wonder, has anyone tied Zimmerman in to Steve Sailer's idea of "flight from white"? (One of those ideas where I actually agree with Steve, by the way.) George Zimmerman identifies as a Hispanic, but not strongly enough. If he'd gone by his mother's family name instead of his father's, there would have been no news stories and he never would have been charged with a crime.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LJZP_4_EN4

one of the best films about the dynamics of power.

gubbler of the church of reformed chechenism said...

Maybe Hispanics didn't get involved in the controversy because the guy's last name is Zimmerman. Suppose it were Gomez.

Also, suppose the media had featured him as a 'Hispanic' than as a 'white male' or 'white hispanic' from the beginning.

Maybe this is why the media played on the Zimmerman's 'whiteness'.
They feared a rift between blacks and Hispanics in the drive up to the 2012 election.

But since the Narrative said a 'white guy' killed a black kid, Hispanics could ignore it as a white-black thing and even side with blacks against the 'white hispanic'. La Raza lost no time in coming to the defense of Martin.

In Jewish-liberal controlled America, a conquistador-hispanic can be a 'person of color' and a chubby mestizo can be a 'white male'.

gubbler of the church of reformed chechenism said...

White America will take this sitting down though the message of this trial is

1. Powers that can be pull strings to have a man convicted by political pressure.

2. Media can spin events anyway they choose to force the Narrative.

3. The message is if an under-privileged white person or a Hispanic is being beaten by a black guy outside NY, he has to just take the beating and not defend himself. In other words, open season on white folks.

4. Blacks can threaten violence and rioting to pressure the jury.

And some people say Chechens are crazy? At least Chechens know when to fight back and have real guts.

If white Americans had real guts and real honor, they will rise up and rebel if Zimmerman is declared guilty.

gubbler of the church of reformed chechenism said...

"Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager carrying nothing but snacks, died of a gunshot to the heart for one reason, he said: Mr. Zimmerman saw himself as a cop and Mr. Martin as a hoodie-clad criminal."

Here we go again. Martin used his fists as weapons, and fists can maim and kill.

And I'll bet this 'youth' didn't carry a gun either. He was 'unarmed'.:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAgjaV_EPbs

I guess his foot was not a weapon.

Anonymous said...

We threw out double jeopardy in England to try and convict The Greatest Ever Criminals In The History Of The World - the slayers of blessed St Stephen of Lawrence. So why not trash guilty beyond reasonable doubt too?

Greater love hath no people than they through away centuries of legal precedent to appease their moral and ethical betters. (Not that it will be enough, nothing will ever be enough, we simply are not worthy)

bleach said...

I sat on a jury once, the judge threw the trial out before deliberation because the prosecutor made statements just like this in his closing arguments. But that judge was a man with integrity, not an ugly lesbian(?) mad at the world.

Anonymous said...

This trial is disgusting and sad. And the media feeding frenzy over it is frightening. Poor Zimmerman. It will be a blight on this country if he is convicted.

The judge strikes me as a harridan. And the prosecutor's speech was a jaw-dropping display of boorish, obscene dishonesty.

On a side note: Why has evidence that Martin was a thug been ruled inadmissible in court, given that Zimmerman's character has been impgned at every turn (can you say "wannabe cop" 7,000 times with me?).

People are showing their true colors over this. "Conservative" radio talkers John and Ken in L.A. have declared Zimmerman guilty because of his evil racist act of profiling. I've lost whatever bit of respect I ever had for those clowns.

BB753 said...

Zim profiled Trayvon correctly: a young black thug. But Trayvon was very bad at profiling: a creepy-ass cracker? Zim is darker than the average Mexican.
Yes, and Zimmermann is as good as sentenced. Because good citizens are supposed to take quietly a beating from the elite´s favourite pet client class without complaining, much less shooting back.
For the elites, Blacks are children without moral agency or responsability from cradle to grave.
What does the patronizing feel like, Troofie?

AMac said...

NYT claim: "On Thursday, the judge... said the jury would also be able to consider manslaughter as a lesser charge. This charge is typically included in Florida murder cases if either side requests it."

Prior to the judge's ruling, I didn't read any story or hear any talking-head making this assertion. It might be true. Or it might be another misstatement, typical of the NYT's PaS coverage of this PaS case.

Can any readers on the Florida Bar weigh in?

AMac said...

@Aaron Gross, comment #1 --

> [Zimmerman] just made certain assumptions about a black teenager out at night, assumptions that all of us [sic] tend to make because of our unconscious biases and white privilege. No matter what was happening at the instant when Trayvon was killed, the fact is that none of this tragic story would have occurred if white Americans had a better understanding of the reality of blacks like Trayvon Martin and Rachel Jeantel.

I take your comment on face value, not as parody. Thanks for writing, and reminding me that many educated, wealthy white Americans really do think this way.

The trial has made the overall facts of the case quite clear. For the most part, they are as they appeared to informed observers within a few months of the incident.

Neither the facts nor the obsoleted civics-class ideals of the criminal justice system have much to do with the Who-Whom view of the case exhibited by Aaron, the elite media, or the racial grievance industry.

josh said...

Judge Judy would have dismissed the charges in about 10 minutes.

BB753 said...

No chance the other famous Mr Zimmerman, Bob Dylan, will write a song defending the innocence of George Zim, like he did with Rubin "Hurricane" Carter. (Who was probably as guilty as sin, it turns out)

Anonymous said...

Media bias on this case is like between Romney vs Obama.

Consensuspiracy is deafening.

Mike Bloomberg said...

George Zimmerman stops the right kind of people.

Don't tell anyone I said that.

AMac said...

@ Aaron Gross --

Click the link to GLP and you can have the privilege of learning more about Trayvon Martin's character than the jury (or most AP readers) know.

"There were thousands of messages [recovered by computer forensics expert Richard Connor from Martin's phone], double password-protected, showing not just interest but involvement in violence, guns, and drugs — gangster life. Someone took the step to delete those messages at some point, for some purpose. The 'Facebook post from a half-brother asking Martin when he was going to teach him how to fight' speaks to what Martin’s family knew about his activities. The text messages reveal 'multiple conversations between Trayvon Martin and specific family members and friends... discussing multi-round street fights and schoolyard fights in which Trayvon Martin had participated,' according to [reporter Bob] Owens. All of it speaks to what kind of person Martin was, and to what may have been going through his mind and what he believed he was physically capable of, the night he was killed."

Aaron, whether you are white or black -- would you be pleased to have folks from Trayvon's crew roaming through your neighborhood?

Note: certain people (e.g. those with family compounds in Hyannisport) are privileged to answer that question however they wish, with no consequence to themselves or their loved ones.

chucho said...

Not sure if anyone saw the testimony of Zimmerman's neighbor who had a home invasion/burglary, but it perfectly illustrated Steve's point about poor people not being rich enough to get away from other poor people. Zim's neighborhood seemed more middle-class than poor, but it was on that scary pivot point where it's not a total ghetto (yet), but getting there.

I can see reasonable people differing on gun laws, self-defense laws or even racial stereotyping, but anyone who thinks what's happening to Zimmerman is fair or reasonable is far, far gone.

pat said...

I've only served on one jury although I was rejected in the voir dire many times. I was rejected once when I admitted that I read the newspaper everyday. Others were grilled on whether they read books. The lawyers really did want 'blank slates'.

The lawyers seemed to prefer female file clerks who worked in big businesses. These ladies were always eager to serve. They were accommodating and compliant. Their regular jobs were so boring that even a boring civil case was a moment of comparative excitement for them.

The men on the jury usually didn't want to be there and looked for reasons to be excused. The women fought to be acceptable. Maybe things are different now.

We had two women on our jury who admitted that the plaintiff caused all his own injuries and they understood that all his medical expenses had been paid. But they still wanted to 'give him something' because he'd been hurt. He was hurt when in a drunken rage he tore away the safety barrier and fell in a hole. He was the safety officer on the project. He was also a blackout drunk who had done things like this before. The judge conspired with the plaintiff to conceal all this from us but the truth leaked out in spite all the rules of evidence. They make the witnesses swear to tell the whole truth and then they carefully conceal relevant information so only half truths are shown to the jury.

That was more than thirty years ago and I'm still mad.

The rationale seems to be that they pick the dumbest people they can get and then keep them in the dark about what really happened. The system has evolved into a corrupt an cynical skunk dance. If you really wanted the jury's judgment you would pick the best people available and then give them access to all the information. We do just the opposite.

So yes, I anticipate that at least one woman on the jury will want to 'do something' for Trayvon Martin's mother by convicting Zimmerman of manslaughter. That makes no sense of course but that's the way jurors often think.

