I do so based upon the opinion of Alan Dershowitz as well as a discussion with a lawyer friend.
When the Florida Attorney General said politics had nothing to do with the decision to press charges, she was lying. Political cowardice had everything to do with it. The actions of the Sanford Police Department did call the case into question, but informed and educated critics say the affidavit is a joke, and an investigator admitted on the stand that there was no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's statement that Martin jumped him after he had turned around and headed back to his vehicle.
Prosecutor Angela Corey purposely charged him with second degree murder so they could have a show trial where Zimmerman will be found not guilty by a jury of his peers, as opposed to the DA having to announce they cannot press charges due to a lack of evidence. This takes the heat off of the Florida political establishment while also ultimately serving justice, in a twisted way.
The prosecutors have no hard evidence, and Zimmerman is the only witness left standing. The second degree murder standard is too high. The official medical evidence will come out showing he did suffer injuries, and the rest is based upon what he told police and his testimony on the stand. He'll walk.
Once exonerated, Zimmerman will be sued for wrongful death, dragging this racial carnival of the grotesque out for years.
This doesn't mean he acted prudently. He did not. This is also not the fault of the stand your ground law, and the race shouters will continue shouting, even thought there is no evidence Zimmerman is a racist or that his actions that night were racially-motivated, let alone a "hate crime."
A Tragic Chain of Events
As in most accidents and tragedies, it took a string of bad decisions to produce the sad outcome.
1) Zimmerman got out of his vehicle.
2) Had he not been carrying a gun, would he have pursued a "suspicious" stranger in the dark? Forgoing either one of those actions would have prevented Martin's death.
3) Zimmerman's statement, and the testimony he is prepared to present, says that he was returning to his vehicle when Martin attacked him. Had Martin simply made haste back to his father's house, he would still be alive.
They can't convict George Zimmerman with no evidence, so I predict not guilty or a hung jury. That doesn't mean racism doesn't exist, it doesn't mean young black men are not racially profiled, and it doesn't mean police department don't treat white adults differently than they do black adolescents.
Race hustlers, social provocateurs and even reasoned thinkers are trying to hang the sins of the world upon George Zimmerman. Injustice cannot give birth to justice.
Mediaite - Alan Dershowitz
52 comments:
Had he not been carrying a gun, would he have pursued a "suspicious" stranger in the dark? Forgoing either one of those actions would have prevented Martin's death.
I'll disagree with you a bit on the above.
1. Can't prove a negative.
2. Zimmerman WAS carrying legally.
Did you hear that recent statement from Jesse Jackson? "If the school had not suspended Trayvon, he wouldn't have died."
If, if, if.
He'll walk.
Once exonerated, Zimmerman will be sued for wrongful death...
I've never supported those types of law suits after a not-guilty verdict. Yes, yes, yes, I understand that the bar for evidence and the bar for finding the defendant are not as high in such cases.
I think that we all know that Zimmerman's life and his family's life are ruined now -- no matter the verdict for the criminal case.
Zimmerman will be found not guilty by a jury of his peers
I do wonder if a jury will find Zimmerman guilty out of the desire to prevent racial unrest. One can never predict what a jury will do!
You all are side line quarter backs and making decisions about this without being part of the situation. Let the facts come forward and let justice prevail..
The information we are getting is twisted by all sides across the media.
RedneckRon
The difference is, how this is being seen and handled by the so called Black "Leaders".
"Eight Minutes You Missed", statement from Zimmerman's former attorney. Start listening at the 28-minute mark. The media did spin this statement in an entirely different way.
Redneck Ron,
You all are side line quarter backs and making decisions about this without being part of the situation.
Ahem. This is a blog. Anything goes! Well, more or less.
AOW: This is just me talking off the top of my head and wondering how things would have turned out if each had made different decisions.
I am not anti-gun; I own quite a few (don't want to say how many and trigger a Heimatlandsicherhieit raid on my house).
It is true that had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle, the incident would not have happened.
It is also true that without a gun, Martin would not have been shot.
These points will be made over and over again, but it still doesn't make Zimmerman guilty.
But the Dog Eater in the White House and the race hustlers in the streets have already convicted George Zimmerman.
Everything I've read since the witch hunt started indicated that this fellow is innocent. Hopefully he will be left alone now.
And 1 last thing, given what martin did after Zimmerman walked away from him, I'm glad he was armed.
