43 thoughts on “No justice…

  1. You mean you’re not looking forward to the perennial National Conversation About Race ™? Maybe it can get corporate sponsorship this time.

  2. Am I to take it you’re hoping for riots over this?

    I don’t see where the “injustice” is here: there was no grounds for convicting Zimmerman for 2d degree murder, and the jury failed to give in to the lynch mob mentality being drummed up by the media, who of course want to provoke racial retaliation and riots over this, which have already occurred in the past.

    I am not a big fan of media crucifixions, especially of the “any white guy who kills a black guy is a racist and therefore guilty” variety. It is clear the mass media deliberately misrepresented the details of this case to generate racial antagonism. If the shooting had been the other way around we never would have heard of it.

    I hope people are not so stupid as to take the bait and riot over this. If the media tries to turn your head in one direction turn it in the other and walk away.

      • Not so:

        In that case a Black guy shot and killed an Hispanic and he walked even though there was no violence used directly against him as was the case with Zimmerman. It was only after several months and a lot of local pressure that they indicted him. Having this occur at the same time as the Trayvon case didn’t help him, obviously.

        This was in Sheriff Arpaio’s Maricopa County, where they arrest you for breathing the wrong way.

          • sean you’re a caution

            “the jury failed to give in to the lynch mob mentality”

            ” drummed up by the media”

            “, who of course want to provoke racial retaliation and riots over this,”


          • “right Hispanic…. wasp same diff eh ?”

            Eh what? The victim in that case was named Daniel Adkins…about as Anglo a name as it gets. He was part Hispanic, though it was interesting the media labeled him an Hispanic unlike that other guy, who they keep trying to shove into the “white” category.

    • Sean sez on 07.14.13 at 10:24:
      Am I to take it you’re hoping for riots over this?

      Uhhhmmm… in a word — yes.

      Not that I’m counting on much, as it seems that 95% of the people who should be in the streets pitching a bitch are sitting around waiting for the Democratic Party to give them permission to rise up.

      Either that, or praying, or some shit.

      • It’s always interesting to see comfortable middle class white lefties calling on urban Blacks to go out and riot. Black people obviously need someone white to tell them to go out and act like savages in response to every media-generated racial outrage.

        Whenever you are upset by the verdict in a highly questionable case where no one knows what really happened and the media has gone to absurd lengths to manipulate the facts and encourage racial antagonism, the appropriate response is to go out and kill random white people. What could be more natural or reasonable….for Blacks?

        Or not.

        For some odd reason, Blacks don’t seem to be taking the bait and going on a rampage, despite the mass media’s endlessly repeated assurances and exhortations that they do so. Could it be there are sensible black people out there? How disappointing.

        With any luck you might yet get your wish, though I suspect you’re not planning to be one of the “creepy ass crackas” who gets dragged out on the street and beaten to death. In a country that lacks gladiator fights niggers vs crackas broadcast live from the streets is as entertaining as you can get while still feeling righteous about cheering on racial violence.

    • Someone has spoken up. Thanks. On ocassion I think our country boy has… not gone off the deep end, but perhaps overboard, sans scapegrace? A bomber/slasher is a mischievous “kid,” a movie critic’s grave is danced on.. as though MS does not himself employ (albeit very trenchantly and brilliantly written) literary or seventh art “criticism” on occasion … nothing to excess, O oracle! MS of all people should know that justice is not just, and that the “news media” are in the business of sparking more “news”… On the other hand, a measure of moderation (forget CNN, I mean on this blog) might mitigate the prose process?

  3. Please let me be a voice for peace and reason. I absolutely disagree with Mr. Smith’s statement that there should be “no peace.” The Florida legislature, judiciary, and jury deserve our respect and pride for handing down a verdict in support of the laws that our representative democracy has enshrined. We must cherish our sacred freedoms and the peace that they bring us. Violence is never to be condoned under any circumstances, except in the last extreme of defending your own life.

    Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman had an unfortunate encounter where George Zimmerman accosted Martin from behind, while armed. We need to support our nation’s “stand your ground” laws–if accosted by an armed attacker, all of us should have the right to defend ourselves by killing the attacker. That’s what Martin was doing; unfortunately, the attacker completed the attack.

