Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Zimmerman Case Roundup

Sebastian really hits the nail on the circus that has spawned from the Zimmerman shooting of Martin. The Left spins it, the right refutes, but the reality is that most of the contention seems intended on increasing racial division, rather than focus on the real aspects of the tragedy.

Getting tired of this case yet? I sure am. But it's all that's in the media, and it's the best shot our opponents have had to return to relevance in years. Unfortunately for them, I think this case jumped the shark. Miguel notes the slowly disappearing political memes. Over at Just One Minute, it turns out the audio forensics expert offered up by the media is, in fact, no such thing. Turns out plenty of other experts agree that the comparison just isn't valid. I'm not surprised to hear this, because the story of the audio analysis set off my bullshit alarm as soon as I read it, but not being an expert in the field, I was reluctant to come out guns blazing on it.

Also, ABC now has an "enhanced" video that shows Zimmerman's injuries, which is several lacerations to the back of the head. I don't think the guy needs to be bleeding out all over the place. I've had my bell rung hard enough in my life without drawing blood to know you can still get a concussion without cutting the scalp. Also in that article:

In a letter to U.S. Department of Justice officials, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton allege that State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met with the Sanford police chief within hours of the teen's death and that together they overruled a detective's recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. The letter claims a lead investigator filed an affidavit stating that he didn't find Zimmerman's story credible.

Wolfinger called the allegations "lies" and said no meeting took place.

"I'm outraged by the outright lies contained in the letter," Wolfinger said in a statement. "I encourage the Justice Department to investigate and document that no such meeting or communication occurred."

It's been rather amazing how much of what the family has said in public have turned out to be outright fabrications. The family has very little credibility left with me at this point, especially since I was originally quite sympathetic to the idea of taking the case to a grand jury to evaluate the evidence. I still think that's the right thing to do in this case, but my sympathy for the family diminishes with every fabrication. I tend to give grieving families the benefit of doubt, but I don't like being outright lied to. The lawyer over at Crayfisher notes:

On another topic, I have seen a number of posts bemoaning how the "wingnuts" are smearing Tayvon Martin and defending his killer. According to these people anyone who casts doubt on Zimmerman's guilt must be a wingnut.

Since when is defending accused criminals a wingnut activity?

This has been driving me bonkers too, that the left has essentially taken the position that Zimmerman is guilty before his case has even gone before a jury. I think blowhards like Sharpton would be happy to lynch Zimmerman in the media if it means Sharpton gets to be relevant again. I believe the reason the NAACP has been, comparatively speaking, the voice of reason here is they probably understand that if this case blows up in a big way, it'll hurt Obama. Rightly or wrongly, I think a lot of Americans viewed Obama as an opportunity to move beyond the politics of race. This case is not only bringing that back to the forefront, it has the potential to set race relations back decades. For people like Sharpton, that translates into increased relevance, but I don't think that's a good thing for this country.


http://www.pagunblog.com/2012/04/03/zimmerman-case-roundup/

And Sharpton is a legacy, a throwback to a time of racial division, but seems inclined to promote the difference rather than attempt to focus on reality. His actions are in fact racist, by focusing on the skin color rather than the situation.

No comments:

Post a Comment