Zimmerman and the wheels of justice

posted at 12:31 pm on June 2, 2013 by Jazz Shaw

I know it probably seems as if I’ve developed a bit of a dim view of the justice system of late, though I’m really trying to maintain a positive outlook. I previously expressed some doubts about precisely who our system of rights and due process are serving with regards to Lois Lerner. That situation struck me as a person who had been accused of no crime, but who was taking advantage of every nook and cranny of the justice system to thwart even the possibility of future charges as if she already were. The legal beagles, including my friend and attorney Doug Mataconis, have had their say on it and apparently that’s the way of the world in our courts. But how about a different case where someone already has been accused of a crime, such as that of George Zimmerman in Florida?

I find it improbable beyond words that you’re not already familiar with the case of Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, so I won’t waste your time with an update of the whole affair here. But there was a recent revelation as we approach the start of the trial which definitely caught my attention. It involved a request on the part of the defense to introduce certain items into evidence which would seem to paint Martin as something other than the Skittles purchasing pedestrian the state claims he was.

Lawyers for George Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in the killing of Trayvon Martin, will be barred from mentioning Mr. Martin’s marijuana use, history of fights or high school suspension during opening arguments in Mr. Zimmerman’s trial, which begins June 10.

At a hearing Tuesday in a Seminole County court, Circuit Judge Debra Steinberg Nelson denied a string of defense motions concerning evidence that was intended to portray Mr. Martin as a troubled teenager with a propensity for fighting and an interest in guns. Prosecutors argued that such evidence had nothing to do with Mr. Martin’s death.

All of this background material – listed at the link – will be inadmissible, at least during opening statements and perhaps for the duration of the trial, depending upon how the prosecution seeks to play their hand. My immediate reaction was to wonder how that happened? What of the importance of offering the defense every opportunity to portray their client in the best light, and of the bedrock assumption that each defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty? Is not a history of potentially violent and illegal activity relevant to how Martin might have reacted that day?

There are postings from social media containing very disturbing admissions, texts and e-mails. Is this not evidence? Should this not be available to the jury if they are to give the defendant every chance and the assumption of innocence? Once again, according to Doug, apparently not.

The question, though, is whether evidence like this should be admissible at trial.1

Perhaps the most important thing to understand about how trials work, especially criminal trials, is that not all “evidence” is admissible evidence. Not every piece of information that might somehow be tangentially relevant to a criminal case2 is admissible at trial. The classic example that most lay people are familiar with is hearsay evidence, which essentially refers to evidence of statements made outside of a courtroom setting that are, for one reason or another, not subject to cross-examination. There are literally dozens of exceptions to the hearsay rule that allow such statements to be admitted into evidence under the right circumstances, but the general rule is that if a party wishes to present evidence of something that someone who isn’t available to testify, for whatever reason, then that evidence is inadmissible unless an exception applies.

In the Zimmerman case, though, we’re dealing with the somewhat more complicated issue of character evidence. Quite obviously, Zimmerman’s hoped, and if given the opportunity during the trial still hope, to use evidence about Trayvon Martin’s past to establish that he was a violent person, thus reinforcing the defense theory of the case that Zimmerman was attacked by a young guy who he saw roaming around his neighborhood. To many lay people, including many people that I discussed this issue with on Twitter and Facebook yesterday evening, it seems self-evident that any evidence that shows that Trayvon Martin was a “thug” is relevant to Zimmerman’s defense and therefore ought to be something that the jury should be able to consider. As a general rule, evidence regarding the character of the victim, or the Defendant, is considered inadmissible unless it somehow becomes relevant to the actual facts at issue in the case. The most well-known example of this is the body of law that has determined, largely correctly, that the sexual history of a woman claiming that she was raped is inadmissible in a rape trial.

(For the record, I was one of the “lay people” on Twitter referenced above. It went on for quite a while.)

It’s a long explanation, so you should click through to get the entire thing, but I don’t care for it a bit. It seems to me, particularly in the two cases we are drawing parallels between here, that there is a rather large, gray area when it comes to when the rules do or do not apply in giving the accused the benefit of the doubt. We’re talking about something that happened with (I believe) no other first hand witnesses. There is precious little to go by in terms of hard evidence to determine what happened during the altercation aside from one sided phone records. How is background information like this not applicable?

