An unnoticed potential legal problem for George Zimmerman
Chuck Rudd at G.L. Piggy points out if this were a sane society that wasn't in a paroxysm of moral panic over "profiling," there's something in George Zimmerman's old MySpace page that would be more of a potential legal problem for him.
This seems like a nice example of how posts on the internet can bite you on the ass later. Just as some future employer may be looking at your Facebook posts, some future prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney may be doing so.
The left have painted a portrait of Zimmerman as a white vigilante who profiled an innocent black child and then hunted him down and shot him like a dog. This account seems incredible to anyone who knows anything about the circumstances of the case but tune in MSNBC - any commentator, any time - and you will still hear that narrative.
But the picture that the right paints of Zimmerman is hardly any more plausible. He is Mother Theresa spending his time and money helping the downtrodden. He is the selfless and noble defender of his beseiged neighbors.
The truth is almost certainly more mundane. From the Sacco and Vanzetti trial back to the Cataline Conspiracy, the injection of politics into a case makes for poor accuracy but good theater.
The statement "They do a year and dont ever open thier mouth to get my ass pinched" is too vague to be useful. He could say it's a joke, or he was pretending to be cool, or by "they do a year" he meant something like they would do a year. Probably not even admissible anyway.
It isn't a legal problem. At best it is an impeachment issue that looks very weak given his age at the time.
What is stronger is that there is only one witness to what happened and the police have admitted under oath that they have no evidence to contradict him. Add to that that the physical evidence and (apparently) the limited witness evidence support George's story and nobody should give a darn about his old social websites. Far more prejudicial than probative.
An insightful commenter had said in regard to a previous post, that the social media is not a natural way to live. I agree, but alas, I don't think it is going away. People who kept multimillion word diaries used to be considered insane. Now it's becoming the norm. It is now suspect not to have an online identity. I've opted out, but I do have some advice for those who partake: anything you post, can and will be used against you.
I'm old enough to ignore it and I'll probably get a pass. Schools would be wise to advise students to treat it as a streaming college application/resume/obituary.
This isn't a legal problem. It's a PR problem, but it's all inadmissible in court.
ReplyDeleteThis seems like a nice example of how posts on the internet can bite you on the ass later. Just as some future employer may be looking at your Facebook posts, some future prosecutor or plaintiff's attorney may be doing so.
ReplyDeleteZimmerman flees to Arizona but is stopped and deported to Mexico. Neil Conan's head explodes
ReplyDelete??? Don't understand the censorship on this thread. ???
ReplyDeleteThe left have painted a portrait of Zimmerman as a white vigilante who profiled an innocent black child and then hunted him down and shot him like a dog. This account seems incredible to anyone who knows anything about the circumstances of the case but tune in MSNBC - any commentator, any time - and you will still hear that narrative.
ReplyDeleteBut the picture that the right paints of Zimmerman is hardly any more plausible. He is Mother Theresa spending his time and money helping the downtrodden. He is the selfless and noble defender of his beseiged neighbors.
The truth is almost certainly more mundane. From the Sacco and Vanzetti trial back to the Cataline Conspiracy, the injection of politics into a case makes for poor accuracy but good theater.
I'm enjoying it.
Albertosaurus
Hey, y'all boy is a "No-Limit Vato!"
ReplyDeletea potential legal problem
ReplyDeleteChuck Rudd does not say anything about a "potential legal problem". It would be a stupid thing to say.
He does cite Jezebel - that fine source of legal analysis - as saying that his MySpace account "might pose some problems in court".
I guess none of the crack grrl reporters at Jezebel are aware of Trayvon's contributions on social media.
The statement "They do a year and dont ever open thier mouth to get my ass pinched" is too vague to be useful. He could say it's a joke, or he was pretending to be cool, or by "they do a year" he meant something like they would do a year. Probably not even admissible anyway.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't a legal problem. At best it is an impeachment issue that looks very weak given his age at the time.
ReplyDeleteWhat is stronger is that there is only one witness to what happened and the police have admitted under oath that they have no evidence to contradict him. Add to that that the physical evidence and (apparently) the limited witness evidence support George's story and nobody should give a darn about his old social websites. Far more prejudicial than probative.
An insightful commenter had said in regard to a previous post, that the social media is not a natural way to live. I agree, but alas, I don't think it is going away. People who kept multimillion word diaries used to be considered insane. Now it's becoming the norm. It is now suspect not to have an online identity. I've opted out, but I do have some advice for those who partake: anything you post, can and will be used against you.
ReplyDeleteI'm old enough to ignore it and I'll probably get a pass. Schools would be wise to advise students to treat it as a streaming college application/resume/obituary.