"I think that we all know that Zimmerman's life and his family's life are ruined now -- no matter the verdict for the criminal case."
Poor Zimmerman and his family! Imagine how sad it must be for him to wake up every day, be able to eat, drink, take walks, listen to music, be with his family, enjoy holidays, maybe some day have children; and if SF's prediction is correct, live to be an old man and enjoying his liberty.
I'm not sure "ruined" is the word I'd use to describe the future for Zimmerman and his family's life.
I'd reserve that word for the 17 year old who was killed and his family.
Silverfiddle,
It is true that had Zimmerman not gotten out of his vehicle, the incident would not have happened.
It could also be true that had Zimmerman not pursued Martin, Martin might have pulled off a burglary on one of the homes in the gated community. I read somewhere that Martin had a stash of women's jewelry in his school locker.
Shaw,
I'm not sure "ruined" is the word I'd use to describe the future for Zimmerman and his family's life.
I think that "ruined" is the exact word. Zimmerman will never live down his now tainted reputation.
Would YOU hire him at your own workplace? I think not.
In fact, a lot of workplaces will never hire him now -- no matter the verdict. I certainly wouldn't hire him for janitor at a school, if for no other reason than the safety of the students and the facility.
Zimmerman will be pursued in some form for the rest of his life. And his family, should they stay with him, will suffer the same fate.
Yes, Martin is dead. That is another ruined life.
It could also be true that had Zimmerman not pursued Martin, Martin might have pulled off a burglary on one of the homes in the gated community.
I'd say a death is a bigger tragedy than a break-in, and you're now talking preemptive justice.
I agree that bad decisions on both sides caused Trayvon's death. I also am willing to hold judgement a little longer. There is still a great deal of evidence that has yet to be released so we don't know what it shows.
I have this feeling that the prosecution is going to use the following angle; Trayvon was exercising his stand your ground rights. If you think about it, it would be a smart strategy for the prosecution to use. Trayvon felt threatened by some strange man following him in a car and then by foot. He tried to protect himself from an overly aggressive man and ended up being shot. Hence, 2nd degree murder.
There is no way to know what happened, we have only word of man facing a jail term. There was a fight that Trayvon was winning. Beyond that we really don't know what happened. Which means he should walk. I guess it will come down to which person was truly standing their ground in the eyes of the jury.
I personally felt all along it should have gone in front of grand jury.
SF: "I'd say a death is a bigger tragedy than a break-in, and you're now talking preemptive justice."
This is why I come back here, despite being in "enemy territory." /sarcasm/
That's a correct statement, no matter what happens to Zimmerman from this point on and going forward. Bravo!
So what's the story, Silverfiddle?
You obsessed with making the world safe for gun loons to cut down an unarmed kid anytime they get the notion?
Yeah, but first you have to get Zimmerman clear so the gun loons have the green light, right?
After all, AOW read somewhere that the nigger had a stash of jewelry in his locker.
Bigots and gun loons. What a mix.
A Latino shoots a Black after the Black attacks the Latino in a small town down in Florida that basically know one in the Nation had even ever heard of and this is deemed "Bigots and gun loons".
I ask just which one in that was the bigot?
And further, what makes one a "loon" by lawfully carrying and using a weapon in self-defense no matter where he or she may be located geographically? People with the license to carry would indeed be a loon if they did not use it be the aggressor any color in the spectrum.
I still contend that we're gonna hafta man up about this crap.
If we’re gonna be all gung-ho about wannabe Dirty Harry’s running around with concealed handguns ever-ready to right the wrongs, we’re gonna hafta be okay with those same vigilantes that we’re romanticizing occasionally making mistakes.
Collateral damages will occur. If you can't stomach that idea, maybe it's time to reconsider the wisdom of equipping any punk and redneck who's out for justice with a concealed, lethal weapon.
I'm as much for supporting our 2nd Amendment rights as anyone else here, but I believe we can both do that AND limit handgun accessibility.
@ Christopher: what makes one a "loon" by lawfully carrying and using a weapon in self-defense no matter where he or she may be located geographically?
Sophisticated East Coast Gun Owners keep their weapons lockered three states away, Christopher, not like us toothless hicks in the hinterlands who carry them around and actually fire them on occasion.