    It’s now up to any concerned citizens to stand their ground and defend themselves if they see attackers like George Zimmerman coming their way to attack them years from now. Pursuant to acts of legislation, as well as standing case law, it’s clear that defending yourself from attackers like George Zimmerman is lawful. As President Obama said, it’s our duty as Americans to keep our eyes open for potential threats to our families and communities. The Florida legislature, and now jury, has made explicit that defending ourselves from attackers like George Zimmerman is a legal right, even if that defense of our persons requires lethal force.

    Be sure to follow the President’s advice, and keep your eyes open in the years ahead, for your own safety. We must do our part as Americans to keep our streets safe from attackers like George Zimmerman.

  4. High Arka sez on 07.14.13 at 06:55:
    Please let me be a voice for peace and reason. I absolutely disagree with Mr. Smith’s statement that there should be “no peace.” The Florida legislature, judiciary, and jury deserve our respect and pride for handing down a verdict in support of the laws that our representative democracy has enshrined…

    Uhhhmm… you’re pulling our leg — right? Right? …’cause you sound like some clown on MSDNC… uh, that is, MSNBC.

    Christ. I need a shower.

    Everybody talkin’ ’bout peace,
    but nobody talkin’ ’bout justice!
    Well, I don’t want no peace —
    I want equal rights and justice!

    –Peter Tosh.

  5. Gonna have to side with the jury on this one. Presumption of innocence isn’t just for people you like, and the evidence just isn’t there. Certainly not for murder 2.

    Something happened between George hanging up with 911 and him shooting Trayvon. It that something condemning? Probably. But probably isn’t enough, even for some asshole LARP cop.

    • Yes, but that “presumption of innocence” only applies to certain people. Mr. Smith’s recent jury-related posts, for example, have illuminated a few of the reasons that people are angry (whether or not they understand exactly why). Presumption of innocence would make almost all crimes un-prosecutable; the only time the presumption really gets to apply is when a savvy perp gets media attention and money.

      The way that the rare reasonable American jury has learned to deal with that is to convict even when there is no proof beyond a reasonable doubt, ergo African American conviction rates. Prosecutors and cops deal with it by railroading most defendants through the system without having to waste time on proving un-provable things to juries.

      Those who are angry with the verdict have to contemplate whether they really believe in (1) democracy and juries, or (2) rule by an educated elite. We have (2) right now, but every so often, they let (1) take hold, to show us what a mistake it is.

  6. Presumption of Innocence? Innocent of what?

    The fucking nation bleeds violence, hatred and bile. Assholes with guns shoot people up and it’s just another fucking day in hell.

    This nation is a pustule sucking on the anus of the earth and we wonder why armed assholes are running around shooting kids? Give me a fucking break.

  7. sean you’re a caution

    It’s called critical thinking; you might give it a try.

    “the jury failed to give in to the lynch mob mentality”

    ” drummed up by the media”

    “, who of course want to provoke racial retaliation and riots over this,”

    Ooh, you put my comments in individual quotes. How craaaaazy they must be.

    The media manipulation in this case couldn’t be more obvious to anyone with the political sophistication of a child. You have an example of it starting you right in the face on this page. Some of it was so ham-handed as to beggar belief, such as MSNBC deliberately editing the audio of Zimmerman calling the cops to make the call sound more racist.


    I’m not surprised anymore at the gullibility of the feckless Left over mass media propaganda like this. Indeed they react like trained seals every time, barking and clapping while their handlers feed them shit.

    • That’s largely true, Sean, but conjoined with that is the strapped, drug-addled Zimmerman driving around playing cop, then changing his story on what was said and how the “attack” went. It’s 60% of available stupid to believe he’s innocent, and 40% of available stupid to believe that this was the Standard Racism Killing.

      The reason they’re pushing the Standard Racism Killing angle is to distract from the larger pictures of informally deputized “neighborhood watch” programs. The end goal here is private citizens who are (1) not armed, but who (2) feel honor-bound to attack and report on other citizens, regardless of race. Imagine this as the perverted mutant child of the twentieth century: the Politically-Correct Hitler National Taser Association of Youth, or something equally obtuse.

      • I don’t see where he changed his story, and the evidence so far has corroborated his story to some extent. Only two people in the world know the truth of what happened that day and one of them is dead. Far too many people think their opinion of what happened in this case is as good as factual evidence, but it is not.

        It is sacrilege to say so, but it is entirely possible things went down exactly as Zimmerman says they did and he is in fact innocent. There is no question who initiated the physical violence portion in the confrontation between “George” and “Martin” and it wasn’t George.

