Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Al Sharpton interviews Rachel Jeantel

Al Sharpton interviews Rachel Jeantel

I think she came across a lot better in this interview than she did in the trial.

And better than the Piers Morgan interview, which resulted in some narrative-busting and generally bizarre sound bites.

It’s loathsome that Al Sharpton has a show on MSNBC, but he did bring out the best in Ms. Jeantel.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

BTW did you read about Sharpton’s …. um, girlfriend? He’s 58. She’s a dish at 35. Being a race baiter and hustler has privileges.

    kentuckyliz in reply to walls. | July 18, 2013 at 12:09 am

    Sharpton been race baiting so long, he’s a master at it. I guess you could call him a master baiter.

    *rimshot*

    mzk in reply to walls. | July 18, 2013 at 4:48 am

    Con-men are good at this. Look at W.J. Blythe, Jr, Bill Clinton’s father. (What is it with Leftist Presidents and name changes? Could he have been elected as William Jefferson Blythe III?) Or Brett Kimberlin.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to walls. | July 18, 2013 at 8:13 am

    Wow, Sharpton doesn’t look a day under 78.

    His sins are evidently taking a toll.

I gotta wonder whether all this talkin’ is helps or hinder further legal actions against Zimmerman. I can’t imagine that the Martin family attorneys appreciate all the extra details about St. Trayvon’s lesser known activities coming to light…

    Spiny Norman in reply to Mogget. | July 17, 2013 at 10:13 pm

    Oh, the more she talks, the more it strengthens Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense, and potential slander case against idiots like Sharpton.

    You go girl! Keep on talkin’

      Speaking of keeping on talkin’ – wasn’t RJ hesitant to come forward because she didn’t want to be known? She sure seems to be enjoying the limelight. A lot!

        Carol Herman in reply to Fabi. | July 17, 2013 at 10:37 pm

        She lied about her age. At what point did sybrina martin catch on that this “baby” WASN’T what you’d expect St. Trayvon to have been “fondling.” (But, of course, it was only ear contact.)

        Not just RJ. But Dee-Dee. Diamond Eugene. And, a whole trail of names like someone who could write bad checks … with many different identities.

        For his next guest, Al Sharpton should bring on Tawana Brawley. Who is no longer 15.

        Somebody wrote about the 3.0 average in high school. And, said since she didn’t read cursive, why are you assuming she can read decimals? What if her grade point average is 0.3 ?

        In court, you could barely hear her speak. Did she get voice lessons since then? Did she get a dentist to fix her jaw?

        Man, it’s just fascinating how blacks can get on TV … it really “blesses” the whole Affirmative Action movement.

          janitor in reply to Carol Herman. | July 17, 2013 at 11:37 pm

          This woman (a legal adult, by the way), is laughing at stupid whitey, including interviewers such as Piers Morgan, who had her define “cracka” instead of the noun being used “ass cracker”, i.e. pervert, i.e. gay guy.

          Don’t see why the racial remark was necessary. Blame MSNBC; somehow the only Black man they respect is a murderous anti-semite.

      JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Spiny Norman. | July 18, 2013 at 12:13 am

      Girl sure needs a lot of ‘mulligans’.

      And paracticing in public by someone who wants to be left alone and didn’t want to come forward sure is a bit ….mmmm….odd.

      The closed captioning guy just hanged himself. He left this note: “Avenge me.”

This post violates my 8th Amendment rights.

LilMissSpellcheck | July 17, 2013 at 10:15 pm

I really didn’t mind Mushmouth Al always pronouncing the word “repubrican.”

Until I realized he was trying to say “elevator.”

Carol Herman | July 17, 2013 at 10:20 pm

Are you sh!tting me? ZIMMERMAN IS SCREAMING ON THAT TAPE!

The GOOD NEWS is that no one watches this stinking channel.

But if they did, they’d bring on Tawana Brawley who’d say “yeah, she really was done raped by dem cops, and dat prosecutor.”

All you have to do is keep repeating the lie!

My favorite one? She’s got a 3.0 … That’s not even her diaphragm’s ring size.

