George Zimmerman is the only living person in the world who knows all the circumstances surrounding his killing of Trayvon Martin. The only other person who knew, Trayvon, is dead.
The rest of us string together bits and pieces about the case and draw conclusions based largely on our world view. One side sees Zimmerman as a murderer acting on racial motivations. The other side believes Zimmerman was properly defending himself against an assault by Trayvon.
Only one thing is certain: Zimmerman will not be convicted by a jury of his peers on the charge of second-degree murder.
The cleverest defense lawyers in the world – Clarence Darrow, William Kunstler, and Johnnie Cochran – are all deceased. But it won’t take the best and the brightest to get Zimmerman acquitted. Even an asleep-at-the-wheel, incompetent public defender could achieve that. It just takes one juror unwilling to convict, even if 11 vote guilty based on the evidence.
The irrefutable facts are few: Trayvon was walking back to his father’s home in a gated community at 7:30 p.m., carrying candy and a soft drink. Trayvon was unarmed; Zimmerman had a gun. He called 911, saying Trayvon looked suspicious. He described Trayvon’s appearance as black. The emergency dispatcher instructed Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon, but Zimmerman pursued anyway. Trayvon was talking to his girlfriend on a cellphone. The girlfriend said Trayvon told her a man was following him; she heard screams she believed to be Trayvon’s voice. A struggle ensued. An unidentified eyewitness saw a scuffle but was unable to identify the aggressor. Zimmerman fatally shot Trayvon. He was questioned by police the same night but was not charged.
Even before prosecutors charged George Zimmerman, his father, Robert, already poured strychnine in the potential jury pool by accusing President Barack Obama and civil rights organizations of spewing hatred: “I never foresaw so much hate coming from the president, the congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP,” the elder Zimmerman told a local Fox affiliate in Florida.
What were Obama’s hateful remarks? “If I had a son he’d look like Trayvon.” What’s hateful about that?
Obama offered personal and national condolences to Trayvon’s family at the same time Fox was finding ways to assassinate Trayvon’s memory. The president urged law enforcement to investigate the killing but did not draw any conclusions or say anything to further inflame the already overheated rhetoric. While others debate racial anxieties, the wisdom of “stand your ground laws” and gun control, Obama properly became the mourner in chief, the same way he did after the Tucson tragedy last year, the way Reagan did after the Challenger disaster, the way Clinton did after the Oklahoma City bombing, and Bush did after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Robert Zimmerman, a retired judge, knows what sways juries. He used that knowledge to plant the Obama-hating seed in every potential juror. Fox did not ask him tough questions because Zimmerman cleverly played straight into Fox’s anti-Obama crusade. You only need one out of 12 jurors to thwart a conviction.
In excusing jurors, prosecutors will try to weed out overt racists and others deemed hostile to their case. But they won’t be able to thin every Obama hater from the herd.
Fox host Sean Hannity has inserted himself – and the Fox propaganda machine – into the story. The same day prosecutors charged George Zimmerman, Hannity’s show was riddled with comments to make viewers doubt the shooter’s guilt. Hannity presented as fact Zimmerman’s assertions (though family members) that Trayvon broke Zimmerman’s nose and smashed his head and that Trayvon had confronted Zimmerman as he was backing off from a possible confrontation with the youth.
Hannity’s guest Michelle Malkin said the Obama administration was exploiting the shooting for political gains and that Attorney General Eric Holder has “perverted the rule of law.” These remarks serve double duty in the propaganda war, sowing seeds of doubt about Zimmerman’s guilt in the minds of potential jurors at the same time making Obama look bad. Another Hannity guest (a tea party “leader”) said Obama’s strategy is “getting people to hate each other.”
Is it any surprise that Robert Zimmerman appeared on Fox to smear Obama or that George Zimmerman himself called only Hannity to talk? Hannity refuses to disclose the contents of their conversation.
