Trayvon Martin

[Roland Deschain]

Find us an example where a black, armed, nosy, wannabe cop killed an unarmed kid who was where he was supposed to be and doing nothing wrong then wasn't charged by the local black cops and became a hero to millions of cheerleaders for cowardice and I promise you that I will be just as outraged.

Until then it's just your lame, racist, "rabid" con, gunhugging and nonsensical diversion and not a "double standard" at all.

So which part will you be outraged about...that it was just a "armed, nosy, wannabe cop" or "that he wasn't charged" because the rest happens everyday. Can't help but notice you also forgot to specify an unarmed WHITE kid. Your racist double standard has been exposed and you can no longer hide from it.

[Stinger]

Best take I've seen on it so far.

The Embarrassment Of The George Zimmerman Verdict
The result of a verdict today in a criminal trial is that everyone with a twitter or Facebook account gets to let the world know how ignorant they are of the criminal justice system. I know, First Amendment. But your ignorance shows again when you mention that. The First Amendment protects you from the government, it doesn't protect you on twitter or Facebook from people calling you out for your ignorance.

@A1Black_: RT @_surlySprite: They need to APPEAL THIS VERDICT AND GO TO THE SUPREME COURT Don't Stop until Justice is Served for T…

@34thwarrior: Trayvon parents should appeal this to the next level

@_CharNae: Trayvon Martin parents better appeal this case! I would NOT let nobody off for killing my child! HELL TF NO!

@_shVn: Trayvon's parents can appeal this verdict and try to get justice again! Lets pray they do and it turns out right this time! Rip

Some background before you start beating on your keyboard:

1. I'm a criminal defense lawyer in Florida since 1995.

2. I watched the trial. Had it on at home, in my office, in the car. I didn't watch it through updates from the morons on HLN or CNN, most of whom should be fired (more on that later).

3. I know the lawyers, on both sides, including the civil lawyers for the Martin family.

4. I did some commentary, and declined commentary on media outlets that were only trying to enrage the public.

As for the case, I think it's terrible that George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin. That's a tragedy. I don't think he had to shoot him, and had one or two things been different (he didn't get out of his car, didn't have a gun, on and on), we wouldn't be here. I keep hearing Trayvon Martin would have killed George Zimmerman, I don't think so, but I wasn't there.

You weren't there either. You don't know what happened, exactly. As much as you want to believe you were there and know what happened, exactly, you weren't, and you don't.

Not knowing exactly what happened requires a not guilty verdict, no matter how angry or outraged you are. [Same thing in the Casey Anthony case. You can't convict based on hate. You've got to have proof.] The jury didn't free Zimmerman because they thought he was a good guy or because they weren't sad that a young boy was killed (jurors were rumored to be crying during the state's rebuttal), they found him not guilty because the facts and the law required them to do so.

The state had a crappy case, they knew they had a crappy case. This is why they assigned 3 career prosecutors with a combined stat of probably over 500 trials. Their first problem was no witnesses to the event. You would agree, wouldn't you, that witnesses help prove cases? Their second problem was a tape that no one could agree on. You know whose voice was on that tape? I don't. The state never laid out, point by point, what happened. If I'm being asked to convict someone of a crime, and I know the state has the burden of proof, the state is required to tell me what happened, not just ask questions and tell me "you decide" over and over again.

Juries don't make decisions because they are mad, sad, angry, or feel bad for someone's parents.

George Zimmerman is not guilty because the law says he's not guilty. You don't think it's right that he killed Trayvon Martin, but that's not what the law says in Florida where we like guns more than we like people. You have a problem with that, do something to change the law other than complain on social media. I know, you're busy, you won't. That's for others to do.

Five things I want to say in closing:

1. Your cries for an appeal are hurting my eyes. There is no appeal. Stop letting the world know how ignorant you are. If you don't know criminal law or procedure, shut up. Ask someone before you display your stupidity to the world.

2. If you didn't see the trial, stop criticizing the verdict, it just makes you look stupid.

3. HLN, get rid of Nancy Grace and Jane Velez-Mitchell. They are not legal commentators helping the public understand our important, essential, and treasured criminal justice system. Neither are many of their guests who should never be asked back. There are 95,000 lawyers in Florida, there is no reason a lawyer from another state who doesn't know Florida law needs to be on daily telling everyone "I don't practice in Florida, I don't know Florida law" just because they can yell. Their daily display of drama may be what you believe to be the "First Amendment," but it is also pathetic, and making people dumber and angrier.

4. CNN needs to send Sonny Hostin and Gloria Allred packing. First of all Piers Morgan, this is a criminal trial in Florida. Why is the only guest you continue to have on is someone from California that doesn't practice criminal law and is known for representing, at press conferences, women victims? What could she possibly have to offer about this case?