    BannedbytheGuardian in reply to Carol Herman. | July 17, 2013 at 11:49 pm

    Ouch . Only a woman could get that in.

    Oh Carol.

    caambers in reply to Carol Herman. | July 18, 2013 at 9:30 am

    Agree…as a former public school teacher of ‘exceptional children (high school), I can tell you she’s probably right–HER GPA is 3.0…but a close examination of her courses, or rather coursework, will reveal she probably functions on a middle school/junior high level. But she feels good about herself so that’s what’s important.

Loathsome, indeed.

Dat’s entertainment!

ProfessionalSpectator | July 17, 2013 at 10:29 pm

In watching her interviews, it’s fairly obvious that she has been thoroughly coached on what to say regarding the substance of the phone conversation she had directly prior to the confrontation. All she “remembers” with clarity are the references to George Zimmerman and him being “creepy” and “a rapist.” These are soundbites that occupy a maximum of 30 seconds…NOT 4 minutes. Keeping in mind that she was on the phone with Mr. Martin immediately up until the point of conflict, there was either a lot of silence on one or both ends of the phone (shades of Manti Teo) or she’s failing to account for everything she heard.

It’s very troubling that she can’t shed any real light on what Trayvon Martin was thinking leading up to the incident. Either he was talking about something else (and confirming that he was unconcerned) or he was talking about something damaging to his character/case. Regardless, her selective memory recall creates a strong inference, in my opinion, that she has been instructed on what to say in public.

    Barnestormer in reply to ProfessionalSpectator. | July 18, 2013 at 9:43 am

    With all the litigation pending and threatened, as a deponent under oath she may have ample opportunity to expand/compare and contrast her recollection(s).

What an accomplishment!!

She managed to not curse in court.

And she thinks that’s “winning.”

In another interview she admitted that Trayvon threw the first punch….duh. As far as West asking her if she spoke English or understood English, he asked her because the prosecution was indicating that English was not her first language. Did her recorded interview come out before the 911 tape with the screaming?

    No way.

    Mary Sue in reply to mwsomerset. | July 18, 2013 at 12:52 am

    I was just watching that interview at National Review. HuffPo originally conducted and posted the interview under a blazing headline: “Rachel Jeantel: ‘I Believe Trayvon Hit First.'” I am at a loss to explain how that isn’t the end of this whole fiasco. Still there were a few rocket scientist commenters at HuffPo who managed to translate that interview into evidence Zimmerman committed 1st degree murder.

    “Fair is foul, and foul is fair.”

      Mister Natural in reply to Mary Sue. | July 18, 2013 at 6:37 am

      “Fair is foul, and foul is fair”
      …Hover through the fog and filthy air” (1.1.11-12)
      sounds like a good approximation of that fateful night in sanford, fl

    But only after Zimmerman grabbed him, per Jeantel.

      Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 12:53 pm

      We have a propensity in this country to root for the underdog, and, given her socio-economic status, I don’t see her the target of litigation; however, if she keeps this egocentric chat-a-thon going, she needs to end up on the wrong end of legal Hell.

      Enough of this shit. She’s a liar, a fraud, and a fool.

    walls in reply to mwsomerset. | July 18, 2013 at 9:03 am

    What is her first language, Ebonics? What dialect? Maybe with her 3.0 grade average, she knows many dialects. ROFLMAO. And our glorious republic declines with the setting sun. Got dat?

    Fabi in reply to mwsomerset. | July 18, 2013 at 2:50 pm

    Crump got the tapes released on March 16th. According to Rachel’s testimony, Tracy called her on March 17th. (She had previously said the 18th) She gave her ‘oral affidavit’ to Crump and crew on March 19th. Crump’s press conference was held the following day, the 20th.

    Look for obfuscation to be a major part of the narrative rehabilitation effort.

I think she comes off as a Stone Age primitive with the auto repeat talents of a mynah bird.

But I do appreciate her exposing St. Trademark as a prime candidate for a federal hate beef, in addition to several state level felonies, had he lived.

Keep talking, Precious.

ProfessionalSpectator | July 17, 2013 at 10:41 pm

I would bet a large sum of money that Rachel Jeantel was explicitly instructed: When you want to say “retarded,” say “RIDICULOUS” instead.