On the same day Zimmerman was charged, Hannity asked his viewers whether Zimmerman should have been charged with second-degree murder: 22% said yes, 68% said no, and 11% were undecided. Hannity’s right-wing audience is obviously way out of step with most Americans. A recent Gallup poll found 36% believe Zimmerman is guilty of a crime, 7% believe he is not guilty and 52% are undecided. Among blacks, 72% think Zimmerman is guilty, while 33% of whites believe he is guilty.
How many members of the potential jury pool have heard Robert Zimmerman? How many have watched Hannity’s coverage? That is significant because fewer than one-quarter of Hannity’s viewers would be willing to consider convicting Zimmerman, and it’s hard to keep all of them out of the jury pool.
John Wright is the author of “The Obama Haters: Behind the Right-Wing Campaign of Lies, Innuendo & Racism” and co-author of “Life Without Oil: Why We Must Shift to a New Energy Future.”



51 Comments

A few quibbles with this post.
First, the statement of the allegedly irrefutable facts is inconsistent and/or incomplete. If (and only if) you are going to allude to the unidentified eyewitness who couldn’t tell who was the aggressor, you should also discuss the statements of other alleged witnesses. For example, one witness says he saw Zimmerman, below Martin, crying for help while Martin beat him. Another, Austin Brown, a black teenager, says he saw Zimmerman on the ground “moaning and crying for help.”
Second, you juxtapose Zimmerman’s statement that Martin looked suspicious with his identification of him a black. However, Zimmerman’s identification of Martin’s race was prompted by a direct question from the 911 operator. It was not volunteered, as your narrative can be read as implying, that Zimmerman was basing his suspicion on Martin’s race. This is precisely the error that NBC committed in releasing and edited version of the 911 tape that omitted the dispatcher’s question about Martin’s race.
Third, you state that it is irrefutable that Zimmerman pursued Martin despite being told not to by the dispatcher. In fact, Zimmerman claims that he was attacked while returning to his vehicle. It is not clear exactly when, with respect to the dispatcher’s warning, Zimmerman headed back to his vehicle.
Fourth, you omit the irrefutable evidence that Zimmerman sustained at least some injuries during his encounter with Martin. You may dispute their severity, but there is no dispute that he received treatment at the scene.
Fifth, your discussion of Obama’s “hateful remarks” is either naïve or disingenuous. Obama clearly intended to signal his belief that Martin was the victim of racial profiling, that all children who “looked like him” were at risk. It was not a neutral statement of sympathy, but an attempt to further inflame racial discord and take a side against Zimmerman. Had there been a videotape of Martin pounding Zimmerman’s head into the pavement, Obama would not have emphasize that he and Martin were of the same race. It is also notable that Obama has never expressed similarly-worded sympathy for a black person victimized by another black person.
Finally, the rest of your discussion of Obama’s role as “mourner in chief” is silly. He has only undertaken that role for naked political gain. He capitalized upon the Tuscon shooting to build upon the existing media narrative that Sarah Palin and the Tea Party were somehow responsible for it. He did not participate in a similar spectacle in response to other mass shootings that have occurred during his time in office.
Funny how you don’t link to any sources for your claims. Are you such a superior being that we should never demand you back up what you say?
It will be an O J Simpson in reverse. Even the most drunken, most incompetent defense lawyer will be able to get him off.
Speaking of John Galt, it turns out that the original model for him and Ayn Rand’s other male heroes was a punk-ass teenage serial killer and probable child rapist.
Please don’t feed the trolls. It just makes them more incorrigible.
Funny how you don’t dispute a word I say, or criticize Mr. Wright for failing to provide links. Stop the trolling, Phoenix Woman, and engage in careful, reasoned argument like I have.
Any idea why we keep seeing pictures of Trayvon as a 12 year old, but we don’t see any pictures of Zimmerman as a 12 year old? My point is, bias is EVERYWHERE in this case. Embracing the bias on one side, while criticizing only the bias from the other side, does not speak well of you as an author, IMO. Might we expect your next book to be about how Obama has finalized the job of killing off civil liberties? Perhaps AFTER the upcoming election?