But I suppose the legal community has once again spoken and some of us laypersons are simply too dense to understand the law. But that doesn’t mean I have to agree or like it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6

Count to 10:

The case will turn on whether Zimmerman reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. The standard is an objective one that must be met by evidence of the facts as they existed at that moment. Trayvon’s character would only be relevant if Zimmerman was aware of a propensity for violence at the time. He was not.

But as others have pointed out, that could all change of the prosecution opens the door by arguing, for example, that Trayvon was just a nice kid on his way home from the 7/11.

SWLiP on June 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

So you smear millions of people based on such a comment? Interesting.

You’re as racist as anyone.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

The biggest reason libtards despise non-liberal political sites and the people who comment on them is that this is the only place the average Joe or Jane can even BEGIN to speak the truth without some level of fear, especially if you haven’t fallen for the social media spy sites.

Shout radio serves only a handful of callers, and is mostly a cash cow for powerless blowhards who’ve otherwise failed in life. None of us here could afford to start our own radio station much less make a profit off one.

But here on HA and elsewhere, we can pretty well say what we please. And that ability drives the likes of Ishouldgodie absolutely moonbat crazy. Cherish that ability. It may not last.

MelonCollie on June 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

You’re so smart.

Thank you, but flattery will get you nowhere.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Notice. The significantly more virulent response to my saying that anti-blackness undergirds conservatives uncritical support of Zimmerman and the paltry response to Seven Seas calling Martin a “rabid ape.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

Yeah, none of us have called for that poster to be banned…

Seven Seas on June 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Really? Gtfo.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 12:47 PM

Seven Seas on June 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

Just don’t, okay. We don’t need that crap around here. Take it somewhere else.

D-fusit on June 2, 2013 at 12:53 PM

But hey, remember, we’re all Racists, and we’re all White!

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

if someone is following you or keeping an eye on you, don’t assault them.

Don’t. Assault. Them.

Really? This is your argument? We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.* Women have been known to go to the police to report a suspicious person following them and if they say they “feel threatened” the police take action. They may also take action via mace. Conservatives, with almost no exceptions, would support a woman describing that behavior as harassment. But black teens aren’t allowed to feel that way when being pursued and followed by a stranger? Got it.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:14 PM
WB, Pilot! How was church?

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:15 PM

On fire and crowded today in a good way. Our pastor is not shy about speaking to the morale decline in the US. Sermon was from 2nd Chronicles. Hezekiah cleansing the Temple.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

there are eye witnesses-

“The guy on the bottom, who I believe had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, ‘Help, help.’ I told him to stop, I was calling 911,” John told the TV station. Zimmerman was wearing red.”

“When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point,” John said.”

“A third witness originally said he saw a black man (presumably Martin) pinning down and punching a lighter-skinned man (Zimmerman) who was calling for help. ”

zimmerman was released at the time due to the evidence and witnesses corroborating his statement as to what had happened.

mittens on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

I made a comparative claim. In terms of the number of responses and the tone of the responses, my comment received a lot more hate and negativity than Seven Seas. You just have to count….

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

Notice. The significantly more virulent response to my saying that anti-blackness undergirds conservatives uncritical support of Zimmerman and the paltry response to Seven Seas calling Martin a “rabid ape.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

Yes, we noticed your selective reading.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

I think Zimmerman got a accurate idea of Martin’s propensity for violence when he attacked him, knocked him to the ground and was banging his head on the cement.

Blake on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

The only thing the State has going for it’s case is one “earwitness” that they cannot possibly put on the stand. This trial is purely political. They were hoping he’d take a plea.

JohnBrown on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Little boy, the last time you knew “harassment” was when someone followed you around on the playground shouting what a moron you were.

MelonCollie on June 2, 2013 at 1:24 PM

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

I know little OT. Now, time with family? May God be at your table.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:24 PM

But here’s the question for conservatives, wasn’t Claudette Colvin, despite her unwed pregnancy, still a victim of Jim Crow violence? So isn’t it also possible that despite Trayvon smoking weed (and really, what does that have to do with violence) and being present when other people beat a homeless person (is his job to police them?) and getting in a few highschool scraps (certainly not the only one) he could have been the victim of a violent attack? Of course it is. So what I need the left to do is stop Rosa Paring Trayvon Martin, trying to make him into the perfectly innocent victim. And I need the right to stop Claudette Colvin-ing Trayvon Martin by trying to discredit him as a potential victim because of previous behavior.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM

blahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblah

One trick phony.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment?

Not with violence.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

He should be banned.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Agreed, but I guess Jazz doesn’t have access to the hammer.

