Image 01 Image 03

Off road

Off road

Off the road, finally.

I’m catching up on what was going on today.  What did I miss?

Okay, here’s what I’m finding:

Rick Santorum on Face the Nation prejudges the Zimmerman-Martin case, and attributes malicious motives to Zimmerman (emphasis mine):

NORAH O’DONNELL: Senator, the President did not use the word race, but do you think race played a role here?

RICK SANTORUM: Well, I mean, I obviously I’m not privy to what’s going on in someone’s mind. Obviously in my opinion someone who had a very sick mind who would– who would pursue someone like this. This is clearly a heinous act. And, you know, there are a lot of people who have a lot of distorted views of reality. And, it’s– it’s a tragic, tragic case. And my heart goes out to the parents, too. I can’t imagine what they’re suffering losing their son in– in such a horrific way. All I would say is that whatever the motive is, it was a malicious one and a very, very tragic one.

We don’t know what the facts are, we only have bits and pieces, some of which may be reliable, some not.


  • Stand your ground law means Stand, Not Apprehend.  We don’t know what precipitated the (alleged) fight which found Zimmerman on the ground just before the shooting.  Was he trying to apprehend Martin, did the two find themselfves face-to-face unexpectedly, or something else?
  • “Color Yourself Lucky” – Threatening note left on car in Madison, WI, which had pro-Walker bumper stickers on it.  (h/t Patricia)
  • Trial starts Monday in the murder of two British tourists by a then 16-year old who celebrates his 17th birthday, on Monday. (h/t Philip)
  • “I’m a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Ugh. Just ugh.

I’d say it’s Rick Santorum who has “a lot of distorted views of reality”

    Terri in reply to Joy. | March 25, 2012 at 9:15 pm

    “RICK SANTORUM: Well, all I can say is that, you know, again, there are a lot of people who have very– very perverted views of reality”

    Pot meet kettle!!

    “Here you have his views – he doesn’t believe women being in the workforce, he doesn’t believe in contraception, he thinks that in the gay issue that it’s man-on-dog, he talks about bestiality, he criticizes very sharply the John Kennedy speech, famous speech in Houston, separation of church and state … next Santorum’s likely to attack Jefferson, who knows what’s next? I urge Rick to have some unexpressed ideas but he’s very dedicated to a very extreme position and I don’t think that’s right for America.”
    Arlen Specter

      Terri in reply to Terri. | March 26, 2012 at 5:52 am

      Whoa! Judging from the dislikes, I’d say we have alot of Santorum supporters on this thread. However, I’d like to make 2 points….

      1. I did not say them.
      2. Those that live in glass houses, shouldn’t cast stones. How about innocent until proven guilty? Rick Santorum, how do you know George Zimmerman was malicious?

Fluffy Foo Foo | March 25, 2012 at 6:44 pm

This whole event has gotten out of control. They’re comparing it to Emmett Till already on bloggingheads. Even John McWhorter is pre-judging.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fluffy Foo Foo. | March 25, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    That is madness. There IS no comparison…at ALL. What do people use for brains?

    retire05 in reply to Fluffy Foo Foo. | March 25, 2012 at 9:22 pm

    You’re right. It is getting out of hand. And when have you ever before heard of a Hispanic man, which Zimmerman is (Peruvian) referred to in the press as a “white” Hispanic?

    That is being done for a purpose. The media needs to portray this as a case of white on black violence, not Hispanic on black violence which they never paid attention to before. So they call George Zimmerman a “white” Hispanic.

    But the press must think Hispanics are stupid. They’re not, and sooner or later, the large Hispanic population in Florida will rally around one of their own who they feel is being unduly smeared. Just like blacks rally around those who they think are being unjustly treated by “the man”, Hispanics are equally as close knit. The New Black Panthers are trying to start a fire they will not be able to put out. What happens when it is the Crips and Bloods against the Zetas and La Familia? The wind will never blow strong enough to carry off the ashes of the rioting that will happen. And my money will be on Hispanics. The Puerto Ricans invented the “gangbanger”.

    Until MediaMorons got a hold of this case, and Al Sharpton decided to throw his Freddie’s Fashion Mart ass into the mix, it was a local story and was being handled by the Sanford PD and the prosecuting attorney. Now it has gone viral, and Sharpton et al are trying to line their pockets once again by race baiting. But they don’t have the support of Hispanics and it is going to blow up if the race baiters don’t drop it pretty quick.

      JoAnne in reply to retire05. | March 26, 2012 at 2:24 am

      I noticed that, too. What the heck is a “white Hispanic?”

        zazz in reply to JoAnne. | March 26, 2012 at 9:04 am

        Some Hispanics are black, as those from the Dominican Republic by and large, like Sammy Sosa, and some are primarily our purely of native ancestry, like Rigoberta Menchú. Others are some mix or of European descent, and hence white. I don’t know if Zimmerman is.

Every time I think Romney’s pandering has hit rock bottom, he finds a way to make it worse.

Oh, wait.

Sanct-orum earns that sobriquet.

He simply does not have the temperament of a POTUS, or the respect for law and due process.

The outcome is heinous, but there is evidence, including eyewitness testimony, which calls into question whether the act was itself heinous. The presumption of guilt is undermining the legitimacy of any verdict rendered to establish either guilt or innocence.

While I can understand the overwhelming emotion felt by the family; the overwhelming fiscal motivation suffered by Sharpton, Jackson, NBPP, etc.; it is not clear at all why either Santorum or Obama are lacking good judgment.

