|

Martin? Zimmerman? Who is on trial?

LARRY GROSSMAN
Guest Columnist
editorial@lbknews.com

If the scales of justice are unbalanced then they are no longer scales of justice but rather a measure of injustice in our legal system. If the Lady of Justice is not blind and impartial then she may be sighted and partial or prejudiced reflecting a deep rift in our social fabric.

Justice was not done in Sanford Florida yesterday.  A jury of six women, no Afro-Americans and no males, acquitted George Zimmerman of 2nd degree murder and manslaughter. This was a trial that may never have been heard since the Sanford Police Department released George Zimmerman February 2012 after hearing his justification for fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old Afro-American who was visiting his father’s fiancée and her son at the Retreat at Twin Lakes townhouse development.

It was only the outcry and outrage expressed by the public that brought Mr. Zimmerman to trial to account for his actions which brought about the death of a teenager who had purchased candy and iced tea at a local convenience store and was walking back to an apartment where he was staying with family. Otherwise, a man with a concealed weapon who profiled pursued and shot through the heart a “suspect” would have been allowed to go free forever based on his word and physical condition that prima facie demonstrated that he was justified in defending himself against his hoodied assailant. Trayvon Martin would be buried and forgotten- just expendable.

The State brought charges against Mr. Zimmerman and after one year or so we had a three week trial which resulted in a finding for Mr. Zimmerman of not guilty. After the acquittal verdict, at the press interview with the defense attorneys, Attorney West spoke of tragedy and travesty the former referring presumably to the death of Trayvon Martin and the travesty apparently referring to the attempt of the State of Florida to hold Mr. Zimmerman accountable for taking the life of another human being.  Mr. West’s comment epitomized how the scales of justice were so weighted down against the victim and how the blindfold of justice  was off exposing deep racial prejudices and anything but “color blindness”.

The burden of proof was not on the defendant but upon the victim who couldn’t defend himself because he was dead. In fact, with no allowance for cross examination of the defendant, the prosecution was at a distinct disadvantage to compose a supportable and evidentiary narrative to counter Mr. Zimmerman’s self serving story of his innocence and of Trayvon Martin’s guilt.

Zimmerman was never on trial – Trayvon Martin was.  This young man was guilty because of who he was –because there were burglaries in the neighborhood committed by Afro-American youth so Mr. Martin was a “suspect”- because Mr. Martin purportedly surprised Mr. Zimmerman and beat him to the ground and repeatedly pounded his head on the concrete walkway and Zimmerman cried for help but no help came and so to save his body and his life he had to shoot Mr. Martin directly into the heart- the kill shot.

Was Mr. Zimmerman culpable? – no way. The would- be policeman who took courses in legal procedures including Stand Your Ground Law and got an “A”? The mixed martial arts guy who took lessons in defending himself with his hands and body who was so inept after taking three lessons a week for about a year that his instructor rated him as .05 on a scale of 1-10?. The man who was only proficient in pulling a trigger point blank on an unarmed boy who, if Trayvon was defending himself, had the right to do so as much as Mr. Zimmerman? Did Mr. Zimmerman act responsibly in leaving his SUV after being instructed by the police dispatcher not to? Wasn’t he ultimately responsible for the altercation which would have never happened had Mr. Zimmerman followed those instructions? Would Mr. Zimmerman have been so bold to pursue an unknown hooded figure in the rain if he didn’t have a loaded and ready to fire weapon? Was an unarmed boy more or a threat to Mr. Zimmerman than Mr. Zimmerman was to Trayvon?

Did Mr. Zimmerman have a mouth to communicate with? Like identifying himself as a resident of the complex and part of the neighborhood watch program?  Or even crying “uncle” or “enough” and talking to Trayvon instead of crying to unseen others for help?  Or was Trayvon, the punk, not worthy of verbal communication and, in the mind of George, was determined to murder Mr. Zimmerman so he could go home and watch the NBA All-Star Game? Was Mr. Zimmerman’s interest to prevent a crime that never occurred or to seek vigilante justice- for burglaries that eluded Mr. Zimmerman and now he had his suspect in his sights?

We’ll never know.

 

Enter your email below to receive occasional Longboat Key breaking news eblasts and updates.

Tags: , , , ,

Longboat Key News

8 Responses for “Martin? Zimmerman? Who is on trial?”

  1. Alex Greig says:

    The problem has been the focus on irrelevant arguments – some of which are actually unsupported by the evidence.

