Friday, April 20, 2012

 

Who Are You Going to Believe, Me or Your Lying Eyes

Remember when CNN and MSNBC were showing the leaked surveillance tape of George Zimmerman every twenty minutes and each time they showed it, one of the talking heads said that he or she couldn't see any injury? The said, "This tape conclusively shows that Mr. Zimmerman suffered no injury to the back of his head." Nancy Grace, who uniquely combines shrill and cloying in every statement she makes, was all over the surveillance tape asking, "Where's the blood?"
Well, today photos of the back of Mr. Zimmerman's head, taken by the police before he received medical care, were leaked or released in preparation for his bail hearing. As the late, much missed Gilda Radner used to say so well.


Never mind.

Labels:


# posted by Roger Fraley @ 7:04 AM
Comments:
I believe in Florida it's called the "Stand your ground" Law. In Martin's eyes George Zimmerman, with his pistol and threatening attitude, posed an imminent threat to his own safety. Therefore any injuries sustained by Zimmerman were merely as a result of Martin defending himself—unsuccessfully I might add—from the threat to his life.

See what I did there?
# posted by Anonymous Andrew : 4:44 PM
 
Yes, you skipped over several steps in legal analysis. If the pistol were drawn (as I am led to believe it wasn't) then that act (brandishing) plus a "threatening attitude" (whatever that is) might have supported a belief that Zimmerman posed an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury. Merely following someone on the street or sidewalk while carrying a gun cocnealed does NOT give the person followed grounds to attack that person. See what I just did there? (Fairly analyzed the facts).

Hope you're well, busy and happy.
# posted by Blogger Roger Fraley : 9:42 AM
 
Ok, so stalking some dude with a concealed gun doesn't fit into the category of "imminent threat of death or serious injury", but walking through the neighborhood with a hoodie and black skin does? How do you at all justify what Zimmerman did (shooting the guy) but not what Martin did (attacking the guy who later shot him)?

Everything's going well over here. Thanks for asking!
# posted by Anonymous Andrew : 5:03 PM
 
"Stalking" is a loaded word. Let's use "following" instead, although it is far from clear whether Mr. Zimmerman disobeyed the dispatcher's suggestion that he not follow Trayvon. No, of course walking through the neighborhood, whatever you are carrying or wearing, does not make you an imminent threat; knocking someone down and beating his head against the sidewalk is the imminent threat. We deplore Martin attacking Zimmerman because, if he turned back and confronted Zimmerman, as I suspect, and Zimmerman did nothing physical to Martin when confronted, again as I suspect, then Martin's was an unprovoked attack giving Zimmerman the right to use deadly force to save himself from being knocked unconscious or killed. As I said before, who threw the first punch is the key question and who is yelling for help is a close second. Good to hear all is well. Hope the North Koreans don't attack. June 26 might be a day to look out for.
# posted by Blogger Roger Fraley : 7:35 PM
 
I think Zimmerman had "vigilante justice" on his mind from the get-go, and the whole confrontation wouldn't have happenede if he'd minded his business, or waited for the proper authorities to arrive and handle it. It appears we're both lacking facts to support our theory, and hopefully all will be clarified by the trial, which is clearly the right thing to happen.

Yeah, I dunno, the NK situation is a bit worrisome, but apparently stuff like this happens pretty regularly. I will likely avoid Seoul on June 26 though, just to be on the safe side. I'm in a very rural area, so I should be relatively safe, should anything happen. How are things in Denver?
# posted by Anonymous Andrew : 3:22 AM
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?