Even in the wild, wild west, gunslingers had more honor than to shoot an unarmed man. Getting your bells rung and having the stuffing knocked out of you [if that's what really happened, we'll never know because Martin is dead] is no reason to shoot and kill. Otherwise every school yard in American would be littered with dead children.
The fact is that Zimmerman began this sorry mess, and the only other person who knows what really happed cannot testify.
IMO, Zimmerman has had plenty of time to consult with his father, a judge, to come up with a story to save his butt. I can't prove that, but neither can Zimmerman prove that Martin initiated a deadly attack against him and threatened his life because Martin is dead.
It's Zimmerman's word against a dead kid's.
@ Silver,,,Hence the rest of my statement,,,
"People with the license to carry would indeed be a loon if they did not use it be the aggressor any color in the spectrum".
We may be hicks in their eyes but we will be breathing hicks enabling us to still cling to our Bibles.
One of the great Unwritten Laws that ought to be heeded at all times:
Take care to avoid even the appearance of evil.
Both individuals in this sad case failed miserably in that regard, and both have paid dearly for it.
Both may be innocent of any actual wrongdoing, but that doesn't seem to make much difference when emotions are running high -- particularly when individuals stop being seen as fellow human beings and are regarded more as symbols by political activists eager to "make hay" out of any situation onto which they may latch their agenda -- AND by the hyper-defensiveness and resentment of the usual targets of such "activism."
It's been a long time since the days of Emmett Till, Medgar Evers, Byron de la Beckwith, and the bombing of that church in Alabama where little black girls were killed, and the murders of Civil Rights activists Goodman, Schwerner and Cheney. Mississippi stopped burning many years ago, thank God, but that doesn't mean that suspicion and resentment of whites towards blacks and vice versa -- much of it justified on both sides -- doesn't still exist.
It probably always will till at last we have blended into one beige-colored human race with slanted blue eyes and woolly blond hair, thin-lipped and broad-nosed with prominent cheekbones -- or some similar silly amalgam.
And then do you know what will happen?
The lighter-colored ones will start feeling superior to the darker-colored ones (this is already the case in much of the so-called "black" community), the short ones will resent the tall ones, the fat ones will hate the thin ones, the dull ones will resent the bright ones, those with even features will feel entitled to lord it over those regarded as homely, etc., etc., etc.
All those "vices" will also be "versa," of course, and one way or another -- despite legislation, globalization and the threat of extermination in a camp of concentration for lack of cooperation -- you may be sure that Hatred will continue to remain alive and well till The End of Time.
Sad though it is to relate, human beings need to hate as much as they need to breathe. That's why we're considered a "Fallen species" by Christian theologians.
If by some miracle, we all decided to follow the words of jesus Christ, things would be different, but I doubt it will ever happen. After all, look what "we" did to HIM. And I say "we" not "they" very deliberately, because every act of cruelty, dishonesty, unkindness, intolerance, and all our manipulativeness and willful misunderstanding is tantamount to spitting directly into His face, or adding yet-another smashing blow to His tormented Body.
As long as we continue to despise and reject one another on one series of superficial pretexts after another, and as long as we cannot find it our hearts to forgive hose who annoy and otherwise offend us, we will continue to live in perpetual agony and anxiety of one sort or another.
Vengeance belongs only to God.
~ FreeThinke
From the persistently antagonistic and divisive tone of too many of these comments it would be a good idea to consider these words of ancient wisdom:
"The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions."
~ Socrates (470-399 B. C. )
In cases such as this -- where the full truth may never be known -- wouldn't it be better to exercise caution, and err, if we are to err, as surely we must, since we are only human, on the side of mercy?
Isn't it always better to give the benefit of the doubt to anyone condemned to live after having been involved in such a terrible incident?
Sorry to wax trite on you, but it remains true that two wrongs never have -- and never will -- make a right.
~ FreeThinke
"George Zimmerman not Guilty."
Wow. Talk about a presumption!
"This is also not the fault of the stand your ground law,"
Really??? Care to expound???
JMJ
"IMO, Zimmerman has had plenty of time to consult with his father, a judge, to come up with a story to save his butt. I can't prove that, but neither can Zimmerman prove that Martin initiated a deadly attack against him and threatened his life because Martin is dead.
It's Zimmerman's word against a dead kid's."