This looks to be an American Dreyfus case. Steve, you should think about being our Zola.

Albertosaurus

Chicago said...

All bets are in, we'll see who guessed right and who missed by a mile. If there's a hung jury then the state can simply start all over again using what it learned the first time around. The resources of the state are unlimited, tax money can be burned up by the truckload giving it a huge advantage. He could also be persecuted at the federal level. The majority of anonymous defendants that pass through the system don't have the money to hire a dream team and quickly go bankrupt if they aren't broke already. Most people are encouraged to plead down since they just don't have the resources to do otherwise. Fortunately Z has received contributions so he can afford, so far at least, to defend himself.
Z may be a non-white "white Hispanic" but his show trial is intended to send a message to white America: if attacked by blacks your duty is to run or curl up in a fetal position and beg them not to hurt you.

Anonymous said...

IMO it was over once they brought the manslaughter charge in. Even the fem-jury wasn't going to go for murder 2, so they threw in manslaughter to allow them to convict while saving face. They want to hang this guy, pure and simple.

David said...

>our unconscious biases and white privilege<

Spoken like a true SPLC rebbe.

They can't help themselves. They will keep spitting at us, fact-free, until the last one of us is gone.

Svigor said...

No, he assumed things that were true, but the defense wasn't allowed to present evidence that these assumptions were correct. The prosecution's argument pretty much rules out the notion of harmless error.

Trayvon was a burglar. He was using drugs. He was a violent thug.


Yeah, I don't understand the Judge's behavior in this case. If the prosecution is going to argue that Zimmerman made a bunch of mistaken assumptions, doesn't that automatically make Martin's assumption-fitting behavior relevant, and thus admissible?

Can a criminal lawyer tell us if a Zim conviction is going to be major appeal-bait? I still don't think there'll be a conviction, but I'm curious about how well this judge's behavior is going to hold up in hindsight.

Assuming Zimmerman is found not guilty (a big if, because I agree with those who think the defense blundered by accepting an all-female jury), what's Obama's reaction?

Does he urge Americans to accept the verdict, even if they don't like it?
Have one of his lackeys announce Zimmerman's going to be tried for violating Trayvon Martin's civil rights?
Just stay quiet, in case riots actually do break out and he looks to be out of touch with his constituents in the 'hood?


Obama doesn't touch this thing with a ten foot pole, going forward. Proxies only.

I sat on a jury once, the judge threw the trial out before deliberation because the prosecutor made statements just like this in his closing arguments. But that judge was a man with integrity, not an ugly lesbian(?) mad at the world.

I haven't even been paying much attention to the trial, and I'm just in awe of this judge's lack of character.

On a side note: Why has evidence that Martin was a thug been ruled inadmissible in court, given that Zimmerman's character has been impgned at every turn (can you say "wannabe cop" 7,000 times with me?).

Yep, I've been wondering that too. This case seems to be operating under the opposite rules of what we've been taught to expect, as Steve pointed out with the mirror comment.

There were thousands of messages

A great example of the through the looking glass effect in this "trial"; the messages on Martin's phone were password-protected, but the judge apparently (heard it second-hand) ruled them inadmissible because someone other than Martin might've sent them? WTF? When did "beyond reasonable doubt" become the state's tool against the defendant?

Big Bill said...

"But Trayvon was very bad at profiling: a creepy-ass cracker? Zim is darker than the average Mexican."

What Tray-tray said was "creepy ass-cracker". Tray-tray was "creeped" at being followed by a Mexican sodomite. Jeantel understood his meaning. When asked about Tray-tray's comment, her take was that Zim was a "pervert".

In fact Zim's pudge and dark skin probably got him whacked. Tray-tray wouldn't have beaten a white homosexual. Not in Miami, anyway.

How long will it be until gays are safe from Black Homophobia, mindless bigotry and hatred?

Svigor said...

This case is making it even more apparent that the media is now the first estate.

Svigor said...

It looks like Drudge is openly calling Nelson a "Show Judge," i.e., the kind of judge you get in a show trial, in his leading headline today:

SHOW JUDGE LIFE LONG DEM

For the sake of symmetry, for this trial to sort of become the other bookend to the OJ trial (and serve as its inverse), it would seem that Zimmerman would have to be convicted.

Anonymous said...

Aaron Gross is a self-described "Jewish Supremacist". Far be it for me to say that this influences his knuckle-dragging opinions about "white privilege" though. I wouldn't want to insinuate that.

