I have been listening to the Zimmerman v. Martin public trial on mainstream media for the last two weeks. Most of us are staring at our screens with our mouths hanging wide open. There is something “stinky” about this case.
- Favoritism displayed by the police department.
- Police falsifying police reports and staging the incident to accuse the victim of an crime.
- Police v. the People.
- Why is the Sanford Police Department involved in an cover-up?
- What’s up with the retired judge and Zimmerman’s mother? Hmmmmm…..
- A person that is privilege and given the opportunity to kill.
- A corrupt police force and judge?
- Fear in the town. Racial tensions run rampant…but folks are afraid to speak up.
- Camouflage of racism when it is actually class war.
- The entire Sanford Police Department needs a sweep.
- An apology to the parents is warranted for not contact them that Trayvon Martin had passed away. Shame on the police department for that blunder.
- Black v. White folks and Black on Black killings? Whassup with that?
- Where is the evidence from the crime scene. Photographs of the actual crime scene, images of an actual beat-down of Zimmerman, hospital records and recordings after the crime was committed?
- Maybe that’s why Sonner was ghost on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show.
- Mainstream news media ain’t shit. They will twist words, bait and switch depending on is signing there paychecks.
Here’s what the law says
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—…… a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
- (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
From where I am watching. Looks like the town sheriff has got some explaining to do, enough with trying to spin the story to create an alibi for the crime Zimmerman committed. It is time to let a a jury of his peers decide the outcome…if that is even possible. Zimmerman v. Martin has been tried on public opinion. Who will the jury be at this point? In the meantime…let’s open some dialogue about black on black crime in our communities? HA!
Zimmerman v. Martin is not about racism. It is about a crime committed by an individual still walking around freely. That is not the normal procedure during an arrest when someone commits an crime in our country.
via Emily Bazelon
….you can flip the premise and see Martin, not Zimmerman, as the person who was acting in self-defense. Jeff writes: “Trayvon saw someone following him, felt threatened, retreated, was still followed, and then was approached by an armed man who had 100 lbs on him. … Because Zimmerman was acting as an aggressor, Trayvon had the right to defend himself by punching, kicking, tackling, etc. Because Zimmerman was acting as the aggressor, his actions cannot be considered self-defense: you can’t initiate and then claim self-defense. The evidence for initiation is there on the 911 tape. … Why is it that a black man cannot be afraid of a white man who follows and approaches him on a street at night?