DarkCurrent on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Unless you’re Tea Party.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

I made a comparative claim. In terms of the number of responses and the tone of the responses, my comment received a lot more hate and negativity than Seven Seas. You just have to count….

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

It wouldn’t have anything to do with your history here .
/

You’re dumber than you appear.

Say I don’t know if you have ever answered.

Why do you let your lover(s) use your HA nic to post?

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

Are there Skittles in hell?

TexasJew on June 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

The prosecution has to prove, without direct evidence, that Martin’s death was caused by an unprovoked attack and that Zimmerman’s life wasn’t in danger. That being so, it will be almost impossible for the prosecution to avoid at least some of the evidence concerning Martin’s character becoming admissible at some point.

Knott Buyinit on June 2, 2013 at 1:26 PM

One trick phony.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Good one!

Wish I had thought of it… :-)

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

He should be banned.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Agreed, but I guess Jazz doesn’t have access to the hammer.

DarkCurrent on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

You have to specifically insult the mods to get hammered these days, no matter HOW hard you troll, not even sockpuppet accounts (which are instabans virtually everywhere) will do it.

MelonCollie on June 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

All of this background material – listed at the link – will be inadmissible, at least during opening statements and perhaps for the duration of the trial, depending upon how the prosecution seeks to play their hand.

My guess is it will be very difficult for the prosecution to avoid opening the door to letting the jury consider this information, assuming the defense is sharp.

So my guess is they are simply trying to delay the inevitable for as long as possible, with the faint hope they might get lucky enough to avoid it entirely.

farsighted on June 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

blahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblah

One trick phony.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

How odd that you would choose *that* post to unleash this aggression. It is telling also that everyone else has ignored that post.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Notice. The significantly more virulent response to my saying that anti-blackness undergirds conservatives uncritical support of Zimmerman and the paltry response to Seven Seas calling Martin a “rabid ape.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM

What a convenient comment for you to have to talk about sockpuppet dude.
But thanks for jumping in and giving credit where credit is due with the Conservatives who dogpiled your sockpuppet pal and his “racism”.

Your act is more fake than a birthday party magician.

BTW, I never called you a pedophile so never, call me a liar. What I said was you’re an advocate for lowering the age of consent and promote older man/younger boy relationships. Which is demonstrably true by comments you’ve left here.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Really? This is your argument? We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.* Women have been known to go to the police to report a suspicious person following them and if they say they “feel threatened” the police take action. They may also take action via mace. Conservatives, with almost no exceptions, would support a woman describing that behavior as harassment. But black teens aren’t allowed to feel that way when being pursued and followed by a stranger? Got it.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Unbelievable. So we may now physically pummel those who annoy us? At what point was Zimmerman physically threatening to Martin?

Listen you thick headed moron, no one is likely yo get a pass for committing unprovoked physical violence. And being followed on public streets is not provocation.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

The anti-black sentiment which undergirds many conservatives response to this case.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

So you smear millions of people based on such a comment? Interesting.

You’re as racist as anyone.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Libfree is probably the most racist person commenting here, really.

Count to 10 on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

So the judge will be very careful in what will be allowed into evidence for the defense, in terms of attacking the victim’s character.

notropis on June 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I don’t believe that telling the truth about somebody is an attack on a person’s character. Apparently the judge and the courts believe otherwise. Do you suppose the same standard will be applied to the accused?

JannyMae on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Are there Skittles in hell?

No, but there are all the Peeps you can eat.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

if someone is following you or keeping an eye on you, don’t assault them.

Don’t. Assault. Them.

Really? This is your argument? We have no right to oppose harassment?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

No. That’s your argument. My argument is don’t assault someone who’s got their eye on you. Zimmerman was doing exactly what the neighborhood wanted him to do. His formal role, in the neighborhood watch, you’re on the look out for people new to you, out of place, or suspicious. You watch where people go, you notice identifying features, you take notes.

Per Zimmerman, Martin walked up to Zimmerman, said “you got a problem with me?”, and proceeded to knock him down, slam his head against the concrete, and repeatedly punch him in the face.

This has nothing to do with “We have no right to oppose harassment?”.

Paul-Cincy on June 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

He should be banned.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM

Agreed, but I guess Jazz doesn’t have access to the hammer.

DarkCurrent on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

If Admin won’t ban the trolls for all they have said the years I have been around, I will object to what Seven Seas posted.

