Zimmerman Prosecution Predictably Collapsing


Zimmerman

To order David Horowitz and John Perazzo’s pamphlet, Black Skin Privilege, click here.

This article first appeared in PJMedia.  Andy McCarthy is the director of the Philadelphia branch of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The state of Florida’s politically driven decision to charge George Zimmerman with murder has resulted, as some of us predicted it would, in a pathetically weak case. It has taken only a few days of trial to collapse of its own weightlessness – undone, in fact, by the direct testimony of a prosecution witness, as Bryan Preston relates at the Tatler and Ed Morrissey details at Hot Air.

Over a year ago, I explained why this would happen:

When Trayvon Martin was first shot to death nearly two months ago [on February 26, 2012], state authorities sensibly opted not to charge George Zimmerman with murder. It wasn’t that they were looking to excuse wrongdoing. It was that the evidence was insufficient to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt.

Plainly, there was a lack of criminal intent: There was obviously no premeditation; and, alternatively, the facts do not remotely suggest that Zimmerman acted with a “depraved mind regardless of human life” (e.g., the savage indifference of a man who fires into a crowd, heedless of the consequences). To the contrary, the known facts indicate (a) Zimmerman’s concern that Martin was acting suspiciously (the depraved do not call the police, as Zimmerman did, before shooting), and (b) a struggle in which Zimmerman may well have been severely beaten and, in any event, would have a strong basis to persuade a jury that he shot in self-defense.

In advancing that argument, Zimmerman would be aided by Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, which gives the law-abiding latitude to use guns for protection….

The “Stand Your Ground” point was gravy as far as the baseless murder charge was concerned. If a prosecutor cannot prove the statutorily required intent element (mens rea) for murder, then the accused’s conduct cannot amount to murder, period. The accused only needs to rely on a legal defense of his conduct (such as self-defense) if the prosecution’s proof is sufficient to establish the offense (here, murder) in the first place. But “Stand Your Ground” would have been very relevant had Zimmerman been formally accused of an offense less serious than murder. Regarding that, as I observed when Zimmerman was initially charged:

Florida law makes causing the death of a person under the age of 18 manslaughter, provided there has been “culpable negligence.” It also criminalizes as manslaughter the “unnecessary killing” of a person in order to resist or prevent that person’s violation of law (e.g., the use of lethal force to repel a clearly non-lethal threat). Neither of these charges would [be] a slam-dunk; indeed, they’d be losers if Zimmerman shot because he was justifiably in fear of his life.

Despite the palpable lack of evidence that Zimmerman had the required intent to commit murder, the state bowed to pressure from the racial grievance industry (led by Huckster-in-Chief Al Sharpton), shamefully aided and abetted by the most politicized, race-obsessed Justice Department in American history. Lest we forget, it was Attorney General Eric Holder’s collaboration with Sharpton and threat to trump up a federal civil rights prosecution that induced state officials in Florida to reconsider the initial decision not to charge Zimmerman.

It’s easy for a corrupt process to produce criminal charges. It is quite something else to prove them. To try to fill the gaping intent hole in its case, the Zimmerman prosecution has transferred the hobgoblin of racism from the headlines into the courtroom. Indeed, it did not even wait for the trial to do that; the prosecutor injected racism directly into the charging documents.

As I noted at the time, the affidavit in “support” of the murder charge employed the explosive term “profiling” to describe Zimmerman’s suspicion of Martin. That word has no place in a charging instrument: It was transparent code to imply, in the absence of any evidence, that Zimmerman is a bigot who assumed Martin was up to no good just because he was black.

“Profiling” is an ambiguous term. Generally speaking, it is a perfectly appropriate, commonsense practice – a marshaling of various characteristics and behaviors typically found in kinds of criminal conduct. It is routinely used by police to avoid hassling innocent people. Like all sound police practices, it can be abused – a bad cop can invidiously home in on one characteristic (like race, religious belief, political stance) and groundlessly associate it with criminality. The latter is rare, but it is unfortunately what the racial grievance industry, echoed by the media, has conditioned the public to think of when the term “profiling” is used. It is this slanderous connotation of “profiling” that the prosecution wants people (especially juror-people) to associate with Zimmerman. Rather than as a legal term, the charging documents use “profiling” as an atmospheric – since prosecutors had neither the evidence to prove racism nor the courage to be forthright about what they were doing.

It would be bad enough to do this in a case where attitudes about race were pertinent – say, a prosecution for violating someone’s civil rights. But it is even more shameful to do it in a case where attitudes about race are legally irrelevant. However much the media may be fascinated by racial dynamics, racism or the lack of it should have no bearing on a prosecution for what the law calls “depraved indifference” murder (second-degree murder in Florida).

Apropos of that, Powerline’s John Hinderaker has had an interesting exchange with Legal Insurrection’s Andrew Branca. Putting aside the lack of evidence that Zimmerman is a racist, John forcefully argues that, in the context of this homicide prosecution, his purported racism is “utterly beside the point.” The crux of the case, instead, is a simple matter of whether Zimmerman’s admitted shooting of Martin was in legitimate self-defense. Mr. Branca counters that the prosecution is using racism (or at least the specter of racism) to substitute for its dearth of evidence on the required mental element – namely, that Zimmerman acted with a “depraved mind.”

Mr. Branca is quite right that this is what the prosecution is trying to pull. He goes off the rails, though, in suggesting that this is a viable theory. With due respect, I think his explanation of the statutory term “depraved mind” is wrong. In part, he is conflating two separate mens rea concepts that arise in murder cases: depravity and premeditation.

After correctly observing that “Murder involves premeditation to kill or, in Florida, a ‘depraved mind’,” Mr. Branca elaborates (italics are mine):

In order to prove the second degree murder charge the State brought against Zimmerman they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted with a depraved mind. To get to a depraved mind they need to show some kind of hatred or ill-will. In most murder 2 cases the people know each other and have a long history of animus, which is the source of the “depraved mind”. Here Martin and Zimmerman did not know each other, so the State is forced to pursue some more generalized hatred – such as racism.

I disagree. Generalized hatred has nothing to do with “depraved mind” murder. In such cases, we are not talking about intent driven by an attitude specifically related to the victim, triggered by long-held animus. We are talking, instead, about something almost diametrically opposite: a perverse lack of regard for human life – not the victim’s human life but all human life.

Explaining this concept (with reference to New York state law) in the 2012 case of Gutierrez v. Smith, the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals instructs (my italics):

The archetypal depraved indifference murder … would resemble “shooting into a crowd, placing a time bomb in a public place, or opening the door of the lions’ cage in the zoo.”  By contrast, … a one-on-one shooting or knifing (or similar killing) can almost never qualify as depraved indifference murder.

Zimmerman’s killing of Martin is a one-on-one shooting. Now, to be sure, the court did not say that one-on-one killings can never qualify as “depraved indifference” murders. But it is exceedingly rare. When it does occur, the focus is not on the subjective intent of the killer but the objective recklessness of the killing – e.g., a mother who beats her infant to death (uncommon brutality combined with a particularly vulnerable victim), or perhaps a game of Russian Roulette (or “Polish roulette” as it was called in a 1989 New York case – People v. Roe – in which the accused loaded a gun with both real and dummy bullets, pointed the gun at the victim, and callously fired).

With due respect to Mr. Branca, when the murderer knows his victim and there is a long history of animus, we are usually talking about premeditated murder. The animus tends to prove that the decision to kill was made before the act that caused death. In Florida, that is first-degree murder, which is not charged in the Zimmerman case.

Depraved mind murder, to the contrary, involves a state of mind evincing no regard for human life. Far from a feeling of hatred or ill-will toward the victim, what makes the killing depraved is the perverse lack of feeling for the victim (i.e., there is no recognition of the victim’s humanity). Having a motive is indicative of acting with deliberation, not recklessness or indifference. In a depraved mind case, motive is superfluous because what establishes the mens rea is the objective barbarity of the act itself, not some fuzzy “generalized hatred” that may have been crawling around the killer’s brain.