Do not ask a scorpion to change its nature.
http://my.firedoglake.com/phoenix/2012/04/11/reading-the-tea-leaves-on-zimmermans-lawyers/
Links can be funny things-note how Phoenix Woman yesterday linked to a news story to prove her assertion that Zimmerman was “on the run.” A click on the link reveals it as actually to a news story that he had surrendered peacefully. ROFLMAO
From the evidence available to all, it is clear Trayvon was the one “standing his ground” in self defense. The armed Zimmerman was pursuing him. If you chase someone down with a pistol in your hand, and you end up killing him, you murdered him. It’s not complicated.
I won’t — unless she solemnly PROMISES me she will not sting on our way across the river.
The facts are in dispute as to whether Zimmerman was pursuing him with the gun, or was returning to his vehicle when Martin attacked him and began pounding his head into the pavement. A jury will decide that question.
If you’re walking around with a gun following people, you are looking for trouble.
Zimmerman found it.
He was even advised not to follow Trayvon, but he disregarded that advice. Looks like the dumbass fucked up to me, in more ways than one, and a guy who just went out for some iced tea is dead.
He should have been arrested 39 days ago. Some other people need to be investigated for obstructing justice.
Following Trayvon with a concealed gun was perfectly legal, as was asking him a question, if that happened. If Trayvon, seeing no gun, decided he could kick this fat guy’s ass with impunity, you would be forced to the opposite conclusion, wouldn’t you? Point is, nobody in the public knows what actually happened as of now.
Funny how you still haven’t provided any links. Nice diversionary tactic, though.
Your statement is a gross oversimplification of this matter.
I believe that after all is said and done, we will realize that George Zimmerman was projecting delusional and paranoid beliefs about criminals and African-Americans onto Trayvon Martin that would amaze, confound and shock us, if he were to intimately and honestly disclose his thoughts.
I think he has convinced himself that he shot Trayvon in self-defense and he has so much invested in sustaining that belief that he is unlikely to ever waver from it, regardless of the evidence.
In other words, he is mentally ill and not rational.
“Kick this fat guy’s ass with impunity,” You mean kind of like
“Stand Your Ground?”
I thought the cowboy is only 170 lbs, BTW? At 5′ 9,” that’s not fat, that’s in-shape.
And the “point” is, someone should should have found out what happened a long time ago. That doesn’t happen by waiting around until the jury pool is tainted and stories are contrived.
The lack of arrest at the time of the offense (murdering someone after you’ve been advised to “not do that”) warrants an investigation. Immediately. Why did that not take place? That’s an important part of this story.
Ah Shooter is that you?
What do you think he needs a link for? Everything he said is common knowledge at this point.
Nope. According to the police report:
Trayvon Martin: 17 years old, 6’1″, 150 lbs
George Zimmerman: 28 years old, 5’9″, 190 lbs
Zimmerman outweighed Martin by 40 lbs. That is a substantial advantage in a wrestling type of match. This advantage is an objective fact and circumstance that negates the necessity to use a gun in self-defense.
I have no dog in this fight, in the sense that I want Zimmerman convicted and imprisoned if the evidence shows him to be guilty. You know that the facts have been all over the place in this case. Is Zimmerman 280 pounds, or 170? Did Trayvon look like the 12 year old boy (apparently) from the picture we keep seeing? If Trayvon was over six feet and athletic, he could well have thought he could kick Zimmerman’s ass. I am 6’3″ and was always in decent shape when I was younger, but TWICE I have been relentlessly provoked and then attacked by assailants who were a whole foot shorter than me. It does not pay to make too many assumptions, especially ssince we will be getting some real additional info now as the case progresses.
Thanks for correcting that.
6′ 1″, 150 is pretty skinny.