        The media frequently generates a circus around “white” vs black crimes in order to sow racial division and keep blacks and whites from uniting together in their common interest. Kind of hard to see the other as a potential ally when you think he’s going to kill you or your kids. It’s the ancient divide and rule game. That the Left so readily buys into and feeds into this manipulative bullshit is a disgrace and a big part of why the Left is so marginalized nowadays.

        • http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/06/george-zimmerman-reenactment-video

          Stopping your car, getting out, and approaching someone with a weapon is threat; it’s an attack; it’s (“legally”) assault; if you do it to a cop on a dark night, you might get shot.

          If someone did that to you, how would you feel? You’re walking down the street to your friend’s house, and a car pulls up, man with a gun gets out, and marches up to you. Clearly, you’re getting robbed, right? Even *if* Martin punched Zimmerman first (which Zimmerman’s story went back and forth on, until he’d had more time to practice it with his lawyers), it was justified.

          Maybe you’re not thinking about this from the feminine perspective. If you’re a woman walking down the street by yourself on a dark night, and a man stops his car, gets out, and comes at you with a gun, is it all right to mace him before he shoots or grabs you?

          (What about if you’re just a kid?)

          Approaching someone with a weapon, without being a friend, police officer, soldier, or apologizing to them beforehand and explaining yourself, is an attack. It’s been an attack ever since humans learned how to pick up sticks and bash other humans with them. It’s hard for many middle/upper class people, especially men, to recognize this, but if a stranger comes at you in the dark, it is time for self defense.

          But–as you’d probably agree–there was no “beyond a reasonable doubt” in this case. An unfortunate fact of American murder is, as I pointed out above, that once you’ve killed someone, if you properly set the scene and get your story straight, you can always make it self defense. Then, unless you’re black or unlucky, you get away with it.

          Zimmerman probably didn’t kill Martin because Martin was black; he probably did it because he was frustrated over break-ins, and over his own sense of self, so he got to be Batman for a few minutes by trying to push some kid out of his neighborhood. When the kid resisted, he shot him. The lies about how he fell, the sudden addition of a punch, the reason for getting out of the Batmobile to accost the criminal in question, make that clear, but not clear enough for the abstruse requirements that sometimes apply to a tiny percentile of lucky people in America.

          • Zimmerman deserved jail time

            he was called off
            he was reckless in pursuit
            and confrontation
            he was armed and fired a fatal sho
            in a fist fight
            jail time

            how much time

            really not important

            of course it wasn’t murder II
            and its not his racism
            its the racism
            of the system that
            arrest him
            then released him
            after “community uproar”
            re arrested and prosecuted him

            racism of a hegemonic white nation
            from the police chief to the jury

    • “The media manipulation in this case couldn’t be more obvious ”

      but Big Media fired out self contradictory messages

      your teleological construct is a nice metaphor
      a Big Media itching to whip up a riot wave
      but a fantasy

      mass spectacle has its internal laws
      but they are in mutual conflict
      and highly unstable
      jumping from take to contrary take

      a chunk here a counter chunk there

      fish motion
      fish in a tank
      fish going no where
      staying put
      circling a dead center

  8. Having seen the video, Zimmerman’s account seems very plausible. he constructs a coherent and plausible narrative of how he and Martin got from point A (where they first encounter each other) to point B (where the fight occurs. Had there been any obstacles blocking either person’s path in the alleged route taken, that would have put the lie to the story right away.

    I don’t see the inconsistencies that the Mother Jones reporter does. This part of the video is confusing, but when Zimmerman gives Trayvon’s location just prior to the punch, he is referring to the cop who stands at attention and asks “here?” and not to himself. When he “gestures forward” with his arm he is not referring to the direction he fell but to the place that he fell, which he then walks over to.

    Zimmerman’s statements in the video are plausible and consistent with his written statement, and most importantly, with eyewitness accounts that saw Martin on top of Zimmerman. Zimmerman mentions the appearance of one of these witnesses opening the door at the point he claims Martin was on top of him, and that claim matches the witness’s report.

    None of the witnesses reported that Zimmerman was holding his gun at this time.

    I don’t think there’s any question of who initiated the violence here. The evidence of this seems clear enough. There is no evidence Zimmerman approached Martin with a gun. We can invent all sorts of scenarios where Martin may have been spooked enough to feel he needed to attack Zimmerman to defend himself, but no one knows the truth and none are backed by evidence other than the fact of Zimmerman following Martin. Zimmerman’s alleged reasons for shooting Martin by contrast are backed by hard evidence of a violent assault, like photos of his nose being either swollen or broken and blood flowing from the back of his head.