It is virtually inconceivable that a situation involving self-defense on the killer’s part will fit a “depraved mind” charge. And I am not limiting myself to situations when the self-defense claim is legally convincing. I am saying that in any one-on-one scenario where self-defense is worth raising, it is nigh inconceivable that a “depraved mind” murder has occurred. To be more concrete, let’s say we are in a self-defense situation where the claim is legally insufficient: for example, the use of lethal force was not a proportionate response to the threat; or perhaps the killer provoked the altercation that eventually led to his use of lethal force. In such circumstances, we can reject the self-defense claim but still recognize that the killing was not “depraved.” The degree of inhumanity required to make a killing “depraved” is not going to be found in circumstances where a person is defending himself, even if that defense is – as a matter of law – excessive.

There is thus a chain of abuses that makes the Zimmerman prosecution a disgrace. There is no evidence that Zimmerman is a racist. Racism cannot be inferred from invocations of “profiling” – which tell us more about the prosecutors than about Zimmerman. The imagined “profiling” cannot be inflated into a “generalized hatred.” Even if there were a generalized hatred, it cannot substitute for proof of the required mental element of depraved indifference to human life – racism is a noxious attitude, but there are people who are mildly racist; no one is mildly depraved.

It is abundantly clear that the murder of Trayvon Martin is not a case of second-degree murder, a charge that carries a possible life sentence and a minimum of 25 years’ imprisonment (because a firearm was used). Yet, the special prosecutor brought the charge anyway. Plainly, she hoped Zimmerman would be either railroaded in a trial that substituted incitement for proof, or intimidated into pleading guilty to a lesser charge.

This case does not belong in a criminal court. That it has gotten this far is a sad triumph of demagoguery over due process.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

  • American1969

    If Zimmerman is acquitted, he should then file a class action lawsuit against the New Black Panther Party as well as Al Sharpton and anyone else that has issued threats. He should sue the DOJ too.
    The ones screaming the loudest about this are the racists.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Zimmerman is a single individual as plaintiff. No need for class action that I can see.

      • tagalog

        No, there’s no basis for a class action lawsuit.

    • jakespoon

      He would get no joy, Sharpton wouldn’t pay,and the NBPP doesn’t have that much on their EBT cards.

      • montbrun

        Which brings me to ask, did rabble rouser Al Sharpton pay the
        fine he was sentenced to in the case of the black girl he
        accused N. York police of having kidnapped and who later on confessed to have been making out with her boyfriend…????
        I remember it because I sent some money for the fund to
        get the N.Y detective off the hook and sue the pants off Al
        Sharpton…
        Did he threaten with civil unrest if Zimmerman is acquitted.??
        The prosecution railroading attempts surely suggests it…!!!!!!

        • adamjw2

          Yes, he did pay it, if I recall correctly

          • Isabel Herron

            as Jean explained I am in shock that a single mom able to profit $8776 in four weeks on the internet. did you look at this web link w­w­w.K­E­P­2.c­o­m

          • montbrun

            Sorry but it is my understanding that he never did pay it

          • tagalog

            Al Sharpton did not pay it, that’s correct.

            A group led by New York City politico Percy Sutton and Johnny Cochran of O.J. fame paid off the Sharpton judgment. The New York Times reported it at

            http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/15/nyregion/sharpton-s-debt-in-brawley-defamation-is-paid-by-supporters.html

          • Bob Bartlett

            Good research. Thanks!

        • tagalog

          Sharpton didn’t pay it, but he had some allies who did.

      • ziggy zoggy

        Hilarious but sickeningly true.

    • John Davidson

      Suing Liberals is senseless. They never pay their bills.

    • Trappedincalifornia

      Perhaps Zimmerman should sue NBC for cutting the audio tape to make him sound like a racist. Then he should sue CNN for releasing his Social Security # on national TV. Another network doctored his picture to make him look lighter & he should sue them too. If Zimmerman wins these suits he might end up owning CNN and/or NBC and he can shut down both these networks so they can’t railroad anyone else in the future lie they did him. These witch hunts powered by corrupt media have to stop and this is a great way to stop them. Sue until they are bankrupt!