She took that advice, modified it a bit, and ran with “Ridikilis.”

The alternate juror (male) is laying out the order, details, facts exactly per the defense. He couldn’t establish what case the prosecution was trying to make.

No racism by GZ, no ill-will – nada. Thought the injuries to GZ were key and also the fact that GZ called the cops BEFORE the altercation. Yup.

I do not understand what this interview shows. It certainly adds nothing to what we heard at the trial. I have not seen all the texts and pictures from TM’s phone but my understanding is that it contradicts the picture of TM she is trying to maintain.

Maybe Al Sharpton “brought out the best in Ms. Jeantel” because she feels more comfortable talking with race baiting street hustlers than in other media forums?

And one of his other famous protoges, Crystal Gail Mangum (Duke Rape case), can come on and tell how she really WAS raped by those guys, and BTW she never killed her boyfriend later that she’s in prison for now.

Oh, wait, that would make the interview difficult, wouldn’t it ?

This is voyeurism, edging into reality tv.

It adds nothing…to anything.

Make it stop.

Lucien Cordier | July 17, 2013 at 11:18 pm

At around 1:26
“Phone records, she show kinda proof, or Joyce said on da tape, on da 911 tape, she said it, and I remind you before da 911 tape came out, I’m da one, my voice came out before ev… the 911s, all dat, and I told ’em listen to his 911, it match what I said.”

Firstly, what it that supposed to mean? Secondly, who is Joyce?

When is the obligatory appearance on The View?

Rachel says on this recording that she regarded Don West as an enemy as she knew he was going to “attack” her. She is quite a bit more eloquent in this recording than she was at trial which shows me that she was being very passive-aggressive in her trial testimony. In the trial she gave minimal answers, just short of her being held in contempt. Her English in this recording is much improved, so that her supposed “3.0” GPA becomes slightly more plausible. But there must still be questions.

I would like to see some written paragraph she has written. Moreover, I would like to see a paragraph she has written if and when she has graduated from one of the “historically black” colleges to which she has been granted a scholarship.

Rachel was a poor and dissembling witness.

    bernie49 in reply to nomadic100. | July 17, 2013 at 11:29 pm

    I guess my point is that Sharpton did little to allow Rachel to improve the credibility of her testimony. If anything it sounded like she took the stand with a strong point of view and was determined to say nothing that would undermine that position. Fortunately her apparent evidence was overwhelmed by the eyewitness statement and the forensic information. Again I doubt her portrayal of TM will survive TM’s phone records and information derived therefrom.

    robbi in reply to nomadic100. | July 17, 2013 at 11:53 pm

    For many years, I worked with learning disabled kids. Some teachers working with the kids pulled out of class for test taking felt sorry for them and gave them answer sheets. While I can’t state unequivocally that this happened with RJ, I wouldn’t be surprised. She’s a 19 year old junior in high school. She is not Einstein.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to nomadic100. | July 18, 2013 at 12:20 am

    What, exactly, would be the scholastic achievement level of a 19 yr. old high school junior with a 3.0?

      VetHusbandFather in reply to JackRussellTerrierist. | July 18, 2013 at 1:47 am

      Most 19 year olds are in their Freshman Year of College, how can you be two years behind with a 3.0? Were all her failures graded ‘incomplete’?

        kermitrulez in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 18, 2013 at 9:17 am

        In fairness, if English is a second language, then she may have been held back in elementary school. Since the GPA restarts at High School, we’ll never know how her early schooling progressed. Nonetheless, given her speech patterns now, it is hard to believe that she is a 3.0 student. Although you had to know that testimony was all an act on the stand.

        caambers in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 18, 2013 at 9:35 am

        I can almost guarantee you she is in some kind of exceptional program OR was held back. In some states, maybe all for what I know now, you can stay in school until you’re 21 if you are so identified.

          Fabi in reply to caambers. | July 18, 2013 at 1:13 pm

          That reminds me of one of the most fantastical comments I’ve seen regarding this case. When TM’s text’s came to light, one of the TM supporters had enough. He had seen the reference to the .22 revolver and he couldn’t tolerate guns, so that was it for him.