    We can also invent all kinds of motives for why Zimmerman or Martin did what they did, but no one knows that answer but Z and M. Martin clearly had some racist attitudes towards “creepy ass crackas” and a history of violent behavior including an assault on a bus driver while there is no evidence of racism on Zimmerman’s part. Martin’s racist attitudes towards whites could have been a contributing factor in his attacking Zimmerman. He certainly wasn’t the innocent angel the media portrays him as.

    I have experienced being “stalked,” stared at or subjected to excessive observation by “creepy” people including black street thugs and cops. It certainly is an uncomfortable situation, but most rational people do not react to this by going up to the person in question and sucker-punching them in the face and slamming their head against the ground. There has to be a pretty high-probability of imminent attack to justify that and I don’t see where there is evidence for that here.

    As for the “Batman” comment, I think there are a lot of white liberals out there who like to play the hero by posing as “Defender of the Blacks.” Anything black people do is always justified especially if it’s done against a white person, and if blacks are angry about stuff it is okay for them to react with violence against random, innocent people. This highly patronizing character treats black people like they are helpless little children who need his protection, not only from evil white people but the dreaded “n” word. Most Black people despise these characters, as they recognize them for the self-serving glory hounds they are. Sensible black people aren’t exactly happy about the behavior of the street thugs in their midst as black people are their primary victims. Mindless, moronic defenses of thug behavior by whites who don’t have to live with this bullshit are as welcome as George Zimmerman at a Kwanza dinner.

    “not clear enough for the abstruse requirements that sometimes apply to a tiny percentile of lucky people in America.”

    Yeah, the tiny percentage of people who base their opinions on evidence, and not emotion.

    • From even Zimmerman’s evidence, a private citizen was driving around with a gun, following an innocent person that a 911 operator told him not to follow, and approaching him in the dark, ______, then shooting him. That shit is, as they say, so wack that I don’t care what happened during _____. If a private citizen were in my neighborhood following people around with a gun, I would have a major problem with it. Would you want your children walking down the sidewalk around armed stalkers? Your wife? I know I’m not comfortable with the thought. If Zimmerman had come up on me like that, I would’ve screamed like hell and called 911. If a woman had maced Zimmerman for stalking her like that, it would’ve been considered more acceptable; a young man should have the same right to be scared and defensive.

      Getting watched, or monitored, by a thug in a neighborhood is normal. That’s okay. When they start coming up to you, though, it’s usually not good news–especially if it’s at night, in the dark, and strapped. At that point, it’s on.

      This ended up dovetailing with Safety zones and reasonable rape.

      • I have no problem with private citizens with guns. I have a problem with cops and thugs with guns. I have no problem with people acting in self-defense of themselves or their communities, “cop wannabe” or not. According to the evidence, Martin got shot after he attacked Zimmerman, not before. The rest is speculation.

        I’m not comfortable with kids being around people who will mace or attack anyone they feel is acting strangely around them. I can see where walking in the grass on a rainy day and scoping out people’s houses might invite scrutiny in a high crime neighborhood. I’m not sure how being thus scrutinized justifies a violent attack or claims of victimhood when the guy you attack exercises his right to defend himself against you.

        You are misinterpreting the “reasonable doubt” instruction given to juries. It is not an invitation to construct as many imaginary scenarios as you can where the defendant might be innocent. It is to take the scenario being given to you be the prosecution and determing whether the scenario is plausible and sufficiently backed by evidence to where you have no doubts in its veracity. If you do have any “reasonable” doubts, then you are required to vote not guilty. It is one of the few worthwhile ideas in our injustice system.

        The only problem with this standard is that a lot of people aren’t reasonable. People who think white defendant plus black victim plus media circus equals guilt in the face of all evidence to the contrary are not reasonable people. People who think all that equals excuse for rioting and killing innocent people are sick in the fucking head.

  9. sean

    “black street thugs”

    were they strapping young bucks sean ?

    what were you doing in their space ?

    co joining them with “cops” suggested you are
    a turbulently conflicted isolate

    a pile of self righteous alienated angry neurotic fragmentary reactions
    a cerebrating hay stack
    as we neuron net experts call it

    a unity only because its all happening inside one skull

    • “black street thugs”

      “Thug” is what they call themselves. You never did move out of Mayberry, did you, Opie?

      were they strapping young bucks sean ?