    • tagalog

      There’s a civil lawsuit with a long pedigree in the Anglo-Saxon system of justice called malicious prosecution, which involves the state initiating a criminal case against a person out of ill will. I don’t have any experience with such a lawsuit, but a superficial look seems to say it might fly. I hope if Zimmerman takes such a course, that he’s successful and that he is able to retire for life on the money damages.

      • NAHALKIDES

        I read this after already posting on the subject. Malicious prosecution is tough to win because you have to prove the prosecutor’s state of mind.

    • silverpie

      Class action is for multiple plaintiffs. This is one plaintiff, multiple defendants. A case like that is simply filed as an ordinary suit.

    • NAHALKIDES

      Unfortunately, he probably can’t sue Sharpton or the NBB. I’d like to see a malicious prosecution suit against Angela Corey, but such suits are very difficult to win – ironically, because you have to prove the prosecutor’s state of mind, just as the prosecutor has to prove Zimmerman’s state of mind. I don’t believe Mike Nifong was ever sued for malicious prosecution in the Duke LaCrosse case, even though his conduct was so outrageous he was eventually disbarred.

      • tagalog

        The fact that the prosecutor wrote “profiling” into the charge against Zimmerman suggests her state of mind and creates an inference of something other than a disinterested pursuit of justice.

  • OfficialPro

    When the shooting of Trayvon Martin first happened, a myriad of Internet Leftists jumped on the “ARREST GEORGE ZIMMERMAN WTF U RACISTS Y U NO ARREST HIM ALREADY” bandwagon. They all assumed it was a clear, open-and-shut case of Whitey Shoots Innocent Black Kid Because He Hates Black People Or Something. All those idiots who rushed to judgment are going to look like fools now, but most of them will insulate themselves with their own particular brand of crazy non-logic and thus never learn.

    And they told anyone that wanted to actually, you know, WAIT to see what the facts of the case were before making up their mind about who did what, that they were racist. How dare they believe the Hispanic Guy over the Dead Black Guy! Even if they hadn’t actually taken a side, if they hadn’t immediately jumped to Trayvon Martin’s side…OMG RACIST! [/sarcasm]

    • asa2222

      Of course it will have no effect on them if Zimmerman is acquitted. First, the shooting was like a whole year ago. Second, the legacy media won’t go anywhere near it. Oh and the media term for Zimmerman is “white Hispanic,” lol..

    • Lover of justice

      OMG what an idiot!

  • DebRollin

    Many people have said Trayvon became the aggressor, when he came up behind Zimmerman and asked, “Do you have a problem?” Zimmerman said, “No I don’t.” Well, You have one now, said Trayvon and hit Zimmerman in the nose and broke his nose, then pushed him on the ground and started pounding his head on the concrete. This is a case of self-defense, when the police didn’t make it to the scene for awhile, and no one would help Zimmerman, he had to defend his life. Martin should have just walked away, he would still be alive today.

    • montbrun

      Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe important to keep in mind that to the African American strata who carries always a chip on its shoulder,
      the fact that having one of them in the White House and his actions in
      confrontations between police and black people, leads them to believe
      they can get away with murder…..

      • DebRollin

        Trayvon decided he was on a vendetta because Zimmerman had observed him in the neighborhood…what was he really up to. The whole scene appears a bit too hostile, punching Zimmerman in the nose, just because Zimmerman was watching him, that is extreme behavior!

        • Sheik Yerbouti

          Unfortunately this is normal for blacks in the US. It doesn’t take much more than aq simple disagreement to toss them into an uncontrolled rage. I’m sure I’ll be called a racist for saying this, but I can guarantee you my skin is thick enough to endure quite a bit of name calling before I get angry enough to react physically. For blacks this is absolutely not the case. For them it’s strike first, ask no questions, and run away laughing. If Zimmerman walks, black on white crime will explode. Not black on Hispanic crime mind you. They don’t fight against people who might actually fight back. So they go exclusively after lone, weak whites.

          • tagalog

            They respond with a rage and physical confrontation first because they know that nearly every time the white person with whom they’re dealing will back down immediately.

