Trayvon Martin

Was George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin Screaming Before the Gunshot?


Video via The Orlando Sentinel

Listening to the the screams in the background of a 911 call placed during the fight that ended in Trayvon Martin's death, I find it hard to believe that anyone can be sure who was the source of those muffled and barely decipherable sounds: Martin or George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed him. But based purely on the testimony presented during Zimmerman's murder trial, the evidence favors his claim that he was the one crying for help immediately before the gunshot. On Friday two witnesses—Zimmerman's mother and uncle—said they recognized the defendant's voice in the recording of the call, and today four more witnesses—all friends of Zimmerman—said the same thing. None expressed any doubt under cross-examination.

By comparison, while Martin's mother expressed equal certainty during her testimony on Friday that the voice was her son's, two other prosecution witnesses seemed less sure. Martin's older brother claimed on the stand last week that he recognized Martin's voice, but he initially told a reporter he did not know who was screaming. When she took the stand the week before last, Rachel Jeantel, the friend who was talking to Martin on the phone when the fight started, likewise confidently identified him as the person screaming during the 911 call.  But she was much less certain about that in a pre-trial deposition, saying the voice "could be Trayvon," adding, "Like I said, I don't know. But it could be. The dude sound kinda like Trayvon." Today the defense presented testimony from Martin's father, who told police the voice on the recording was not his son's.  On the stand, Tracy Martin said that when police played the recording for him, "[I] just kind of shook my head and said, 'I can't tell.' I never said, 'No, that's not my son's voice.'" But two Sanford police officers testified that was the gist of what he said. Weeks later, after listening to the recording over and over again, "I knew that it was Trayvon's voice," Tracy Martin testified.

All these witnesses, of course, have strong incentives to hear (or claim to hear) whatever favors the side of the case they favor, and it may be that the ones who have expressed doubts are simply more honest (or less self-deluded) than the rest. A voice analysis expert who has testified for both the defense (during a pre-trial hearing) and the prosecution (during the trial) said the recording was too short and indistinct for any conclusions to be drawn about who was screaming. But if the jury gives any weight at all to the dueling claims of friends and relatives, the testimony helps the defense more than the prosecution. Even a draw on this issue would be a win for Zimmerman, since all he needs to do is create reasonable doubt about the state's narrative, according to which Martin was calling for help and/or begging for his life before he was shot.

NEXT: Snowden Predicted the Script the Government Has Followed To Attack Him

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Even if it TM’s voice that is not a huge blow to GZ’s case.

    1. It makes no sense as Martin’s voice. The screams are (IIRC) about 40 seconds. So Martin screamed for 40 seconds after he got shot in the heart? Or he stood facing an armed man for 40 seconds, screaming? Or some combination?

      Zimmerman had the head wounds, and Martin had scuffed knuckles. Martin was seen on top of Zimmerman, beating him. The only scenario in which it makes sense that Martin was screaming is if it was some sort of psycho taunting of Zimmerman, or intentional misdirection, and neither seems at all likely. Martin’s father was proven to be lying, because after the incident he didn’t think it was Martin. The rest of the “it was Martin” witnesses are deluded or lying.

  2. Is there a libertarian question at issue in this trial?
    I’ve yet to see it but it wouldn’t be the first time if I’m missing something.

    1. Carrying guns for self-defense and not getting screwed over by the state?

      1. Not seeing a carry question here.

        1. Having the cops and prosecutor decide it was self defense, and then have politics decide maybe it wasn’t, and try to railroad you? Seems like a carry question to me.

          1. Still not seeing a carry question.
            Seeing “victim studies”, not seeing carry.

            1. Could you elaborate on this? I’m not sure I understand.

              I’d certainly throw self defense into any definition of libertarianism.

              Carrying weapons I think falls in there, too (or maybe banning of carrying weapons is on the authoritarian side.)

              To me, a conviction would have a chilling effect on carrying for a lot of people (even though it shouldn’t, because if you needed the weapon and didn’t have it due to fear of courts/trial/etc, you’d probably be dead, anyway.) That, and I’m not sure about the mob getting a prosecution like that.