    Rixriver in reply to n.n. | March 25, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    There isn’t much actual physical evidence because the cops didn’t treat it as a crime or crime scene, and from what I’ve heard, no forensics work was done on the body.

    Southern justice….just a dead black kid who can’t speak for himself.

    The guy will walk whether he is guilty or not, because the cops didn’t do their jobs.

      n.n in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:13 pm

      What is the source of your knowledge? According to the city, and the corroborated public releases of information, the position you are taking cannot be supported. It is at best constructed from hearsay (e.g. “i’ve heard”) or stated as an assertion.

      If you believe there is probable cause that necessitates external oversight of the local authorities then that would be a reasonable proposition. Anything else only contributes to corrupt the handling and resolution of this incident. If Zimmerman acted in self-defense, then he should he should be cleared of all allegations to have committed a crime. If, on the other hand, it can be proven otherwise, then he should be imprisoned for his crime against society and Martin.

      As for “just a dead black kid”, please don’t argue from an appeal to emotion. I am not predisposed to condescending attitudes or arguments based on selective recall. I am not your typical American and, in fact, the prevailing stereotype of Americans is also not typical. Not now and not ever.

        Rixriver in reply to n.n. | March 25, 2012 at 10:19 pm

        When the ‘self-defense’ argument can be made for almost any incident where one person winds up dead, it’s not really much of an argument anymore. That’s part of the problem.

        If I can walk up and shoot you and claim “self-defense” or “I felt threatened” and the law just takes my word for it, it’s not much of a claim.

        Yep…absolutely take it out of the hands of the locals and put greater scrutiny on it.

        You say: “I am not your typical American” — by this condescending statement, I’m going to conclude that you run around in a skin-tight costume declaring your superpowers to anyone that will listen. 🙂

          Ragspierre in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 11:15 pm

          What a self-righteous, know-it-all, and bigot you are.

          “Southern justice”? Really?

          You know this is an AMERICAN neighborhood. All races live there.

          The Sanford city manager is AA.

          What a prig you have shown yourself. You can spell that how you like.

          Milhouse in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 3:01 am

          Ever heard of probable cause? Killing someone is not a crime. Killing someone unjustly is a crime. Without probable cause to believe that a killing was unjust, how can the police possibly justify arresting someone? Do you want them to just presume guilt, and arrest someone without any reason at all to suspect that he’s committed a crime?!

          zazz in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 9:31 am

          They seem to have released the body for burial without an autopsy, so there’s no evidence about how the bullet entered the body. You don’t gather evidence when there isn’t a crime, and the presumption of innocence seems to have been the deciding factor.

          It would have been evidence if the clothes of the two had been examined, but since there seems to have been no investigation beyond questioning the shooter, that won’t be possible. Zimmerman may be innocent, but he’ll live under a cloud because of the incompetence of local law enforcement.

          Jeb Bush was clear that this was not a case of “Stand Your Ground” since Zimmerman was pursuing Martin. I missed seeing Prof. Jacobson criticizing Jeb Bush for prejudging the case.

          I wonder why we’re not supposed to assume that, however misguided Sharpton or Jackson may be, they may be sincere in wondering if a miscarriage of justice wasn’t happening. Why are we supposed to assume the worst possible motivations from them? Apparently there wasn’t much of an investigation until there was a public outcry. It may be that Zimmerman is innocent, but if he’s not, if he is convicted of a crime, should there not have been public questioning of how this was handled?

      myiq2xu in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:32 pm

      The incident took place outdoors on a rainy night. Trayvon was shot at close range. An autopsy was performed but the results haven’t been released.

      What forensic evidence would you expect to find?

        Rixriver in reply to myiq2xu. | March 25, 2012 at 10:11 pm

        Skin under the fingernails, perhaps…who knows? Right now there is only one side of the story….the side told by the survivor.

          Rixriver in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 10:54 pm

          We seem to already ‘know’ (according to ‘witnesses’) that Zimmerman got more than he bargained for and wound up on the ground being beaten up by a guy half his weight.

          I’m not sure what new info you are offering here.

          Also, while there will probably be a toxicology test run on the body, because there was no arrest, we will likely never know if Zimmerman was drunk or on something that impaired his judgement.

          That’s the thing….there’s a bunch of stuff that we have to simply take Zimmerman’s word for, because the cops just took his word for how things played out.

          Word to other pudgy dudes who want to play cop: if you can’t fight, don’t get out of your car. Wait for the cops. I’d ask what Zimmerman was thinking, but obviously he wasn’t.

          myiq2xu in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 12:23 am

          Skin under fingernails would be part of an autopsy. Maybe the cops didn’t do a toxicology test on Zimmerman because he didn’t appear to be under the influence of anything. If he was, what would that prove? It would not be a defense.

          There are a lot of things we don’t know. Even the best of investigations would not tell us what Trayvon was thinking or whether Zimmerman is telling the truth.

          Even if Zimmerman is a racist and a cold blooded killer, what does that prove? How do his actions attach to anyone else?

          How does a “no duty to retreat” law apply to a man lying on the ground and being beaten by someone on top of him? If Zimmerman “got more than he bargained for” how does that affect his right to self-defense?

          BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 12:36 am

          I have read that Martin was 6’2 & over 200 ilbs. Being a football player & young that might be all muscle. I have seen the pics of his tattoo on a muscly bicep.

          Zimmerman does look a bit pudgy but no way is he over 400 ibs.

          Therefore your ‘1/2 his weight’ is ridiculous.

          I have read Martin was over six feet but 140 lbs, which would explain his nick name being “slim.” But maybe he was bigger. Or not. Who knows at this point? It is speculation This is a troublesome case, but until the real facts come out we really do not know.