You may be right, Ms. Shaw, but there may also be forensic evidence that would help determine truth from mere assertion -- if we are ever permitted to see it unfiltered by the shamelessly sensation-hogging media of both the left and right wings.
There's been oh-so-much heat and ever-so-little light regarding this case. I'd appreciate seeing a clear-headed, scientific appraisal of what occurred before I could reach any sort of conclusion.
I tend to think the whole thing was the result of impulsive, emotionally immature behavior and poor judgment on the part of all concerned.
From what I've read, Zimmerman has a rather officious meddlesome sort of personality. People who actively seek trouble often get more than they've bargained for.
I would rather see theft than death any day. I can understand the impulse to steal, because it makes some sense in the case of desperately poor people. What I cannot understand -- and could never condone -- is the impulse to vandalize.
I have a beautiful home. I think I would want to kill anyone who sought to do it harm. I feel the same about anyone who seeks to do me bodily harm.
Vandals, bullies and rapists are like mad dogs.
It's not a matter of taking vengeance, but of self-preservation. My life and property are certainly worth more to me than the life of a proven thug.
~ Sorry, but that's what I believe. In trying to follow Jesus, I don't believe we have any obligation to allow ourselves to be shot, stabbed and cut into little pieces, stomped to jolly, maimed, tortured or otherwise harmed for His -- or any other person's -- sake.
At the same time, I do not believe in SEARCHING for Trouble.
~ FreeThinke
Jersey: You loony lefties are the ones asserting that the Stand your Ground law is to blame, so it's on you to prove you assertion.
I've explained it to you before(we have an inherent right to self-defense), and its a shame we need these laws, but our rapacious government is trampling our rights, so sadly they must be restated in law.
Now, professor, tell us how that law caused this.
"world safe for gun loons to cut down an unarmed kid anytime they get the notion?"
See Ducky got the daily talking points memo from Sharpton again today.
Zimmerman follows Martin.
Nothing illegal about following someone.
Zimmerman has no idea whether Martin is unarmed until after the fact.
Nothing illegal about stopping someone from bashing your head in the cement sidewalk.
"After all, AOW read somewhere that the nigger had a stash of jewelry in his locker."
Might racist of you to toss in the N-word. Or is it you're a liberal hack that gets a pass?
Dershowitz is right. the second degree murder charge should be thrown out by any good judge. If not the jury will likely aquit. There was nevver any evidence that this tragedy was due to racism. It was clear from the intial reports that this tragedy was due to stupidity; probably on the part of both parties. Smietimes in life we get a d-over after a stupid act and sometimes we don't get a do-over. Neither Zimmermna or Martin will get a do-over.
we can also thank the media for tier incitement of this division. We don't need to have another Reginald Deny incident on our hands although I believe there already has been 3 incidents of attacks on whites adn no hispanics for payback thus far.
I guess we won't be hearing from Dear Leader to help keep this pressure cooker from exploding and calling these attacks "Acting Stupidly"
Jersey: You loony lefties are the ones asserting that the Stand your Ground law is to blame, so it's on you to prove you assertion.
-------
That's why it's going to a jury, bobo.
No its, not, bobo.
The jury trial is to find a man guilty or not guilty, silly little man.
Even if he is found not guilty he's still a dead man. The leader of the black race in America, Pope Al Sharpton the First will demand his death. (For the sake of justice of course.)
"Jersey: You loony lefties are the ones asserting that the Stand your Ground law is to blame, so it's on you to prove you assertion.
I've explained it to you before(we have an inherent right to self-defense), and its a shame we need these laws, but our rapacious government is trampling our rights, so sadly they must be restated in law.
Now, professor, tell us how that law caused this."
Professor? Would it take a professor to show the facts to you?
This shooting looks like it may very well have been an avoidable homicide, something Zimmerman may have started and ended unnecessarily. If you can not at least see the possibility of that - and remember, we're talking about a homicide - then you probably think the Stand Your Ground law is a good idea. But the Stand Your Ground law has so far impeded justice in the case of a homicide. Be Zimmerman innocent or not, and whether or not his actions are covered by the text and intent of the law, the law is a part of all this. Whether you can accept that reality or not.
It seems strikingly obvious to me the law has played a negative role in all this, and may well set this screwball free, when he should at least be treated equally in initiating an assault. At what point does someone tailing you become a threat?