          • Lover of justice

            yeah, right. have you ever heard of stereotyping, tagalog? Or that don’t do that where you come from near Manila?

          • defcon 4

            I’ve dealt w/at-risk black youth, some of whom were already in gangs. Most of ‘em were good kids (even some of the gangbangers) at least WRT me. I only had two instances when I felt threatened (by black gangbangers) and it never progressed beyond veiled threats (but I was in pretty good shape back then).

          • Lover of justice

            wow defcon, wtf are you doing here?

          • Lover of justice

            You are a racist and an idiot.

          • Sheik Yerbouti

            And you’re a childish fool who clearly has little experience with black Americans.

          • Lover of justice

            I am a Black American and you are literally talking out of your back end.

          • Sheik Yerbouti

            Sure I am, suuurrreeee. Blacks have a terrible reputation for poor impulse control and over-the-top violent reactions to the simplest of circumstances. If that’s not you, fine. It only means you’re one of the rare ones. MOST of the rest are hard core racists who hate anyone with white skin. But not you. You just LOVE white people don’t you?

          • MLCBLOG

            Give it a rest. We CAN all just get along!! Let’s forget about skin color once in a while.

        • tagalog

          Early on in the Zimmerman-Martin case, it came out that Zimmerman notified 911 that Martin was wandering around the complex looking into windows. That has been lost over the months, but I remember it being reported at the beginning of this story.

          • DebRollin

            There is alot of information from the Zimmerman team that prove he was observing the neighborhood and what Trayvon was doing, BUT he was not the one who acted in violence until threatened and nose broken.

          • Lover of justice

            you were not there. Trayvon’s father lived in the complex and he was coming back from buying candy at the store. Really? You are an ignoramus.

          • DebRollin

            YOU WERE NOT THERE EITHER, SO DON’T PRETEND! We all know how the left loves to put out propaganda! The Medical examiner said the position of Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman, by the bullet hole in the hoodie, Zimmerman was getting his head pounded on the Concrete. Anyone would fight back to defend themselves! Zimmerman was the one who received the broken nose, and scalp abrasions. If Trayvon had good sense, he would have called the police and got a patrol car to come to the scene…NO…HE CHOSE TO TAKE MATTERS INTO HIS OWN HANDS. HE WAS ON A VENDETTA TO GET THIS HISPANIC WHO WAS ON A NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH, AND IT ENDED BADLY! Trayvon’s blood was full of marijuana, another factor that shows he was into other things besides Skittles! Don’t try to intimidate those of us who have the Facts!

          • Lover of justice

            Oh really? Those are FACTS? OMG Why do you people even bother to have a discussion when you lack complete and utter logic.

            1) The defense PAID the ME and the pathologist money, so, of course, they are going to side with the killer
            2) the amount of marijuana in his blood and organs does not indicate a heavy user
            3) Trayvon was being stalked while he came from the store to his father’s condo and he was being racially profiled by a man with gun
            4) Zimmerman was told not to follow Trayvon and Zimmerman did not tell police during the 911 call before the shooting that he had a loaded gun or was supposedly a neighborhood watch person
            5) and most importantly, the voice experts that said it was Trayvon’s voice screaming for help were not allowed to be brought into evidence.
            It was definitely NOT George Zimmerman’s voice IMHO.As far as I am concerned George Zimmerman self-inflicted those wounds to get away with murder. He had an itchy trigger finger and wanted to be a hero, instead, he has only brought shame to America

          • DebRollin

            You’re wasting your time on trying to propagandize this case….It was self defense! Anyone who was being attacked would have reacted in self-defense with whatever weapon they had. I made my decision on the facts not your stupid propaganda so go work on some useful idiots, Mr Occupy Wallstreet! And why do you continue to try to brainwash people you have no chance of convincing? Many of us are too smart for you lies and deception! Martin was the aggressor, all testimony confirms it as well as the marijuana in Trayvon’s system!

          • Lover of justice

            It is the wing nuts like you who are bringing down this country. Get a grip. You are a fossil.