          Wise leaders would express concern but also council for restraint and patience. Let the investigation happen and look to objective facts to be developed. We do not yet know what happened that night. Anyone suggesting that they do is just guessing and part of the problem, not the solution.

          Rixriver in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 8:10 am

          I’ve also read that he weighed 140 pounds, and by his thin features, that weight seems appropriate.

          Note that there is a Facebook profile pic going around that is NOT the correct person, that shows a ‘scarier’ looking guy….not that that makes any difference. The confrontation still should not have happened in the first place.

      Estragon in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 1:29 am

      The cops DID “do their jobs” and found NO evidence of a crime at the scene. The physical evidence – Zimmerman’s broken nose and bloodied back of the head, his statement, and the witnesses who saw Martin on top of him beating him as Zimmerman cried for help – all fit together as textbook self defense.

        Scorpio51 in reply to Estragon. | March 26, 2012 at 8:13 am

        Yes, the information is now coming out that Zimmerman has a broken nose. That in itself should tell everyone that Zimmerman was overpowered by Martin and was beaten senseless.

        The police did do their job. There will now be a grand jury and we go from there.

      Milhouse in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 3:02 am

      You are clearly a bigot against Southerners. Why is that not just as bad as being a bigot against blacks?

Midwest Rhino | March 25, 2012 at 6:58 pm

So Rick could be counted on to go with the PC flow. Sick mind, malicious motive … give him a fair trial and hang him. Presidential decisiveness.

Not only did Santorum judge Zimmerman, but he overrules the police. The cops acted stupidly, right Rick?

Left Coast Red | March 25, 2012 at 7:03 pm

911 neighbor calls, 2nd conversation (the background noise, rather) is the key one:

The politicians as well as shake-down artists like Sharpieton are gonna look pretty foolish.

    drrogera in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 25, 2012 at 7:27 pm

    They should look foolish but they wont. Why because MSM will cover for them or drop coverage altogether – Tawana Bradley sound familiar?

      Left Coast Red in reply to drrogera. | March 25, 2012 at 7:44 pm

      Listening to this 911 tape, he is clearly getting the daylights beaten out of him, pleading/screaming for residents to come help him (he’s been voluntarily protecting their property), and at a certain point realizes he’s gonna get beaten to death, because nothing and nobody will stop Trayvon.

      This could well be the key piece of evidence if it goes to trial.

      If at some point this gets wide play, public perception will change. If the MSM doesn’t sit on it. I was living in New York during the Tawana Brawley thing, and it was clear at the end that it was a outrageous put-up job. The media went all quiet and let Sharpieton go on to shake-down another day — I guess because the New York elites saw him as useful.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 25, 2012 at 7:32 pm

    the third call says she saw the guy in the white shirt on top .. of the other guy. I think that was Trayvon.

Santorum is done, over with, as far as I’m concerned. This issue is a litmus test for me. If you can’t exercise the basic maturity to resist the PC Gods and stand up for the individual’s presumption of innocence — a classic liberal premise at the heart of our society — I want nothing to do with you. Go away, you screechy little sell-out.

This is what infuriates me about Santorum. He reacts instead of gathering the facts. You can count on him to say about the worse thing possible and fall right into any trap the media lays out for him. Sorry but he is not ready for primetime…

Newt is the only one of the four who handled this situation well and took on Obama’s response. As much as I do not like Romney, I know Romney will not say something so ignorant and lacking in facts.

Florida Democratic Chairman Rod Smith. Smith, a former prosecutor, was the legislator behind the “Stand Your Ground” law, the Tampa Bay Times reports. Smith co-sponsored the bill as a state senator; it was passed .

From City of Sanford website…click on Trayvon Martin Investigation to hear the 911 calls separately.

    Estragon in reply to Joy. | March 26, 2012 at 2:05 am

    Everyone should listen to those calls, and read the police chief’s statement – which amounts to a FAQ on the case – before commenting.

Professor, from the first, you have had a calm and clear-headed approach to this case. Finally, some of the press is following in your wise footsteps! I certainly hope that the families of both men are able to find peace when this is all finished.

They need to keep Santorum as far away from “The button” as possible. He would go off half cocked and do something that we all would live (maybe) to regret!

“I’m a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color.”

From the link in the original post:

At one point Oliver became choked up with emotion talking about his friend but said he was coming forward freely even though it may expose him to reprisals.

Regardless of what the investigation reveals, I salute Mr. Oliver.

I like the way Santorum (Latin for asshole) says he does not know what was in Z’s mind before he goes ahead and tells us what was in Z’s mind. I am thinking Santorum (Latin for asshole) might just be cut out for this slimy politics thingy.

Of course if the Pope decides recreational mind reading is a sin, Santorum (Latin for asshole) might be against it after he was for it.

Trial starts Monday in the murder of two British tourists by a then 16-year old who celebrates his 17th birthday, on Monday. (h/t Philip)

Interesting that you’d bring that particular matter up, Professor; I’ve been following it almost as closely as I’ve followed the cause celeb killing in Sanford.

As I see it, if folks were really interested in protesting a heinous, interracial crime, this tragedy would be a much better candidate than the Zimmerman-Martin affair … but, so far, only the British press seems really interested in it; and no, I’m not going to speculate as to the reason why the American media is virtually ignoring it.

    Rixriver in reply to Samuel Keck. | March 25, 2012 at 8:32 pm

    It’s not the ‘crime’ that’s being protested. It’s the perception that this guy could just murder this unarmed kid and be let off without even being taken in for questioning, much less being arrested and charged.