I think the DA wants to lose this case and in so doing call to question the Stand Your Ground type of laws. These laws can be used to murder people and get away with it, and you righties are just oblivious to that potential! This one may be questionable, but sure enough other's will come up and this will motivate a lot of bad actors to commit acts they otherwise may not have.
Think man, think.
JMJ
"Heimatlandsicherhieit" good one, SF.
AOW..think the REVEREND Jackson is planning to sue the school district!?
Parse words, deflect to other stories past and present, believe the one left alive and blame the media. But based on his past and the tapes, it's obvious Zimmerman was hunting Trayvon.
JMJ: "But the Stand Your Ground law has so far impeded justice in the case of a homicide. "
Assumption on your part. All we have so far is conjecture, innuendo and rhetoric. We have yet to hear all the evidence, and we may never hear it. It's entirely possible that it will never go to trial as the likely first move from the defense at a preliminary hearing will be a motion to dismiss, based on the statute.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html
The most relevant section in terms of what we do know is
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. 2(A)
which pretty much says that even if you started the fight, you don't have to die because you bit off more than you could chew.
As I read it the whole thing comes down to whether or not GZ believed that his life was in danger. That's a pretty low bar without incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. I have to agree, that he's probably going to walk, and if that's not enough to burn your butt Jersey, read
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.— (3)
If he's exonerated, your tax dollars are likely to go to defend him in that hypothetical wrongful death suit.
This story only gets worse as it goes along.
Lib-Mann: "Parse words, deflect to other stories past and present, believe the one left alive and blame the media. But based on his past and the tapes, it's obvious Zimmerman was hunting Trayvon."
"Hunting" implies an intent to kill from the outset. Since there has yet to be shown that any evidence to support your claim, the only thing obvious is your biased opinion.
Jersey: You failed to show a connection. The Stand Your Ground law does not allow someone to hunt down and kill another person, as some on the left are accusing Zimmerman of doing.
It's a bogus issue, but the progressive left never lets a good tragedy go to waste. The real agenda here is to disarm free citizens.
You're the one who needs to do the thinking.
Stand Your Ground is to protect you of not being the lamb but allow you to stand up for yourself.
There was a difference from the 911planes in New York/Washington and Pennsylvania on how the passenger responses even thou the end result was the same. Do you think there will be more alive if they decided to respond versus cowaring?
Let the courts decide what the outcome is versus passing judgement here. We don't know all the facts?
Redneckron
Redneckron's got one thing right...we don't know all the facts.
Of the facts we do know:
1. The media is using 3-5 year old photographs of Trayvon Martin.
2. The media is using Zimmerman's Mugshot.
3. NBC edited the 911 tape, got caught and fired a scapegoat, so everything's okay.
4. A witness "John" statement to police puts Martin on top of Zimmerman beating him with Zimmerman calling for help.
5. The capias warrant and probable cause affidavit are long on opinion and short on facts, particularly those facts prejudicial to the filing of charges.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/04/11/zimmerman.charges.pdf
http://www.scribd.com/doc/89120165/Zimmerman-Probable-Cause-Document-2
The police felt they didn't have sufficient evidence to proceed. I'd be willing to guess that the special prosecuter felt she didn't have enough evidence to proceed with a grand jury, so simply bypassed them and filed charges anyway to appease the crowd.
"Ei incumbit probatio, qui dicit, non qui negat; cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probatio nulla sit."
The proof lies upon him who affirms, not upon him who denies; since, by the nature of things, he who denies a fact cannot produce any proof.
Cheers!
This D.A. does have a history of overcharging. Anderson Cooper did a story on CNN in which it showed that she once indicted a 12 year-old boy for first-degree murder when he pushed his 1 year-old brother into a bookcase and the brother died (and I guess that the 12 year-old had had a history of being abused himself).
"... The law is a ass. ... "
~ Charles Dickens
Submitted by FreeThinke
Mr. Hart, did that 12-year-old boy get convicted of first-degree murder, or was the case thrown out, as well it should have been?
~ FreeThinke
AOW,
Thanks for that link to Mr. Zimmerman's former lawyer statement to the media.
I hope everyone clicked on the link and took the time to listen to the part you suggested from the 48th minute on.
It's a shame that attorney was not identified. I liked him a LOT -- a real standup guy -- something all-too rare these days.