              1. Not sure I understand either.
                Self defense certainly rings libertarian bells, but while that might include carry, it doesn’t need to do so.
                Carry isn’t necessary to prove self defense.

        2. Not in the courtroom, no.

    2. Of course Sevo; Are you racist or not?

      1. I stopped beating my wife last week!

    3. Is it just to railroad a man into prison?

      Should a minority (of people) be able to compel the state to prosecute?

      It is just for the state to present false or misleading evidence?

      Is is just for the state to coach witnesses?

      Is the doctrine of lesser included offenses fair to a defendant?

      1. Anonymous Coward| 7.8.13 @ 8:39PM |#
        “Is it just to railroad a man into prison?”

        Uh, I don’t know that someone is being “railroaded”. Do you?

        1. I strongly suspect someone is being railroaded, just based on the fact that the prosecution’s star witness was impeached in open court.

        2. Even if he is guilty, Zimmerman is still being railroaded.

          Stranger things have happened.

          How often do cops commit perjury in order to get a guilty man convicted?

          1. How often do cops commit perjury in order to get a guilty man convicted?

            Every day? I mean, when don’t cops lie?

          2. robc| 7.8.13 @ 9:07PM |#
            “Even if he is guilty, Zimmerman is still being railroaded.”

            Rob, that’s a pretty specific claim. Not going for it.

        3. Uh, I don’t know that someone is being “railroaded”. Do you?

          Well, we’ve got a case that wasn’t brought until sufficient political pressure forced it. We have a case where almost every bit of evidence, even from the prosecution witnesses, aligns very well, if not perfectly, with the story Zimmerman has been telling since the night of the incident. We’ve got a case that, using Florida law, should have resulted in a directed verdict of not guilty after the prosecution failed to meet its burden beyond a reasonable doubt.

          It looks pretty railroady to me.

          1. Yeah, that is pretty much how I see it as well.

    4. There are libertarian aspects to the incident that aren’t issues at the trial.
      This took place entirely on private property. The police don’t patrol the property because they don’t have permission from the HOA. They can only respond to calls. Zimmerman was voluntarily patrolling the common areas of the private community. This is kinda like Libertopia where there would be a lot fewer government police.

    5. Rule of law versus satiating a mob’s racial grievances?

    6. Did you also fail to see a libertarian issue when Reason reported on the Cory Maye case, or the Duke lacrosse team rape case?

  3. Yawn.

    Why are libertarians buying in to the idea that this is somehow an important trial that we should all pay attention to whilst we scrutinize every detail?

    Why is anyone?

    1. I don’t really care either. I think the fact that the media tried to lynch mob him and the overrzealous prosecution is what drew the initial attention.

      1. Pretty much this. Media sensationalism and prosecutors with lynch mob mentalities are pretty concerning – or should be – to libertarians.

    2. They actually bith sound lkke punk assholes to me.

      1. Both like. Need smaller thumbs or bigger touchpad.

          1. +1 muumuu

          2. Hey fatty, I’ve got a movie for ya: “A Fridge Too Far”

            1. +1 banana split!

    3. Not really sure anyone’s buying the idea that this trial’s important; really, the only time I ever see/hear/read about it is on Reason. I think it’s just a byproduct of the 24/7 news channels’ inability to report anything worth reporting.

      1. “I think it’s just a byproduct of the 24/7 news channels’ inability to report anything worth reporting.”

        The reincarnation of Ludwig Erhard is worth reporting.

    4. The statist media brought it to the national stage I think not so much to stoke racial animosity, but as a means to attack SYG laws, as part of the statists’ crusade against an armed peasantry. Libertarians’ main interest in this case is in preventing any such attack, even if just by mooting it by pointing out that Zimmerman never invoked SYG and it would irrelevant to the situation he claims he was in.

    5. MLG, yeah, watching four lawyers talk about it on CNN I muttered the same thing to myself. How is this any different than any other murder? I just don’t get it. It’s obviously politically driven. Shit, some (beautiful) black conservative (of all people) on The McLaughlin Group was pining for Zimmerman’s head waaayy back when it first happened and even one shred of evidence had been collected.

      And then there’s your faux-man-boy leader claiming TM would look like his son if he had one.

