Zimmerman a public figure? Why an analyst is likely wrong


I saw this over at Hot Air and what struck me is that some analyst claims that NBC is more or less protected because Zimmerman is a public figure and therefore it is harder to show how his reputation was damaged.

I am not a lawyer yet I do think that the analyst is wrong (not just because James Beasley is on the case). Here is my reasoning as to why that analyst is wrong:

1. At the time of the incident George Zimmerman was just an ordinary person who worked for a mortgage broker compay.

2. At the time of the incident George Zimmerman was a concerned citizen who cared about the well-being of his neighbours.

3. A short time after the incident took place someone got hold of the tape that had the NEN call and doctored it. The result of that manipulation was the intention to malign George Zimmerman as a racist. The manipulation was to remove the NEN person asking a question about race. The implication for George was that he was identified as a racist even though that was clearly not the case.

My conclusion here is that the lawsuit is based upon the time when George was an unknown citizen. As such his good name has been dragged through the mud and there have been threats against his life.

This of course was not the only manipulation. We also have the impact of what Matt Guttman did, as well as the selective editing of the CCTV footage at the Sandford police station by ABC news which was done in order to make the claim that George Zimmerman had not been seriously hurt by the incident. The reasoning was the unreasonable belief that one had to be severely injured before being able to use a gun in self-defense.

At the same time I take issue with the writer of the article for another reason, and for that matter I take issue with Jeralyn Merritt in regard to Neighbourhood Watch. This is due to the false narrative concerning the role of Neighbourhood Watch and how it applied to this case. The truth is, George Zimmerman was not on any patrol because there is no such thing for Neighbourhood Watch. You simply look out for each other, observe and report if you see something suspicious. George’s role as Captain was more or less that of a liaison with the police. On top of that, on the night in question George was heading out to go shopping when he saw someone acting in what he thought was a suspicious manner, and that is why he called the NEN.  There was nothing wrong in any of the actions taken by George. Getting out of his car to at least try to keep an eye on where the person went was a reasonable action. Neighbourhood Watch performs a service in the community. Without that service there would be a lot more in the way of break-ins, and probably murders as well. George was correct in thinkint that there was something suspicious about the stranger.

George Zimmerman does not meet the test of being in the public eye. He is not an actor. He is not a sports person. He is not a politician. He is an ordinary person who was beaten up by a thug. As such, I doubt that it can be said that such a test applies to his case. However, I will defer to lawyers such as James Beasley on that matter, and let him make the case regarding whether or not George Zimmerman is a public person.

Advertisements

7 responses to “Zimmerman a public figure? Why an analyst is likely wrong

  1. What I think that NBC will argue is at the time of the edit, he was already a public figure as a defense. Whether it will work remains to be seen, NBC already said that GZ was picking on them as other Media outlets had done similar things, a novel defense if I ever heard one.

    Like

    • They might try to say that at the time of the edit he was already a public figure but that is not essentially true.

      The edit occurred at a point that was prior to the story becoming national.

      I have a feeling that James Beasley is lining up the other lawsuits for ABC, CBS and probably even Fox.

      All of them breached Zimmerman’s rights in regard to his good name.

      What is more they are continuing to stoke the anger, and there is more.

      Once again today I got the opportunity to read the Daily Telegraph (Murdoch Press) and once again there was a story showing the picture of a 12 year old instead of the person who did in fact die that night.

      Few of them are telling the truth. The exception has been Sean Hannity. I saw a portion of the interview with Mark O’Mara and Don West. I note that Mark O’Mara has a little bit of steam coming out of his ears.

      I think that O’Mara and West are weighing up their options right now. I heard O’Mara talk about some emails…. interesting…..

      What is more Piers Morgan had that slut Rachael Jeantel on his show, and surpris surprise she thought that there was nothing wrong with a bit of “Whoop ass”. I have been thinking about that statement because I think it supports what some were saying that she knew that Trayvon Martin was going to whoop ass that night… and that perhaps she egged him on.

      Like

    • Absolutely, notice how she also changed the meaning of cracker to now mean a “security guard or rent-a-cop”

      She is a cunning young lady and she knows far more than she is telling, given enough time she will spill the beans, people like that can’t keep a secret. She will want people to know how she conned people about Trayvon.

      Like

    • Well George was not a security guard and he was not a rent a cop.

      It is all about whoop azz…. and Rachael gave the game away.

      Like

    • Yes she did, Trayvon thought that GZ was a homosexual rapist so he wanted to give him a wop azz. The problem is too many idiots think that TM was justified in doing it.

      Like

    • operative words “too many idiots”

      I would add ignorant and uneducated idiots to that descriptor of these idiots.

      Like

    • Those are all good ones.

      Like