Sunday, May 20, 2012

Zimmerman murder case looks like long shot

Unless Angela Corey has something she's not telling us, her second-degree-murder case against George Zimmerman is looking more and more like a long shot.  The special prosecutor assigned to investigate the death of Trayvon Martin released hundreds of pages of evidence last week.

But any expectation of a bombshell to explain her reason for filing a murder charge — which comes with a much higher burden of proof than a manslaughter charge — was short-lived.

The documents failed to answer the case's biggest questions: Who started the fight between Zimmerman and Trayvon? And whose voice was heard screaming for help on a 911 call?

None of the witnesses saw the entire confrontation between the two, or who threw the first punch.

The evidence does, however, support Zimmerman's claim that he was assaulted by Trayvon — whether Zimmerman started it or not.

Photos of Zimmerman's bloodied head and swollen nose show he was injured.  On the other hand, Trayvon's autopsy report showed no sign of bruising or other injuries that would indicate he was punched by the Neighborhood Watch leader.

That only further serves to bolster Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon went after him and that he shot Trayvon in self-defense.

It can't be good for Corey when her discovery documents appear to strengthen the defendant's case more than her own.

The best piece of evidence for the prosecutor is something we already knew but was explicitly stated in a Sanford police report: Trayvon's death was "ultimately avoidable" if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle and waited for law enforcement to arrive.

Police, who recommended Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter, also affirmed, "There is no indication that Trayvon Martin was involved in any criminal activity at the time of the encounter."

But getting out of your vehicle isn't a crime. Neither is following someone on foot.

More here

Breyer Push For More Protection Illustrates Elite Double Standard

 An early May robbery at the Washington, D.C. home of Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer was the second time the jurist has been victimized since February, The Washington Post reported Thursday. While no one was home in this latest incident, the earlier one involved the jurist and his wife being confronted by a machete-wielding home invader at their Caribbean vacation house.

“The robbery comes a month after Congress allocated nearly $1 million to hire 12 new Supreme Court police officers, according to The Hill,” Fox News related in a follow-up report. “Breyer had been among the group pushing for that greater protection after U.S. District Judge John Roll was among six people killed in a gunman’s rampage at a Tucson shopping mall last year…”

That Breyer demands armed police protection provided at taxpayer expense illustrates no small amount of elitist hypocrisy considering his dissent in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case, in which the Supreme Court majority held the Second Amendment protects the right of individuals in federal enclaves to possess a firearm in the home for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense.

“We must decide whether a District of Columbia law that prohibits the possession of handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment,” Breyer wrote in an opinion shared by Justices Souter and Ginsberg. “The majority, relying upon its view that the Second Amendment seeks to protect a right of personal self-defense, holds that this law violates that Amendment. In my view, it does not.”

Breyer dissented again in the Chicago v. McDonald case. Joined by Justice Sotomayor and again by Justice Ginsburg, Breyer rejected the application of the Second Amendment to the individual states.

More here

No comments: