The author gives his opinions
regarding the Trayvon Martin case under the pale of his experiences
with similar legal dynamics, as he presented in his paper published
in two parts by the New York Bar Journal in 1983 (Sorrells, Entrapment
or Due Process can be read at www.senderberl.com/NYSBarJournal.pdf).
The author rejects any reliance by the defense on the Florida stand
your ground statute on the predicate that any case supporting second
degree murder charges against a defendant, daresay first degree murder
charges, cannot diminish or abrogate a victim’s or his family’s, as
the case here, due process rights to have his killer criminally charged
and duly adjudged by a jury of his peers.
While many bandy about the question whether George Zimmerman was overcharged
with second degree murder, to some legal professionals practicing in
the criminal arena, there is already sufficient evidence that Mr. Zimmerman
was undercharged, to wit: should have faced a grand jury indictment
for first degree murder.
Let us get to the heart of the claim: that the evidence is that the
cries for help came from Trayvon Martin. What would cause the minor
to cry out for help in the manner done, the victim, surely reflecting
a good dose of hysteria, fear and concern in those cries? How long after
hearing those cries was Trayvon Martin shot and killed?
To answer the second question, the released tapes indicate that the
17 year old was shot and killed within seconds of his cries for help.
While one can make an intelligent assumption that the reason for his
cries for help and his immediate death thereafter have a connecting
link, we have a superior route of evidence for what was said that caused
the minor to cry for help with the desperation heard. The witness: Robert
Zimmerman, the defendant’s very own father.
In one the early interviews, Robert Zimmerman expressed the following
as reported by the media:
"Trayvon Martin said something to the effect of 'You're going to die
now' or 'You're gonna die tonight' -- something to that effect," Robert
Zimmerman said. "He continued to beat George. At some point, George
pulled his pistol and did what he did." LINK.
Also see: LINK
and LINK
From the prosecution’s own affidavit in support of the information,
we know that the cries were those of the victim, not the defendant.
What the defendant and his father, a retired judge, helping his son
in past skirmishes with the law, were no doubt concerned about is whether
a witness would come forth hearing what the defendant said to the victim
causing the victim to cry out desperately for help before shooting him.
If a witness heard the words, Robert Zimmerman, an attorney and retired
judge, no doubt knew that they better own the issue by claiming those
words were said by the victim, when they painted him, the victim, to
the media as the aggressor, the sine qua non, for the use of the alleged
defensive use of the firearm the defendant carried.
However, the fact that the cries that were heard belong to the victim
show a jury that the speaker of those incriminating words, de facto
already attested to by the defendant, were not likely to be the words
of the victim, who was in fact shot seconds after his cries, but the
words of the defendant telling the victim that he was about to die.
This degree of evidence regarding first-degree murder has a great deal
of supporting evidence already out in the public domain. The defendant
made it clear from his words on the 911 audio tapes released that he
viewed the victim, again a minor, returning home with candy and a drink
as someone casing the area, appearing to be on drugs, and the poster
child (literally and figuratively) for all the other criminals effectuating
crimes in his home community, where defendant served as a member of
the community watch.
Consider what the defendant said on the audiotape, where he resisted
the advice from police dispatch to stand down to not pursue the victim:
He says to the police dispatch that Trayvon Martin:
Was starring at all the houses
Starring at me
Coming towards me
Had his hands in his waistband
Something is wrong with him
Coming to check me out
He had something in his hands
These assholes always get away
He's running...
“This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something.”
The police arrived one or two minutes after the shooting but the defendant’s
words and actions should clearly prove to a jury that he acted as judge,
jury and executioner in dispensing justice against the minor child for
all those criminalizing previously his community. While CNN and other
media outlets obfuscated what else the defendant said, the following
Internet link (www.senderberl.com/zimmerman_audio.wav) has a very short
audio in wave format where you can hear for yourself that the defendant
who was predisposed to interact and intercede with the victim said:
“These fuck’in coons.” CNN first highlighted two words (fuck’in coons),
which they changed the next day to “fuck’in cold.” But CNN became aware
of what many were aware, there were three words and the first of those
three words was the word “These…” So “These fuck’in cold” absolutely
did not make sense (aside from not being on the audio) but to be grammatically
compliant CNN came up with “These fuck’in punks,” which oddly was attested
to by the prosecution’s information. However, the EVIDENCE is that the
defendant said “These fuck’in coons,” which by itself represents far
more than a hate crime but also defendant’s state of mind in his behaviors
attributable to the victim’s death.
There is a great deal more supporting the proffers made. First, it seems
clear at this point that the defendant did not relay to the victim when
the confrontation took place that he, the defendant, was a member of
the neighborhood watch. He also did not apparently tell the victim that
the police were called and they were on their way and would be there
any moment. The victim in getting shot and killed in the next two minutes
activated the minor child’s and thus his parents full due process rights
to have the killing investigated and addressed. Under the evidence already
in hand that the defendant was the conditio sine qua non for all that
happened and the evidence from his own mouth (through his father) that
one said to the other that he was going to “die now,” coupled with the
defendant’s statement that “these assholes always get away” when combined
with “These fuck’in coons,” all foreclose any thought that the defendant
could avail himself of any affirmative defense in what the evidence
supports is nothing other than a first degree murder case.
The truth of the matter is that it all happened as it did exactly because
Trayvon Martin was black and George Zimmerman owed him nothing including
any presumption of innocence, basic respect or courtesy, the need to
identify himself or restrain himself to await the police arriving one
or two minutes later (after the shooting). The defendant did not contain
the situation, inherent in his standing down as he was advised, but,
conservatively said, inflamed the confrontation, one where one was told
that he was going to “die now” and the evidence is sufficiently clear
beyond any reasonable doubt at this early juncture to point to the defendant
as both the speaker and the shooter. The only person that night who
feared death was the minor child, Trayvon Martin. The only person pursuing
death was the defendant who took the minor child’s life in payment for
all the accumulated hatred he carried for the “coons” that plagued his
home community.
|