We handled him ourselves; we police our own.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Sorry, Teaching Assistant, but simply looking at somebody on a public street is not “harassment.” But if you can find me a lawyer who can prove that it is, I will be willing to listen to their evidence.

And the burden of proof would always be on the accuser as far as being “followed”. After all, the person accused of following the accuser could simply be heading in the same direction.

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:30 PM

I know little OT. Now, time with family? May God be at your table.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:24 PM

And God at yours.

Not going straight to the right-wing extremist compound now. Mrs Hawkdriver’s Mom (Not her real name either) isn’t feeling well, so we’re going to stop there and visit before playing farmer. Should have planned it that way in the first place.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Sticking keys…My last should read, “…I will object to Seven Seas being banned for what he wrote, if Admin won’t ban the trolls we have suffered for years.”

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment?

Not with violence.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM

Great, I look forward to you reproducing this sentiment the next time a woman attacks a guy with mace because she “feels threatened.” Look, I also don’t think responding with violence is the right answer. But before we even start that debate, we do not know who confronted whom remember. Since Zimmerman was pursuing it seems much more likely that he confronted Martin. But either way, in the heat of that moment of being pursued, who knows what people would do. In general, conservatives support acts of self defense (or even pre-emptive self defense) except when it comes to black people apparently.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

HondaV65 on June 2, 2013 at 1:13 PM

Yeah, you voted for this cr@p, Honda. Here’s some fap music for you.

Sekhmet on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

I made a comparative claim. In terms of the number of responses and the tone of the responses, my comment received a lot more hate and negativity than Seven Seas. You just have to count….

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

I did count. It only took one minute and one post for Seven Seas to get a negative response from one of us White Conservative Hot Gas Racists.

H

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

This is too stupid for words.

SWLiP on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

HA Racist comments counter:

SevenSeas: Two that I know over

Libfree: Hundreds that I know of

Now wonder Libfree you receive so many comments.

Get it ? Diwmwit.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

What was it you were saying a couple of weeks ago about the IRS going after Tea Party groups?

Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

itsspideyman on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

I made a comparative claim. In terms of the number of responses and the tone of the responses, my comment received a lot more hate and negativity than Seven Seas. You just have to count….

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM

The Moby Seven Seas made a single post attempting to incite racism. You won’t stop vomiting all over the place. Yes, it is quite shocking you get more responses.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Where did the final conflict happen?

Accounts show that George was heading back to his vehicle when Trayvon approached George..
Why did Trayvon feel the need to do this?

Electrongod on June 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM

How odd that you would choose *that* post to unleash this aggression. It is telling also that everyone else has ignored that post.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Aggression? You call that aggression? Oh, and you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

*of, not over

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Love it! :-)

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

And being followed on public streets is not provocation.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM

You harass us here on a regular basis.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM

Great, I look forward to you reproducing this sentiment the next time a woman attacks a guy with mace because she “feels threatened.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

If the guy wasn’t being an a-hole who made the woman feel threatened, he wouldn’t have gotten maced. He should have watched himself.

But what would YOU know about man/woman relationships and/or interactions?

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:35 PM

Trayvon Martin is more melanin enhanced than George Zimmerman. Therefore Trayvon totally innocent and blameless.

JohnFLob on June 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Since Zimmerman was pursuing it seems much more likely that he confronted Martin. But either way, in the heat of that moment of being pursued, who knows what people would do. In general, conservatives support acts of self defense (or even pre-emptive self defense) except when it comes to black people apparently.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Breathtaking. Especially coming from the side so desperate to play the Race Card in this case they turned Zimmerman into a White Hispanic.

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Great, I look forward to you reproducing this sentiment the next time a woman attacks a guy with mace because she “feels threatened.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Look! Squirrel!

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Count to 10:

The case will turn on whether Zimmerman reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm. The standard is an objective one that must be met by evidence of the facts as they existed at that moment. Trayvon’s character would only be relevant if Zimmerman was aware of a propensity for violence at the time. He was not.

But as others have pointed out, that could all change of the prosecution opens the door by arguing, for example, that Trayvon was just a nice kid on his way home from the 7/11.

SWLiP on June 2, 2013 at 1:21 PM

Actually, what Zimmerman thought is going to be irrelevant. The case will hing on whether the jury believes that the assault that Zimmerman described actually happened. If they think Zimmerman shot Trayvon in cold blood, they will convict. If they believe Zimmerman only shot after being beaten into the ground, they will acquit.

