B-Man Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 The Day the Hard News Died: CNN Only Cares About Egypt in Little Boxes The 24-hour cable news network that's redefining non-stop news picked the wrong story today. In case you hadn't seen, history is unfolding in Egypt right now. It is truly earth-shattering news. But the poop-cruise network has spent the entire day broadcasting the bumbling minutiae of the George Zimmerman trial in Florida instead, relegating the chaos in Cairo to a picture-in-picture box in the corner. The only time CNN broke to cover Egypt in any sort of real depth was when the trial broke for lunch. And then it was back to the sad new reality of American TV news now. Across social media, CNN faced huge amounts of criticism for choosing to cover a small but microcosmic domestic trial while a very important government in the Middle East, one that has close ties to the U.S., was falling. "Gotham gets the CNN it deserves," wrote Circa's Anthony De Rosa. Indeed, CNN has spent this important day fulfilling every cynical commentary about the non-stop Trayvon Martin murder trial coverage, about the Carnival Cruise thing, about the true-crime obsession, about all of CNN's attempts at rebranding under new president Jeff Zucker by way of story torture. Where was Will McAvoy when we needed him? What made matters worse was the ridiculous, television unfriendly morning in the trial itself. George Zimmerman's college professor was attempting to Skype in to give his testimony remotely. But a bunch of trolls started calling the prosecutor during questioning, disrupting the call, making it impossible for anyone to hear what the professor was saying, turning the entire mess into televised garbage. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2013/07/cnn-egypt-trayvon-martin/66836/ . The administration's failure in Eygpt does not meet the media's narrative, while the Zimmerman debacle does.
boyst Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/zimmerman-trial-review-how-we-got-here-and-where-were-going/
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 You may be right but hard to take anyone serious who posts this He has the wear with all......oh my bad, I meant where with all. For all "intensive purposes..."
3rdnlng Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 http://legalinsurrec...ere-were-going/ Just got finished reading it. A very good summary. If only our little holdouts here would bother to take the time to follow Andrew Branca's coverage, maybe they would see how wrong this whole persecution is.
boyst Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 (edited) Just got finished reading it. A very good summary. If only our little holdouts here would bother to take the time to follow Andrew Branca's coverage, maybe they would see how wrong this whole persecution is. My gf is annoyed I am following this so much. But I am so caught by the spin of the media, the corruption of power and the social media frenzy that I can only be amazed. Edit: which is exactly what your point is. How is anyone not taking the time to learn the case before hanging this man? Edited July 4, 2013 by jboyst62
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 There are a few things about the GZ story that just don't add up for me. 1. He says TM walked out of the darkness and circled his car reaching in his waist band. (Cop lingo for he probably has a gun, excuse me, firearm). And he thinks TM "is on drugs". Then TM goes back up the sidewalk. So GZ can't remember the street name. In the heat of the moment I can see this happening. So, he decides to WALK up the sidewalk to his street right where the guy possibly with a gun and "on drugs" just went to meet the cops. Makes no sense. Why not driver over there to meet the cops? Unless you're in foot pursuit that is. 2. GZ says he forgot he had his firearm on him in the reenactment. Really? He takes it everywhere, even when going to Target. 3. GZ says he hung up with the 911 operator and within seconds TM jumped from the bushes and confronted him. Phone records show TM was still on the phone with whats her name for 2 minutes after GZ hung up. 4. According to GZ, TM had his hands all over him, punching him in the face, holding his nose and mouth, yet TM has ZERO GZ DNA under his finger nails and only one small injury on his left hand. I believe that GZ has exaggerated his story and made it fit into self defense. I certainly do not believe TM "slammed" his head into the sidewalk 20 to 25 times and hit him a couple of dozen times as GZ contends. His injuries just don't bear that out. Nor do Trayvon's. The "you're going to die tonight" comment supposedly made by TM seals the deal for self defense if you believe GZ. I think GZ pursued TM even after the 911 operator told him they didn't need him to do that and tried to detain him until police arrived. Trayvon fought back as probably any of us would if some stranger tried to detain us. Most thinking people capable of reasonable thinking have been asking these questions since the beginning of the case. Yes for some Z claiming Martin attacked him at told him he was going to die tonight is enough to make the case for self defense.
boyst Posted July 4, 2013 Posted July 4, 2013 Nancy disGrace has 2 hour special coming up. "Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman case: What you need to know."
3rdnlng Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Most thinking people capable of reasonable thinking have been asking these questions since the beginning of the case. Yes for some Z claiming Martin attacked him at told him he was going to die tonight is enough to make the case for self defense. Follow the actual case and you will find the truth. jboyst just posted a link to an excellent summary up thread.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Follow the actual case and you will find the truth. jboyst just posted a link to an excellent summary up thread. I have been following the case. And Z's story just doesn't add up. However, GZ did not get out of his car intending to kill TM. What he should have been charged with is manslaughter. Not Murder 2.
meazza Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I have been following the case. And Z's story just doesn't add up. However, GZ did not get out of his car intending to kill TM. What he should have been charged with is manslaughter. Not Murder 2. Or self defense.
3rdnlng Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I have been following the case. And Z's story just doesn't add up. However, GZ did not get out of his car intending to kill TM. What he should have been charged with is manslaughter. Not Murder 2. Go to the link jboyst posted. Learn what the actual testimony says. Read the comments from knowledgeable people in the field. See what actual defense attornys have to say. Forget about what they say on HLN and MSNBC.