      What a dolt.

      1. ‘even before one shred’

  4. Both like. Need smaller thumbs or bigger touchpad.

    1. That’s what she said.


  5. Was George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin Screaming Before the Gunshot?

    Depends. If you’re black, it’s Trayvon Martin. If you’re a racist, it’s Zimmerman. Case closed.


  6. I served on a criminal trial jury ten years ago and it was amazing what happened during deliberations. I don’t recall the term “reasonable doubt” repeated very much. I think anyone who believes “reasonable doubt” equals acquittal should know that very often jury members base their vote on whether or not they like the defendant. If they don’t like Zimmerman he may be in a lot of trouble despite the evidence.

    1. I’ve never served on a jury, but a friend who did mentioned that the jury he served on did really consider the evidence and ignored the fluff.
      Specifically, the defendant was charged with X, and the prosecution did not prove that to the exclusion of reasonable doubt.
      The jury found the defendant ‘not guilty’ in spite of the guy being a real sleaze bag; my friend said it was his ‘education’ concerning the difference between ‘not guilty’ and ‘innocent’; the defendant was in no way ‘innocent’.

      1. Ultimately our jury did the same as your friend’s did, but for a while a few members wanted to vote guilty and go home.

      2. Being a sleaze bag isn’t a crime. Yet.

        1. I can’t help but think of Scott Peterson when you say that. I don’t think there was much evidence against him.

    2. I served on a criminal jury… about 15 years ago now. It was in Miami. Armed robbery case. Evidence was severely lacking. Get to the jury room, all six of us seemed to agree that he *probably* did it, but there wasn’t enough evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. 5 of us were for acquittal, but one person, for some reason, was absolutely dead set on voting guilty, no matter what we tried to reason with her. The guy was bad, he probably did it, so he was “guilty”.

      Luckily for the young man on trial, the judge gave him the option of staying with the decision of the 5, or declaring a mistrial and going forward with a new jury. He rolled the dice and went with the majority, and got his acquittal.

    3. I did jury duty for an assault case* and they repeated the words “reasonable doubt” about a million times. The judge made it real clear about how we were supposed to approach the matter.

      I was an alternate and didn’t hear the deliberations but when talking with the other alternate after we were let go, we both were considering the evidence and thought the guy innocent. I called the courthouse later and found out that the guy was a acquitted.

      The whole experience actually gave me an iota of faith in the system. The entire process seemed geared toward not convicting a person based upon prejudices, biases and flimsy evidence.

      *The case was against a huge black dude (6’8″+ 350+lb) that supposedly beat up this lady in a bar after she got in his face about some bullshit or something. The lady said he had punched her multiple times, but the incident photos showed nary a scratch on her, but he had bruises and cuts from where she broke a beer bottle on his head. He did say that he pushed her, but in self-defense after she hit him. I couldn’t believe they charged the guy on such flimsy evidence, but he got off, thankfully.

      1. Once a defendant decides to roll the dice on a jury trial, the proceedings have some features in his favor. The problem is when someone whose guilt is doubtful is pressured to cop a plea – seek an acquittal while risking a false conviction and heavy sentence, versus pretend you’re guilty and get a light(er) sentence.

  7. I see two lessons to be learned from this whole affair.

    First off, don’t go playing cop without the training. As much as I despise cops, they are supposed to be trained to quickly subdue an unarmed punk that jumps out of the bushes. Had Zimmerman been a trained policeman, instead of shooting Martin he likely would have just beaten him to the edge of death.

    Second, don’t bring fists to a gunfight. You never know whether or not the creepy-ass cracker who’s following you has a gun, so it might not be a good idea to jump him.

    1. If Martin had attacked an officer, he’d have been subdued with lethal force. Police are an inviolable caste, and their bodies, sacrosanct.

      1. That’s not true. While most cops long for the opportunity to take a life, they don’t get that opportunity as much as they would like. In general an unarmed kid jumping out of the bushes to start a fist fight isn’t such an opportunity.

        1. 1. Yes – assume the creepy cracker, or spic, or whatever has a gun.