          Another lunatic TM sycophant told him this, and I am not kidding: a 22 revolver was not a gun, but a person who was in and out of high school until they were 22. And the person (who had had this beautiful epiphany!) totally bought it and came back to the narrative. Curiouser.

        I was a junior in college at 19. White privilege, I guess.

        And is there a minimum ACT/SAT score for these HCBUs? I imagine that RJ would be on the western slope of the bell curve.

        I’d like to see her take the Wonderlic, as it would be more appropriate vehicle. Her result would be a lot closer to Morris Claiborne’s (4) than Greg McElroy’s (43).

      Her grades would be higher if she spent less time in the cafeteria, got dat?

      Maybe it’s a 3.0 out of 5.0?

    Exiliado in reply to nomadic100. | July 18, 2013 at 12:51 am

    I would like to see some written paragraph she has written.

    ——- ——- ———– ———– ——–

    Not gonna happen.
    She can’t.
    She had a “friend” write the letter to sybrina fulton. Go figure.

LukeHandCool | July 17, 2013 at 11:27 pm

“It’s loathsome that Al Sharpton has a show on MSNBC …”

Understatement of the century.

Al Sharpton is one of the most dangerous men in America.

Rachel Jeantel was her name at birth – true or false?

You could almost surf on the amber waves of stupid emanating from that young lady.

I’m in favor of her talking and talking. The more she says the more she will give up TM.

healthguyfsu | July 18, 2013 at 12:29 am

Just to remind everyone of a couple things:

1. She (and by that I mean her handlers) can get a lot more “creative” now that she is no longer and being tossed the softest of softballs.

2. It is very convenient that her boastful GPA is protected under the federal education rights to privacy act. It’s the same reason Traystein can be reported to have a 3.7 and not get called on it.

Last side note: I can’t tell you how many kids think they are geniuses because of inflated high school GPA from a lousy school that has very low standards only to show up in easy 101 classes she’ll shocked by college because they’ve been pushed through a system designed to boost their self esteem rather than prepare them for success.

I agree she did handle this better. But then of course Sharpton could make Rain Man look like Thomas Edison.

Apparently she really busted the narrative tonight. I’m reading that she was interview on HLN and stated that Trayvon threw the first punch. Can’t seem to find the video, but it will probably show up tomorrow.

Somebody tell me why she’s now a “celebrity”?

She was a horrible state’s witness; she was inarticulate, hostile, dissembling. She gave up one key piece of evidence FOR the defense, though: she provided the information that Trayvon was at the back of his dad’s girlfriend’s house, and had “lost” Zimmerman.

And for that, she’s some kind of hero or star to the left? I truly don’t get it, and I truly weep for my country.

I’ve listened multiple times to her response at 10:22 to Al’s question about whether Trayvon looked “suspicious”. Best I can tell, it’s “Umm, I wanna say Trayvon little suspicious” or possibly “Trayvon look suspicious”. Definitely not, “Oh no, I would not ever call Trayvon suspicious”. She then goes on to say that you would notice his height and that he was so tall. If you listen closely, you can hear the defense cheering in the background.

Then again, the two of them combined could barely manufacture more than a few complete sentences.

I have no doubt whatsoever that Ms. Jeantel will graduate with a solid 3.0 GPA from the Florida public school system.

VetHusbandFather | July 18, 2013 at 1:08 am

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/rachel-jeantel-trayvon-martin/51e5784b2b8c2a08d90000f5

Interview with Marc Lamont Hill in which she pretty much takes the ‘probable’ out of Zimmerman’s account of the event by validating everything he said.

1) She thinks Trayvon threw the first punch, although she maintains that GZ must have forced him into it, because otherwise he would have hung up the phone.

2) She says that Trayvon was beating GZ down, but that she thinks he would have stopped before killing him.

3) She says Trayvon told her he was right behind his “Daddy’s Girlfriend’s” house right before the fight started.

I think we are going to see her story fall apart more and more in the coming weeks as she enjoys her new found infamy.

You guys have to realise this interview isn’t for you but for everyone who believes GZ is guilty.