    And that all this is okay, just fine, under Florida’s ridiculous law.

    The case of the British tourists…well, the kid has been arrested, and faces life in prison. What else do you want? He is not being allowed to walk. He is in prison awaiting trial. In other words, it seems like the system works…when the victims are white, anyway.

      Samuel Keck in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 8:57 pm

      And that all this is okay, just fine, under Florida’s ridiculous law.

      Actually, it’s not okay or just fine … and, as I see it, Florida’s law is definitely not ridiculous.

      This article should help you understand the legal matters currently at issue respective to the arrest of Mr. Zimmerman more fully:

        Rixriver in reply to Samuel Keck. | March 25, 2012 at 9:49 pm

        From your link: “By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time.”

        That sounds like one hell of a ridiculous law that needs to be changed.

        Shoot somebody, make up whatever story you want, case closed. Great system.

        I’ve yet to see a situation where cops couldn’t find a reason to arrest somebody if that was what they wanted to do.

          Estragon in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 2:10 am

          What Florida law PROHIBITS is an arrest WITHOUT probable cause. Where there is no probable cause, an arresting officer is personally liable under civil law for false arrest, and so is his department and his city or county.

          Unlike your ideal Marxist world, you need a legitimate reason to arrest someone in Florida, or you face the music in civil court.

          Milhouse in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 3:07 am

          So you’d like the police to have the legal power to arrest anyone they like?! There are plenty of countries where that is already the case; please go to one of them. Our founders fought and killed to prevent that; if your wishes ever become law it will be time to do it again.

      Steve in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:08 pm

      You seem to have a prejudiced anti-white attitude. Also don’t seem to understand a difference between defense and assault. Facts on scene did not convince cops a crime was committed. Their notes and evidence is in front of a grand jury. In other words the case is still in progress and facts being determined.

      The other case with the black minor, they have several witnesses and a grand jury already indicted, so apparently much different set of facts that will now be tried in a court.

      Running away/retreat only works if an aggressor allows you to disengage, turning your back is a good way to get it stabbed or shot by someone who doesn’t wish to disengage.

      Quit jumping to stupid conclusions.

        Rixriver in reply to Steve. | March 25, 2012 at 9:44 pm

        Was Zimmerman going to be shot with the pack of Skittles or the can of tea?

          SmokeVanThorn in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:46 pm

          Rixriver is obviously not a serious commenter – don’t feed the troll.

          Rixriver in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:55 pm

          Sorry, but only one person was armed, and Zimmerman should have stayed in his car.

          The whole ‘can’t retreat because you might get stabbed/shot’ just means that the situation should never have gotten to that point IN THE FIRST PLACE, and the reason it did is Zimmerman, not this kid. But the kid is the one who wound up dead because of Zimmerman’s judgment.

          The idea that Zimmerman gets some sort of pass because HE is the one who (allegedly) wound up on the ground getting pummeled is silly.

          Estragon in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 2:12 am

          Beaten to death with bare hands, judging from the evidence which you willfully choose to ignore, you idiot.

          Milhouse in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 3:09 am

          Why should he have stayed in his car? This is America, not some dictatorship where people are prisoners. He had the right to go anywhere he damn well wanted to. And he certainly had the right to follow a suspicious person who was lurking around probably up to no good. Please explain what Martin was doing there.

          Rixriver in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 8:21 am

          Probably up to no good? Of course, you have no evidence of such. Seems like anybody ‘up to no good’ would have other things in his pockets besides candy and tea.

          And having a ‘bloodied face’ and ‘grass stains on his back’ is a FAR CRY INDEED from being “beaten to death”…talk about exaggeration.

          Please remember that getting into a fight and winding up on his back getting hit is not being ‘beaten to death.’

          Come on, stay in reality here.

And the nerve of Senator Santorum to say Congressman Gingrich was wrong!! I was just livid over this.

He’s a lawyer who should know better than to speak about something without knowing the facts.

Turn over your delegates Senator, you are DONE!

    raven in reply to Scorpio51. | March 25, 2012 at 8:38 pm

    I agree. He’s done. That he doesn’t get this issue either legally, fair-mindedly or politically is too revealing, i.e., beyond backtrack or apology.

    Also, I keep hearing that “Breitbart Lives!” Really? Where? I’m not seeing it. Freedom is being clobbered by the mob and all I see are “conservatives” caving. The essence of Breitbart was to stand up to the mob. Who’s standing up to the mob? Newt is the only candidate (as far as I know) who did, and the only one who rebuked Obama.

      Left Coast Red in reply to raven. | March 26, 2012 at 12:39 am

      I did. I stopped the conversation cold over at Mother Jones (under neills) on their thread with some facts (and 911 tapes)……sometimes in short supply on the Left.

      We can all do it. I just support the conservative point of view with facts.

      Breitbart would be happy with whatever we can each provide and move ahead with.

        Good response, good work.

        Rixriver in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 26, 2012 at 8:24 am

        “Breitbart would be happy with whatever we can each provide and move ahead with.”

        And in real Breitbart style, it wouldn’t even matter if what you could provide was true or not, as long as it could be exaggerated, taken out of context, or creatively edited.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Scorpio51. | March 25, 2012 at 9:08 pm

    Rick Santorum’s answer on the Treyvon Martin situation was showed he was not in on many of the details.

    Newt commented that there may have been some emotional imbalance, lack of judgment or over-zealousness on the part of George Zimmerman in his job as neighborhood watch captain, due to the number of 911 calls Zimmerman had made (over a hundred) since the burglary outbreak in the neighborhood.