And CNN, especially Anderson Cooper, get rid of Sonny Hostin. This woman was a prosecution shill from the beginning of this trial, struggling to say anything positive about the defense. Last night, after the verdict, she said "justice took the day off." She wasn't there to provide commentary, she was shilling for the state. She should have disclosed from the begining that she desperately wanted a conviction, that way it would have been easier to listen to her biased commentary. She's terrible and should never be asked to appear in the media again when there is an important trial.

5. The media, especially TV, needs to start vetting their guests. I know these are lawyers with agents, but they've never been in a criminal courtroom, or at least not since they spent a year as a prosecutor in 1978. Can you not find lawyers that actually know what they are talking about? Piers Morgan is asking Gloria Allred what she would do in opening in the Zimmerman case? I have a better question, Gloria, when is the last time you gave an opening statement, in any case?

That's all I want to say, for now.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal and Bar Defense lawyer in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court, and the author of The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer.

http://criminaldefenseblog.blogspot.com ... n.html?m=1

[O Really]

Excellent commentary. And herein lies the real problem... "George Zimmerman is not guilty because the law says he's not guilty. You don't think it's right that he killed Trayvon Martin, but that's not what the law says in Florida where we like guns more than we like people. You have a problem with that, do something to change the law other than complain on social media. I know, you're busy, you won't. That's for others to do."

[Mr.B]

"Best take I've seen on it so far."

"Not knowing exactly what happened requires a not guilty verdict, no matter how angry or outraged you are."

"You weren't there either. You don't know what happened, exactly.
As much as you want to believe you were there and know what happened, exactly, you weren't, and you don't."

"Juries don't make decisions because they are mad, sad, angry, or feel bad for someone's parents."

Thank you Stinger. That's the best commentary I've seen so far, and goes along with what I've attempted to express all along.
These so-called "legal experts" (ex-spurts), along with the media, is going to keep beating this dead horse as long as the money for their appearances
on TV keeps rolling in.

Ever since this story hit the news, GZ was portrayed as the crazed wanna-be cop who shot down an innocent kid. Long before the circumstances of the confrontation was revealed, GZ had already been tried, convicted, and condemned by the gun-haters, the SYG opponents, and the liberal media.

[Mr.B]

"Ever since this story hit the news, GZ was portrayed as the crazed wanna-be cop who shot down an innocent kid. Long before the circumstances of the confrontation was revealed, GZ had already been tried, convicted, and condemned by the gun-haters, the SYG opponents,
and the liberal media."

"Long before the circumstances of the confrontation were revealed, GZ had not even been charged yet was exonerated and worshiped (sic) by the gunhuggers, the SYG cheerleaders, and the con media."

Point proven. Thanks.

[Mr.B]

"Point proven. Thanks. You worshipers/worshippers always think you've got the one true path."
But the liberals never think that....got it. (when they're able to think, that is)

"Either way is correct, it's not like I took a "p"."
Yeah, it is. Except in your case, the vernacular.

[neoplacebo]

Curiouser and curiouser......just read a news story about how John Henry Spooner, a 76 year old white guy in Milwaukee shot and killed Darius Simmons, 13 year old black boy and next door neighbor to Spooner. Seems John Henry suspected young Darius of breaking into his house and taking some shotguns. John Henry was yelling at the kid to bring the guns back, but when the kid said he didn't know anything about it, John Henry shot and killed him. The story says he was still standing there on the sidewalk with his handgun when the cops arrived. He was taken into custody immediately.

[Boatrocker]

Saw that, his lawyer is claiming "mental illness" rather than self-defense.

John Henry Spooner Trial: Wisconsin Man Accused Of Shooting 13-Year-Old Neighbor

Having endured the escalating dementia and ultimate death of both parents and a mother-in-law, I urge anyone with aging parents to not only get control of the checkbook and car keys when the time comes, but also the household weapons. Personal dignity has its limits in the face of senility.

[Boatrocker]

Caregiving ain't for the lazy or squeamish.

[Boatrocker]

Paraphrased: "If Florida is going to give George Zimmerman his gun back it should give Casey Anthony a kid."
-- Bill Maher on Letterman

It is the same "logic."

[Stinger]

Long before the circumstances of the confrontation were revealed, GZ had not even been charged yet was exonerated and worshiped by the gunhuggers, the SYG cheerleaders, and the con media.

And long before the circumstances of the confrontation were revealed, Zimmerman was thought to be a hateful bigot who gunned down an unarmed teenager in cold blood.

[Boatrocker]

Why Isn't NRA Arguing Trayvon Martin Tragedy Could Have Been Averted if Only He Had a Gun?

[Boatrocker]

Saw that, his lawyer is claiming "mental illness" rather than self-defense.

John Henry Spooner Trial: Wisconsin Man Accused Of Shooting 13-Year-Old Neighbor

...It took the jury less than 30 minutes to agree he was sane and in control of his actions at the time of the shooting...

It appears, from what I have read here and elsewhere, that the old poop prob'ly is suffering from dementia. But he should def be placed in some sort of institution.