          • MLCBLOG

            You are incorrect on several points.

          • Lover of justice

            get a grip and listen to the 911 call yourself. Zimmerman was definitely profiling and sounds like a wanna be cop.

          • DebRollin

            Take a Hike…You do not control me or anyone else on this website…Learn it and get it in your pea Brain…they are checking out all you wallstreet types for your intimidation tactics..you are not going to control anyone…Got it!

          • Lover of justice

            Whoa! Are you threatening me?

          • DebRollin

            You don’t control what we think or how we make our decisions….so quit pushing your propaganda on those who do not conform to your way thinking!

          • Lover of justice

            It must feel really good to not only bully me, but to pretend that it doesn’t matter that a white borderline retarded man shot and killed an unarmed minor that he did not know and who lived with family in that complex even after police told him not to follow him. Only in America do the wing nuts think they control the courts. One day, maybe not today, but one day the people will get justice. I am a lover of justice. Trayvon Martin R.I.P. •http://youtu.be/M-Utk_g7y4A

    • tagalog

      The trial testimony goes farther than that. The transcript of Zimmerman’s police questioning says that Martin placed his hand over Zimmerman’s nose and mouth, depriving him of the ability to breathe and said, “You’re going to die.” A threat of death coupled with the apparent ability to carry out the threat imminently, justifying the use of deadly force for defense of self with or without the Stand Your Ground law. Even if Zimmerman is found to have initiated the contact with Martin, the acts of Martin in trying to choke Zimmerman to death as he threatened him with that very thing is an escalation of the physical confrontation that justifies the use of deadly force.

      • DebRollin

        Yes, not only was Trayvon banging Zimmerman’s head on the concrete, he was trying to block out any cries for help by covering his mouth! Zimmerman was justified in feeling that Martin was a threat to his life!

  • John Davidson

    The media has now become our justice system. They have reduced our constitution to mere comic book status.

    • Lover of justice

      no that would be the lawyers and the judges.

      • tagalog

        Only half of them. The other half is doing what the rest of us want them to do.

    • tagalog

      When it comes to the media and the justice system, the media is a joke. They don’t know what they’re talking about.

  • Mohammad Izzaterd

    The taxpayers of Florida should be furious at the State. What a waste of money this trial will be. Zimmerman is acquitted, and the finger pointing begins. The state had a lousy case from the start. They knew it, every damn one of them that participated in creating this prosecution, and no one said a word. No one requested to be reassigned off the case because they believed there was no case there. They just all went along, building the case out of thin air. Now that it is falling apart, watch the cockroaches scatter.

    • Lover of justice

      There is a case. Get over yourself.

  • ElizabethMC

    When a case has no merit and is brought purely as a result of public pressure, you won’t be able to produce witnesses for the prosecution. This was inevitable.

    • tagalog

      Well, not exactly. In the Moscow show trials during the 1937-1939 Great Terror, the state was able to produce the defendants as witnesses against themselves. In some cases, they didn’t even have to torture them to get them to tell their self-damning stories; they were so ideological bound to the concept that the Communist state is on the leading edge of history and doesn’t make mistakes, that they agreed to be the main instruments in their own destruction.

      • NAHALKIDES

        Luckily, Obama and Holder haven’t corrupted the justice system to quite that extend just yet although they would if they could. Zimmerman should be acquitted, and he will be.

  • The Dead Critic

    Common sense says this. Why did he have a gun? Why was he carrying the gun at the time of the shooting? Why did he point the gun, and shoot it? Worst case scenario, he’s guilty of manslaughter. This looks more like a case of an individual who may have had the best intentions, but took the law into his own hands, and another persons life too.

    • Sheik Yerbouti

      Or it was a guy who already knew about violent encounters his neighbors had with black non-residents. His neighborhood was being preyed upon. What should have have had? A slingshot? Mace? Harsh language?

      • The Dead Critic

        Frank Zappa…my point when I stated clearly…”but took the law into his own hands..”

        • tagalog

          He took the law into his own hands because law comes from the people, and because when seconds counted, the cops were minutes away.

