Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Misleading, Photoshopped Image of the Victim George Zimmerman



Ammoland
The family of a charming young teenage boy had pictures of their adorable young child circulated by the “news” media after he was brutally shot to death by a ruthless wannabe vigilante.

Then it came out that the teenager was actually a 6-foot-two-inch football player with a history of violence and gang connections who had pounded the block-watch captain’s head into the pavement until he was bleeding and nearly unconscious.

The survivor, on trial for his life, caught a tough break from a circuit-court judge in pre-trial motions the other day.

It turns out that prosecutors seeking to convict George Zimmerman for (the merciless cold-hearted vigilante murder of poor little Trayvon) (defending himself against the brutal life-threatening assault by Trayvon Martin) (you pick), will be able to suppress all evidence showing the attacker’s controversial school records, previous drug use, history of prior fights, ownership of removable gold-tooth caps, or any text messages and photos found on Martin’s cell phone, which defense attorney Mark O’Mara has seen. A delay in the proceedings was also denied. Trial is set for June 10 2013.

If you think the nation’s diligent media turned the Jody Arias thing into a circus, you ain’t seen nothin’.
What do you think about the suppression of that "evidence?"  Is it right for the judge to have ruled so? 

What about the sarcastic bias of the writing by Alan Korwin? Doesn't that and the incredible photo more than make up for the media's protrayal of Trayvon as an innocent youth?

What's your opinion?  Please leave  a comment.

27 comments:

  1. Martin's school records and cell phone images are totally immaterial. Zimmerman had no previous contact with Martin before the night he stalked him down, got into a confrontation and shot him as he was getting beaten up.

    Knowledge about the victim gained after that incident is irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm curious how you know that Zimmerman stalked Martin.

      Delete
    2. Call it what you want, Greg, to downplay the fact that Georgie boy should have stayed in the car.

      Delete
    3. Without using hindsight, why should he have stayed in the car? What is so provocative about getting out of one's car to get a closer look that it justifies jumping him, or counts as him starting a fight?

      Delete
    4. Sounds like Trayvon should have gone home instead of attacking George.....

      Delete
    5. If the prosecution tries to portray Trayvon as some innocent choirboy then his past knowledge is very relevant, his drug use, gang affiliations, are all fair game....

      Delete
    6. How do you figure? Do you feel the same about a woman who is raped?

      Delete
    7. Mike, It's a matter of rules of evidence. If one side starts bringing character into the case, the other side gets to try to refute that evidence.

      If you're in a rape case, you don't go into the beautiful, virginal character of the victim as proof that she was raped, because you could open the door. Similarly, you don't defend a client by talking about what an angel he was unless you want to let the prosecution bring in anything they want about what a mean s.o.b. he is.

      Delete
    8. Mikeb, a person has the right to say no to sex, regardless of who that person is. It doesn't matter if said person had fifty partners that day, saying no to the fifty-first time is sufficient--not that there's necessarily anything wrong with someone like that, anyway.

      This is the difference. If Martin is presented as someone who would never do what Zimmerman says and the evidence perhaps supports, then we have to consider whether he was or was not that kind of person.

      On the other hand, if he had merely walked back to the house where he was staying or if he had told Zimmerman to fuck off and then walked away, Martin's character wouldn't be relevant. See, he should have done exactly what you tell us to do--leave a situation, rather than sticking around to defend his ego. Instead, it appears that he doubled back and provoked a fight.

      Delete
    9. As an addendum to Greg's comment, if the prosecution is silent on whether Martin was the type to attack Zimmerman or not, and they merely produce evidence to say that Zimmerman confronted Martin and picked a fight, then Martin's character is not at issue, and not relevant for the defense to bring in.

      Delete
    10. What makes you think Trayvon "provoked a fight," other than your biased support of the vigilante?

      Delete
    11. I don't "support the vigilante." I'm going on the evidence that I've seen to date. What do you call it when someone doubles back and attacks another? Oh, right, when it's a white guy with a gun, you call it unjustified. But if it's Martin, it's o.k.

      Delete
    12. What hard evidence do you have that Trayvon "doubles back and attacks" George? You keep talking about proof and evidence. You keep insisting you're not biased towards Zimmerman. Explain.

      Delete
  2. I had to go to the source to see the picture, but what, in your view, is wrong with it? Do you call it misleading and "photoshopped" because it shows a broken nose and blood?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where is the allegation of being photoshopped coming from? Wasn't this picture released by the prosecution?

      Delete
    2. I'm sure Mikeb has proof that the pic was "photoshopped," but he isn't going to provide that proof, because we have no right to demand that he provide evidence for the rushes to judgment he finds so "fun."