BTW, there WAS an immediate arrest, but they released him. We don’t know yet what evidence they considered in making the decision to release him. Maybe it was a bad move under their law, maybe not, we can’t know that yet. To me, the real significance of this case is as a Rorschach test for all of us, to see how willing we are to distort the known reality to support a victim who we deem to belong to our team. It’s a human failing, not a political one, but I confess I would have hoped our side would have been a bit more analytical and even-handed in our reaction. Being clearer-headed than the righties has always been a source of pride for me, and something I have always given our side credit for.
I picture myself walking down the street, talking on my phone, bothering no one and being stalked. Do I turn around and confront the person, or do I try to ignore the guy and get home as fast as possible? Remember, I’m only 17, I’m full of hormones and I’m probably thinking this is the mugging my mom warned me about.
I picture myself as a community watch person. I phone in a call to the police and then, let it go, because THE GUY HASN’T COMMITED A CRIME. Why would I grip the gun in my pocket and continue to follow him after being told not to? If I did confront the person I suspected of being a criminal, I would warn that person I have a gun, and I sure as hell wouldn’t turn my back to him. Zimmerman’s story is fishy.
We all have a dog in this fight. A kid was killed and no one questioned why until the stink got too big. We agree the truth needs to come out, but the problem is that now, after 40 or so days of delay, that’s infinitely harder to establish.
My “dog” is always justice and fairness of process. I suspect, and hope, you know me well enough by now to know that. Your take on the facts is reasonable as a speculation, but it is just a speculation. I could come up with a number of other plausible and reasonable speculations, and they would also be just speculation. There was one and only one set of actual facts here, and neither of us can possibly know at this point exactly what they were. So, we have to wait and see what info comes out to inform us about what actually happened. I think the SYG law is a bad one, and I suspect the police did a weak investigation, but even that cannot be determined at this point without really digging into the SYG law itself. Which nobody has really done yet, but I note that it does contain a presumption in favor of the shooter, so I suspect that the police were influenced by that.
And despite your rhetoric, Angela Corey saw enough there to charge Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder. The police investigators the night of the murder wanted to charge Zimmerman. Clearly the people who know more about this than you believe this guy commited at the very least manslaughter.
Zimmerman told the police at the scene that Martin followed him back towards his vehicle and started beating him. IF that is what happened — and it’s not clear either way — then Zimmerman had the right to protect his life. Martin certainly wouldn’t have the right to follow him and beat him, even if he was offended that Zimmerman was initially investigating his conduct.
Look at it this way. What if I am walking in a strange neighborhood and I feel “threatened” by some youths that I don’t know. Am I permitted to turn around and beat them because I believe they may be about to single me out for a mugging? I suspect if I did, you’d expect me to be arrested and charged with a hate crime.
The notIon that Zimmerman was out there hoping to commit a racist killing is silly. How would he expect to get away with it, if he was on the phone with 911 the whole time? He’d been doing this for years without incident. His version of events, which is consistent with his injuries, makes much more sense.
“hoping to commit a rascist killing” are your words, “looking for trouble” were my words.
Being stupid enough to commit actions leading to killing someone is what the man did.
I haven’t mentioned race. I’ve only mentioned the fact that Zimmerman assumed the kid was a criminal,without any other basis than his appearance.
“Martin followed him back towards his vehicle and started beating him.” This sounds ridiculous.
Zimmerman is the one instigating a confrontation. He is out patrolling the neighborhood with a head full of suspicion, an attitude that someone walking down the street he doesn’t know is a criminal, and a freaking gun in his pocket, while commenting to a dispatcher “they always get away.”
An investigation immediately after the incident, should have been conducted in order to establish what happened.
“You just shot somebody you were stalking? Oh okay, no biggy. Here’s your gun. See you later.” WTF?
If there is enough evidence to charge him with second degree manslaughter now, there was enough then. It was just overlooked for a reason we all need to understand.
Even if Zimmerman’s statement is true, which I doubt because it makes no sense, he was limited to using reasonably necessary force to prevent being killed or to prevent suffering serious bodily harm.