[Roland Deschain]

Why Isn't NRA Arguing Trayvon Martin Tragedy Could Have Been Averted if Only He Had a Gun?

Maybe because the NRA believes in following the law and as a MINOR Martin could not legally own a gun. Damn, you people are dumb as a box of rocks.

[Ombudsman]

Mad Roland's been memorizing his talking points.

Freedom in Peril

[rstrong]

Why Isn't NRA Arguing Trayvon Martin Tragedy Could Have Been Averted if Only He Had a Gun?

Maybe because the NRA believes in following the law and as a MINOR Martin could not legally own a gun. Damn, you people are dumb as a box of rocks.

It doesn't bother you that if Martin were just a tiny bit older, he could have carried a gun - and with Zimmerman following his EXACT SAME course of actions - Martin could have felt threatened, shot Zimmerman to death, and been acquitted?

The ONLY difference being that with Zimmerman being on record as instigating the confrontation - despite ignoring police orders not to do so - Martin would likely never have been charged?

Really, you don't have a problem with this?

[Roland Deschain]

Again a spot on post that is proven by the liberal silence regarding black on black or black on white crime.

We're against it. Only you are stupid enough to post on and on as if we aren't.

It seems to me that those who tend to throw the word "racist" the most, fit the model the best.

You have a lot of delusions, like foolishly imagining that the NYT invented the phrase "white hispanic" in 2012.

Still running away from that stupidity, no surprise.

I post on and on as if you are not against because you fools post on and on about the Zimmerman/Martin confrontation while ignoring countless others of black on white or black on black. Why the double standard? If you are going to post page, after page, after page, for one should not another you are "against" not get the same attention, or are you just lying again in order to protect your rabid liberal ideals????

Find us an example where a black, armed, nosy, wannabe cop killed an unarmed kid who was where he was supposed to be and doing nothing wrong, then wasn't charged by the local black cops and became a hero to millions of cheerleaders for cowardice and I promise you that I will be just as outraged.

Until then it's just your lame, racist, "rabid" con gunhugging, and nonsensical diversion and not a "double standard" at all. Apples and oranges much?

Roderick Scott......look it up! Funny thing is I don't remember a peep about this in the media.....I wonder why????

[homerfobe]

Find us an example where a black, armed, nosy, wannabe cop killed an unarmed kid who was where he was supposed to be and doing nothing wrong, then wasn't charged by the local black cops and became a hero to millions of cheerleaders for cowardice and I promise you that I will be just as outraged.

The kid's dead. Zimmermans in hiding. All your pissing and foaming at the mouth is hilarious. You're like a rabid dog.

[Roland Deschain]

Roderick Scott was in his own home, not a patrolling "nosy, wannabe cop" vigilante.
Then why didn't he stay there and "mind his own business"?? Isn't that part of your rub with Zimmerman..he should have just "minded his own business", or is it just easier to be a hypocrite now to suit your argument??
There were 3 teens, not a single one lighter than Roderick Scott.
Two fled...last I checked that is one on one and from your own article

His name is Roderick Scott. He’s a 42-year-old black man with the build of a football player

So, this man with the "build of a football player needed a gun???
The teens were breaking into cars, Trayvon was walking home from the store.
Were they, or were they trying to get back in because the keys were locked inside?
The teens were drunk and hopped up on meth. Trayvon had pot in his system, possibly from toking as long as a month before.
Yep, Trayvon was such an angel. Enough pot in his system to get him fired for failing a job drug test
At least one of the teens had been convicted twice, once for a violent crime. Trayvon had never even been charged with any crime.
Again, such an angel, on suspension for drugs when shot, kicked out of school for tagging, suspended once for repeated skipping and tardiness, allegedly attacked a bus driver, twitter account under the name "NO_LIMIT_N***A" Oh yeah such the angel
Roderick Scott was arrested and charged, no "local black cops" refusing to do so.
Was Scott injured or have evidence of a struggle to back up his SD claim. The investigative process took a little longer in the Zimmerman case but the end result is the same and yet you have no outrage over the Scott verdict. Why is that hypocrite?
Roderick Scott Trial: What’s Wrong with New York?
Love the Op-Ed piece posted as the source....even you could do better

Well, leave it to vrede to pick apart every little detail in an effort to appear correct again...unfortunately for you the similarities far out weigh the differences and your little line by line commentary only served to prove you at a minimum a hypocrite and more so a racist liar.

[Roland Deschain]

Run away, Roland Deschain, run away.

Vrede speak translated into a baiting tactic to either continue the argument or get the last word...either way a win/win for the lying racist hypocrite. Fine vrede.....I'll run away, you get the last word, be sure to taunt it up now, but just know that no matter how much of the usual childish bullshit you post.....the Roderick SCott case and your responses have proven you to be a bigoted, lying, racist, hypocrite. So taunt it up good now.....who knows I might even reply again...or I might not.
PS: Don't forget you pic of the kid with his fingers in his ears....it just wouldn't be complete without it