    Newt went on to say it was wrong for the president or anyone to use this tragedy to promote racism and divide our country. Amen to that!

    It would be best if the candidates said, “I can’t comment on this tragic event since I do not have all the facts and I do not want to compromise an ongoing investigation.” And leave it at that.

      BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 26, 2012 at 12:29 am

      I read that ‘hundreds ‘ figure was wrong. I read it that there were only 46.

      Clearly this number is disputable -therefore I won’t judge Mr Zimmerman as unstable or a 911 prankster just yet.

Midwest Rhino | March 25, 2012 at 8:25 pm

The “Stand Not Apprehend” article seems biased to me. Knowing few facts, he claims Zimmerman IS the aggressor because he had followed Trayvon. But the account I heard was that he was returning to his truck when he was assaulted … not the aggressor, the retreater. Beyond that, the witness heard him yelling for help, and the witness left him, being still beaten. Only then was there the shot.

What needs to be verified from tapes is who was screaming for help. A witness, Zimmerman, and one report said even Trayvon’s Father said it was not Trayvon screaming for help. Maybe he screamed when shot. Doubtful the guy on top would be screaming as he was beating the other guy.

If facts find Zimmerman tried to apprehend, that would contradict his story of returning to his truck, and make him the aggressor. Having called the cops, why would he try to apprehend? Why would Trayvon assault him if he had his gun out? An important fact is the police did not arrest.

Does just following someone constitute aggression? It seems there would need to be physical threat.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 25, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    Martin’s father heard the recording of the screams and said that was not his son’s voice.

      Rixriver in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 25, 2012 at 9:10 pm

      Terrified kid fighting for his life and Zimmerman got more than he bargained for.

      I’m not sure why Zimmerman being on the losing end of the physical conflict (if that’s what happened) is an argument for him to use deadly force, especially since he should have never left his vehicle, and was not supposed to have a gun at all.

        Samuel Keck in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:40 pm

        … and [Zimmerman] was not supposed to have a gun at all.

        Actually, if you’d take the time to read the information at the link I have previously provided you, you’d learn that Zimmerman was, according to the local authorities, well within his rights to be carrying a concealed firearm on the evening in question.

        You may not like it, but that is the simple fact of the matter.

        SmokeVanThorn in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:47 pm

        Don’t feed the lying troll.

        Midwest Rhino in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 9:53 pm

        First, the “terrified kid” could have run away it seems. Zimmerman says he was returning to his truck when assaulted. Indeed every witness has Trayvon on top doing the “assaulting”.

        Zimmerman was licensed to carry a gun … the argument for using it seems to be that his life was in danger. There seems to be at least a minute of him being beaten and screaming, before the shot.

        In one tape I think I heard Zimmerman comment “they always get away” or something. But there is no evidence I’ve seen to indicate he decided to take matters into his own hands to apprehend, AND lie to the cops about his actions. Instead it seems he honestly told the cops everything he was doing.

        The tragedy, beyond the death, is that Obama has inspired a race based trial by media, with misstatements and lies all admissible. Obama could play hero again and call off the New Black Panther bounty, but he seems too busy for that.

          Rixriver in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 25, 2012 at 10:42 pm

          Whether Zimmerman could legally own a gun himself or not is another matter (although why a guy with domestic violence and assault on a cop in his background could get a conceal-carry permit is worth asking).

          From what I was reading yesterday (don’t have it in front of me, sorry), as part of the Neighborhood Watch Assn., he wasn’t supposed to be armed.

          Obama’s statement was pretty tasteful. You guys are exaggerating it out of all proportion, as always.

          janitor in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 25, 2012 at 11:09 pm

          According to Zimmerman’s initial 911 call, the kid did run away. Zimmerman indicated he would keep following him.

          Milhouse in reply to Midwest Rhino. | March 26, 2012 at 3:16 am

          So a mere claim of domestic violence is enough to deprive someone of the right to bear arms for the rest of his life?! What other rights should it deprive someone of? Please let me know your name and address so I can accuse you of domestic violence and eliminate your rights.

          And what “assault on a cop”? He lifted a cop’s hand off his friend’s arm. That’s not assault, and that’s why the charge was dropped.

          Why was he “not supposed to be armed”? Since when does the Neighbourhood Association get to tell people whether they may be armed or not? What are they, dictators?!

          Obama’s statement was shameful. If anything happens to Zimmerman, Obama will bear at least some of the blame.

        janitor in reply to Rixriver. | March 25, 2012 at 11:05 pm

        I agree with you Rixriver. The kid is out walking on a dark drizzly night, and repeatedly tried (confirmed by Zimmerman) to get away from a man who kept following him. Stand Your Ground is for self-defense, not for people who deliberately create a confrontation. The kid tried to retreat until, apparently, he thought he couldn’t. Put yourself in the kid’s place. Who the hell was this guy trailing him? Zimmerman on 911: “He’s running; these assholes always get away”.

        Being a nervous wuss hero-wannabe who deliberately put himself into a physical confrontation he couldn’t handle didn’t give him the right to pull a gun and shoot the person who just wanted to be left alone. What would you do if some guy kept following you under these circumstances? And you kept trying to get away, and that didn’t work. Expect a pleasant chat when he caught up with you? Wait until he pulled a knife?

          Rixriver in reply to janitor. | March 25, 2012 at 11:19 pm

          Well, that’s the thing….to me it doesn’t matter who got physical first. I’ve been out at night and been followed before, and it’s scary as hell. And I’m a full-grown adult with some life experience, not some kid.

          When it did get physical, if the kid was frightened, I’m not surprised that he just started whaling on the guy.