    1. ‘GZ racially profiled TM’ There is no evidence of this.

    2. ‘GZ disobeyed an order by the police’ * The civilian dispatcher, Sean Noffke, testified that he did not give GZ an order and, in fact, he, like his fellow dispatchers, are trained not make comments that sound like commands. * Noffke also testified under cross that, as a result of his asking GZ which way TM was going, GZ could have reasonably interpreted this as being asked to follow Martin. * It is also not a crime in Florida to disregard a comment made by a civilian dispatcher.

    3. ‘GZ got out of his car’ Not a crime on public property and not negligent either.

    4. ‘GZ followed TM’ Again, anyone can follow anyone on a public street unless the followee has obtained a restraining order against the follower and even there, the RS only places time, place, and manner restrictions on the person enjoined.

    5. ‘GZ wasn’t really injured’ * Under Florida’s self-defense laws, one doesn’t have to be injured AT ALL to use deadly force * No one is required to refrain from defending himself while another is engaged in or attempting to commit a felony.

    6. ‘TM is dead through no fault of his own’ * If you believe that TM assaulted GZ, then he IS dead as a result of his own actions.

    7. ‘GZ could have left’ * Under Florida law, there is not a duty to withdraw rather than use deadly force * TM was straddling GZ so how the latter was supposed to leave the scene is unanswered.

    8. ‘GZ was armed and TM wasn’t’ * One’s fists can be considered weapons and can result in severe bodily harm or death. * GZ was legally carrying a weapon * There is no requirement under the law that the same weapon be used by the assailant * A homeowner can kill an intruder whether or not he has been threatened * Those that attack cannot feign surprise if they are met with superior firepower.

    9. ‘Stand Your Ground!’ * SYG is NOT at issue in this trial. * The defense is a classic self-defense case.

    10. ‘Black men NEVER get to use SYG!’ * Wrong http://tinyurl.com/nboht35

    11. ‘GZ is a man and TM was a boy!’ * As if ‘boys’ don’t commit murder, rape, and assault everyday in this country.

  2. Ernie Kaputnik says:

    Who was on trial? Well, according to the D.A. and every news channel, it was Zimmerman. But in my opinion, it should have been Martin, his parents and the black community. They created this mess. The only mobs that I know of that run around beating, robbing and murdering people are comprised of black urban youth. Only 3% of the USA’s population is black men, yet they commit 50% of the murders. Trayvon was part of that culture and mentality. His text messages, facebook page, and eventhe testimony of Jenteal “what’s-her-name” demonstrated that in court. He had an obligation to retreat just as much as did Zimmerman. Unfortunately for Trayvon decided to ambush Zimmerman (1st mistake) and they decided to bring only fists to a gun fight (2nd mistake). I will shed no tears, nor give any consideration to the “black” community until they change their ways a join the rest of civilization. If they want to act and live like a bunch of tribal savages, so be it. But don’t complain when the other tribes fights back.

    Here endeth the lesson.

  3. David in Cal says:

    This column omits the most significant aspect. Based on witness testimony and medical evidence it’s virtually certain that Trayvon Martin was beating the Dickens out of George Zimmerman, bashing his head against the sidewalk. And, it’s probable that Martin threw the first punch.

    It’s a complete falsehood that Zimmerman left his SUV after being instructed by the police dispatcher not to. The timeline and the recording of Zimmerman’s phone call to police shows that Zimmerman was told that he didn’t have to follow Martin (not instructed not to do so) at a point when Zimmerman had already left his vehicle.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Getting so much established fact wrong can’t be mere incompetence. You have to be still pushing the far left’s discredited racist agenda.

    Let’s have some real facts:

    Martin never bought ice tea. It was Arizona Watermelon Juice Cocktail

    Courtroom testimony established Zimmerman did not profile Martin.. Nor did he “pursue” him. He followed Martin at a distance to report where he was going.

    Zimmerman was NEVER instructed to stay in his vehicle or do anything else by the police dispatcher according to the police dispatcher’s sworn testimony.

    It’s clear facts don’t matter to you. You have an agenda and you will pursue it regardless of the consequences to any innocent in your way.

    Martin was a gangbanger thug who attacked Zimmerman without provocation. The jury saw this was the truth and that is why George Zimmerman is a free man today. With any luck you to will be getting a notice in the mail some day soon informing you of the civil suit for slander Zimmerman has filed against you.