Count to 10 on June 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

I’ll play devil’s advocate:

Let’s say that the charge were rape and the State were prosecuting a male (pick your race) for the rape of a young woman he did not know. Would we think it was OK for the defense to bring in her past sexual activity, pot use, and Facebook posts in the “opening statement.”

No.

If the prosecution decides to promote Martin as a “good kid” who did nothing wrong, had no tendency towards violent behavior, didn’t want anything to do with guns, etc., the evidence should come in. And I’m fairly certain that GZ’s attorney will be working hard to get the lid pried off that box.

I’ll let the process move along a bit before I pass judgment on how the judge is doing.

EdmundBurke247 on June 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

I did count. It only took one minute and one post for Seven Seas to get a negative response from one of us White Conservative Hot Gas Racists.

H

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Hmmm and I don’t see 7Seas …but I still see Liveforfree ….

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

I did count. It only took one minute and one post for Seven Seas to get a negative response from one of us White Conservative Hot Gas Racists.

H

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Really? Your intellectual dishonesty is astounding. Count the number of responses Seven Season comment got. And then count the number of responses my post at 1:03 got. Analyze the tone and tenor of those comments and come back with your new conclusions.

F-

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

If the police started beating someone on suspicion of “following” that would be considered excessive force.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

An aside…It’s ‘elicit‘.

To make you a better professor…

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

And being followed on public streets is not provocation.

NotCoach on June 2, 2013 at 1:28 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Some examples would be nice…

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Old/busted:
 

But before we even start that debate, we do not know who confronted whom remember.

 
New in-the-same-post hotness:
 

In general, conservatives support acts of self defense (or even pre-emptive self defense) except when it comes to black people apparently.
 
libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

rogerb on June 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Hmmm and I don’t see 7Seas …but I still see Liveforfree ….

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

Perfect.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

We have no right to oppose harassment? And yes, being surveilled and followed is *harassment.*

This is too stupid for words.

SWLiP on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

This is what the country has come to. Personal “offense” and grievances have become magnified, thinly sliced, a huge cottage industry. The perception of offense and slight everywhere such victims look. It used to be relegated to junior high school, prisons, the ignorant, and the lower classes. Now everyone is involved.

Paul-Cincy on June 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

If the guy wasn’t being an a-hole who made the woman feel threatened, he wouldn’t have gotten maced. He should have watched himself.

Liam, you do realize you just proved my point about conservative hypocrisy in this case?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

Count the number of responses Seven Season comment got. And then count the number of responses my post at 1:03 got.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Yes. It’s always about YOU.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

Zimmerman was within his rights to follow a suspicious person. He could even have approached Trayvon and asked him what he was doing there. He did not have the right to arrest or detain Trayvon.

Trayvon had every right to ask Zimmerman “Why are you following me?” He did not have the right to attack Zimmerman.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:41 PM

An aside…It’s ‘elicit‘.

To make you a better professor…

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

We should demand that Hardvurd give us our money back.

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:41 PM

If the police started beating someone on suspicion of “following” that would be considered excessive force.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Oh you think so? Because in the last week Miami Dade police attacked and choked a 14 year old black kid because they claim he was “clenching his fists” and giving them “dehumanizing stares.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/30/miami_olice_choke_and_tackle_black_teen_for_dehumanizing_stare/

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:42 PM

An aside…It’s ‘elicit‘.

To make you a better professor…

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

heh

Oh … no. What I meant was *sigh*.

Why are you so mean, Dog?

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

I did count. It only took one minute and one post for Seven Seas to get a negative response from one of us White Conservative Hot Gas Racists.

H

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:31 PM

Really? I don’t like you.

F-

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Edited for accuracy.

I was not referring to the comparative number of posts, simply how quick the first post came back calling out Seven Seas for their racism. And as I said, that first post was the very next post below Seven Sea’s post, and it came exactly 1 minute later.

That’s not intellectually dishonesty at all. Except to one with no intellect like yourself.

How many times did you take Alinsky 101 before finally passing?

Z-

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Actually, what Zimmerman thought is going to be irrelevant.

Incorrect. Fear is a state of mind. The issue is whether the facts support the conclusion that Zimmerman’s fear of death or GBI was reasonable.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Liam, you do realize you just proved my point about conservative hypocrisy in this case?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:39 PM

I’m protective of women,. You disdain them.

Actually, after two years of your dementia, you disdain everybody. Well, except those you can’t use for liberal propaganda.