          We’ll never know how things might have gone after that, if there had been no gun.

          I’m wondering…other than calling the cops, is there any kind of training for these neighborhood watch association people? It sounds like an excuse for a-holes to get a bit of authority and feel like big men.

          Milhouse in reply to janitor. | March 26, 2012 at 3:19 am

          What was Martin doing there in the first place? Tell me honestly, what do you think would have happened that night, had Zimmerman not seen him, or had he decided to stay in the car and ignore him? Whose home would have been broken into?

          What would I do in Martin’s position? I wouldn’t have been in his position in the first place.

        Left Coast Red in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 12:50 am

        Woulda. Coulda. Shouldna.

        None of your blather has to do with the facts and legal merits involved in this case.

        Where did Zimmerman break the law?

          janitor in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 26, 2012 at 2:55 am

          F.S. 782.11 Unnecessary killing to prevent unlawful act. Whoever shall unnecessarily kill another, either while resisting an attempt by such other person to commit any felony, or to do any other unlawful act, or after such attempt shall have failed, shall be deemed guilty of manslaughter, a felony of the second degree.

          Milhouse in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 26, 2012 at 3:22 am

          What has that got do with anything? He had every right to follow him and prevent him from committing a crime; he just didn’t have the right to kill him for that purpose. But he didn’t. He killed him afterwards, when it became necessary.

          janitor in reply to Left Coast Red. | March 26, 2012 at 4:02 am

          Following someone at night who keeps trying to get away would constitute threatening behavior, i.e. assault.

          F.S. 784.011 Assault… is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent.

        Milhouse in reply to Rixriver. | March 26, 2012 at 3:12 am

        How was the kid terrified? What would make him afraid? Was Zimmerman threatening him in any way? If he had some legitimate explanation for why he was lurking around a building nowhere near his home, why didn’t he just give it?

        And why should Zimmerman have stayed in his car? Why should he not have had a gun? This is America, not the USSR. People have the right to go wherever they like, and to arm themselves.

          Rixriver in reply to Milhouse. | March 26, 2012 at 8:34 am

          Well, like you say, nitwit, it’s a free country, not the USSR, so why does Martin have to justify his reason for being ANYWHERE?

          He has the right to go ANYWHERE, just like you insist that Zimmerman had. He is not required to provide a reason for being there to anybody except actual law enforcement.

          Why do you keep assuming that Martin was some kind of criminal? What kind of criminal goes out to commit crimes armed with only some candy and tea?

Since the case has been thrown in the national spotlight…

A Grand Jury has been convened.

What I’d like to know is this:

The Prosecutor is trying to convince the jurors that the State’s evidence, testimony, and witness accounts are bogus-

The Prosecutor is trying to convince the jurors that the State’s evidence, testimony, and witness accounts are accurate, but Zimmerman should be charged due to the public outcry.


    Left Coast Red in reply to Browndog. | March 26, 2012 at 12:58 am

    Lynch-mob outcry.

    Color me crazy, but is it a coincidence that these kind of episodes play out the way they do under the Obama administration?

To me, the real outrage of Santorum’s comments followed what the Professor quoted above:

NORAH O’DONNELL: Well, Newt Gingrich said that what the President said in a sense is disgraceful because it is not a question of who that man looked like. Any young man of any ethnic background should be safe. Was Newt Gingrich wrong to make those comments?

RICK SANTORUM: Well, all I can say is that, you know, again, there are a lot of people who have very– very perverted views of reality…

(emphasis mine)

    OcTEApi in reply to Browndog. | March 26, 2012 at 5:13 am

    Its obvious that Santorum was referring (in agreement with Newt) to Obama having a perverted view of reality by trying “to make a bigger point out of it” ie profiling.

    ALL the candidates are profiling Obama’s radical leftist ideologue worldview, Obama is trying to project he’s being targeted or pursued based on his race instead of the reality that its his caustic policies and agenda.

Uncle Samuel | March 25, 2012 at 9:01 pm

UPDATE – Treyvon had just been suspended from school for 10 days for being in an unauthorized location and possibly for assaulting a bus driver. Since those wide-eyed innocent photos the media is putting forth, Treyvon had acquired gold teeth, tattoos and other signs of possible ‘unsavory’ life choices, such as drugs and/or dealing. His twitter account (awful name) and tweets are being scrubbed.
Another photo of the older, bolder Treyvon:

    William A. Jacobson in reply to Uncle Samuel. | March 25, 2012 at 9:10 pm

    People need to be very careful about what they are accepting at truth. Between PhotoShop and spoofing various types of accounts, what things seem may not be what they are.

      Uncle Samuel in reply to William A. Jacobson. | March 25, 2012 at 9:14 pm

      Thanks for that information. I am not tech savvy and have never had a facebook acct…

      How awful that someone might frame or defame a dead teenager.

      How naive I am. Feel free to delete my comment and links.

myohmymanatee | March 25, 2012 at 9:28 pm

Disappointing. Unfortunately, even the left doesn’t know the facts but blame it on Limbaugh anyway.

Zimmerman’s own lawyer has been on TV saying the ‘stand your ground’ law is not applicable in this case.

He says its a simple case of self defense.

From what I’ve been able to find out so far about the case, I agree.

Nice to know Rick’s quick to get on board with the lynch mob-mentality crowd without knowing any details of the incident. Disappointing. But this guy’s going to jump on any bandwagon he thinks the majority are on and has media support going forward.

Unfortunately, Politico reported:

Earlier in the day Gingrich told reporters that he thought the case should be investigated and suggested the shooter was at fault.