  5. JL Lee says:

    Mr. Grossman: Why do you repeat myths that have long been disproven? Did you even watch the trial? The dispatcher testified that he didn’t even know Zimmerman was in a truck; how cd he have “instructed” him not to leave it? During his testimony the dispatcher emphasized over & over & over that he does NOT give commands. If he did, the police wd become legally responsible for what ensued. The words he actually used, “We don’t need you to do that,” [which didn't even apply to getting out of the truck in the first place] are a catch-all phrase devised by lawyers to absolve police of all responsibility. They are NOT an order/command.

    As long as you keep repeating untruths, you will not make a persuasive point. First you need to be accurate in what you say, & then you can make your case.

    PS: Under cross, the dispatcher said he wouldn’t even tell a person to stay in the house for their own safety. If a pitched gun battle was taking place outside, & the person said, ‘I’m going out’, the dispatcher wdn’t say, ‘Stay in the house’. He wd say, ‘We don’t need you to do that’. It’s not an instruction. It’s a legal means of avoiding responsibility. Get it?

  6. willow says:

    Where are you getting the evidence that the police dispatcher instructed Zimmerman not to leave his SUV? In the non-emergency 911 call, you can hear Zimmerman leaving his vehicle before being questioned by the dispatcher as to whether he was following Trayvon (and the dispatcher testified that dispatchers cannot give any orders- think that one through for the reasoning). When he was told that he did not need to do that, he said “okay.” What happened next cannot be proven for certain. The defense doesn’t have to prove anything. How many murderers have you heard of who call the police for assistance but are planning to shoot someone? He told the police to meet him at his truck and described where he was parked. That is not conjecture but of record. How would Zimmerman have known the exact second that the police were going to arrive? They did arrive immediately after the shooting. Many ignorantly claim that this case shows why Stand Your Ground needs scrutiny. SYG was never asserted by the defense.

    How fair was it that Zimmerman’s words were edited as follows:

    On one of the NBC News broadcasts, on “Today” on March 27, Zimmerman is heard on the call telling the dispatcher, of Martin, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”

    But Zimmerman did not say the two sentences in sequence. His comment, “He looks black,” was made after the dispatcher asked him if Martin was “white, black or Hispanic?”

    And Zimmerman himself is apparently not allowed to identify himself as Hispanic. The media gets to choose one’s identification: White Hispanic. Would you agree with a name like Zimmerman, there was an expectation that he was lily white?

    There is so much wrong with your analysis. Our rule of law is based upon the notion that in order to find an individual guilty, there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. You are conjecturing. There is no direct proof as to who initiated contact. Zimmerman may have brandished his gun; I don’t believe he did, but there is no proof either way. The latest juror to speak out seemed to think at first that the fact that Trayvon was shot indicates that Zimmerman automatically committed murder under the law. She realized that the law says otherwise. Self defense has a long history in our country.

    I wonder why Trayvon’s brother did not seek out any kind of help when Trayvon never came home? His father was gone far into the night. Did the child have a number to call someone to say Trayvon went out for candy but he never came back? Why didn’t Trayvon call his dad and say “Someone is following me at the complex”? We don’t know what happened for sure, but the evidence shows that Zimmerman was punched in the nose, and he had some abrasions/contusions on his head. Rachel J. basically said in a subsequent interview that the jury and Zimmerman didn’t understand that he was merely whoopin’ Zimmerman’s behind or words to that effect. How was Zimmerman supposed to know how far Trayvon would have gone?

    The jurors were chosen because of the pool, they exhibited the best ability to be open minded and to base their verdict on the law. Why should they have to be punished by living in fear? The race baiting has made it unsafe for the Zimmerman and Martin families. Neither should be targeted. An unfortunate set of fact led to a shooting.

  7. Exton says:

    “You’re entitled to your own opinions. You’re not entitled to your own facts.” – Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    I really do not what is worse, Larry Grossman’s propaganda article or the Longboat Key News publishing it. When the Marxist Liberal cannot make the point they want with the facts on hand, they want they resort to out right lies and half truths.

    This race baiting article attacks our legal system, our common sense, and is a fairy tale meant to support the obama agenda of ending gun ownership and having people defend themselves. In fact stories like this are used to enrage the weak minded with the result that everyone associated with Zimmerman have had death threats. Including people with similar phone numbers and last names. DISGUSTING AND UN-AMERICAN.