          • The Dead Critic

            LOL, what? Sooo what you’re promoting is that everyone carry a gun for those moments when you feel suddenly threatened. Lunacy if that’s they way you think…

          • tagalog

            No, I promote the idea that law comes from the people, and the cops are not always conveniently available when you are being seriously threatened. YOU decide for yourself whether you carry a gun or not, hopefully after considering carefully the potential consequences.

          • Well Done

            No, dead one, lunacy is if you think people have a right to assault and threaten to kill and their victim isn’t allowed to shoot. You’re trolling, or a moron.

        • Sheik Yerbouti

          Because when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. This is the reality of the situation. Zimmerman was indeed taking the law into his own hands as well as the hands of the other people involved with the neighborhood watch. That’s how it works. We have one where I live and since I work all kinds of odd hours I routinely walk the neighborhood down. And yes, I carry a pistol. Why? Because we have more coyotes than criminals. But either one that jumps on me is catching lead. Just think of what would have happened if Zimmerman lost consciousness. Trayvon would have had Zimmerman’s wallet AND his gun. What would happen next? I can think of all kinds of things.

      • tanstaafl

        Now if he had a sharp retort……

    • asa2222

      “Worst case scenario, he’s guilty of manslaughter.” — CORRECT, so why was he charged with murder?

    • NAHALKIDES

      You’re badly mistaken. People do have the right to carry guns, although not every state recognizes this, and Zimmerman’s carrying a gun is completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not the shooting was justified. He would only have been “taking the law into his own hands” if he had tried to detail or arrest Martin. He had every right to approach Martin and ask him questions (of course Martin did not have to answer them).

      The only way Zimmerman is guilty of anything here is if he started the fight, and there’s no indication he did. Assuming Martin started the fight, there is ample evidence that Zimmerman could reasonably have been in fear of death or great bodily injury, and that’s sufficient to justify his use of lethal force.

      • The Dead Critic

        This incident has the look of a classic case of someone playing cop, and then latter claiming he was in danger. Perfect defense claim, and obviously the right one if you want to get off. IF the prosecution can prove he acted reckless (should have called the police and waited to fill out a witness statement)then they can charge him accordingly. That was only point.

        • tagalog

          You know what? There’s no law against playing cop anymore than there’s a law against pretending to be revolutionary with one’s Occupy Wall Street buddies. Just don’t perform an act of violence, or, like George Zimmerman, you may find your feet being held uncomfortably close to the fire. Zimmerman will beat this case, I agree with HAHALKIDES about that, but not until he’s had several months or a year or two of anxiety and high blood pressure.

        • momsaid

          After multiple break-ins and a home invasion in the neighborhood, Watch captain encouraged by Police to get a CCW permit; suspicious person looking in at windows in the dark and rain; calling the police to report said person; exiting vehicle to establish location; confronted on the way back to vehicle (opposite direction of the path the ‘poor scared choir boy’ took to get to his father’s girlfriend’s house); pummeled into the sidewalk (multiple contusions/abrasions/blood-lettings); screamed for over a minute for help; threatened with death; managed to get to the gun first; stopped the attack. Where, in all of this, do you find any evidence of Zimmerman ‘Playing Cop’?

          There is evidence aplenty to confirm all of his claims…none to support the prosecution’s.

        • Juan Motie

          Are you trying to claim Zimmerman did not call the police? Or are you saying Zimmerman shot poor innocent little travon even after the police operator told Zimmerman the patrol officer(s) were on the way? What, you feel Zimmerman wanted to be arrested and jailed just for the momentary pleasure of shooting poor innocent little travon?

        • MLCBLOG

          but that is not what happened.

    • CowboyUp

      Zimmerman had and carried a gun to defend himself against unlawful violence. He pointed the gun and shot it because he was assaulted, beaten to the ground, pinned there, beaten further, then threatened with death. Martin took the law into his own hands when he initiated the use of force against Zimmerman, who merely defended himself.

    • Well Done

      Common sense says this: He had a gun because he felt like it. He was carrying because he is allowed to. He pointed and shot at a guy who was asaulting him and vowing to kill him. You’re a moron, dead critic.