I have seen you stand on a pile of caskets. So have the rest us.

There is nothing more you can say except the history of your own posts.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

As I recall, it was raining when the incident happened, and Martin was apparently taking the scenic route home. In the rain.

The neighborhood had experienced break-ins, and Martin was apparently loitering in the neighborhood. In the rain. We have no direct evidence now, but was Martin perhaps casing condos in the neighborhood while it was raining, and he was unlikely to run across a witness on a casual stroll?

The focus on inflicting head injuries on Zimmerman–Isn’t it a trope in all those cop shows that once a witness takes too many blows to the head, he can’t identify his assailant?

This more than anything points to Martin as being up to no good, being surprised by Zimmerman, and while trying to incapacitate a witness, finding out the hard way that witness had a gun.

Sekhmet on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Count the number of responses Seven Season comment got. And then count the number of responses my post at 1:03 got.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

And dummy 7seas is not here spewing like you are…..so no surprise.

You’re a professor? For real?

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Oh you think so? Because in the last week Miami Dade police attacked and choked a 14 year old black kid because they claim he was “clenching his fists” and giving them “dehumanizing stares.”

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:42 PM

If those facts are correct and complete then yes, the police used excessive force.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:45 PM

The anti-black sentiment which undergirds many conservatives response to this case.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:03 PM

Frackin’ race baiting bigotted troll.

So in the statistics course you took on the way to your worthless meaningless PdD “one” (ambiguous) comment (on HA) translates into the “anti-black” sentiments of “many conservatives” about “this case”, and “one” is a statistically significant number?

Or did you not take even a basic rudimentary statistics course on the way to getting your worthless meaningless PhD? Wouldn’t surprise me.

Maybe you learned this principle in Race Baiting 101 For Bigots.

farsighted on June 2, 2013 at 1:45 PM

*points patiently at the “DON’T FEED THE TROLLS – SHOOT THEM” sign*

Midas on June 2, 2013 at 1:45 PM

And dummy 7seas is not here spewing like you are…..so no surprise.

You’re a professor? For real?

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:44 PM

Like I told the lib: We police our own.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

*points patiently at the “DON’T FEED THE TROLLS – SHOOT THEM” sign*

Midas on June 2, 2013 at 1:45 PM

We ARE shooting the trolls, friend.

We’re just using slow bullets. ~S~

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

That’s not intellectually dishonesty at all. Except to one with no intellect like yourself.

How many times did you take Alinsky 101 before finally passing?

Z-

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Its the definition of intellectual dishonesty. I made a comparative analysis to draw a conclusion about the racial politics of HotAir commenters. In order to dispute my conclusion you performed your own comparison, but you switched the data set by analyzing the *time* it took for one person to condemn. That’s all well and good, except that the conclusion that you attempted to dispute was drawn from an analysis of the number of comments and the tone of those comments. You offered up a data set irrelevant to the original conclusion and attempted to pass it off as a substantive response. Textbook intellectual dishonesty. And minus extra points that you forced me to explain it to you like you were a freshman in quantitative methods.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

And that really is that. For example, people who are murdered while in jail still by another inmate still receive justice before the courts (murdered by a prison guard is another matter). If it were admissable to smear the character on the victim we would only convict crimes committed by people we don’t like. And when it becomes more about emotions and whether jurors identify with the victim or with the defendant thats when predjudices, about gender, race or class can influence the juries verdict. Which is why, of course, O’Meara has released this information to the 24 hour media in order to pollute the jury pool. So I’m not sure why you’re concerned Jazz. All of this information is out there and the Jury pool knows what O’Meara wants them to know.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 12:42 PM

I decided to respond to your first remark, because it is clear you are emotionally caught up in this which makes you immune to logic.

Have you watched MSNBC and Al Sharpton’s show. It basically is the Lynch Zimmerman Show. The defense attorneys did this because the prosecution has been throwing out information about Zimmerman’s past already and they were threatening to release more and use it as a tactic in court to smear Zimmerman. For example Domestic abuse etc. This is the defenses warning that if the prosecution goes there so can they.

Does the defense not have the right to do the same as the prosecution? Does the defendant not deserve a fair tail without being lynched by you and Rev. Al?

If based purely on eye witness testimony that I have seen so far Zimmerman is innocent.