You can also bet your left testical that she was heavily coached by Sharpton and his team before the interview so that she gives the right answers and so she comes across as a victim of GZ’s “criminal act”.

While the skeptical will question her ever changing story, to the “true believers” she just reinforces their view that GZ must be killed.

Regards

Mailman

Uncle Samuel | July 18, 2013 at 3:34 am

Re: Ms. Jeantel –

1. Retired Officer Dennis Root, witness who worked on the Defense timeline, said Ms. Jeantel’s testimony could not be used because it was not congruent with the other witnesses, esp. John Good’s. Moreover, her story changed with each deposition and in court.

2. Both Ms. Jeantel and Trayvon Martin revealed their interests, attitudes, their drug use and his violence online and on their cell phones. She was complaining about having to be sober for the trial.

3. Trayvon Martin’s school record, GPA and behavior were affected by their drug use. There are actual photocopies of Trayvon’s police record available online. His tweets talk about his suspension, fighting, looking for guns, with photos of guns, marijuana, porn. Jeantel’s school record and GPA likely show the effect of her drug use.

It’s more than disgusting – it’s downright scary that a major American media (I won’t say news) outlet hired a vicious, murderous, racist, anti-semite with blood on his hands as a regular.

As a Jew, this scares me. I don’t care which side does it.

And how incredibly sad that the black grievance industry keeps beating the drum “Why didn’t GZ testify?” I guess “innocent until proven guilty” and “the state needs to prove its case, the defense does not have to disprove it” mean nothing, as well as Constitutional rights not to have to testify against yourself.

    MarkS in reply to ZurichMike. | July 18, 2013 at 5:40 am

    A lynch mob doesn’t concern itself with the niceties of the law.

    bizbach in reply to ZurichMike. | July 18, 2013 at 7:34 am

    That is because they have nothing else. Zimmerman did not need to testify obviously after the prosecution decided to use the police interviews, etc. What more was there to say?

Michelle has put on a bit of weight.

Exasperated | July 18, 2013 at 6:28 am

Was Mike Geregos a defense consultant? The Daily Mail has a picture of West, Omara and Geregos post trial at Nello in NYC.

Further up the this comments thread there is HUFFPO posted where she says Trayvon threw first punch.

    But only after the ‘creep’ grabbed him in the dark, per Jeantel.

      AYFKM in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 10:04 am

      Sounds like you and Jeantel (sic) agree that TM thought GZ was a rapist and therefore being beaten to death is the only correct response, at least in the mind of a gay basher like TM.

      You support beating homosexuals, yes?

        AYFKM: Sounds like you and Jeantel (sic) agree that TM thought GZ was a rapist and therefore being beaten to death is the only correct response, at least in the mind of a gay basher like TM.

        That’s just silly trolling. If someone accosts you in the dark, you have a right to defend yourself.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 1:27 pm

          TM was accosted? Not according to Rachel. Please, keep digging…

          Fabi: TM was accosted?

          She testified that Martin said “Get off, get off”.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 5:04 pm

          Her first two interviews did not include that information. Well, she did say that to BdlR in her second interview. Unfortunately, she forgot that she had earlier mentioned that her phone was already cut-off at that point, i.e., she lied. Again.

          The phone call was cut off during the same minute as the sound of the gunshot was recorded.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 7:04 pm

          Not what I’m talking about. Serino said did you hear anything else, she said ‘no’, that the phone had hung up. Then he asked another question, then, if she heard anything else. Serino suggested ‘Did he ever say “Get off”?’ Then she said ‘yes’, but, by this point, she already perjured herself.

          As I posted earlier, stick around for the lawsuits – it’ll all make more sense.

          Fabi: Serino said did you hear anything else, she said ‘no’, that the phone had hung up.

          Jeantel isn’t providing a chronology, but responding to questions. Claiming that perjury is just silly.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOLZ97rJCXQ

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 8:33 pm

          Well, I guess that’s open to interpretation. Her deposition to the defense will be made available to the public. Maybe it will shed more light on the genesis and evolution of her story.