Yes, he had no duty to retreat and could stand his ground, but there is a limit to the amount of force he could use to defend himself. The test is objective. That is, he was limited to using the amount of force that a reasonable person in the same situation would have used.
While there is little question regarding whether he sustained an injury, apparently he suffered an abrasion to the back of his head and a bloody nose, I do not believe he suffered serious bodily harm or injury. That would appear to rule out the use of deadly force to defend himself.
Plus, he outweighed Martin by 40 pounds.
Of course, we will have to wait to see the actual evidence, but I do not believe he was justified in using deadly force, even if we assume he was telling the truth.
There are also problems with his credibility. For example, there is no sidewalk in the immediate vicinity of Martin’s body. How does Martin slam his head repeatedly into the cement sidewalk causing Zimmerman to grab his gun and shoot him, yet Martin’s body winds up some distance away lying face down in the grass?
Finally, do you really think the prosecutor would be so stupid as to charge Zimmerman with murder 2, knowing that she not only must prove that crime, she also must disprove his claim of self-defense, if his injuries were serious?
Granted I’m reading between the lines and drawing an inference here, but I think we are going to find out that his injuries were minor and materially contradict his claim that he had to use deadly force to save his life.
I was a felony criminal defense lawyer for 30 years specializing in death-penalty defense, forensics, and complex litigation in state and federal courts. I won approximately 80% of my cases. I was also a law school professor for three years. I taught Wrongful Convictions, which included a heavy dose of forensics, and Trial Advocacy.
I do not agree with your statement. Not. One. Bit.
It’s pretty clear that the special prosectuor is acting on specific instructions from attorney general Holder and president Obama to charge Zimmerman with something with the word “murder” in it to appease their base. She knows she can’t get a conviction, but wants to prevent rioting.
Zimmerman said he WAS retreating when Martin jumped on him and began pounding his head into the sidewalk. The severity of the injuries is irrelevant — you don’t have to wait until you’re nearly dead to fight back. You don’t even have to be touched if the person is menancing you in a way that you reasonably believe might result in injury.
Zimmerman outweighed Martin by 10 pounds, not 40, and was several inches shorter.
By the time this case goes to trial, if it ever goes to trial, I don’t believe any of the jurors will give a damn about what Obama, Hannity, Zimmerman’s father, or anyone else said about this case.
I’m not sure anyone cares very much about what they’ve said anyway. I certainly don’t.
The arraignment is scheduled for late May and that is a long delay that suggests to me that the defense wants time to work up a full spectrum mental health evaluation and, if the results confirm my suspicions, I would not be surprised to see a plea to negligent manslaughter.
Yes, I believe Zimmerman has some serious mental health issues.
Except the special prosecutor is a Republican elected official from Jacksonville appointed by Republican Gov of Florida Rick Scott.
the latest:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47031841
I got my information about age, height and weight from the police report.
Your argument that the prosecutor is following orders from Obama strikes me as absurd.
Your analysis of Florida’s self-defense law is invalid.
I respectfully suggest you remove your tin foil hat.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/94515279@N00/1505091017/lightbox/
Don’t get all conspiratorial now, you were doing fine until that point, and not speculating as much as most others have.
Mark O’Mara appears to know what he is doing. I approve of his decision to request the court file be sealed as that is likely what I would have done.
He’s trying to dial down the emotion and that is a good thing.
It also suggests that there is information in the file that hurts his client’s case.
This is yet another sign that Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense is in trouble.
My kingdom, such as it is, for an edit button.
That would be 80% of my trials.
(which means I knew which cases to try, which cases to deal, and my clients listened to my advice)
Do you think the delay in this charge, warrants any kind of seperate investigation?
Your point is well taken, counselor. I certainly hope that my theory is wrong and that justice is done — whatever the outcome — without interference by political and racial prejudices or smear machines. But, as I see it, daddy Zimmerman is clearly using his judicial experience in an attempt to tilt the jury pool in his son’s favor, and Fox is blatantly trying to blame the victim.