          2. Lot’s of people die in adult fist fights – no cop alone is not going to reach for a weapon when attacked.

          1. This goes back to training. A trained cop may have pulled his gun immediately to stop the fight before it began, with the assurance that there would be no consequences if he killed the person so long as he uttered the magical incantation “I feared for my life.”

            Zimmerman, lacking the training and assurances, did not immediately pull his gun on Martin until after he was getting his ass beat.

            1. Because a civilian is not allowed to “brandish” a gun – it’s a crime. He was only legally allowed to draw the weapon when he felt his life was in danger.

              Those are the rules and laws taught in every concealed carry class.

    2. If Zimmerman had been a cop, he would have shot TM to death and received a month or two of administrative leave.

      The totality of the evidence supports a determination of a righteous shoot and appropriate use of force.

  8. OT: This is one of the best things I’ve ever seen.

    Someone has collected tweets from liberals just whining about everything. The level of narcissism, self-delusion, and faux altruism on display is really amazing.

    My favorites:

    Working class people that make it and then turn into tories, fucking hate them (and Adele)

    How dare people succeed without the guiding hand of the state? And what the fuck is that Adele thing doing in there?

    People shouldn’t have to choose between pointless work and destitution.


    1. Laurie Penny seems like quite an idiot. But she’s on Twitter so it’s to be expected.

    2. Maybe destitution and prostitution. Although the latter is rather pointed work.

    3. From another part of that series:

      Our biggest tasks r 2 defeat the two ideological pillars of capitalism: 1) that we have to pay our debts 2) that we have to have jobs

      1. That’s funny, I seem to recall “He who does not work, neither shall he eat” being a popular saying with certain types a while back. (It’s Occupy so I’m making the safe assumption that he’s talking about any job whatsoever–guaranteed minimum income, etc.–and not just in the Marxist bourgeoisie sense.)

        Also insert Repo Man quote about commies and debts.

      2. How immoral can you get? Someone should be forced to work to pay for my leisure? My benefit from your loan is all that matters?

        Ye gods.

        1. Looters and parasites.

        2. Well, not *your* leisure. You’ll do the work part of it.

          1. I was talking from their perspective. Jesus, are we riddled with spoiled brats.

            1. Back to the grievance mine with you!

    4. I read through all of the updates in that serious, and there some absolute gems in there. Like the time when Laurie Penny talks about eating bacon and gets called out by a guy who considers eating bacon to be analogous to killing a black slave or raping a woman

      1. Yeah, I was going to post that one. “Why is it alright to say ‘I ate bacon’ and not alright to say I shot my black slave or raped my wife?” Um, because, to a sane human, eating pork isn’t the same thing as rape or murder?

        1. Wonder if she’s been reported to ex-vegans? I just kind of assume she must have been vegan at one point. Nothing to base it off of.

          1. The woman’s neck-deep in self-effacing social justice tripe. Vegan fits that glove quite well.

            1. Tripe is triggering to vegans.
              Fits is thin privilege.
              Gloves are ableist.

              Worse than hitler.

                1. That site is odd and quite funny.

              1. Ativia!

    5. I’m always glad for the folks spelunking the deep left for folks spelunking the deep left for these nuggets.

      “People shouldn’t have to choose between pointless work and destitution.”

      Obviously there needs to be a works program to put puppeteers to work in their field of expertise.

      1. Partly it seems weirdly utopian, like saying “People shouldn’t get sick.” Partly it seems ignorant: no rational person (outside of government) ever pays for “pointless work.” It might be boring, but not pointless.

    6. Aside from the worrying fact my wife hasn’t gotten her period yet, thanks for that utterly demoralizing and depressing link, Irish. Those people are just…sad.

      1. I think you have an obligation to bring as many children into this world as possible and home school them to be libertarians to combat this pinko menace.

        1. you first need to find a libertarian lady to go along with your scheme.

          1. Or find one who can be converted. That’s probably easier.

      2. Maybe you’ll be joining me and Brett L soon enough.

        Most pregnancy tests work before a missed period, so you could know for $3.

    7. dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb

      1. Some of the replies to Laurie Penny were pretty funny though.

    8. I like the one where she’s fighting for her looks not to matter.

      I googled her, and she definitely spends a lot of effort on looking good. Grooming, clothes, makeup.