      Hard to tell when they’re doing drive-bys in their welfare Cadillacs.

      what were you doing in their space ?

      What makes it their space? What was “Martin” doing in “George’s” space?

      co joining them with “cops” suggested you are
      a turbulently conflicted isolate

      You’re too dense to see the connection and I’m too tired to explain it to you.

      a pile of self righteous alienated angry neurotic fragmentary reactions
      a cerebrating hay stack
      as we neuron net experts call it

      From wannabe Zinoviev fruit loop racist calling for Whitey’s blood over a media circus to PC Powder Puff girl upset over the word “thug” in just a few lines. A tearful Haystacks Calhoun chiding others over their weight problem.

      I liked you better when you were a blubbering, incoherent bourgeois bolshevik bookworm with no clue what goes on outside that cluster-bombed clusterfuck you call a brain.

      Oh wait.

      a unity only because its all happening inside one skull

      You need to step outside the ashram, Wormananda.

  10. sean reflects an important insight however

    “a lot of white liberals out there who like to play the hero by posing as “Defender of the Blacks.” ”

    but even more prevalent paleface farce is
    “I be down with the black man ”

    a big hunk of the college boomer identity politics
    was “identifying with” /”wanna be like” politics

    like blacks like tribals like robots…..

  11. Zimmerman deserved jail time

    Under what law? It’s interesting to see how the self-styled contrarians here have suddenly become “friends of the cops” in calling for someone’s head when there was no evidence under which he could be convicted of the crime he was charged with.

    he was called off
    he was reckless in pursuit
    and confrontation
    he was armed and fired a fatal sho
    in a fist fight
    jail time

    A claim of self-defense doesn’t require you to fight back with the same weapons your attacker is using. There is no evidence he “confronted” Martin. His claim that he got out of the car to look for a street address he could use to direct the cops to his location seems backed by the evidence (him discussing the matter of being unable to determine his location on the phone with the cops). Martin started hitting Zimmerman before Zimmerman shot him, that much is clear from the evidence.

    Great article why the decision in the Zimmerman case was the right one regardless of what you feel about the guy or the case itself.


    its the racism
    of the system that
    arrest him
    then released him
    after “community uproar”
    re arrested and prosecuted him

    The “racism of the system” is a convenient canard with little basis in reality for most people. Not that there isn’t racism and every other kind of evil you can name in this system, but the idea that there is some kind of white guy pass you can flash and walk away from crimes like murder is pure bullshit. I don’t think this, I know it, from personal experience dealing with the cops and from the experience of everyone I know. The only people who get a pass are those who can buy one, and I don’t think Hispanic Zimmerman qualified either by racial affiliation or income for that.

    racism of a hegemonic white nation
    from the police chief to the jury

    Where’d you get this professor, your Whiteness Studies class? The idea the ruling elite of this country governs on behalf of the lower-echelon of white-skinned primates is comforting to some I suppose, but from what I’ve seen in my life, the opposite is true.

  12. ex-opium:

    but Big Media fired out self contradictory messages

    There is no one size-fits all propaganda. There is always a “liberal” and “conservative” version and sometimes dozens of variations where appropriate for whatever they want you to believe.

    Advertisers can simultaneously promote multiple pick-up truck brands at the same time, and still people will self-select the brands they want to buy, just like they select the propaganda they will buy into, often in defiance of the facts in both cases. So long as they make a sale it’s all good. If you buy the vehicle you got a truck, if you buy the propaganda you’ve gotten fucked.

    your teleological construct is a nice metaphor
    a Big Media itching to whip up a riot wave
    but a fantasy

    A fantasy that usually plays out in reality whenever we have one of these media-generated racial carnivals.
    A fantasy shared by the media, who are constantly talking about riots, riots and more riots.
    A fantasy endorsed right here on this page.

    Yet, yet… the idea that anyone would want to encourage race riots is craaaazy talk.

    • Sean, although you feel there is reasonable doubt that Zimmerman shot Martin to death based on a threat to his life, do you also feel that there is reasonable doubt that Zimmerman stopped his car, which had working headlights, and got out of the car to check a street sign:

      (1) In his own neighborhood;

      (2) Where he had been living for years;

      (3) Where he had been working on the neighborhood watch for those years, and called in dozens of reports about the locations of people in the streets of that neighborhood;

      (4) When the person he was supposedly concerned about the police catching was, at the same time, “on the move” away from that very street?