And why is he Mr. Zimmerman's FORMER attorney do you suppose? If I were in trouble, I'd be very glad to have him working in my corner.
VERY interesting -- and vitally important -- to learn that Mr. Zimmerman, who is of mixed racial heritage, himself, -- mentored BLACK kids, isn't it?
The enemedia is ROTTEN to the CORE.
How many different ways can you say TAWANA BRAWLEY?
And Al Sharpton is permitted to walk the streets a free man?
GEDDOUDAHERE!
~ FreeThinke
Does anyone know the name of Mr. Zimmerman's FORMER attorney?
And is there a GOOGLE Link to that interview?
If "all we know is what we read in the papers," we don't know NOTHIN.'
~ FreeThinke
Anonymous, I think that they're still going forward with it. They showed the kid in the story and the frigging kid looked like baby himself.
Silverfiddle,
I'd say a death is a bigger tragedy than a break-in, and you're now talking preemptive justice.
No, I'm not talking pre-emptive justice. Rather, I'm exploring "if's."
Is shooting a burglar in the middle of a home burglary pre-emptive justice? Or does the home owner just wave the gun around and force the burglar to run?
As one who has three times been the victim of theft (home burglary, car theft at my home, and cash stolen from my purse in the public library), I don't have favorable views of that crime nor of the perpetrators.
I recovered NOTHING from those thefts -- not even insurance money.
In the case of the home burglary, the piece of jewelry stolen was worth a bit less than the insurance deductible. The car didn't have total coverage; if not for my parents buying us another car, I couldn't have finished teacher certification or commuted to work. I had no insurance coverage at the public library, of course, when two weeks' worth of grocery money was taken.
I know only too well the psychological impact of home invasion. One never feels safe in that home again. NEVER!
Even now, three years after the home burglary here (more would have been taken if I hadn't arrived home off-schedule, with the result being that the thief or thieves slipped out the back door as I was coming in the front door), the minute I get home after being out, I check the various places where I now squirrel various items of jewelry, those hidey holes being scattered all over the house and in the strangest places. No more jewelry box out in the open, no pieces of jewelry in the convenient top drawer of my dresser. And I always rush to the piano room to see if the jade bird is still there. It's a crazy routine -- and every damn day.
And, no, I don't live in a bad neighborhood. However, there are lots of shrubs and privacy fences here, so we all feel a bit "isolated" in our homes. That "isolation" does give thieves or potential thieves an advantage -- never mind the security systems and all the locks on doors and windows. Hell, we're living in fortresses.
I've also had my identity stolen -- when my accountant's office was burglarized. Of all places! The hours upon hours of the paperwork required to take care of that violation!
FT,
Thank you for taking the time to follow all those links.
Would that the media would cover even 25% of that material!
AOW: I'm in agreement with you on the larger issue of right to carry and to defend yourself and your property.
Is shooting a burglar in the middle of a home burglary pre-emptive justice?
No. It is self-defense and it is a basic right, regardless of whether the perp was armed or not.
Zimmerman was not defending his home, however. He was engaged in a very different activity and we all know how it ended up.
Let's face it, if you think someone may break in to a neighbor's house, you call the cops.
If you decide to personally intervene, you better be damned sure you know what you're doing and it better be a serious issue.
Silverfiddle,
I don't know much about the Neighborhood Watch programs. We don't have such a program here in my neighborhood.
I'm guessing that most people who live in neighborhoods with such watch programs don't know the first thing about firearms.
I am all for calling the police. Of course, getting the police to actually SHOW UP is another matter entirely. I know for a fact that here in Northern Virginia that if a resident calls the police, the first advice is "Get out of the house." In fact, I've been told that myself. I did refuse to leave as I had no idea if armed accomplices were outside. Instead, I told the police, "I'm sitting tight with my back against an inside wall. I am armed." The police came within three minutes. I was told that there would have been a 10-20 minute wait -- until I mentioned that I was armed.
Great Analysis. Bad decisions resulted in a gunshot and a dead kid that never should have happened.
i dislike this item.
Except for discussing political influencing and racial tensions, ALL comments on what are facts, intentions, evidence or even justified is simply not yet proven and speculative at most.
it is what the judge accepts and finds admissable as well as what the jury decides that only counts.
Nobody has the right to say he is guily or not. he is accused, that is all.
D Charles
Alan Dershowitz is a turd.
Post a Comment