George Zimmerman: the black, Hispanic, Peruvian, kind-hearted non-white, not-racist poster boy
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2876692/posts
George Zimmerman Has ‘Black Roots’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2876518/posts
Zimmerman jury was right on, don’t know what the Dunn case was
Is the jury system broken?
Let me answer that . . . No!
Oldplayer
Jury trials are so yesterday. Today we need lynch mobs for the Zimmerman’s and Wilson’s of the world.
No.
Dunn was guilty. I worked at a urban high school and making a big deal about their loud rap music is a losing battle. There was a movie called The Blackboard Jungle that had a scene where music clashes against the generations.
Well, we know that the DoJ is broken. The EPA is broken, The Doe (both of ‘em) is broken, The BATFE is broken, The DHS is broken, The Dept. of State is broken, The Dept of Interior is broken, etc.
So, what is "JD"? I take it that it has nothing to do with education or wisdom.
Funny how the author didn’t cite O J Simpson as an example of why the jury system is “broken.”
Not enough trials even GET to juries because of the stacked deck corrupt prosecutors + draconian mandatory minimums present. Almost everyone cops a plea. Even the innocent.
Juries are the only thing in our legal system that work. And that’s very inconvenient for prosecutors and judges.
In the early 90s I had several months with not a lot to do and ended up watching a lot of Court TV. I came away basically disgusted with our court system. Juries can by just plain stupid.
I am not a fan of F. Lee Bailey but I agree with him on one thing he said. He said the American judicial system was flawed in that it often found guilty people innocent and innocent people guilty.
He said the military system of justice is better but I know nothing about it.
LOL!!! Yeah, old Trayvon was baiting into beating up the white Hispanic.
Who is this moron? And why doesn't he delve into the jury trials of the thousands of black-on-black murders?
Bullshirt. Did that clown even watch the Zimmerman trial??? No way could ANY non-biased jury say guilty with that joke of a prosecution.
I suggest everyone take a moment to review the facts of his disbarment from the practice of law in 2002 for incompetence and malfeasance. From Findlaw:
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-supreme-court/1193317.html
(*excerpted - I recommend you read the whole finding)
Supreme Court of Georgia.
IN RE: Harold Michael HARVEY. No. S06Y0176. Decided: October 24, 2005 Elizabeth M. Williamson, Assistant General Counsel State Bar, William P. Smith, III, General Counsel State Bar, for State Bar of Georgia.
This matter is before the Court on the Review Panel's report and recommendation that Respondent Harold Michael Harvey be disbarred from the practice of law for his violations of Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.15(I), 1.15(II), 5.5, 7.5, and 8.4 of Bar Rule 4-102(d).
In 2002 this Court suspended Harvey from practice for two years, see In the Matter of Harvey, 275 Ga. 28, 560 S.E.2d 646 (2002), and Harvey certified to the Court that he had complied with the requirements of Bar Rule 4-219(c) of notifying his clients, removing any indicia that he was a practicing lawyer and immediately ceasing the practice of law. Nevertheless, 18 months later Harvey was continuing to maintain his law office as The Harvey Law Firm and his staff wrote letters on the firm's letterhead with Harvey's approval despite a warning from the Office of the General Counsel at the State Bar. ...
...In light of Harvey's pattern of neglect in his handling of legal matters and his obvious disregard for the rules and ethics under which lawyers are allowed and privileged to practice law in this State, we hereby order that the name of Harold Michael Harvey be removed from the rolls of individuals authorized to practice law in Georgia. He is once again reminded of his duties under Bar Rule 4-219(c).
Disbarred.
PER CURIAM.
All the Justices concur.
What was “broken” in the Zimmerman case was being charged in the first place
A political witch hunt is all it ever was
For instance, Trayvon Martin does not get the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to walk home without being stalked and baited into fighting by a white man.
...
I think the system that gave the author a law degree is broken.
So the author knows more than and better than the jurors ...
I think the author is a egotistical jerk - liberal - leftist who thinks that because the jury didn’t see it his way then they had to have made a total error... The Hubris of this ego maniac ... WOW!
“For instance, Trayvon Martin does not get the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to walk home without being stalked and baited into fighting by a white man.
Jordan Davis does not get the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to disregard a command to turn his music down without being shot to death by a white man.
In each instance, a white man was the aggressor who initiated the deadly altercation.”
Jordan Davis does not get the benefit of the doubt that he had a right to disregard a command to turn his music down without being shot to death by a white man.
“In each instance, a white man was the aggressor who initiated the deadly altercation.
The George Zimmerman and Michael Dunn trials are modern-day examples of how justice has played out in American courtrooms for centuries outside the spotlight of media attention.”
Interesting he neglects to mention the difference in the outcome of the trials.