The more this young lady talks the more obvious the verdict was correct and that this never should have gone to trial. I cannot watch the Sharpton interview, just can’t do it, watched the HuffPost one. But she obviously knows what happened and lied about it on the stand and is now revealing in bits and pieces the truth even while being coached by the liberal media. I am sure she has told her friends all about the beat down Martin was giving GZ.

She did not want to come forward but now can’t stop making the talk circuit. She knows that Martin started the fight. One fact she has not waivered on is that Martin was right by the house he was staying in. That negates the argument that he didn’t want to lead GZ to the house to protect his “non-brother.” Put all the pieces together and she has confirmed GZ’s account perfectly. I still believe she is the one who got Martin all riled up and why he attacked GZ. Love how she keeps claiming she is a TEEN-ager and Don West was mean. I think West was quite kind and careful when he questioned her. Love that she says O’Mara was scared of her, uh yeah can you blame him?

I got a message from a often FoxNews viewer who said that the Zimmerman coverage, or should we say repetition, was getting over the top. We all need to take a step back.

    ClinkinKy in reply to Neo. | July 18, 2013 at 8:25 am

    Uh huh. Because this administration and all of their media arms are lacking in coverage…/s

    Fen in reply to Neo. | July 18, 2013 at 8:54 am

    I just got a message from a Rush listener that we are too strident against gun control and should just go ahead and hand over our firearms.

    Fen in reply to Neo. | July 18, 2013 at 8:55 am

    I just got a message from Ronald Reagan that we should surrender the Republic.

Exasperated | July 18, 2013 at 7:51 am

Other than Geraldo, has any public figure. from any where on the Hispanic spectrum, come forward to object to GZ as a standin for white guilt?

Ugh! Twelve minutes of Jeantel is just too much!!!

Note to self: Read the reviews of future Jeantel interviews before subjecting yourself to more than two minutes of her drivel.

Next up, “The $1,000,000.00 parents.”

A 3-inch soap dish would come across as a “good interview” when Al Sharpton was on the other side.

Uncle Samuel | July 18, 2013 at 8:34 am

Still waiting for one Republican legislator to speak out or take action against the targeting and violations of Civil Rights of George Zimmerman and family by the Obama DOJ, Sharpton, Jackson, Crump, Julison, Corey, Spike Lee, the New Black Panthers and the Media and against the (so far) 30 acts of violence ‘For Trayvon’ these criminals have inspired against innocent victims and property.

One Republican….?

So far only Mark Levin.

    Patience. Right now, they are very busy selling us out on immigration reform for a better table at Martha’s Vineyard. I’m hearing Boehner may even get to sit next to Oprah.

Uncle Samuel | July 18, 2013 at 9:10 am

America may not be all too keen on buying what Obama, Holder and Sharpton are selling.

At one ‘Protest’ only 3 Black Panthers showed up and one preacher drowned them out preaching Jesus.

One lady interviewed remarked, “Love is the answer, and prayers for both the Martin and Zimmerman families.” (and she was African-American)

http://weaselzippers.us/2013/07/16/new-black-panthers-hold-trayvon-martin-protest-in-tampa-3-people-show-up/

Rachel says that GZ should have just taken the beating, that Martin would not have killed him. She says Martin threw the first punch. Can she be charged with perjury? She conveniently left that out when questioned under oath.

bizbach: She says Martin threw the first punch.

But only after the ‘creep’ grabbed him in the dark, per Jeantel.

Zimmerman had followed Martin, first slowly in his vehicle, then on foot. According to Jeantel’s testimony, Martin thought he had lost Zimmerman, but was surprised in the dark. Martin said “Get off. Get off.” The implication is that Zimmerman grabbed Martin, who defended himself.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 9:35 am

    BS

    Uncle Samuel in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 9:38 am

    Jeantel had THREE opportunities to tell that story, but she was under oath then.

    Of course, if she changes her story now, that means she committed PERJURY three times.

    Is her new story worth jail time to RJ?

    Tune in tomorrow as Rachel decides what to do on As The Stomach Churns.

      Samuel: Jeantel had THREE opportunities to tell that story, but she was under oath then.

      That is from her testimony.

        Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 1:32 pm

        From her evolving testimony, perhaps. ‘Get off, get off!’ was not in her original interview. Or her RJ 2.0, if I remember correctly.