William Eaton on June 2, 2013 at 1:48 PM

in the last week Miami Dade police attacked and choked a 14 year old black kid because they claim he was “clenching his fists” and giving them “dehumanizing stares.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/30/miami_olice_choke_and_tackle_black_teen_for_dehumanizing_stare/

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:42 PM

Ah, yes, good old Salon. At Friday’s close, their stock price was 25 cents a share.

Let’s hear the other side of the story, from C-BS News:

Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta told D’Oench it was just after 11:00 am on Memorial Day on Haulover Beach when officers saw McMillian slamming another teenager on to the sand.

“They told him that behavior was unacceptable,” said Zabaleta. “He walked away and officers followed him. They asked where his parents were. He said he was not going to take them to them. When he started to leave the beach area, officers had to get off their ATVs to detain him. He had closed arms, clenched fists and pulled his arm away.”

“Once he was approaching the road, the officers restrained him. Again his body language was that he was stiffening up and pulling away,” said Zabaleta. “Now you’re resisting officers at that point and when the hands are swinging and you are resisting officers, at that point you have to be taken into custody.”

“Of course we have to neutralize the threat,” said Zabaleta. “When you have somebody resistant to them and pulling away and somebody clenching their fists and flailing their arms, that’s a threat.”

-snip-

McMillian was charged with resisting arrest with violence, a felony, and disorderly conduct. Miami-Dade Police said he had been arrested once before for robbery.

At the Juvenile Justice Center, an Assistant Public Defender entered a plea of not guilty for McMillian. He also asked that the state reconsider the charges against McMillian.

But Judge Maria DeJesus Santoveria declined to do that and said McMillian’s trial would start at 9 a.m. on July 16th.

Racist White Judge!

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:49 PM

Incorrect. Fear is a state of mind. The issue is whether the facts support the conclusion that Zimmerman’s fear of death or GBI was reasonable.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:43 PM

Ideally, that’s the way we would like it to work, but it will still hing on whether they think he is telling the truth about being beaten.

Count to 10 on June 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Ever notice how libfree needs long paragraphs to get to his point?

He needs an essay to say what we Conservatives — who have nothing to prove –can state in ten words or less.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:44 PM
Like I told the lib: We police our own.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

i know seven seas comments. He is not one of us. He’s clearly a Moby. It drops a stereotypical comment and then runs like Hell as the libtards zero in on what it posted and nothing else.

All too convenient.

I consider that type of thread behavior illicit.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Dimwit still doesn’t get that 7Seas has posted two such comments . You do it all the time and are the far greater problem.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Oh you think so? Because in the last week Miami Dade police attacked and choked a 14 year old black kid because they claim he was “clenching his fists” and giving them “dehumanizing stares.”
 
libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:42 PM

 
While failing to mention this from your link:
 

The “peacekeeping” officers say they saw McMillan roughhousing with another teenager, told him it was “unacceptable behavior,” and asked where his mother was. When McMillan walked away, they chased him on ATVs, jumped out, pinned him to the ground and arrested him.

 
And then a complaint about
 

…Textbook intellectual dishonesty…
 
libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

 
Five minutes later. Nicely done, professor.

rogerb on June 2, 2013 at 1:51 PM

And minus extra points that you forced me to explain it to you like you were a freshman in quantitative methods.

Oh, and by the way, I passed Alinsky 101 on my first try. Got an A+

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Edited for accuracy.

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:51 PM

So you smear millions of people based on such a comment? Interesting.

You’re as racist as anyone.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Spot on.

farsighted on June 2, 2013 at 1:51 PM

When I was young I was followed a dozen of times for looking suspicious. I was even arrested twice (for nothing), probably because of where I was and the way I looked.

I never, even for a milisecond, thought of assaulting the officer, mallcop, student-patrol, bouncer, store clerk or nosey old lady that might of been following me. The bash a head option never crossed my mind.

BoxHead1 on June 2, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Then why is it enough to illicit a response from the police if brought to their attention?

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:33 PM

An aside…It’s ‘elicit‘.

To make you a better professor…

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Freudian slip perhaps?

slickwillie2001 on June 2, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Its the definition of intellectual dishonesty. I made a comparative analysis to draw a conclusion about the racial politics of HotAir commenters. In order to dispute my conclusion you performed your own comparison, but you switched the data set by analyzing the *time* it took for one person to condemn. That’s all well and good, except that the conclusion that you attempted to dispute was drawn from an analysis of the number of comments and the tone of those comments. You offered up a data set irrelevant to the original conclusion and attempted to pass it off as a substantive response. Textbook intellectual dishonesty. And minus extra points that you forced me to explain it to you like you were a freshman in quantitative methods.