      She’s kind of hot, actually. I wonder how she feels about a capitalist fapping to her many internet pictures.

  9. This trial is more important and libertarian-concern than the Aaron Shwartz incident.

  10. Was George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin Screaming Before the Gunshot?

    Yes. And so what if it was Z, M, or *both*? It was a life-or-death struggle. I’m waiting for someone to surface the notion that Z “screamed for help” just so he could joyously blow M away “with impunity”.

    1. “They’re coming right at us!!!”

      1. “That wanna-be cop shot Trayvon like he was a dog!”

  11. Listening to the the screams in the background of a 911 call placed during the fight that ended in Trayvon Martin’s death, I find it hard to believe that anyone can be sure who was the source of those muffled and barely decipherable sounds…

    AFIK, neither the prosecution nor defense called an engineer who designed the microphone or audio processing software for TM’s cell phone to the stand. This equipment is specifically designed to attenuate and even cancel out sound frequencies outside of normal human conversation voice frequencies. A DSP can even shift frequencies up and down. Cell phones are designed for maximum utility by their users and maximum profits for their sellers, not for authentic hi-fidelity voice transmission.

    1. excellent points that I had not considered.

      + 3db !!!

  12. Now we need someone with the last name Swallow to run for office in New York.

    Wiener… Spitzer, Swallow.

    1. Spitzer came too soon for that to work.

    2. I prefer they form the world’s sextingest law firm.

  13. I’ve never heard my family members screaming for help while fighting for their lives – so I would be guessing.

  14. Comment over at Legal Insurrection:

    On the day when eyewitness Jonathan Good testified that “the Black guy in black hoodie was on top punching down Mixed Martial Arts style”, CNN reported that as “Witness says lighter skinned person was punching other one” (screen grab here).

    CNN lies to aid the narrative du jour. It’s who they are. It’s what they do.

    1. Here’s the direct link to the comment; the two-link limit is rather obnoxious at times.

    2. I just found this little nugget:

      @Sonji Holloway Lacy-you are very ignorant, what does section 8 have to do with it? This incident could have happened anywhere. Innocent people get injured and killed all the time anywhere! Trayvon Martin was murdered in a neighborhood that wasn’t section 8!

      This was in a discussion about a little kid getting shot while he was watching tv.

  15. It ONLY makes sense that George Zimmerman was screaming for his life while getting his ass whopped.

    Zimmerman is INNOCENT of Murder. At best, maybe, maybe involuntary manslaughter.

    That said, this is the problem with this story and why it is so controversial.

    Adult shoots and BLACK teenager with no witnesses present and,

    1. the police let the shooter go (required the media, al sharpton, and protest to even get an investigation), no questions asked. This is actually what caused the protest. The fact the bubba the cop in florida said to Zimmerman’s story ‘daaa-yup’

    2. the police drug test the victim and not the shooter.

    THIS would have never ever happened had Zimmerman been black.

    The police would have drug tested Zimmerman.

    In fact, this would only be another black-on-black-crime…and never reported to the news as the fellow below mentioned.

    1. In short, after provisionally determining that Zimmerman was the victim of an assault by Martin, the officers should have drug tested both victim and offender. Despite, at this point, Zimmerman’s having been charged with no crime. Because he’s white.

      1. What I’m pointing out is that the “provisional determination” by the police would not had happen if Zimmerman was black.

      2. To be cleared, Zimmerman would had been arrested or at least investigated further had he been black.

        1. Fair enough. I don’t disagree, although it seems like the TSA profiling bit rehashed.

          1. lol

        2. Zimmerman WAS investigated by Det. Serino. The police dropped charges because as you can see, there is no evidence to suggest he committed a crime

          1. +1 internet.

    2. Except that there WAS an investigation.

      Every single material piece of evidence, every material witness(the eye and ear witnesses) was gone over.

      All of it backed up Zimmerman’s story. Just like it’s doing now.

      That’s why prosecution witnesses seem, so often, to be working best fot the defense. Because the facts are with the defense. The prosecution has had to create an altenate explanation to even attempt a case. And that alternate is not backed by anything factual whatsoever.