        This person has zero credibility, and I’m being charitable.

          Fabi: ‘Get off, get off!’ was not in her original interview.

          It was part of her testimony.

          Fabi: This person has zero credibility, and I’m being charitable.

          Jeantel was on the phone with Martin before and at the time of the altercation.

          Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 18, 2013 at 5:08 pm

          Oh, dear. She may have been on the phone with TM. The phone that was connected to TM that night was not in her name (‘It should be now.’) and she admitted that other people used that phone, as well. So, no, there is no proof that she was on the phone with TM at the moment in question.

          Wait around a few months for the lawsuits. You’ll be surprised.

          Fabi: So, no, there is no proof that she was on the phone with TM at the moment in question.

          Seriously? You’re denying Jeantel was even on the phone with Martin? That just shows how far you have to go to maintain your position.

          Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 18, 2013 at 7:10 pm

          The only available forensics show that those two phones were connected – nothing more, nothing less. It doesn’t identify the parties using them. Who was on RJ’s, given that RJ admitted that she shared the phone, is not a certainty.

          That is rudimentary deduction, not hardly difficult – just intellectually honest.

          How would you prove that TM and RJ were on the phone?

          She was Martin’s friend. She testified to the events. Serious, you’re denying the obvious.

          Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 18, 2013 at 8:08 pm

          I’m only saying it’s unproven. Please show me the proof. Her testimony could have been scripted, as the NEN call had been available to Crump and others before she came forward – simple logic.

          Nothing is ever proven absolutely. Just some things are less plausible than others.

          Fabi in reply to Fabi. | July 18, 2013 at 8:28 pm

          I think they proved absolutely that TM was shot. Lots of things are proved absolutely and some things not. I can’t prove with available evidence that it wasn’t RJ on the phone, by the way. Elements with uncertainty have to be discounted as such. In my humble opinion, of course.

          Proved to whom? They have pictures. People said they saw a body. Maybe it’s fake, like the moon landing.

          It is reasonable to believe that Jeantel talked to Martin that night. It would require too many arbitrary assumptions to support an alternative view.

While in Other Rev.Tawana Sharpton news-headline sucking: “REV. SHARPTON DECLARES ‘STAND YOUR GROUND’ AS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO CIVIL RIGHTS IN AMERICA”.

Ya like that one, Professor, for putting your Head Shaking Mode into full freaking frenzy?!

Me…? I’m in FULL Disgusted with Current American (cough!!) Culture Mode. )-:

George Zimmerman: He’s a free man in the eyes of the court, but he’s going to be looking around his shoulder for the rest of his life.

Yes, he’ll be looking around his shoulder. Can you imagine? Feeling like you’re being followed. Everyone just assuming you’re a criminal. I mean, if I were him, I’d wear something to hide my face.
http://www.zachriel.com/blog/ZimmermanHoodie.jpg

allmenroder | July 18, 2013 at 9:51 am

After watching her testimony and subsequent interviews, I believe that TM would still be alive today had he not been talking to Ms. Jeantel at the time of the incident. For whatever reason, either to impress her or, more likely in my opinion, egged on by her, TM decided to confront Zimmerman.

    Uncle Samuel in reply to allmenroder. | July 18, 2013 at 9:56 am

    Trayvon was talking with multiple females on Jeantel’s phone and perhaps other phones. No proof of anything that was said, unless the Obama NSA wants to cough up the truth.
    But that is as likely as pigs flying.

    bizbach in reply to allmenroder. | July 18, 2013 at 10:37 am

    Agree completely. I think she felt a little guilty because of her role in the whole thing, one of the many reasons she did not come forward right away. However now she is all giggles and happy getting so much attention.

FINALLY!!!!

The male alternate juror gives an interview and he is the FIRST person I have heard say that George Zimmerman didn’t have to go back to the car, that he had every right to be out there? YES! Thank you sir!

No offense to the highly intelligent ladies we have on this forum, nor to the ladies of the jury, but this is why I wanted a man on the jury.

The women on the jury still thought George did something wrong. They wanted to punish him, but the law just didn’t allow it.

