Comments

ZIMMERMAN VERDICT PART 20: …AND INTO THE FUTURE — No Comments

  1. Power, money, and fame. These are the driving force behind many in our society. It seems as if all of these, at least in the minds of some, can be achieved in career politics. Each of these goals can produce good or evil according to the moral and ethical foundation of the individuals involved. Each political entity involved in this travesty failed the moral/ethical test miserably, placing them in the evil category. Historically, most serial killers and mass murderers were seeking at least two of these. The political figures that history has remembered as most evil were seeking all three. It behooves us all to seek out and support those who can pass the morality/ ethics test to fill our positions of political power. Alas, asking those who could pass the muster to serve would be asking them to jump into a cesspool and asking them to associate themselves with people their inner-being is repulsed by. In a just world the voters of Sanford, Florida would elect their fired police chief to the office of mayor in a write -in campaign. He passed a very public test showing his fitness to lead as did others who were punished for displaying integrity.

  2. Mas,

    Thank you again for a wonderful series loaded with fact instead of the usual b.s. perpetrated by the mainstream media. As usual your integrity remains in tact unlike most of the whores that call themselves journalists these days.

    Well done Sir…..

  3. I think Zimmerman is almost going to HAVE to write a book, because I have a feeling that with everything out there about him and him being so well-known, he isn’t going to be able to work a normal job any more.

  4. I’ve read your analysis on the trial since you’ve started, and have followed it on Legal Insurrection, and I’ve to to say I thank you and Mr. Branco’s work. I’ll be looking for those aforementioned books. Thank you.

  5. Mas, I can’t thank you enough for everything you do for each of us. Your work is truly amazing.

  6. Although I’ve never met her, Angela Corey is well known by many defense lawyers in the 7th Judicial Circuit (where I practice) because she was an assistant state attorney in St. Augustine for a while. She is widely regarded here as a loon.

  7. Do you think you can find something else,anything else to talk about? Really tired of hearing about this.Its over move on .

  8. I think he didnt expect you to read the comments, refreshing to know you do.
    Thank You for a great series , and for Your Service.

  9. Mas,

    Thanks, great series, I learned a lot and enjoyed reading.

    I hope George Zimmerman has the intelligence and emotional control to stay out of the spotlight for awhile.

    George should perhaps write his story in DRAFT while events are fresh in his mind, but don’t publish just yet.

    I don’t believe anyone thinks all that clearly after an emotional event. And George has certainly been on an emotional roller coaster.

    I believe, that there will be more to this saga. I hope George makes good decisions and has a good life.

  10. i find it odd that the dispatcher’s statement to zimmerman has been misquoted over and over again by people that claim to be on the side of the facts. the dispatcher said “we don’t need you to do that”. mas, you have repeatedly mentioned what he said was “you don’t have to do that”. marty’s article @armedcitizensnetwork, The Unmeritorious Prosecution of George Zimmerman, also misquotes “You don’t need to do that”.

    it may not be a huge difference, but i expect someone that is pointing the finger at the media for twisting facts to be careful of not doing the same.

  11. I don’t think this was discussed too much at all. What I was sick of was the media hype and uninformed opinions from people, and that, thank God, has subsided. But I found it refreshing that Mas was able and willing to speak on this subject, and to do so in such an exhaustive manner. Because this case will be with us for a long time.
    When I discuss self-defense options with people and I bring up Evan’s Marshall’s Dangers of Intervention essay, or even Mas’ many writings over the years, people give me a blank stare. Now I’ll just have to say, “remember Zimmerman?”, and anybody will instantly know what I’m referring to and what could happen to any carrying citizen when he walks into an iffy situation. This should be an argument ender whenever someone sings that same old a-good-shoot-is-a-good-shoot song.

  12. Thanks so much, Mas! I saved my comment for the end of your GZ series. When friends ask me in the future what my view is on CCW/ justifiable homicide/ and this case in particular, I will send all questions to this blog. Your commentary on the GZ case should be textbook reading for all American History students along with Jeff Cooper’s commentary on Ruby Ridge. Thanks again for a “No BS” analysis! 🙂

  13. Mas,

    Excellent series. The last couple of lines are destined to be classics. Your experience and love for justice really shone through the series. I’ve recommended your posts to many, and all have enjoyed and learned from all of them. Thanks for the breath of fresh air.