      The initial decision, that this was a simple case of self defense, that no arrest was warranted, was the correct one.

  16. Was George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin Screaming Before the Gunshot?

    I think the court should first rule on whether there really is a Santa Claus.

    1. I’m going to say yes. Maybe NSFW. Cleavage.…..s-elf-1-2/

      1. I like

  17. Here is all you need to know:

    TM: “you’re gonna die tonight, mother fucker”
    GZ: “HELP!”

  18. I’m glad someone’s covering this Zimmerman thing. You hear nothing about it in the MSM.

  19. “You hear nothing about it in the MSM.”

    You’re using MSM very generically.

    So if I have this straight, Americans (that’s US citizens to you) watch the British MSM for entertainment. Canadians watch the US MSM for entertainment. Who watches the Canadian MSM for same?

    1. I was being sarcastic.

      1. And I wasn’t?

  20. OT: Cato had a good article on the illegal delay of the employer mandate.

    Now a follow up – what if the whole reason for the delay was to block lawsuits on it?

    1. It shows how bad things have gotten. Even relatively recently, an administration acting this far in contravention to black letter law would face serious legal challenges. Not clear that’s going to happen now.

      1. Hasn’t the government avoided certain challenges in bad faith for a while now?

        Not that Obama should be clear here, but isn’t the reason some ‘bad’ laws have never been challenged is because any time any someone with resources to really fight gets ‘caught’ – the government just dismiss the charges…

  21. he truth is, Travon did get his justice.
    The injustice that was done to Travon was that he was killed and the police didn’t even bother to investigate the shooting.

    It took the media, al sharpton, black panther’s, and various protests by black people in order for there to be a hearing.

    Regardless of the outcome. And I’m sure Zimmerman will be found NOT GUILTY, the fact that there was at least a hearing into the matter does show some sign of justice.

    And, I think you libertarians should agree with me on this.
    Although I’m not libertarian, Habeas corpus is a BAD THING. Just as bad is no one even bothering investigating the shooting.

    1. You lost me again. Indefinite detention is a good thing?

      1. In addition to being guaranteed a hearing upon arrest, I would hope that there’s at least a Grand Jury hearing when I’m shot by someone and there’s no witness around.

        1. The same grand jury hearings in which a certain sandwich might be found guilty of a certain capital offense?

        2. Somebody shot Alice.

          They held a grand Jury hearing.

          And nobody came.


          1. lol

            1. I was going to do a Haiku but it wasn’t coming out so well.

              Let’s just call it modern poetry with an eye towards social justice.

    2. The injustice that was done to Travon was that he was killed and the police didn’t even bother to investigate the shooting.

      They did investigate. Pretty much every bit of “testimony” by Zimmerman in this trial was introduced by the police who gathered it as part of their investigation. It’s ignorance or stupidity to claim the shooting wasn’t investigated.

    3. What do you mean, “the police didn’t even bother to investigate the shooting”? Officers Chris Serino and Doris Singleton have both testified about the investigation they conducted.

  22. Good article, and I agree with the analysis. Ultimately, to me, Zimmerman’s story, and the fact that he gave it summarily at the scene and didn’t lawyer up, the fact pattern, and comparison of this case to scores of other self defense shoots I’ve looked into led me to believe early on that Zimmerman acted in self- defense. Not only has the prosecution of this case not changed my mind, but of course one need not believe he acted in self defense to find him not guilty, one just has to believe there is a reasonable doubt he did not act with murderous intent (for the murder charge – which is a ridiculous charge), or that there is reasonable doubt he did not reasonably fear imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.

    I’m thankful to live in a state where the govt. has the burden to disprove self defense and has to pay lost wages and lawyer fees in self defense cases they lose that are judged self defense. Florida’s law is not as strongly protective as WA’s law, but it’s PRETTY good for self defense, as is the federal case law.

    The prosecution/cops made the right initial call, which was to not even CHARGE him. This case is pure politix, like so many other shootings, especially when there is a race angle to be played.

    1. Your feeling that there should had been no hearing what so ever I find is the problem and what is really angering the blacks.