Obama and Holder have both alread ymeddlesomely and racistly intervened in this local matter, so no conspiracy theory is needed. Thousands of murders have occurred since Obama took office, but this is the only one where he decided to declare that his hypothetically son would look like the victim. It would require a tinfoil hat to DENY that he’s engaging in crass racial politics, particularly with his friend Al Sharpton involved.
If you’re going to rely on the police report for your facts then it’s self-defense.
Well, prosecutor’s affidavit certainly says it all:
Zimmerman “confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.”
In other words, Zimmerman asked Martin what he was doing there, and Martin jumped on him and began pounding his head into the sidewalk.
And note that they rely on Martin’s mom’s identification of his voice, rather than the scientific evidence which indicates it was Zimmerman.
Acquittal.
“How many members of the potential jury pool have heard Robert Zimmerman? How many have watched Hannity’s coverage?”
Shrug. How many have heard Al Sharpton or watched NBC?
The sensationalized news stories, the political agenda speechifying, the venomous blogging (all from both sides) are going to make jury selection very difficult. It might even make a fair trial impossible but, hey: can’t let a crisis go to waste, ya know?
“the scientific evidence which indicates it was Zimmerman.”
Source, please?
I believe your observations are correct, but I disagree with your conclusions.
No, I think the defense wants time to do a full spectrum mental health evaluation of Zimmerman and a mitigation investigation, such as a lawyer would do in a death penalty case, even though this is not a death penalty case.
IIRC, Florida is one of a few states that uses jury sentencing in felony cases. That means that if this case goes to trial and Zimmerman is convicted by a jury, the same jury will impose the sentence.
Since the maximum possible sentence is life, O’Mara needs to have some powerful and persuasive mitigation evidence assembled and ready to present before trial, in case the jury convicts Zimmerman of Murder 2. The court will want to proceed to sentencing with no more than a day or two break after the jury renders its verdict in the guilt phase.
Mitigation evidence is generally defined as evidence about the crime or the defendant that in fairness or mercy warrants a lesser sentence.
Mental illness caused by an organic brain disorder is the most powerful kind of mitigation evidence because it’s not a behavioral disorder like sociopathy. No one chooses to suffer from an organic brain disorder and it’s not fair to hold such a person to the same level of accountability as a person without such a disorder.
Mind you, this is not a defense to the charge, unless it so incapacitates a defendant that he cannot form criminal intent. Rather, it mitigates the offense and calls for less punishment, possibly even treatment instead.
This is the last time I am going to respond to you because you do not know what you are talking about and your conclusions are irrational.
Two independent audiologists using different scientific methods to analyze the scream for help on the 911 call have independently concluded to a reasonable scientific certainty that George Zimmerman is not the source of the scream.
There is no point in having a discussion with you, if you base your arguments on conspiracy theories and misstatements of fact.
Please peddle your theories elsewhere.
Good day, sir.
“…meddlesomely and racistly…”
“The road to hell is paved with adverbs.”
― Stephen King, On Writing
and in reply at 43 where you state,
“And note that they rely on Martin’s mom’s identification of his voice, rather than the scientific evidence which indicates it was Zimmerman.”
you are, wait for it…wrong again:
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/01/10963191-trayvon-martin-case-911-call-screams-not-george-zimmermans-2-experts-say
I only depart from you where you say Obama and/or Holder instructed the Florida prosecutors what to do. That part about direct instruction is just speculation, and also seems unlikely to me. The state authorites would have their own independent reasons for wanting to get a charge going against Zimmerman, IMO.
It’s now a classic media circus case. Both sides are doing all they can to tilt the scales and influence the jury pool. For example, do you actually think the picture we keep seeing of Trayvon is a current one? But the Trayvon supporters were quick to cry “Foul” when a cleaner picture of Zimmerman than the mug shot became available. See what I mean?