“That’s just nonsense dividing this country up. It is a tragedy this young man was shot,” Gingrich continued on Hannity’s show. “It would have been a tragedy if he had been Puerto Rican or Cuban or if he had been white or if he had been Asian-American of if he’d been a Native American. At some point we ought to talk about being Americans. When things go wrong to an American. It is sad for all Americans. Trying to turn it into a racial issue is fundamentally wrong. I really find it appalling.”

I don’t think that Newt meant that Zimmerman was at fault but you have to be careful how you say things to the Obama press.

    Left Coast Red in reply to gad-fly. | March 26, 2012 at 1:05 am

    They all seem to be over-shooting. But the rest of the statment seems great to me.

    Benson II in reply to gad-fly. | March 26, 2012 at 11:15 am

    I saw no earlier statement by Gingrich anywhere only the portion you put here which of course showed once again how Obama’s only concern is dividing Americans along racial lines.

BannedbytheGuardian | March 26, 2012 at 12:47 am

I read that things are hotting up over this in Philly. Don’t know why but there you go.

The DA has gone out in sympathy & started wearing a hoodie.

Rick will be now selling hoodie & vests matching sets.

The “Ob Populus” author to whose article you linked is an idiot. He thinks a neighbourhood watch person calling 911 when he sees suspicious activity means he’s paranoid?! How about it means that there are criminals about? And since when does following someone who is lurking around a building where he has no legitimate business constitute aggression? Zimmerman had every right to follow Martin, Martin had no right to use force to stop him from doing so, therefore Zimmerman was not an aggressor and the aggressor exception does not apply.

The author is also utterly wrong in asserting that the “duty to retreat” is the usual default rule. Even before Florida’s “stand your ground” law, only a minority of states believed in a duty to retreat; now that minority is even smaller.

    janitor in reply to Milhouse. | March 26, 2012 at 4:52 am

    This is the United States, where a person has the right to stroll in the public streets in the early evening, to explore the surroundings of the community where he’s visiting, even to wander aimlessly while enjoying the night air while talking on his cell phone, and doesn’t have to explain himself to strangers who seemingly inexplicably and threateningly keep following him. (“Lurk” by the way involves concealment, lying in wait.)

    The idea that this nerved-up cop-wannabe pointlessly set in motion events that caused the death of this young man who was in fact not committing any crime at all bothers me immensely.

      BannedbytheGuardian in reply to janitor. | March 26, 2012 at 6:04 am

      A question. Is a gated community ‘public street”?

      I have no opinion -just having been around various sites. There are too many versions of everything about this case.

      The photo is from a 12 year old – some have him now 6’3 & 200lbs & others 140ilbs. Most ‘young’ peoples sites have Zimmerman being white whilst older people sites have him mixed race .

      However most are very resolute in their views & will not be shaken from them. Dissenters on blogs are rare- this is one of the few with disparate views.

        The ‘wannabe-cop’ aspect bothers me the most. That and the ‘they always get away’ sentiment.

        The earlier report I read about Zimmerman following some guy who allegedly spit at his car is disturbing. It sounds like over-reaction to small offenses.

        And this sounds like the same…Martin was in his neighborhood, allegedly ‘acting suspicious’….but actually on his cell with his girlfriend talking about how he was being followed by ‘some guy’…it just sounds like Zimmerman over-reacted, like he apparently has a pattern of doing.

        We’ve all known guys like that, who get set off by a word or a gesture, who aren’t mature enough to know the difference between when to calm down and relax, and when to act.

        It sounds like the 911 dispatcher told him pretty clearly that this was a situation where he should calm down and wait for the cops….and he chose not to do so.

        A question. Is a gated community ‘public street”?

        Going from what I observed when I lived near Charlotte, NC I would say they are limited access public streets. There are a limited number of entrances, thus the term “gate”.

        They are essentially residential developments in which the perimeters are bounded by low brick walls and trees. The houses therein are built to specific price points targeting specific socioeconomic groups.

        The roads are not thoroughfares, rather they meander and are meant for access to residences only.

        They may have owners associations and may have community (membership only) recreational facilities.

          Benson II in reply to Jack Long. | March 26, 2012 at 11:10 am

          I think term gated community was something used by the liberal press to make it look like it was an upscale community. All the better to employ another prejudice against the shooter. Let’s face it they know no bounds when it comes to lying.

As one of Rick Santorum’s earliest public supporters, I am terribly disappointed to see Rick the same talking points as the LYNCH MOB when he clearly doesn’t know what the hell he is talking about.
Twitchy picked up on my shock and horror at RS’s incredibly irresponsible words, be sure to scroll down to comments to see the email I sent the Santorum campaign.:
Unless Rick retracts his inflammatory and ignorant words on this matter, I will be withdrawing my endorsement of him, and I will be joining the Good Professor in fully supporting Newt Gingrich for the rest of this primary season. I will vote for whoever the GOP nominee is, but Rick Santorum has seriously ticked me off. Unfreaking believable.

“Rick Santorum on Face the Nation prejudges the Zimmerman-Martin case, and attributes malicious motives to Zimmerman (emphasis mine):”

In the first part of Santorums response he seems to be defining profiling with the intention to commit a crime as clearly a heinous act… its disturbing that he would prejudge the case by parlaying that notion of “a heinous act” into [a case] “like this” and “that whatever the motive is, it was a malicious one.”

To me its clear that he’s pandering to those that hold that notion.

I think the bigger issue in this is when will the black community STOP accepting Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson as their leaders? They make their living race baiting!