      Delete
    3. Just look at it. It's as bad as those shots of models with three arms.

      Delete
    4. ...and why would the prosecution photoshop it?

      Delete
    5. Again, are we talking about the photo of Zimmerman? And if so, What is so bad in it? I'm not seeing anything that looks tampered with, PLUS, we have acknowledgement that this picture is the Evidence Picture from the police, unaltered.

      Delete
    6. Look at what? I see a bleeding and apparently broken nose.

      Delete
    7. So wait a second--let me see if I'm understanding you correctly, because it's really hard to believe you would try to make the argument you seem to be making.

      Are you claiming that the photo that the prosecution reluctantly, grudgingly, and perhaps illegally tardily released to the defense was "photoshopped" in such a way as to strengthen the defense?

      Can you suggest a motive for this? Perhaps the prosecutors hate their careers, and so are deliberately torpedoing them? Or will you claim that they're so "racist" that they'll damage their own careers in order to acquit a guilty Hispanic man for the murder of a black person?

      Come on, Mikeb--that's silly. Please tell me I've misunderstood your position here.

      Delete
    8. "Just look at it. It's as bad as those shots of models with three arms."

      I agree Mike, when I look at the original black and white photo released by the prosecution its pretty obvious in this day of digital media that they must have worked very hard to degrade the quality of the photo so a broken and bloody nose becomes just a bloody nose.


      Delete
    9. Wow, your new post shows that you really were accusing this picture of being photoshopped. Apparently, in your mind, it makes sense that the prosecution would first alter the evidence to weaken their case, and then withhold this altered evidence, first turning over a grainy, degraded version, and then turning over the one that they tampered with several months later, compounding evidence tampering with evidence suppression.

      What color is the sky there?

      Delete
  3. The prosecution released this photo in May of last year. A black and white version of the above photo. It want until the end of October that the prosecution released a higher quality color version of the same photo which obviously gives a better perspective as to the injuries he incurred from Mr. Martin.
    Are we to believe that the delay in the release of the color photo was because it takes longer to process color photos at Walmart? Zimermans defense team has repeatedly brought up the prosecution's foot dragging in producing evidence through discovery.

    Original photo release:
    http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/national/photo-zimmerman-bloodied-after-martin-shooting

    Color photo release:
    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/03/15647937-defense-posts-george-zimmerman-photo-from-night-of-trayvon-martin-shooting?lite

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you ask for discovery from the prosecution, typically, they'll give you a CD or other electronic file with the original photos they've taken, whether of the accused, or of evidence, etc.

      The original black and white photo looks like a degraded, black and white photocopy of a black and white photocopy. Honestly, turning over only a degraded hard copy rather than the original photo, which showed injuries that did not appear in the black and white, should be considered prosecutorial misconduct.

      Regardless of Zimmerman's guilt or innocence, whoever pulled that trick needs to suffer severe consequences for trying to pull something like that.

      Delete
  4. I'd like to see the proof of gang affiliations and previous fighting. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with associating with or even being a member of a gang. Maybe the defense can bring in some students that will attest to Martin's ruthless skills as a street fighter. It just sounds a little bit contrived and unproven. And yes, highly irrelevant to the case at hand. Martin was hardly out committing any type of crime that evening. He was getting some sweets, like teenagers do that are too young to purchase alcohol and probably don't have access to the hard drugs that clearly twisted and frightened Zimmerman's already pint-sized psyche and mind. Oh that's right, he was a known marijuana smoker. Well, then of course, it all makes sense.

    Maybe the right-wing reactionary defense is plausible. Probably what happened was Martin saw Zimmerman lurking in his vehicle acting suspiciously. Perhaps of a mind to civic responsibility, Martin may have confronted Zimmerman, believing him to be under the influence of drugs and or alcohol. Then, before the unwitting Zimmerman could roll up his windows and lock his doors in time, Martin forcefully pulled him out of his car to give him a sound thrashing so that he could hold Zimmerman until the police arrived. Thank god that Zimmerman had a gun. Otherwise he probably would not be among us today. Good DGU. I mean no disrespect to the dead. I am merely ridiculing those who come running to the defense of a clearly, psychotic and delusional, indeed very dangerous man.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Flying Junior says,

      "I am merely ridiculing those who come running to the defense of a clearly, psychotic and delusional, indeed very dangerous man."

      Sounds like that this is exactly what your doing, FJ. Besides your extreme stretching of what you believe to be facts in your own warped mind.

      Delete