  • ziggy zoggy

    Zimmerman is innocent. What people refuse to acknowledge is that he can lose his freedom and his life over a crime he didn’t commit.
    This isn’t a news story. this is a life or death situation involving a real human being. DON’T FORGET THAT.

    • Lover of justice

      really? wow. Zimmerman is not only guilty, deranged, but amazingly stupid. Oh, that’s right, so are most of you here!

      • MLCBLOG

        take a breath

  • tanstaafl

    The left believes in show trials.

    • Lover of justice

      sorry. the left believes in justice.

      • MLCBLOG

        but they have a weird and deranged definition of justice. I know, I used to be the biggest one of them…

  • Rostis

    I think that this article is an excellent gift to all the true friends of America for her Independence Day. But those, who join the well-known early verdict “Trayvon Martin could be my son”, would probably wait for the trial’s result to celebrate the autumn red date: another anniversary of the accursed “Great October Revolution”. I cross my fingers in hope that the free spirit of the 4-th of July will overcome the evil breath of the 7-th of November, but anyway – my heartiest congratulations with this wonderful summer day! I know, I know, that probably it’s the worst of the worst times in the history of your country – but nevertheless the spirit of the day remains as pure and as invincible, as, say, the spirit of Christmas: I remember how we secretly celebrated it in the very midst of Stalin’s ugly repressions – and believe me, I can’t say that I was any less happier then, than now, during the post-USSR free Christmas celebrations! No, the great symbols of our trust to Christ, to Freedom, to Resistance are always evergreen and always helpful – in spite of any evil Stalins, Hitlers or Obamas who may surround us in this or that particular time. Hence – three cheers for the Day! Rostislav, Saint-Petersburg, Russia.

  • mtnhikerdude

    This case is all about race . When you have the president weighing in on it pre the facts and the MSM using Martin’s baby pictures to sway public opinion ,Hollywood elitists wearing hoodies and Trayvon T-Shirts , justice takes a hike. Zimmerman’s crime was his name which the MSM assumed was “Cracker” implicated .
    If convicted he will be murdered in prison. If acquitted ,riots will ensue and he may eventually be murdered.
    Anti racism is the new racism.

  • NAHALKIDES

    Interesting explanation by McCarthy, filling a void left by the mainstream media. The next question to be asked is this: why aren’t the media investigating Angela Corey and her motivations in bringing this case?

    • tagalog

      It will be interesting to see how the accusation that appears in the charging documents against Zimmerman, that say he “profiled” Trayvon Martin (in the face of no evidence whatsoever for that claim), will unfold. Such an accusation may give Zimmerman and his civil attorneys some actionable insight into the state of mind of the prosecutor.

  • musterion

    As the state case continues to fall apart, any bets that a civil case will be filed, or some sort of federal civil rights case will be filed against Zimmerman?

    • steve b

      WHAT, ONE MINORITY VIOLATING THE RIGHTS OF ANOTHER MINORITY? I THOUGHT ONLY WHITE PEOPLE COULD DO THAT.

      • musterion

        Remember, he’s a “White Hispanic” (whatever that means).

  • dizzyizzy

    We are so afflicted with groupiness and racialist thinking, often emanating from the Left broadly defined. I tried to sort them out here: http://clarespark.com/2013/07/02/groupiness-group-think-and-race/. “Groupiness, group-think, and “race.”

  • HiPlainsDrifter

    To avoid riots, Zimmerman will be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter, sentenced to prison, then quietly released…

    • MLCBLOG

      so much for crystal balls.

  • Legatus legionis

    Lets hope the State has to pay Mr. Zimmerman’s attorney fees. There should be a crime against prosecutors who press false charges. The only racist I see in this debacle are Eric Holder, Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton, Obama, and the pathetic racist Nation of Islam

  • Melinda Craig

    Black people should be thankful that white people do not have the major media outlets putting black on white crimes on the front page it would take several front pages to do it. this is all about money and the thirst for blacks to have a reason to hate whites even though zimmerman is hispanic