http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/04/20/Zimmerman-Bloody-Head Date/Time/Location stamped photo of Zimmerman’s head shows that it (Zimmerman’s head) was beaten against the ground. If the back of my head looked like that, I too would have been in fear for my life.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/04/20/Dershowitz-prosecution-immoral Even Alan Dershowitz calls the prosecutor’s arrest affidavit essentially “too thin.” Alan Dershowitz is not particularly a friend to gun owners or self-defense, and I’m stunned—pleased, but stunned—that he’s weighed in at all in this racially charged case. He says he’s not taking sides, which … ok, I accept that, especially with Dershowitz’s “liberal” biases. He “just wants to see both sides play fair.” Ok. I doubt he’d play it that way in court… so, interesting he’s got anything to say at all.
This is another politically motivated prosecution, like the Duke University lacrosse team prosecution by Michael Nifong and the Harold Fish (http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/8010) prosecution by Michael Lessler. There should be severe penalties for prosecutors who falsify affidavits, ignore the opinion of police who did initial investigations and, instead, give in to the opinion of some contingent of the population which is racially or culturally motivated to support the real perp and attack the defender.
Time was, there was no prosecutor until a Grand Jury had investigated. The Grand Jury could be held jointly and severally liable for malicious prosecution, so they were serious about making sure they had a real case—a real crime and real evidence without having to deny or “forget” about exculpatory evidence—before they indicted. This doesn’t mean that Grand Juries never maliciously prosecuted, but they certainly had a motivation to get it right. DA’s offices, however, are not so motivated; in fact, they are generally indemnified for malicious or negligent prosecution. Yes, Mike Nifong got pilloried, but he went up against the rich with his malicious prosecution, and when it became clear that it was pure manure, the rich bought big-dog attorneys and went after him. This didn’t happen for Fish, and it won’t happen for Zimmerman. But it should.
Otherwise, the courts—in fact, the whole system of “administration of ‘justice’”—becomes the ready weapon of those who can pull influence, either by money or by threat of using the race card (or being “dog lovers”—when Fish didn’t even hurt the dogs!), or whatever other improper means of undue influence one can come up with. That puts us back into the law of the jungle—the “innocence” of the mighty.
After seeing Zimmerman’s head and seeing that the prosecutor is resorting to hiding not noticing exculpatory evidence, along with the fact that most of the Trayvon side is motivated by anti-gun hostility, racial horse manure, or family “blood is thicker than water” nonsense, I’m convinced that Zimmerman shot in self defense.
Now the argument is expected to be that if Zimmerman hadn’t “profiled” and followed Martin, none of this could have happened. Yah, and there goes any utility of neighborhood watch. “Profiled”??? Martin was acting suspiciously! If that’s disreputable profiling, then all of law enforcement and security is wrong. I don’t think we are going to see anyone argue that position. And yes, despite the Today Show’s falsification of the matter, the report was suspicious behavior, not “black man, therefore suspicious.”
The ABC report said that a dispatcher advised Zimmerman not to follow Martin. I’ll take their word for it, but dispatchers are trained to tell people such stupidities and even not to defend themselves when under imminent threat. They can’t be seen as encouraging action based on the reporting of a caller—the reporting could be false, misleading or just inaccurate, and who ends up holding the bag if a dispatcher says “go for it”? The department, of course. So they always advise the most cautious route. Big surprise there!
Also, this argument attempts to say that it’s ok for Trayvon to “take the law into his own hands” to stop this … stalker (?) … but it’s not ok to defend one’s life when it’s in jeopardy. What trifling crap! If Trayvon weren’t a violent criminal actor, he might have had words with Zimmerman and then called the cops. But he didn’t. He tackled Zimmerman and beat his head on the pavement. Seeing that, a cop arriving on the scene might well have shot Trayvon if Zimmerman hadn’t. The same screeches about racism would have been raised, but a prosecutor wouldn’t have come on board unless the evidence were mostly culpatory of the officer instead of exculpatory. And the department’s lawyers—and the department itself—would be pursuing those threatening the officer in a serious way, instead of leaving him like Zimmerman, having to hide from the gang of racist scum.
I don’t believe for one minute that Zimmerman followed, or shot, Trayvon Martin, for being black. I DO believe, most profoundly, that those claiming it was based on race are the real, the most dangerous, racists in our society—willing to use the court system to deny rights under color of law (a crime per the USC) to avenge what should never be avenged, to support criminal behavior by criminalizing legitimate self defense.
Now we have the idiots in Congress looking to attack “stand your ground” and “shall issue” concealed carry laws. It’s not because they believe a wrong was done here. It’s because they see opportunity for their political agenda of anti-gun (… and anti-Constitution and therefore anti-law and anti-equal-before-the-law and pro-elitist-demagoguery).
Somebody show me to be a liar, please, when I said above that Fish and Zimmerman will never get the satisfaction the Duke lacrosse team players finally got. Go after the malicious prosecutors. And if the racialists want to riot or whatever their wont is these days, arrest their asses, too. And let us defend ourselves when and if it comes to that.
Another approach, may well be on target: http://thedailybell.com/3818/Anthony-Wile-Is-Zimmerman-Americas-Dreyfus.