Trayvon Martin.

Perhaps this is a fine argument for an ideal world. But in the real world, where we permit people to own firearms without any military or paramilitary training, and we create a culture that fosters intervention with guns, it's impossible to hold people to a perfect standard of firearms discipline.

In the best of all possible worlds, she might have thought everything through better. But she did what she thought was likely to be effective in her defense without immediately having to kill someone, which is what any untrained person would have done.

I can accept the idea that she made the wrong choice, and am open to the idea that there should be some consequences for that. But 20 years in prison?! Not only is draconian beyond all comprehension, it is simply unreasonable.

And as for Zimmerman, it is equally ridiculous to suppose that a guy should bear no responsibility for an altercation that ensued because he followed the victim, and what is more, did so after the police instructed him not to do so; and that his defense be that the victim was actually armed because he managed to bang the head of his pursuer on the sidewalk before being shot to death.

And what is more: the real issue is not whether Ms. Alexander made the right choice or the wrong choice-- it's that if she had been a white man firing a warning shot at a black man, (s)he likely would have faced no charges, and if any charges were filed, (s)he would've gotten a slap on the wrist. And likewise, had Mr. Zimmerman been black, and Trayvon Martin white, he would be incarcerated as we speak, and no doubt facing the death penalty. The real problem over all of this is not the law per se, or even whether the victim in either case did or did not do the right thing, it's that what happened to them really had little to do with the facts of the cases or the law.

 

The more I read about Florida min. sentencing laws the more amazed I am. I knew they threw out parole years ago but didn't know they had these min. 10-15 or 20 year hitches for several crimes. I don't live there but I've been there many times, in fact I'm headed that way on Friday for two weeks (yeah Disney Word /sarcasm) and every interaction I've had with Floria law enforcement has been strange in my opinion. I was stopped on the main route from Miami to Orlando about two years ago and the officer wanted to search my vehicle, kept asking if I had drugs and how much cash I had. He was really aggressive. When I asked "why all the interest in my car, do you guys have a "bolo" on the make and model or something? Why exactly did you stop me?" He got even more aggressive, red in the face mad- "Are you telling me my job? Go stand in front of my vehicle and don't move!" I let him search but thought this is complete BS. Seriously the last time I can recall being barked at like that was in boot camp. On the other end of strange every time I've gone to Key West for Fantasy Fest it's a basic free for all and anything goes. I once asked an on foot officer where the port-a-johns were, they'd always been down by the square or over by the marina. She told me "they don't have any this year I think everyone's just using the alley" and she pointed to a dark alley. Public urination? That's the plan?

 

Unfortunately, that sort of thing isn't limited to Florida. On a routine traffic stop in Indiana a couple of years ago, the officer asked to search the vehicle. When I politely asked why, and what probable cause he had to search, he angrily ordered me to step out and let him search or be arrested for failure to comply with the lawful demands of a peace officer. I did so, he searched, found nothing of course, and wrote me a fat ticket. As I signed, I noted that his search and threat of arrest had probably both been unconstitutional. He angrily told me to take the ticket and get gone.

 

I believe it. Law Enforcement has for years attracted type-A assholes. In fact many major departments would give head shrink tests and if you weren't aggressive enough you failed. The more aggressive the better. Many have since figured out that assertive trumps aggression but it's been a slow transition.

My point about Florida is every interaction has just been odd. In the 90's I did a prisoner transport/pick-up from Miami even that was just plain weird, had to insist they sign off that I picked-up the inmate. Everyone I asked to sign off that I'd relieved custody just refused. finally ended up in a Lt's. office and she seemed confused why I needed the form signed. I kept thinking this is freaking standard shit, every state I'd ever been to this had been done by some low level desk guy at the jails intake/released desk. It's like "here sign this showing you released custody to me." "Ok, he's all yours enjoy your flight home." In Miami I think they were waiting for the Mayor or Governor to approve it. Just baffling.

 

One thing that worries me, this is in general, but could apply to this case is:
If every time I touch a hot stove I am told that the reason I was burned is because I touched it not because it was on I won't ever learn there may be more than one reason. If at the same time I am told that the reason it did not burn this other person is because he is evil, not because he knew to only touch it if was not on, then I will not like that other person, based on false information.
Put another way-
If am young and easily manipulated and - I reach out and grab a dog by the tail from behind, startle it and get bitten. Or I could approach the dog from the front slowly and pet it and the dog will lick me.
If I am told that the only reason that I was bitten is because I am black, then why would I worry about how I approach the dog. If I am told the only reason that the dog did not attack this other person is because he is white, then I ignore how he approached the dog. From this point on I am going to be more likely to get bit, and hate both the dog and those that don't get bitten. I am also not given the tools and knowledge I need to be able to change this or to consider that there may be more to why something is occurring than the definition already provided to me.

 

Got the Defendant's motion? From the prosecution's (and obviously biased) motion, it appears there was no imminent threat of serious bodily harm--even if she was in her own home.

 

That makes a lot more sense then the stuff I've been reading in the media. I kind of figured there was more to the story. One article had her outside firing shot(s?) in the air. So assuming the motion represents the actual facts, which is assuming, then I can see why she's in prison. I still have a problem with a 20 year no parole sentence but that's not my decision.

 

A sad day for young black males in this country.

 

You say that like it has relevance with respect to what actually happened.