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM

Like I said before

blahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblahblahblahblahracismblahblahblah

One trick phony.

And I predict that Zimmerman will be found not guilty and there will be riots. Just like when O.J. got off….oh wait!

VegasRick on June 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM

“Once he was approaching the road, the officers restrained him. Again his body language was that he was stiffening up and pulling away,” said Zabaleta. “Now you’re resisting officers at that point and when the hands are swinging and you are resisting officers, at that point you have to be taken into custody.”
 
Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:49 PM

 
Textbook intellectual dishonesty, racists.

rogerb on June 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM

Liveforfree:

Zimmerman has been far more unfairly treated in the media and that is a fact. You may say some nice things but in the end you are perfectly fine with the attempt to convict him prior to the trial.

CW on June 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM

I consider that type of thread behavior illicit.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:50 PM

Agreed! He elicits the illicit. (triple-dog dare you to say that ten times fast!)

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM

libfreeordie on June 2, 2013 at 1:47 PM
Edited for accuracy.

Del Dolemonte on June 2, 2013 at 1:51 PM

But his English would only illicit an F-.

hawkdriver on June 2, 2013 at 1:54 PM

I’ll play devil’s advocate:

Let’s say that the charge were rape and the State were prosecuting a male (pick your race) for the rape of a young woman he did not know. Would we think it was OK for the defense to bring in her past sexual activity, pot use, and Facebook posts in the “opening statement.”

No.

If the prosecution decides to promote Martin as a “good kid” who did nothing wrong, had no tendency towards violent behavior, didn’t want anything to do with guns, etc., the evidence should come in. And I’m fairly certain that GZ’s attorney will be working hard to get the lid pried off that box.

I’ll let the process move along a bit before I pass judgment on how the judge is doing.

EdmundBurke247 on June 2, 2013 at 1:37 PM

I have to agree here. As for your rape analogy, I am reminded of that sportscaster who had a rape charge levied against him. Only thing was, rape shield laws prevented testimony that the bruising pattern on the “victim” was from a known part of her (consensual) sexual repertoire. Hence, consistent with the sportscaster’s story that it was a consensual round of “rough sex,” after which he had somehow ticked her off.

Sekhmet on June 2, 2013 at 1:54 PM

I made a comparative analysis to draw a conclusion about the racial politics of HotAir commenters.

You cherry-picked a couple data points to support your predetermined conclusion. You ignored contrary data.

Then you retreated into an academic word-fog.

myiq2xu on June 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

obamas son was a thug…get over it….Zimmerman is being set up for a fall because of the race baiters in this country who support a black man because of his color and not his character….what was Zimmerman to do as he was being pummeled, ask for an affirmative action lawyer…….that very same week, I had a lad get in my face because his sister almost hit me from behind with her bike…I simply said, geez that was close and the kid came back a half a block to confront me for saying things to his sister….could it have gotten ugly, maybe, we will never know but what it proves is that kids raised in an environment where there is no father figure and the family structure sucks are brought up to be the voice of the house no matter what age. The lad in my case happened to be black and I thought of how Zimmerman must have felt as this kid confronts him and starts beating on him….I did not have a conceal carry permit at that time but I do now and I pray God that I never have to use it other than at a gun range.Pray that Zimmerman does not pay a price that he does not deserve……

crosshugger on June 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

Freudian slip perhaps?

slickwillie2001 on June 2, 2013 at 1:52 PM

If libree were to get Freudian, he’d have to get back to both his oral and anal stages.

Liam on June 2, 2013 at 1:55 PM

But I suppose the legal community has once again spoken and some of us laypersons are simply too dense to understand the law.

It has long been the case that the probative value of character evidence of the victim must outweigh its prejudicial value in order to be admissible. Having said that, it is likewise the case that, if the prosecution opens the door by making arguments that the victim was of impeccable character and the idea that s/he would have done what the defence alleges is impossible or implausible, then the defence can often get character evidence in as a rebuttal.

IOW, if the prosecution argues that it would have been against the nature of the law-abiding Trayvon to attack Zimmerman, then his disciplinary record involving fights/violence, the social media evidence depicting him with a gun and making violent statements, and testimony of witnesses to his behaviour under the influence of drugs may all become admissible.

None of this is new.

Resist We Much on June 2, 2013 at 1:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 6