  14. Thanks Mr. Ayoob. I have eagerly awaited each part in this blog and have used what facts you have presented to combat the uninformed here at work.

  15. Mr. Ayoob, excellent work on the series and using this tragic incident as an opportunity to teach valuable knowledge. Would like to see an extended version of this in a book by you. At least I would know that I was not getting “spin” or ghostwritten stuff.

  16. Mas, It is great to read about facts when something this dramatized happens. I just don’t understand why the media blows things out of proportion. Thanks for all your hard work.

  17. At last, a pro gun rights advocate that can present their side with civility and logic. Too bad the rest of them don’t seem to have that capability. Disclaimer: I don’t agree with your philosophy, but it is good to hear from someone on that side who is as articulate, intelligent, and polite as you. People on both sides should reflect on how you present your points.

  18. Funny, Mike T.: to me, it’s the often antis who sound uneducated, uninformed and unable to let reason win over emotions! The smart and educated ones come across as disingenuous and/or self-serving, and their agendas always show.
    If you spent more time around them you might find a disturbing (to you) number of articulate and reasonable people among gun folks.

  19. Mas, I am fairly new to the world of firearms. I was raised by a mother who detested guns and all that they stood for. I am married to a man who disarmed himself at my request due to the children in the home. They are now grown and gone. My husband has purchased a Ruger SR40 and I a Ruger SR9c and I am learning how mislead I have been all those years. We recently completed taking our training for our concealed weapons permits and are waiting on them to come in the mail. We were told about you in our CCW class by the instructor, Mr. Bob Denis. I appreciate the time you took to outline the trial of Mr Zimmerman. I read each of your entries and all of the connected links. This is the first time I can actually say I understand this trial and what really happened that night. I look forward to reading more from you!

  20. I’ve kind of been Mas’ loyal opposition throughout this series, so I’d like to offer a valedictory from my point of view. As Mas pointed out in the last installment, there are those of us liberals who see this case as a gun issue or a black/white issue. I don’t. I believe that Zimmerman was, indeed, legally innocent and as implied by that, that when all the facts are considered, that it is highly probable that Martin probably committed the first unlawful act which led to Zimmerman being forced to use deadly force in self-defense. I also do not believe that Zimmerman pursued Martin with the intention of engaging with him, much less confronting him; indeed, I believe that Martin initiated both the contact and the physical confrontation. I do not believe Zimmerman should have been prosecuted and that the prosecution was, more than likely, politically motivated. I do not believe there is any clear evidence that Zimmerman was racially motivated in doing anything that he did that night. I do not believe that Florida’s stand your ground laws played any direct legal part in the outcome of this case.

    If all that’s the case, then how am I the opposition? Zimmerman left his vehicle while armed and engaged in an unnecessary and unreasonably risky scouting mission in the face of a suspect who Zimmerman had not see do anything which was illegal but who, if you believe Zimmerman (and I don’t on this point, but we’ll take his word for it for this purpose), had exhibited possible aggression (circling Z’s vehicle) but no immediate actual threat towards Zimmerman at the time he left his vehicle (and and any possible immediate aggression towards Z had terminated by Martin’s departure). The police had been called and were on their way. The risk of a violent confrontation, though unintended by Z, wholly outweighed the risk of the loss of any benefit which could have been achieved by scouting for this particular suspect. Even if there had been some clear tie between this suspect and property crimes in this neighborhood — which there was not — by getting out of his vehicle, armed, Z was putting his own life, Martin’s life, and the lives of bystanders at risk. That was an unreasonable and foolish act, not a valorous one.