 

Right, but it's the prosecutor's job to get a conviction, not find the truth. And the history of the world (which includes the frequently too self congratulatory US justice system) is full of prosecutors filling courts with bullshit and then using that bullshit to convict innocent people.
--- merged: Jul 15, 2013 at 12:45 PM ---
The media and the prosecutors have similar jobs, just different audiences.

 

I strongly disagree. Prosecutors have a special position to represent the best interests Of The People. They have extremely broad latitude to 'do right' (this is from my time in court plus talking with an AUSA mentor). On the other hand--the media enjoys twisting shit, injecting "coon" and "racism" in to a case to sell ratings. Prosecutors--at least the decent ones--do not have similar jobs.

 

I bolded the important part. Does a prosecutor's career advance based on some sort of 'decency' metric, or does it advance based on the prosecutor's ability to get convictions? I imagine it depends on the office. I'm not saying prosecutors are all horrible people, just that they have a job to do, and that job tends to bias them towards painting pictures of guilt rather than pictures of reality (though I admit that frequently the two are identical).
--- merged: Jul 15, 2013 at 1:11 PM ---
And in the end, they have to convince people that a particular story is true.

 

Heh. Here's Harvard Law Prof Dershowitz tearing Prosecutor Corey a new asshole because she's a horrible prosecutor.

Alan Dershowitz: DOJ should investigate Zimmerman prosecutor | Fox News Video

 

dershowitz? seriously?

the isolation of the confrontation between zimmerman and martin from the fact that the former was fucking stalking the latter is a remarkable piece of courtroom theater. it'd be foul even without the delightful american background relative to which this can be positioned:

The U.S. v. Trayvon Martin: How the System Worked | Robin D.G. Kelley

i rarely agree with Aceventura, but i do with the post above.

 

On the issue of prosecutors- they're people, some are really good and some are just horrible and they're many that fall somewhere in between those two points. I've worked with DA's that would unhappily lose a case because they couldn't get the evidence they wanted in court without breaking the rules the I've worked with some that encourage out and out lying. I think the head DA sets the tone, least it always did in the small counties where I worked. There's a small county in the northwest corner of Oregon where it's just institutionalized horse shit. The elected DA , in my opinion, cares more about getting convictions and getting his face on the TV then reality or justice. I had a deputy DA of his office tell me during a pretrial interview "But you saw the knife in the suspect hand when he departed the store." "No, I was parked at least 100yards away and was reviewing my notes at the time, wasn't even aware anything had happened until several minutes later when the clerk came out yelling." We went back and forth over the issue several times and she final got really aggressive and stated "You're not hearing me- YOU SAW the suspect leaving the store and YOU SAW the knife!" I told her I would not make that statement in court and I didn't. The guy was convicted anyway but for at least a month I couldn't get a return call from the DA's office. Not from her and not from any other deputy DA. The message was obvious- give the testimony we tell you to even if it's a lie or be persona no gratis.

On the issue of the two case- Zimmerman and Ms Alexander. I got to thinking about it last night and part of the states case against her was the SYG law didn't apply because she had several options to leave the situation, the motion filed by the state even mentions she didn't exit out an window when she could have. Basically the SYG didn't apply because she had options to leave... didn't Zimmerman have options to leave? I mean the dude was told by 911 dispatch to stay in his truck. He had the option not only to leave but not put himself in the situation to begin with. Yes there are other issues that apply to each case but I find that interesting.

 

Why are people like
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson given so much attention?

According to the Associated Press, Sharpton and Brawley's lawyers asserted "on 33 separate occasions" that a local prosecutor named Steven Pagones "had kidnapped, abused and raped" Brawley. There was no evidence, and Pagones was soon cleared. Sharpton then accused a local police cult with ties to the Irish Republican Army of perpetrating the alleged assault. The case fizzled when a security guard for Brawley's lawyers testified that the lawyers and Sharpton knew Brawley was lying. A grand jury investigation concluded in late 1988 that Brawley "was not the victim of forcible sexual assault" and that the whole thing was a hoax. The report specifically exonerated Pagones


Crystal Magnum says she was raped by lacrosse team members.

"We understand that the legal system is that you are innocent until proven guilty," said sophomore Kristin High. "But people are nervous and afraid that these people are going to get away with what they did because of a wealthy privilege, or male privilege, or a white privilege."

"The circumstances of the rape indicated a deep racial motivation for some of the things that were done," District Attorney Mike Nifong said. "It makes a crime that is by its nature one of the most offensive and invasive even more so."

"The silence is what I can't stand. It's the fact that people know information but they're not saying the information. So therefore, they're jeopardizing the safety of everyone else," Morgan McGhee, a Duke University student tells CBS News.

Turns out this was false. The university suspended the players, sacked the team's coach and eventually cancelled the entire lacrosse season.



She recently made the news again though.

woman who falsely accused three Duke lacrosse players of raping her in 2006 was charged Monday with murder

Crystal Mangum faces charges of first-degree murder, assault with deadly weapon and larceny in the death of Reginald Daye, 46, who died at Duke Hospital 10 days after Mangum stabbed him in April 2011.

----------------
When there are plenty of better role models starting with Michael Nutter
From deficit to Surplus budget, reduces crime, and is sued by the American Civil Liberties Union. Administration that replaced him got right to work trying to correct all of that.

Bill Cosby, Dr. Ben Carson, Alan Keyes, Allen West, Herman Cain, Justice Clarence Thomas, I could keep going with this list. The media ignores these people, or worse allows the misconception that the black community rejects them to be treated as fact, which if the opposite of the facts. I have not met any white or black person that comes close to what the media portrays as the standard or norm.

 

hello.