DC Tom Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I have been following the case. And Z's story just doesn't add up. However, GZ did not get out of his car intending to kill TM. What he should have been charged with is manslaughter. Not Murder 2. The prosecution might have had a chance at manslaughter conviction (I'd consider it a coin toss, frankly). But I think the prosecution found themselves in a position where, either willfully or reluctantly, they had to charge with murder 2 because "depraved mind" fit the established racial narrative (i.e, if they had filed for manslaughter, people would have started jumping up and down screaming "What? He's a racist who killed a black boy! That's a 'depraved mind!' That's murder 2!" And no one likes to be perceived as stupid...except maybe you.) Another point, re: the inconsistencies in Zimmerman's and everyone else's testimony. Yeah...eyewitnesses are notoriously inconsistent. A two minute discrepancy in testimony and phone records, for example, means jack **** - no one's checking their watch at the time. And having been in similar situations to Zimmerman's (actually, more similar to Martin's)...it is very difficult to keep track of exactly what's going on, when, and how when the adrenalin kicks in, and then relate it back after the fact. Go to the link jboyst posted. Learn what the actual testimony says. Read the comments from knowledgeable people in the field. See what actual defense attornys have to say. Forget about what they say on HLN and MSNBC. !@#$ defense attorneys. It's their job to disagree with what the prosecutors are saying. I want to know what the prosecutors' peers are saying about the case. Real ones, not the clowns they have persecuting this case.
boyst Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 The prosecution might have had a chance at manslaughter conviction (I'd consider it a coin toss, frankly). But I think the prosecution found themselves in a position where, either willfully or reluctantly, they had to charge with murder 2 because "depraved mind" fit the established racial narrative (i.e, if they had filed for manslaughter, people would have started jumping up and down screaming "What? He's a racist who killed a black boy! That's a 'depraved mind!' That's murder 2!" And no one likes to be perceived as stupid...except maybe you.) Another point, re: the inconsistencies in Zimmerman's and everyone else's testimony. Yeah...eyewitnesses are notoriously inconsistent. A two minute discrepancy in testimony and phone records, for example, means jack **** - no one's checking their watch at the time. And having been in similar situations to Zimmerman's (actually, more similar to Martin's)...it is very difficult to keep track of exactly what's going on, when, and how when the adrenalin kicks in, and then relate it back after the fact. !@#$ defense attorneys. It's their job to disagree with what the prosecutors are saying. I want to know what the prosecutors' peers are saying about the case. Real ones, not the clowns they have persecuting this case. agreed with the prosecutor comments
3rdnlng Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 The prosecution might have had a chance at manslaughter conviction (I'd consider it a coin toss, frankly). But I think the prosecution found themselves in a position where, either willfully or reluctantly, they had to charge with murder 2 because "depraved mind" fit the established racial narrative (i.e, if they had filed for manslaughter, people would have started jumping up and down screaming "What? He's a racist who killed a black boy! That's a 'depraved mind!' That's murder 2!" And no one likes to be perceived as stupid...except maybe you.) Another point, re: the inconsistencies in Zimmerman's and everyone else's testimony. Yeah...eyewitnesses are notoriously inconsistent. A two minute discrepancy in testimony and phone records, for example, means jack **** - no one's checking their watch at the time. And having been in similar situations to Zimmerman's (actually, more similar to Martin's)...it is very difficult to keep track of exactly what's going on, when, and how when the adrenalin kicks in, and then relate it back after the fact. !@#$ defense attorneys. It's their job to disagree with what the prosecutors are saying. I want to know what the prosecutors' peers are saying about the case. Real ones, not the clowns they have persecuting this case. There have actually been some attorneys trying to argue manslaughter or knock O'Mara's and West's strategy, questions or demeanor but I think GZ has got himself a couple of top notch guys. Andrew Branca, who's doing the blog is the author of "The Law of Self Defense" and is a defense attorney. He's been pretty even handed, but the problem for the persecution is that they just don't have a case. Hell, the original lead investigator even said he believed Zimmermans story and he was a witness for the persecution. They called in a ME from another jurisdiction to evaluate GZ's injuries from a picture. She claimed that the injuries weren't that serious. As if getting your head slammed to the cement isn't a dangerous situation. BTW, this was attested to by the State's witness.
boyst Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 OK. Maybe I am confusing all the crap... But can Zimmerman still get a manslaughter conviction? I am mixing up all the hearsay, rumors, and legal experts...
3rdnlng Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 OK. Maybe I am confusing all the crap... But can Zimmerman still get a manslaughter conviction? I am mixing up all the hearsay, rumors, and legal experts... Andrew has a link in the comments section that he explains his answer to that very question. "yes and no". I haven't opened it yet.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 Go to the link jboyst posted. Learn what the actual testimony says. Read the comments from knowledgeable people in the field. See what actual defense attornys have to say. Forget about what they say on HLN and MSNBC. I have been. I still don't think GZ's claims of what happened that night add up. But I also don't think the state has been able to prove it's case. If I were on the jury I would find him not guilty. They might have had a chance to prove man slaughter.
3rdnlng Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 I have been. I still don't think GZ's claims of what happened that night add up. But I also don't think the state has been able to prove it's case. If I were on the jury I would find him not guilty. They might have had a chance to prove man slaughter. What specifically doesn't add up? From actual testimony, not from what some talking heads spew out of their mouths.
DC Tom Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 OK. Maybe I am confusing all the crap... But can Zimmerman still get a manslaughter conviction? I am mixing up all the hearsay, rumors, and legal experts... As best I can tell, manslaughter is a lesser included offense for second-degree murder (but not second-degree felony murder - I can't find which Zimmerman is charged with, but I think the former) under Florida law, and the jury could convict if instructed by the judge to consider it.
Doc Posted July 5, 2013 Posted July 5, 2013 And since TM was a minor, a manslaughter conviction could carry up to 30 years jail time. But the jury would not be told about that part.
Recommended Posts