    Am I suggesting that Z should have left his gun in the car if he was going to scout Martin? No, that would have been equally stupid though somewhat more because of issues of his own safety than on public safety. What I am suggesting is that Z should have, under these circumstances at this time and place, not left his vehicle at all but especially should not have left it while armed. This finally brings me to Florida’s SYG and self-defense immunity laws. I have no proof of this, but I strongly believe that Z would not have left his vehicle were it not for his knowledge of and reliance upon the protection of those laws. He would not have left it unarmed because of the possible risks to his person and he would not have left it armed because he would have been afraid of the legal consequences of self-defense. And that would have been the right outcome in this case.

    I can see other circumstances which might have been more ambiguous: Had Z seen Martin coming out of someone’s broken window or running from a person lying bleeding on the ground, perhaps his armed scouting trip would have been justified and the confidence given by Florida’s laws justified as well. But in this case, and as a general principle for citizen patrollers (and yes, Z was not actually on patrol at this time), Z should have stayed in his truck and what actually happened when he did not was clearly and obviously within the scope of the possible risks he assumed when he chose not to do so. While I do not believe that he should have been prosecuted, neither am I outraged that it happened. That, too, was within the scope of those risks and, whether fair or unfair, by getting out of his truck Zimmerman sewed the wind and reaped the whirlwind.

    (Do I feel the same about Martin? Yes. While I can understand his frustration as a young black man being observed and scouted by a white man, there’s nothing in the record which suggests that he had any specific reason to believe that Zimmerman was an actual threat to his safety any more than Zimmerman had a specific reason to believe that Martin was an actual threat to Zimmerman’s safety or neighborhood property. I can also understand that young black people who have drawn the suspicious attention of white men can, in general, be at some risk of assault or worse and justifiably fearful. But none of that justifies a preemptive physical strike. The circumstances and history which have given rise to those fears and frustrations are both very real and unfair in the extreme, but that inequity and oppression must be addressed by addressing the circumstances, not by allowing individuals to strike out when not legally justified or diminishing their legal responsibility or legal risks if they choose to do so: equality under the law must work both ways. Martin also sewed the wind here by assaulting Zimmerman, and also reaped the whirlwind.)

    I believe that Zimmerman’s foolish act of getting out of his truck to scout Martin was the “but for” event which set the stage for this tragedy and that he was thus morally responsible for the events which foreseeably followed. That does not mean that Martin was not also morally responsible, nor does it justify his irresponsible and illegal act. The real villain was, in my opinion, Florida’s extreme self-defense laws which emboldened Zimmerman’s irresponsibility.

  21. Are we going over this all over again? Martin was not a suspect, but a subject until he committed his first illegal act by assaulting Zimmerman.

    Those who want to blame Zimmerman for getting involved are basically saying that he should’ve been in fear of someone on the street, in his own community, and kept a safe distance.

    Was he emboldened by the fact that he was allowed to carry a gun into that situation? Why would that matter? Saying that he reaped what he sowed is just blaming the victim and encouraging fear of the other, pure and simple, which is certainly NOT a liberal ideal! We, of all political stripes, should promote the opposite and just make sure that those attacked without cause are able to defend themselves, like, by pushing for more guns issued and carried. An armed society is a polite society. Martin acted like a punk because he didn’t suspect that his victim would be armed – his (final) mistake.

  22. For God’s sake (Dave-the-liberal) all this coulda-woulda-shoulda and victim-blaming is just SO tiresome. Being extremely liberal myself (when it comes to social issues such as abortion, gay marriage, health care, tree hugging, the usual) it exasperates me to NO END how ridiculously fearful my compatriots can be when it comes to guns. Why must liberals be such SHEEP when it comes to self defense? I mean really, “don’t get involved”? THAT’s your recommendation for a better society? Why do we liberals all seem to have a Daddy complex, thinking someone else will always save us? That bad things won’t happen to us good people? That guns “make” people violent-minded? That the cops will, (or even can) always save us? Please, please, please wake up, and realize that YOU bear the responsibility for yourself and the people around you, and that there are no guarantees that the world will cooperate, and that there is certainly NO SUCH THING as perfect security. One of the hallmarks of maturity is being able to handle a little ambiguity and uncertainty without falling apart.

    Sorry for the rant Mas, because what I really wanted to say was Thank You from the bottom of my heart for such a great, level-headed, well-written series.