Marc B said...

"Here we go again. Martin used his fists as weapons, and fists can maim and kill".

Particularly when those fists are used in concert Zimmerman's head and a slab of concrete sidewalk. In essence, the anti-Zimmerman factions are claiming that because Zimmerman had the temerity to confront Martin to find out what he was up to, Zimmerman deserved whatever punishment Martin decided to dish out.

ColoComment said...

AMac at 7/12/13, 4:46 AM: I wondered the same thing. My brother is a Michigan county prosecutor, and I asked him. He responded:

"Either side can ask for “lesser includeds.” States differ on how narrow or broad “lesser included” is defined. In Michigan, a lesser only is one that has the same elements, only less than the greater. An example would be Armed Robbery vs Unarmed. The only element in the greater different than the lesser is a weapon. And then it would only be given if the existence of a weapon really is at issue. On the other hand, if we charge Assault With Intent to do Great Bodily Harm (the harm was caused with a weapon, but a weapon is not required – could be hands) then Assault With A Dangerous Weapon is not a lesser included (even though it is a lesser charge) because the lesser AWDW has an element ( a weapon) that the greater does not have. Anyway – the states are really different on that issue, in short, yes the judge can do that and usually it is to the benefit of the accused."

Paul Mendez said...

I heard that Jeb Bush has put the National Guard on alert in case Zimmerman is found guilty and the white hispanics in Miami start rioting.

Paul Mendez said...

Rick Scott, not Jeb Bush.

(Only 7 years off. I've been wronger.)

Anonymous said...

In Dylan's defense, I think he and most other liberals idiots of that era sincerely believed that Rubin Carter was innocent of the shooting. In the case of Trayvon Martin, I get the impression that a lot of anti-Zimm observers (especially urban blacks, as opposed to SWPL libs), accept it as a probable fact that Trayvon went and attacked Zimmerman in response to the latter's grievous transgression of "profiling" him and calling the police. These same people, moreover, consider it to have been Zimmerman's responsibility under the circumstances, simply to take the beating he was getting as his punishment for what he had done. In their view, GZ simply didn't have the right of self-defense, and certainly not the right to use his gun for self-defense, insofar as too many young blacks have already been killed with guns. Thus, they're not so much claiming Trayvon didn't do what GZ says he did as they're asserting a belief in the righteousness of TM's actions and the effrontery of GZ's efforts to protect himself.

It's the same mentality, I suppose, that permits large groups of young blacks to go out onto the street randomly assaulting whites. They actually see it as their right to do this as partial retribution for the collective abuse they feel they've taken from white people over the centuries (albeit not the specific white people they are assaulting, but no matter).

Anonymous said...

"In Dylan's defense, I think he and most other liberals idiots of that era sincerely believed that Rubin Carter was innocent of the shooting."

I dunno. I think he was being nostalgic to Hattie Carroll days.

Sean said...

A little off topic, but I’m wondering why Zimmerman's defense hasn’t tried to simulate the screams heard on the recording by having Zimmerman scream ‘help!’ and recording it, and ask the judge to let the jury compare the two.

The screams already sound a lot like Zimmerman. A comparison would cinch the deal.

The recording could even be done at the same location, with Zimmerman standing on the same spot. The recording device could be the same model iPhone or whatever device captured the screams on that night.

Seems all too easy. Wouldn’t that be admissible?

Anonymous said...

"[Zimmerman] just made certain assumptions about a black teenager out at night, assumptions that all of us [sic] tend to make because of our unconscious biases and white privilege."

No, it's white under-privilege that leads to make such assumptions because non-privileged whites experience black thuggery first hand. It is white privilege of the likes of Diane Sawyer and Ken Burns that allows them to live in safe zones and dream about mountain-sized negroes who love little white mice or an angel child munching on skittles.

black reality has changed much but privileged white liberals feel safe enough to cling to the old moral simplifications.

Anonymous said...

Rioting, whether guilty/not guilty?
Won't happen; all the WH has to do is issue a statement- "Will the people who look like they're of my fathers race, please not attack the people who look like they're of my mother's race"
No worries! Should be any minute now...

nuke laloosh said...

The lead prosecutor has Kevin Costner's voice. I think he's watched "Bull Durham" a dozen times.

helene edwards said...

because someone other than Martin might've sent them? WTF?

