Posted on 05/21/2012 10:53:16 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Think about it. If the prosecutor had really wanted to put Zimmerman away, a manslaughter charge would have been a much safer bet. So why did she file a charge that she pretty much knew she couldn't prove?
Might it not be because it was actually an "in your face" response to all the political pressure she was getting? I mean, she had the media, the race pimps and the White House all over her in an effort to force her to railroad Zimmerman -- something she was probably not inclined to do from the start because 1) he's not guilty of anything and 2) nobody likes that level of pressure.
Now Second Degree murder charge is flashy! And, when the race pimps heard that she was going to file it, they probably thought it was super cool.
What they didn't know (if my theory is correct) is that she was playing them all for chumps. She knew the evidence wouldn't support it. She know it will probably be thrown out before it goes to trial. She also knows that even if it goes to trial, she's not going to get a conviction.
But that was never the point. The point was to 1) stop the pressure, 2) hand the hot potato off to someone else, 3) hope that everything dies down as the evidence comes out.
Plausible?
The Crump team places the onus of responsibility on the police for failing to contact the girl. It’s true they had Martin’s cell. Incoming calls are stored on most phones, but not always. On February 27 it would not have mattered much to the police who Martin was talking to before he took a swing at Zimmerman. If they could do it again, no doubt they would call the number. By March 2, they had returned the phone to Tracy Martin; a mysterious call to 911 was made on that date.
So it was only when Tracy Martin was looking over his son’s phone bill about three weeks after Trayvon’s death that he noticed the call. He didn’t dial the number, according to Julison, the Crump spokesman, but turned the phone over to the lawyer, who contacted the girl. Crump, needless to say, did not inform the police. Instead he went to Matt Gutman of ABC. According to Julison, Gutman was chosen because he’d done some good — i.e., sympathetic — reporting, but the spokesman insisted there was no special reason to select him.
After giving her brief phone interview, Dee-Dee refused to speak with reporters or with the Sanford police. The concern about the girl’s safety — repeated by Julison — is implausible. No “white supremacist” has threatened a member of Team Trayvon. If Dee-Dee had come forward, any of the “Justice for Trayvon” rallies across the country would have been delighted to feature her. However, fifteen minutes of fame does not appeal to everyone, and it’s understandable that she might not wish to sign on, or to be interviewed on camera. But why not talk to the police or FBI? If what you’re telling investigators is the whole truth and nothing but the truth, you should have no worries. If you’re concealing something, talking to authorities is a more dicey proposition. In any event, 35 days after the shooting and 12 days after the ABC interview, the girl complied with a subpoena and spoke with two district attorneys working for the Special Prosecutor.
The Content
The portion of the phone interview that was released takes just a few seconds to listen to. It was broadcast on ABC’s Young Turks and then on World News with Diane Sawyer. Dee-Dee’s actual words are
“he say this man was watching him so he put his hoodie on. Trayvon say what you are following me for. Then the man say what you doin’ round here. Someone push Trayvon because the headset just fell.” After the first sentence a reporter interpolates: “Suddenly Martin was cornered.”
A different version, though credited to ABC, was broadcast on CNN. This is the interview featured on the Parks and Crump website.
“He was walkin’ fast when he say this man behind him again. He come an say this look like he about to do somethin’ to him. And then Trayvon come an say the man was still behind him and then I come an say run.”
In its printed rendition, ABC provided still a third version:
“He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man. I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/dee-dee_trayvon_and_dj.html#ixzz1vXaERAhy
So what did happen in the final moments before the fight? According to Zimmerman, he was headed back to his truck for the second time when he was surprised by Martin, who was waiting for him between two buildings. The teenager said, “Do you have a f***ing problem?,” and when Zimmerman replied “no,” said, “You do now,” and decked him. Zimmerman told police that he reached for his cell as he said “no.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/04/dee-dee_trayvon_and_dj.html#ixzz1vXapOVr2
Exactly. When Z left his vehicle, knowingly and with malice aforethought, to get an apartment number for the police, the large chip on M’s shoulder spontaneously combusted.
“Is she doing it for Obama?”
Maybe she was promised holder’s job after the F&F thing is finished.
From The Conservative Treehouse, with excellent research and many photos, about Zimmerman and Martin and other topics of interest.
So we’ve been lowered to the sibling complaint of: “MA! He’s lookin at me!” Liberals the party of the immature.
Really, really bad.
It seems the DA’s primary case is predicated on the irrelevant and unprovable allegation assertion that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon.
First off, the allegation of the racial not button term “profiling” is totally irrelevant. Zimmerman is not a law enforcement officer working in the field he is a private citizen ACTING ON HIS OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY.
