The only logical verdict but what is next?


At last, after 16 long months the jury has listened to the evidence in the case of State of Florida vs Zimmerman and they found Zimmerman, “NOT GUILTY” on the grounds of self-defense. Since I am not a lawyer, I rely on legal blogs such as Legal Insurrection to provide me with vital information regarding the case. A very big thank you to Andrew Branca who did a wonderful job updating readers of LI on the court case. Based upon the evidence as it was presented in a court of law, there were no grounds upon which George Zimmerman should have been charged in the first place.

The people who are making the most noise (yes on my own blog I can call them chimps if I want), are the ones who never bothered listening to the actual evidence. As such it is necessary to reiterate the elements of the case that would lead a reasonable person upon hearing the facts to come to the conclusion that George Zimmerman, in shooting Trayvon Martin was acting in self-defense.

The point at which George Zimmerman first saw Trayvon Martin happened to be when he spotted someone acting what he thought was in a suspicious manner. The type of clothing and even the colour of the person’s skin is totally irrelevant. According to the NEN call, George Zimmerman identified something about the actions of the person that made him seem suspicious. His first remark to Sean N was that the person was acting like he was on drugs or something (George was in fact correct about making that observation).  Since George Zimmerman was the block captain for Neighbourhood Watch, he was aware of what to look for when he saw someone that he did not recognize as one of his neighbours. In this instance, Trayvon Martin was apparently taking an interest in a home that had previously been burgled.

There are elements of this case that remain a bit of a mystery. I happen to belong to the camp that thinks the DeeDee thing was made up. Phone records were produced, but the point here is: there was virtually no evidence produced that did in fact tie DeeDee as she was called up until her name was revealed, to any phone calls made to Trayvon Martin at the relevant time. The initial spreadsheet screen dump of the account of Tracy Martin could have been doctored. On top of that, what made me suspicious about what DeeDee actually heard was her response to a question about the ownership of the phone because she said “It is now”. A response like that should have cast doubt on the phone ownership.

It would seem that the jury was likewise not so willing to believe the Rachel Jeantel story. They were not willing to believe what the Persecution was claiming about what did in fact take place. This includes the identification of the voice heard in the background of a phone call to 911. In my mind, I had no doubt the voice was George Zimmerman. I did not believe the theatrics of $ybrina Fulton (I will try to put up another post about the parents of Trayvon Martin and where I think this should lead).

No matter what the Black Grievance Industry claims, the truth is that Trayvon Martin was not the victim that night, but that he had plenty of time to reach Brandy Green’s place, and he chose to backtrack, then attack George Zimmerman. This is the same conclusion made by the jury.

What will be next? First of all we do not know if Martin’s parents will be stupid enough to push for a civil lawsuit. They will lose because the detail on that phone will become public knowledge. In civil court there will not be a judge stopping that detail coming into evidence. What about the Department of Justice? Well the FBI already determined that there was no civil rights violation.  Trayvon Martin was not gunned down. He was shot as he was committing a felony. Do the parents of Trayvon Martin really want the DoJ to go down that road to humiliation?  This will be where the school records will come into play. This is where the actions by the Miami schools system will be open to scrutiny.

On the other hand, George Zimmerman certainly has the right to sue every media outlet who smeared his name, and the name of his family. There is one more hurdle and that is Shellie’s perjury case. I am hoping that it will be thrown out and that BDLR will face some form of disciplinary charges over that affidavit since it contains a lie.

Advertisements

12 responses to “The only logical verdict but what is next?

  1. Lynn Atkinson

    So the black congress members, liberal press and NAACP are already calling for Eric Holder to charge Zimmerman with civil rights violations immediately to reverse the decision of the obviously biased jury and said that OMara’s comments about the press are responsible for any racial violence that occurs! Wow.

    Like

  2. Lynn Atkinson

    And I will add, niw that the trial is over, George Zimmerman is no longer a white hispanic-now he is just white!

    Like

  3. As the world turns.. SMH

    Like

    • Can you do me a favour and check to see if Rene Stuzman has filed any news stories.

      I saw one in the Sydney Daily Telegraph that has my blood boiling because of the deceptiveness of her report, including the use of incindeniary words such as VIGILANTE and of course the picture of a 12 year old who was not murdered, rather than the 17 year old who was murdered.

      Like

    • I actually stopped reading the OS since most of the blogs I follow quit posting links to her articles, but here’s her latest stuff from the past week:

      http://www.orlandosentinel.com/search/dispatcher.front?Query=rene+stutzman&target=adv_all&date=07%2F08%2F2013-07%2F15%2F2013&sortby=contentrankprof

      She and Jeff Weiner usually co write their articles.

      Here is her Twitter account but I think she stopped posting at FaceBook.

      https://twitter.com/renestutzman

      Do you have a link to the Sydney Daily Telegraph story? I guess I could handle one more blood boiling story before bedtime .

      Like

    • no link because I read the print version and I do not access anything behind a paywall.

      Like

    • I did a search for it but maybe it only appeared in the print version. Did you ever have communication with her?

      Sorry..

      Like

    • No, not me…

      I was shocked that her article actually appeared in the Daily Telegraph. Maybe she thought she could get away with the lies in an overseas country.

      The only reason I saw the article is due to me going shopping and reading the paper where I purchase a capacchino

      Like

    • Can you scan it and post it? What was the title?

      Like

    • Again, no… I do not have the copy of the Daily Telegraph because I was reading the copy at the coffee shop.

      Over here we can have a coffee and read a paper for free in some coffee shop places.

      Like

    • interesting because her article in the OS is vastly different from the one in the Daily Telegraph.

      It looks like she is continuing the narrative when writing outside the USA and that she has to make sure there is no slander for anything printed in the OS.

      Like