      Also, after he stopped the car, Martin kept walking, and Zimmerman went over to check the street sign, did Zimmerman then “walk” up to Martin? With Martin walking in the other direction?

      Zimmerman reported, at one point, that he walked up–that he didn’t have to jog or run to catch up, even though he’d first stopped his car, put it in park, taken off his seatbelt, gotten out, shut the door, gone to the street sign, squinted at the sign, then turned around to continue pursuit. However, he later changed it to walking innocently down the street when Martin “jumped out of the bushes” and said something about “homie,” at which point this fight started.

      Your version of “reasonable doubt”–a version that depends on plausible human memory and behavior, as well as the 60-second minute–does not comport with Zimmerman’s story. The only way he could have overtaken Martin in the rain, with a lead, after he’d been denied permission to pursue (especially after stopping his car to “check a street sign”) would violate his story, because it would require, at the last, a brisk jog.

      What his story spells out is that he stopped his car near Martin, asked the 911 operator if he could confront the suspect, and was then denied permission. When he was denied, he got upset, and got out of his car to go after Martin anyway. Martin saw a guy watching him in the car, plotting on the phone, and then the guy stopped the car, got out, and rushed at him with a gun. That is plausible “standing your ground,” and a justified first punch in the nose. Zimmerman’s actions, and the little mistakes he made in his story later (about why he got out of his car, how he caught up to Martin, and whether or not he was ambushed or just “walked up to” the kid), are the only portions of the story that are not plausible.

      Oh, and have you ever had your head slammed into the concrete? Zimmerman got a bloody nose from getting punched, and some scuffles from when he tried to take the kid down afterward and got, as only a crude and sexist person might put it, “bitched.” He did not get his head “slammed into the concrete”–his mild lacerations (widdle scwatches) came from a brief tussle–say, trying to keep a 140 lbs. dripping-wet 17-year-old from taking his gun away.

      His injuries, and their quite-rapid healing, go along, reasonably, with what you’d expect from a fat coward playing rent-a-cop by stalking and attacking a black kid. This is why Zimmerman did not get an X-ray, or more importantly, a CT scan, for having his head violently and repeatedly slammed into the concrete. (From a medical perspective, there is no way he wouldn’t have gotten told to have a CT scan if he’d actually gone in for such an experience). If Zimmerman had just gotten whacked like that, and had bleeding in the brain or an aneurysm, he should’ve had some after-effects, not the least of which would’ve been a legitimate concern about going to the doctor. Instead, he was able to calmly report things to the cops, go home, come back the next day, tell a slightly different version of the story with more violence, and not worry about his health at all. He reasonably did not go to the doctor because anyone examining him would’ve been able to tell it was just a few scratches, and that he didn’t even have any bruising, or anything else that would’ve saved him from getting second-degree for attacking and shooting some kid.

      That’s why “reasonable doubt” does not actually mean “plausible”–it means luck, money, and popularity.

      In closing, I’d like to remind all Stop Me! readers about my earlier call for peace and justice. It is reasonable to assume that, wherever he ends up, Zimmerman may continue to violently stalk children. If he appears in your community, years from now–perhaps having disguised his name, as the government reports sexual predators and terrorists often do–it is your duty to make sure all nearby parents know that he may take violent actions against their children.

      So that Zimmerman can be reported to the proper authorities.

      • The mass media version of what happened between Zimmerman and Martin is almost completely bogus. This was an actual case with actual evidence. You have to go by the evidence presented in the trial, and not the distorted and manipulated mass media bullshit or whatever plausible scenario you want to drum up to explain what happen. That evidence overwhelmingly corroborates Zimmerman’s side of the story and strongly suggest it was Trayvon, and not Zimmerman, who was the aggressor. The jury found the same and voted not guilty.

        From the word go this was a mass media racial witch hunt against a “racist white guy” who was neither white or a racist.