      I think all homicides, especially those in which there is no witnesses, should be investigated in Trail, not by the local cops.

      1. I think all homicides, especially those in which there is no witnesses, should be investigated in Trail, not by the local cops.

        Leaving aside that this homicide isn’t lacking a witness, and leaving aside that something over 90% of cases don’t go to trial, why are you willing to ruin people lives and how much money are you willing to spend to put every user of self-defense on trial?

        Because we don’t have enough prosecutorial overreach now, let’s put someone on trial for shooting an intruder because the shooter wasn’t smart enough to invite the neighbors over to watch.

      2. There should have not been a trial because there was no evidence to prosecute. How many times do charges get dropped because the State has no case? Lots. Would you suggest ALL charges get brought to court? Who’s going to foot thje bill for that?

        1. There should at least be a Grand Jury Hearing. Not necessarily a trial.

          This should ALWAYS go in front of the local District Attorney and a Judge, at the least. Not the local cop. Absolutely NOT.

          For the same reason I believe that we shouldn’t have enemy combatants and just take the arresting officer’s word for it, it should work the same when there’s a dead victim…especially a minor.

          Just stop and think not like a libertarian for a second, but like a christian (and u don’t have 2 b a christian):

          If it were your child that was shot by security sam, would you at least demand a hearing? Even if in fact your child is found to be at fault.

          1. Do you speak english as a secondary or tertiary language? If so, I might be able to excuse your rambling nonsense. If you’re a native speaker, please see below.


    2. Your feeling that there should had been no hearing what so ever I find is the problem and what is really angering the blacks.

      I think all homicides, especially those in which there is no witnesses, should be investigated in Trail, not by the local cops.

      1. And btw Dumphry, I’m ok with paying lost wages and legal fees. But the idea of State having to disprove self defense is no good. You may be trying to dis-prove a negative. The standard “innocent until proven guilty beyond the reasonable doubt” is good enough.

      2. It’s really the prosecutor who makes that call, though, right?

        1. In Florida, It’s bubba the cop.

    3. Lawyering up for protection against mendacious, manipulative LEO = guilt by proxy, eh?

      1. And before the inevitable paeans to honest, diligent police work, let me make clear that the lawyer isn’t for the 95% of honest officers (or whatever BS number you surmise) isn’t why I’d lawyer up. It’s the DA I worry about.

      2. My FIL is a lawyer and says “if you’re innocent, nothing you tell the police without a lawyer will help you”.

        He used to be an assistant DA, so I believe him.

  23. I’m gonna ignore Dunphy and Alice and ask if none of you find Jens Weidmann’s comments that the state is subservient to the market worthy of notice?…
    Is 24/7 so unfashionable? Does it need a Starbucks franchise to get readers?

    1. Martini bar. I didn’t realize 24/7 gets enou traffic to support a McDs.

      1. Dunno what to say; the guy made what amounts to a revolutionary claim, and it’s ignored because it’d in 24/7?
        So no Mickey Ds, no views?

        1. We’re waiting for Jacket’s writeup.

        2. I like the cut of Weidmann’s gib, but how earnestly is he taken in Europe? Leader of the Bundesbank sounds irreparably tainted by finance and/or German preferences, at least from an American POV. We had a straight-up Austrian preaching nutjob in Congress for decades and his message was given very little play. (full RP supporter, I mean nutjob affably.)

        3. Monetary policy has already done a lot to absorb the economic consequences of the crisis, but it cannot solve the crisis,” Weidmann said in his speech.

          Statements like this intrigue me because there’s two possible imterpretations. Either he’s throwing a softball to central banking, or suggesting that monetary policy does much to conceal the symptoms of crisis but can do nothing to reverse its own disastrous policies.

    2. 24/7 sux.

      If I want links to links, I’ll golf in chains.

  24. OT: you can’t make this stuff up……..r-madam-in

    1. I actually voted For Kristin Davis when she ran for Governor of the State of NY.

    2. I saw this earlier.

      The real tragedy is that an honest business woman will most likely lose to a known corrupt authoritarian.

      Is there any human alive or dead, including Hitler, that’s worse than eliot spitzer?