    The writer is a propagandist and corrupt, the paper is Liberal and corrupt for publishing it. Nothing stated uses the facts in evidence, and instead uses the much heard talking point of “Marin as a victim cannot defend himself, because he is dead.” Overall the writer tries to fake a real interest and distain of the outcome in order to gather the support of the gullible, and paint the USA as something that it is not.

    The real criminal in this Stalinist show trial is obama, for he used us power to force a trial where none was required. The public would have just ignored this had the race husksters, like Jackson and Sharpton, not to ramp up a false outrage and the President saying that ‘Tryavon would look like his son, or was him 30 years ago.” No comment that the press showed propaganda pictures with Martin as a fresh face twelve-year-old, and George as a criminal in an orange jump suit.

    No mention of the Sheriff that was fired or the District Attorney that was replaced, because they thought this was a simple case of self-defense, and George Zimmerman did not break any laws. Then to create a false outrage the writer makes ludicrous unfounded comments. He uses insults to paint Zimmerman as a “would- be policeman, a man with a concealed weapon who profiled pursued and shot through the heart a “suspect.” Why does the Grossman have to add the comments of Attorney West that end with “exposing deep racial prejudices and anything but “color blindness”. When just ABOUT EVERYONE, INCLUDING THE MARTIN’S PARENTS, SAID IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE?

    Martin is painted as an innocent child with candy and a ice tea; when the real truth was, as revealed by his destroyed liver, that Martin had two of the three ingredients to make “Lean,” a drug cocktail to get high and delusional with. That Martin took martial arts training and was seen by witness to be hitting Zimmerman in this fashion; and, Martin should have been in jail for the theft of women’s jewelry but the school officials wanted to manipulate the crime numbers to show a false improvement. Grossman can only make his points by hiding the truth of Marin’s background and lying about George Zimmerman. If you have to lie to make your point, then your point is not worth making.

    The revealed facts were that Marin took about 30 min to make the 10 min walk back to his residence, on a rainy night. Why was the fool out that long in the rain, looking in window? Then the phone calls to 911 by George reveal that he lost sight of Martin for about 4 min, which does not sound like Zimmerman was really following Martin or posing as a threat. If Martin had just punched Zimmerman and then stood there after he had knocked him to the ground, as a Man would of, Martin would still be alive. If Martin had not hit Zimmerman’s head onto the cement pavement, he would probably still be alive.

    Then as a typical liberal with a straw man argument that NO ONE has ever heard before, Grossman throws in more propaganda with “The burden of proof was not on the defendant but upon the victim who couldn’t defend himself because he was dead.” Where is that in the US law books? I guess the writer would rather be “you are guilty until proven innocent.” I bet Grossman is the type that cries for more rights for terrorist and murders, which make him a hypocrite.

    In fact to say that Martin could not speak or that the prosecution was at a distinct disadvantage is also a big lie. How many TV shows have the bad guys convicted because of forensic evidence? There was nothing on Martin’s clothes or body that contradicted Zimmerman’s or the eye witness details.

    When Zimmerman left the truck, Martin was no where to be seen. No one points out that the 911 operator told Zimmerman to stay in his truck, to protect him from being attacked by a young black man. Crime statistics show that Black youths are involved in more crimes and murder than there numbers would suggest. During the time between the shooting of Martin and the acquittal, over 10,000 Blacks have killed each other. Another shocking statistic, the United States is 3rd in the World for murders! But if you take out just four cities with high black populations – Chicago, Detroit, Washington D.C., and New Orleans – the United States is fourth from the bottom.

    The failure of Grossman is to not go after the real problem of crime – the high rate of single mothers with illegitimate babies – makes his article worthless and nothing more than a propaganda piece for those that would destroy our Country. For it makes the USA, which is the most tolerant and least racists country in the World, seem evil and intolerant. If this is the case, then should not the current President be held responsible for this?

  8. Larry Grossman says:

    I suggest the commentators read the Nation Magazine’s article by Patricia Williams entitled ” The Monsterization of Trayvon Martin”. This ought to get their venom flowing. Wouldn’t one be justified in fearing a young white men since it is young white males who have recently committed mass murders? They seem to particularly like killing children. Notice that?

Leave a Reply