        Just to respond to your points and add a few of my own:

        1. It is not illegal or unethical to be part of neighborhood watch.
        2. It is not illegal or unethical to observe suspicious people and report them to the cops as part of that job. The sign at the entrance to that community said it is a neighborhood watch community and suspicious people will be reported to the police.
        3. It is not illegal or unethical to get out of your car.
        4. It is not illegal or unethical to walk behind someone.
        5. It is illegal to walk up to someone, punch them in the face, jump on top of them and start slamming their head into the ground.
        6. If someone does this to you, you have a legal right to fight back with any weapon at your disposal.
        7. A claim of self-defense does not require you to allow someone to beat you half to death before you act. Zimmerman’s nose was fractured according to the medical report of the doctor he saw.
        8. The prosecution’s own witness, Rachel Jeantel who was the young lady on the phone with Taryvon just before he died, states that Trayvon made it all the way to the house he was staying at, which was several hundred feet away from where the confrontation with Zimmerman took place. If you look at diagrams of the area in question, the only way that confrontation could have occurred where it did is if Trayvon turned around and went back towards Zimmerman, which is exactly what Zimmerman claimed happened.
        9. Ms Jeantel’s testimony also suggests that it was Trayvon who initiated the verbal part of the confrontation.
        10. All other evidence suggests Trayvon was in the aggressor in the physical violence portion of the confrontation as well, where Zimmerman’s side of the story was once again confirmed by witnesses.
        11. The testimony of forensic specialists confirmed Zimmerman’s statement that Trayvon reached for Zimmerman’s gun and they both struggled for control of the gun just before Trayvon was shot. So Zimmerman really was fighting for his life here.

        The idea that Trayvon was an innocent, defenseless angel is a frace. He was 6’3 —7 inches taller than Zimmerman but about the same weight. Martin was a high school football player in muscular, athletic condition who had training in mixed martial arts and who participated in “fight club”-style activities where he and his friends fought each other and practiced their techniques. He also has a history of violent confrontations with other people, including a bus driver who he punched in the face. He would have been a formidable opponent for the average cop, let alone some dumpy neighborhood watch guy.

        As for Zimmerman being a fat racist coward playing rent-a-cop, did you know this “rent-a-cop” once put his ass on the line going up against the cops by defending a homeless Black guy who was beaten up by the son of a Sanford police officer? He went around with flyers to all the Black churches trying to get people organized to protest what happened when no one in the Black community gave a fuck. If you know anything about how cops operate, you know that they sometimes make life a living hell for anyone who takes them on like this.


        The evidence from the trial proves that the media grossly distorted the facts in this case to turn it into a racial show trial. You really should look at the link I posted as it proves all this and lays out the real evidence of what happened as far as anyone knows it. There was strong consistency between Zimmerman’s written account of what happened, the video he did with the cops and the testimony of eyewitness for both the defense and prosecution as well as the forensic evidence. This was an open and shut case of self-defense that never should have gone to trial.



        • The mass media may be slightly less trustworthy than a Florida trial court, but the difference between them is not that great. Do remember that we’re discussing the justice system in a country of torture and genocide, where the trial only happened at all because of outside media and political pressure.

          Is walking down the street suspicious? What could have possibly made Martin “suspicious” to Zimmerman, other than that Martin was black? Was he carrying a weapon? Burglary tools? Wearing a ninja hood? It’s possible that Zimmerman accosts every person he sees in the neighborhood; I’m willing to believe he is indeed that much of an asshole, and call Martin’s race irrelevant to what Zimmerman did, if not the jury.

          Discrimination against young black males is not limited to white people. One of the archetypical opening stories in John Burris’ Blue v. Black is that of a female, Hispanic patrol officer in the LAPD stopping her cruiser and assaulting a black man who was walking down the street a few blocks over from where a robbery suspect may have been a black man. Zimmerman being able to claim some type of “mixed” ancestry (which is not an uncommon claim for 21st century whites) is irrelevant here; even many black people will stereotype other black people.

          Still, stereotyping is not illegal for a private citizen. It’s irrelevant here. Zimmerman’s neighborhood watch status, and his play-cop games, are a matter for his homeowner’s association, and his racial composition is a matter for no one.

          It is, similarly, not illegal or unethical to get out of your car or walk up behind someone. However, it is illegal to put someone in reasonable apprehension of a danger to their life. That’s what Zimmerman did when he stopped his car, got out, and hurried after Martin with a gun.

          We look at Zimmerman’s getting out of the car because it demonstrates his lie. He claimed he got out of his car to look at a street sign more closely, which was a lie he constructed to explain why he had gotten out of his car, when he’d actually gotten out of the car to rush Martin. We know his story is true because he had lived in that neighborhood for years, patrolled that neighborhood, and called in reports about it–so there was no confusion over what street he was on. Why, then, did he lie? Because he didn’t want to admit he’d gotten out of the car to try to citizen’s-arrest the kid.