      1. Eliot Spitzer must be real connected.

        I saw him on Bill Maher, and Bill didn’t mention a thing.

        This guy is all over the media, was a criminal prosecutor that prosecuted people for going to hookers.

        I don’t know how the MEDIA forgave him. He must be really connected.

        1. His continued media exposure sans shame almost has me believing in a devil for eliot to sell his soul to.

          I mean, how the fuck did he get a goddamn teevee show after what happened? He’s not that interesting or smart. Other than the devil, how do you explain his not creeping sneakily into the night; banished from the heights of power to being an adjunct at some third rate community college?

        2. You haven’t noticed that the media tends to be soft on Democrats, especially when their crimes have anything to do with sex?

          1. …or tax evasion, or drowning girls in ponds…just about any crime a Dem can think of, the media can think of an excuse.

      2. Chuck Schumer?

        1. Michael Bloomberg?

          I gotta say, as bad as California is, and we do have some awful politicians, don’t get me wrong, but I feel like even the worst of our lot (ok, except for Pelosi) is not as bad as those three stooges. I guess New York serves the purpose of making California look good (ok that’s not the right word, I should say not completely totally relatively horrendously awful)

          1. They’re both awful in their own way. Like a gunshot wound vs. a stab wound.

  25. you want annoying, try the people who are blaming the Calgary and Toronto floods on “mother nature’s wrath against our lifestyles”.

    1. Things are so sad nowadays that I can’t even pick the politics of the people claiming such nonsense.

      Is it a bunch of christfags blaming buttsex and beer…

      Orrrr, is it a flock of commies railing in defense of Gaia?

      Or is it YOU, you son of a bitch!?

      1. in this case it’s the humans causing climate change.
        definitely don’t listen to this.

        1. As the world heats up, do you agree that the issue is getting the cold shoulder? Listen to the essay and share your reactions in the comments below.

          Sorry, I have to castrate myself with a spoon and can’t spare a minute to listen. I’ve been putting it off for too long.

  26. Re: Alice Bowie,

    [T]he truth is, Travon did get his justice.
    The injustice that was done to Travon was that he was killed and the police didn’t even bother to investigate the shooting.

    The police did investigate the case, A. The conclusion was that GZ acted in self-defense, which means that your proposition is wrong.

    It took the media, al sharpton, black panther’s, and various protests by black people in order for there to be a hearing.

    Well, you’re almost right up where you say that it took all sorts of race whores to get something. Where you went wrong is when calling it a “hearing”. It is more like a show trial than anything else, the judge not being too far away from being Roland Freisler at least in principle.

    And, I think you libertarians should agree with me on this. Although I’m not libertarian, Habeas corpus is a BAD THING.

    You’re right there, we libertarians agree with you that you’re no friend of liberty.

  27. You know how bad Obama is doing?
    Letterman pulled out a Dubya joke.

  28. Lac-Megantic explosion: Missing man was hated by all

    Sitting on the steel rails that have brought him so much joy and so much misery, Richard Custeau remembered his brother Jean-Luc, missing since the Lac-M?gantic train explosion.
    As boys, they lived in a white clapboard house overlooking the rusty tracks that roll downhill ? fatefully ? into town. Across the tracks, they played softball in the park and rambled in the woods.
    “The trees weren’t so big then,” he says.
    On Saturday morning, when the train derailed, his brother Jean-Luc was likely at his apartment near the Musi-Caf?, a popular bar that was gutted by flames.
    No one has heard from him since.
    Jean-Luc hated company, and never had a large circle of friends. “He never went out a lot,” Richard said.
    On Saturday, outside the local high school, a class mate of Jean-Luc already missed the 57 year-old.
    “I’d like to see him alive and not in the newspaper, but I don’t have big hope,” said Norman Rondeau.

  29. Didn’t they invent voiceprint identification in 1968 or 2001 or something?

  30. One of the other things I don’t see anyone really considering is that there was no black/white narrative when the cops got there. They saw that a hispanic guy killed a black guy.

    And the case didn’t blow up until someone who didn’t know Zimmerman was hispanic saw an easy payday.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.