The white community is really tired of all of this and don’t want race relations back in the 50’s. We have progressed as a nation and the black community needs to as well.

    zazz in reply to Scorpio51. | March 26, 2012 at 9:45 am

    I think the bigger issue is that the police bungled any kind of investigation until there was a public outcry, that a kid may have been threatening, or he may not have, but the evidence wasn’t considered worth collecting by the authorities. I don’t know I’d that was because of race our straight up incompetence, but that’s not how justice is done. Zimmerman will always live under a cloud of suspicion because of that incompetence even if he’s found innocent.

      Benson II in reply to zazz. | March 26, 2012 at 10:46 am

      You could be right but we won’t know until all the facts are in which we’ll be lucky to ever get.
      This whole episode was initiated for only one reason, Florida gun laws. The liberals saw this as an opportunity to force changes. If this wasn’t the reason they would have never tried to make what should have been a local event into a national event with distortions and lies.

All I can say is my son is 17. He wears hoodies. He’s 6’1″ and 185 pounds. He’s very fit and can punch like a boxer can punch. He could easily beat up a guy the size of Zimmerman if he wanted to. That makes me think that Zimmerman’s account is totally believable.

Did it happen that way? I don’t know. I really find it distasteful that the media circulated a photo of the victim as a 12 year old.

    zazz in reply to PhillyGuy. | March 26, 2012 at 9:37 am

    Yeah, you can’t tell from the photo, but the description the police released was of someone who weighed 140 pounds and several inches shorter than Zimmerman. I don’t know what happened, either. My son is 6’1″ and a sneeze could blow him away.

Our country seems to have a severe shortage of people who have smarts. 30+% voting for Romney, the liberal. 40+% voting for Santorum, the religious zealot and inability to communicate. Gingrich the brain with ideas, solutions and vision w a record of getting the job done getting 16%.

Yesterday Santorum was cussing out a reporter and now this stupid statement.

Unbelievable that Santorum would give this kind of answer to something he has no knowledge of except for liberal news coverage. He is in so far over his head it staggers the imagination.
For a proper answer that makes Obama look like the divider he is you need to look at Newt’s answer.
Please people look at Gingrich’s experience and how he’s the only one making Obama explain in speech after speech why his policies are not working for America’s energy independence.

Henry Hawkins | March 26, 2012 at 10:42 am

FYI/RE: The term “white hispanic”…. as another commenter (can’t recall who just now) pointed out the other day in another thread, ‘Hispanic’ is not a category of race.

My business includes provision of substance abuse treatment for those identified as needing such after some criminal conviction such as DWI, MJ poss, etc. On DWIs, we have to report the program completion to the NCDMV. To the extent that the NCDMV has it right (no guarantees on that on anything), this is how they break it down on the e-form we use to report into their computer system:

For race, our choices are:

American Indian or Alaska Native
Black of African American
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

If you enter ‘white’ (and only when you enter ‘white’), you are required to further clarify by choosing from this list:

Hispanic Puerto Rican
Hispanic Mexican American
Hispanic Cuban
Hispanic other
Not Hispanic or Latino

I assume this race/ethnicity ID system is fairly uniform around the country in government institutions like the DMV, etc.

Therefore, Zimmerman is white in race, Hispanic in ethnicity.


Do I have permission to wonder why the same set of people who say speculation is pointless and potentially harmful without all the facts nonetheless speculate despite ignorance of the facts for over a 100 posts?

I’ve been guilty of it before, heaven knows, but trying not to this time.

Apart from case specifics, I think it dangerous in general to focus on a ‘perpetrator’s’ history or nonhistory of racism after he or she has had a fatal altercation with someone of a different race. Even a white Grand Wizard of the KKK can be assaulted by a nonwhite mugger while he’s, um, off-duty (not in robes or otherwise identifiable as KKK). If it is necessary for him to use lethal force, legally, in self-defense, the media – and many citizens – will nonetheless call it a hate crime.

Premature speculation when one knows one hasn’t all the facts too often serves a master other than justice.

    OcTEApi in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 26, 2012 at 11:25 am

    Delving into the minutia of a case that will probably last months if not more than a year is pointless.

    No, permission denied.. lol

      Henry Hawkins in reply to OcTEApi. | March 26, 2012 at 3:17 pm

      Here in NC I was at ground zero for the infamous Duke Lacross case, and this rush to judgment is eerily reminiscent.

    PhillyGuy in reply to Henry Hawkins. | March 26, 2012 at 11:48 am

    Henry, you are correct in that. But I believe the point is that the media are using it as a further way to insinuate a hate crime in this matter. Mr. Zimmerman’s father, a retired judge, said that their family includes members of color as well. That point is hardly ever mentioned in stories about this.

    I think we should all wait and let things unfold before making final judgments. These hoodie protests are a bit premature.

Uncle Samuel | March 26, 2012 at 1:08 pm

You all have to hear Rev. Jesse Jackson preach lies to the congregation, working them up, putting thoughts of racism in their heads that Treyvon is a martyr for the Black (perpetual victimhood) cause:

Here is the real reason for Obama’s Race Card campaign in Florida – BLACKS ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY – not by a long shot.


Is this a dishonest political ploy to solidify race-based voting despite the very negative effects of your presidency on black jobs and businesses?

The Obama, Farrakhan, Jackson, Sharpton, Spike Lee campaign is certainly not about these statistics:

DOJ statistics on murders from 1976 to 2005:
86% of white victims were killed by whites
94% of black victims were killed by blacks
Other DOJ numbers:
White-on-black crimes (90,717)
Black-on-white crimes (429,444).