Tuesday, July 16, 2013


The Unnecessary Trial of George Zimmerman

The Case of Zimmerman versus Martin

When all of the extraneous matters have been explored, this case turns on a very few considerations of the Florida law. In that body of law, the right of self-defense is allowed under specific circumstances. These circumstances were met by Zimmerman. In his deposition before trial, he claimed he shot Martin in self-defense because Martin was pummeling him and beating his head on the concrete and he felt threatened for his life. One witness corroborated this fact and stated that he witnessed Martin sitting astride Zimmerman and beating him. Subsequent medical attention and photography showed evidence of contusions to the back of Zimmerman’s head, and a nose injury. There were no other credible witnesses to the shooting of Martin by Zimmerman. The law does not require that Zimmerman suffered injuries at all, but only requires that Zimmerman’s state of mind was that at that specific time he felt threatened for his life.

The police did not arrest Zimmerman because they decided that it was a case of self-defense, and hence his arrest was not necessary. All of the press hoopla, conniving, pressuring, forcing action by the law, avoiding an empanelled grand jury, and moaning since that time has merely resulted in a jury confirming the decision the police made a year or so ago at an enormous cost.

Virtually every legal authority in the nation agreed with the decision of the police and the jury that Zimmerman was not guilty by virtue of self-defense, although several lawyers waffled primarily for their own aggrandizement or that of the progressive left, which wanted a conviction regardless of the facts and law.

This was a trial motivated by leftist dogma and racial thinking, when race didn’t enter into the situation at all.



Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?