There is one huge and significant fact that has been completely ignored by the media in this case.
The incident took place in the common area property of his gated condominium complex and Zimmerman is member of the community's association and part owner of the common area by virtue of his membership and lawful ownership of a condo in the community of sole and joint private property.
That gated community has a legally valid warning sign on the gate informing all that enter that due to high crime in the area and the fact that the gated community is private property any non member of the gated community wandering around in the gated area is subject to being stopped and questioned as to why they are on the private property and who they are a guest of in that private gated community.
All members of the gated community have signed on this policy by virtue of the bylaws of the condo association, including the woman who Trevan and his father were a guest of.
The operative word for Trevon and his daddy here is GUEST because daddy was not married to the woman who lived in the gated community nor did he ever have any intention to do so as is evidenced by actions with Treyvon’s mom over the past few months.
As a guest of a person living in a condo of the gated community (and we don't know if the woman owned a condo there,was a renter or a Section 8 housing recipient of a unit in the gated community) Trevon and Daddy were obligated to follow the rules for guests visiting the private gated community.
Included in the rules for guests was the obligation to submit to being stopped and questioned as to your reason for being in the private property of the gated community and informing the person who is questioning you who you are visiting or staying with.
This is a big deal and is legally valid.
According to the bylaws of some gated retirement communities, you are not allowed to have friend or family members living with you for more than a few days if they are below the age of 60 and these communities routinely use these laws to have young people evicted if they stay on too long.
Courts have come down hard in the favor of the rights of communal associations to police their gated community private property. The fact of the matter her is that Zimmerman was acting well within his rights on his own private property in accordance with regulations for visitors of his private property that were properly posted legal notification signs to guests entering the gates of the private property.
Treyvon and his father, in their capacity as guests on private property were obligated to follow those rules of conduct while guests on the private property.
Clearly written on the entrance sign on the gate was the obligation of guests on the private property to submit to questions regarding who they were a guest of and the reason for their visit to the community. Obviously, Treyvon violated these rules and decided to beat Zimmerman up on Zimmerman's own private property. I can't believe this fact has been ignored
Interesting point. So TM was violating the communities rules/laws.
Yeah, and she needs to be disbarred.
Two words: MIKE NIFONG. I think Ms. Angela Corey is going to find out this is a dead end railroading that will not end well for her and her career. This will be most interesting as the case unravels.
“That gated community has a legally valid warning sign on the gate informing all that enter that due to high crime in the area and the fact that the gated community is private property any non member of the gated community wandering around in the gated area is subject to being stopped and questioned as to why they are on the private property and who they are a guest of in that private gated community.”
You NAILED it.
Moreover, Zimmerman was HIRED to patrol the area by the association, and was far more than a mere “onlooker” who acted on his own curiosity. Zimm had every right to do what he purportedly did, and that is why the police didn’t charge him.
Well, spur dialog may have been incomplete terminology. Drumming up anti-gun support by stirring up the populace with half truths and outright lies, to pressure politicians to vote changes to gun laws based on complete fabrications and lies is the purpose.
I hope I got it right this time.
I would go for disbarred. She knew it was all BS.
It's an interesting fact, but it doesn't change the self defense outcome. Martin doesn't get any [more] right to deck strangers who annoy him, when he is out in the wild where you have no obligation to submit to questioning. You still have to listen to annoying jerks from time to time, panhandling, cussing, "hey you" stuff, and so forth.
However, I agree that it changes the "profiled" and "followed" question. Martin should have been given a clue that the association does this, albeit usually via police as proxy.
Where can I see a picture of the sign?
However, I agree that it changes the “profiled” and “followed” question. Martin should have been given a clue that the association does this, albeit usually via police as proxy.
Where can I see a picture of the sign?
There was a picture of the No Trespassing/ Visitors required to submit to questioning by residents sign posted on the gate of the community that was published in one of the early local news outlets in early to mid March.
“Martin should have been given a clue that the association does this, albeit usually via police as proxy.”
It was the responsibility of the women who hosted Treyvon and his father as guests in the private gated community to inform her guests as to the rules guests must follow and expected conduct of guests while visiting in the private gated community.
Furthermore, the law states that when you have a prominently placed sign on the entrance gate of private property, it is the responsibility of the person entering that private property to inform themselves regarding the rules and entry onto the property constitutes implicit acceptance of those rules by the guest.
The media has been explicit that Treyvon and Daddy entered the private gated community as guests of Daddy's girl friend so they had legally valid, fair warning that they must cooperate with any resident who wished to approach them and inquire as to who they were visiting and what the purpose of their visit was.
Obviously, by all media accounts, it is undisputed that Treyvon violated all of the rules guests must follow in order to be admitted as guests of the gated community.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.