The 'might've happened' gambit is a standard aspect of Black Truth. Several years ago, we had a black federal judge in San Francisco named Ware who claimed his brother had been killed by the KKK. When it was revealed that he'd made the story up, he actually said, "it could have happened."

Anonymous said...

think about what the prosecution would have if Zimmerman had exercised his right to remain silent. there wouldn't be inconsistencies in statements because there wouldn't be the statements in the first place.

Anonymous said...

"It looks like Drudge is openly calling Nelson a "Show Judge," i.e., the kind of judge you get in a show trial, in his leading headline today:

SHOW JUDGE LIFE LONG DEM

For the sake of symmetry, for this trial to sort of become the other bookend to the OJ trial (and serve as its inverse), it would seem that Zimmerman would have to be convicted." - She was rabidly pro the prosecution for the first 3/4ths of the trial but is trying to back away from that at this point I think, from my watching of the trial.

Anonymous said...

Several years ago, we had a black federal judge in San Francisco named Ware who claimed his brother had been killed by the KKK. When it was revealed that he'd made the story up, he actually said, "it could have happened."

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/11/07/us/judge-says-he-lied-in-story-of-a-brother-slain-in-bias-attack.html

Matthew said...

From the article linked by Svigor: "In 1999, Republican Governor Jeb Bush appointed Nelson, a lifelong Democrat, to fill a vacancy in the 18th Judicial Circuit (covering Seminole and Brevard counties)."

Need I say more?

Them Bush Boys just reliable conservatives as can be, ain't they?

Anonymous said...

"I heard that Jeb Bush has put the National Guard on alert in case Zimmerman is found guilty and the white hispanics in Miami start rioting."

Classic.

"In Dylan's defense, I think he and most other liberals idiots of that era sincerely believed that Rubin Carter was innocent of the shooting."

And the liberal idiots of this era sincerely believe that Martin was sweet and innocent kid and Zimmerman was a bad, bad racist man.

Btw a few idiots here didn't seem to notice that Aaron Gross was predicting the media reaction to a not-guilty verdict, not stating his own views on it.

AMac said...

Anon @7/12/13, 1:47 PM

> Btw a few idiots here didn't seem to notice that Aaron Gross was predicting the media reaction to a not-guilty verdict, not stating his own views on it.

I won't cop to the idjit part, but yeah, on re-read, you're right. In Comment #1, Aaron was channeling MSNBC etc. Apologies for the misinterpretation.

Svigor said...

What Tray-tray said was "creepy ass-cracker". Tray-tray was "creeped" at being followed by a Mexican sodomite. Jeantel understood his meaning. When asked about Tray-tray's comment, her take was that Zim was a "pervert".

No. The "cracker" part means "white male." The "creepy" part means pervert.

And am I the only one who thinks Aaron was being facetious, or playing Devil's Advocate, or something?

Btw a few idiots here didn't seem to notice that Aaron Gross was predicting the media reaction to a not-guilty verdict, not stating his own views on it.

Yeah, Aaron isn't my favorite featherless biped in the universe, but I was kind of surprised everyone took his comment so differently than I.

92 clinema said...

[QUOTE]Zim profiled Trayvon correctly: a young black thug. But Trayvon was very bad at profiling: a creepy-ass cracker? Zim is darker than the average Mexican.[/QUOTE]

To some Black people, all Nonblacks look alike. Hence the Mestizo guy with a Indio Peruvian mother of Inca descent, is a creepy ass cracker.

Either that, or Trayvon Martin was high as a kite when he referred to a Mestizo as a creepy ass cracker.

Svigor said...

To some Black people, all Nonblacks look alike. Hence the Mestizo guy with a Indio Peruvian mother of Inca descent, is a creepy ass cracker.

Either that, or Trayvon Martin was high as a kite when he referred to a Mestizo as a creepy ass cracker.


Or it was just dark and raining, and he'd only seen him from a distance at that point.

Anonymous said...

The six women jurors are not shrinking violets. They are profiled in Meet the Zimmerman Trial Jurors by lawyer Andrew Branca who writes on the law of self defense and blogs at the site Legal Insurrection.

Bill Grant

Truth said...

"
Either that, or Trayvon Martin was high as a kite when he referred to a Mestizo as a creepy ass cracker.

Or it was just dark and raining, and he'd only seen him from a distance at that point."

Svigor, is that really you?