          Since it is not illegal to shoot someone when you’re worried that they are threatening your life, Martin breaking the fat coward’s nose was not illegal. Martin was the one actually standing his ground. As you put it, if someone does this to you, “you have a legal right to fight back with any weapon at your disposal.” And Martin was actually fighting for his life–he was walking home with snacks, when some guy tailed him in a guy, got out, and rushed to catch up to him with a gun.

          Also, as you put it, “[a] claim of self-defense does not require you to allow someone to shoot you to death before you act.” Zimmerman doesn’t know how to fight, because he’s a coward with a gun–that’s why his nose was so vulnerable when he rushed the kid.

          Ms. Jeantel’s testimony–reported to you, by the way, through the “mass media” you were decrying earlier–is that of a terrified young girl who got dragged into court on camera after her friend had been killed by an armed man who lives near her. Put that aside, though, and let’s assume that she was 100% accurate–her guess as to how close to home Martin was when Martin said, “Yeah, I’m almost there,” is irrelevant.

          If Trayvon initiated the verbal part of the conversation, good for him–it showed remarkable self-restraint if he talked to the armed private citizen coming at him, before standing his ground.

          The evidence suggesting that Trayvon was winning the physical component of the confrontation is not necessarily the evidence suggesting that he initiated it. What is the evidence saying he initiated it, given that there were no witnesses?

          The forensic time travelers who suggested that there was a struggle for the gun may have been able to tell that there was a struggle, but not who started it. That’s beyond “reasonable doubt,” as well as “plausible”–they would have no way of telling. I have no doubt that, when Zimmerman got ready to shoot Martin, Martin tried to take the gun away. As you put it, “So, Martin really was fighting for his life here.”

          Trayvon wasn’t innocent and defenseless. Yet again, you seem to be conflating “High Arka” with “the mass media.” You’ve adopted one version of the mass media story–the heroic self-defender–while other people have adopted a different version–the innocent angel. Like Democrats v. Republicans, you’re letting the teevee tell your story, and throwing in a little machismo to go with it. My understanding that Zimmerman attacked someone, though, is not the same “Zimmerman” narrative provided by the teevee.

          Many, many young men nowadays–particularly minorities–have some kind of martial arts training, and perhaps most (or almost all?) young men the world over have experience wrestling around with their friends. That aspect of Martin’s background is entirely irrelevant to the case, since no one is saying that he lacked the ability to punch or grapple with Zimmerman.

          By the same token, Zimmerman’s prior racial activities are irrelevant. When the shit goes down, everyone has at least one black friend. Zimmerman is certainly a child-stalker, and a child-killer, but like Dubya, probably not a racist in the pejorative sense.

          There were no witnesses to the fight; if you’ll review the mass media sources that were disseminated to help people like you form your macho outlook, you’ll notice that they were based on people who, once there was a national trial, decided that they “might have glimpsed a fight” through their window on a dark night, and that they now felt, upon looking back, that George Zimmerman was a hero who was being defeated. Naturally, they weren’t clear on this when they heard the gunshot and saw the cops, but later on, when they got the opportunity to be on TV, they might have seen something outside that might have been those two at what was possibly that time and one of the shapes that might’ve been there might have been the shape that they wanted to be on top of the other shape at the time they now remembered hearing the gunshot.

          Your suspicion that this is a circus (like Snowden) is dead-on; unfortunately, the case they trumped up was that of an actual asshole who stalked and shot someone. That’s always happening in America, but you picked the wrong self-defender to stand up for, in a moral sense. You will, though, get the satisfaction of knowing how misguided and stupid the other side is, if they extra-racialize Zimmerman (as opposed to the jury).

          Oh, you forgot to mention the CT scan, the MRI, the X-rays, and all the other crap that should’ve happened if that fat coward had really gotten “slammed.” It’s easy to break a sissy’s nose, but if you’re un-trained enough to waste time and energy slamming heads into the concrete, the said head would definitely need a CT scan. The broken nose came from a sucker punch when Martin saw a guy rushing him with a gun; Zimmerman recovered, they grappled, and Zimmerman squeezed off a shot, saving his pansy ass.

Leave a Reply