Finally this guy says George did nothing wrong… Which he didn’t.

Watch it here…
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/17/alternate-juror-in-zimmerman-trial-says-agrees-with-verdict/

    JEBurke in reply to fogflyer. | July 18, 2013 at 8:48 pm

    I don’t think you have it quite right. Clearly, Zimmerman had a RIGHT to leave his vehicle, whatever the 911 operator said to him. However, a lot of people, including juror B37, believe he was unwise, foolish, or even irresponsible in leaving his truck. B37 said words to that effect but she was also clear that (a) there was nothing illegal in his action, and that (b) the 911 operator also asked Zimmerman for more information in a way that may have prompted Zimmerman to think he was being encouraged to investigate further (her solid understanding of the evidence was underscored by her grasp of the possible significance of this detail.

    So, I don’t think there is a male-female thing here at all.

      Apparently it is legal to stalk and surprise someone in the dark while carrying a weapon.

      VetHusbandFather in reply to JEBurke. | July 19, 2013 at 12:18 pm

      So where did you come up with the idea that TM was stalked and surprised? GZ testified that he had lost sight of TM and that TM came out of nowhere and asked him if he had a problem. What RJ heard on the phone corroborates thatt account. If anyone surprised anyone, it was TM surprising GZ. Your statements are speculation based on no evidence or testimony.

oops that was a response to another post but it didn’t post that way

Notice how the BGI is complaining that there were no blacks on the jury. So the jury should look like the the victims of the crime being charged? Or is that only applicable when a white-hispanic or white person is on trial, when a black is on trial the jury should look like them. It is really tough to keep up with the changes required to follow the leftists train of thought. You can twist yourself in knots trying to keep up with whats acceptable from day to day. Didn’t I read that the prosecution cut a black man from jury just for watching Fox News:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/16/Black-Juror-Cut-From-Zimmerman-Jury-For-Watching-Fox-News

It’s really painful watching his girl speak but I have seen every video that has been posted online and I’ve yet to hear her utter a complete sentence. She speaks the way she tweets and texts which tells me she hasn’t had many classes in grammar and compression or if she has they just passed her along to next grade. It’s really sad frankly, I have a 14 year old daughter who could speak better than her when she was 6 yrs old.

    styro1: It’s really sad frankly, I have a 14 year old daughter who could speak better than her when she was 6 yrs old.

    Jeantel speaks three languages, with English not her native tongue.

      styro1 in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 11:38 am

      Have you heard her speak them’? Thats what the media and BGI claim but they have told so many lies I for 1 don’t believe a word they say now. She has been in this country since at least 2nd grade and she can’t speak in complete sentences. I have friend who came to this country when he was 16 from Poland never spoke english and within 4 years spoke better than she does now after 13 or so years in the US school system. My friend only had 2 years in US schools and had to learn to speak on his own.

        Her testimony seemed quite comprehensible, though obviously in the vernacular.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 1:56 pm

          ‘…in the vernacular’ is certainly one of the talking points provided to you. Perhaps you should buy a thesaurus and change up the lexicon a bit. Who knows, you might fool someone.

          Fen in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 2:04 pm

          Quite comprehensible? Then please explain why the judge, prosecution and defense had to direct her over and over and over again to speak up. And why they had to ask their questions three different ways to get an intelligible response.

          Fabi: Perhaps you should buy a thesaurus and change up the lexicon a bit.

          No, vernacular is accurate and precise.

          Fen: Then please explain why the judge, prosecution and defense had to direct her over and over and over again to speak up.

          Because she was shy, talking softly, and they were unfamiliar with her vernacular.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 5:11 pm

          Dialect is more precise.

      Mrshowell51 in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 12:40 pm

      Rachel Jeantel herself said she grew up speaking English.

      Chuck50 in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 4:57 pm

      Sorry, but according to her own court testimony (what could be understood of it), she stated it was her primary language. I sincerely doubt she speaks either of the other languages any better than she does English..

    tigercpa in reply to styro1. | July 18, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    Are you kidding? Rachel has a 3.0 GPA. 😉

Uncle Samuel | July 18, 2013 at 11:26 am

Pam Geller, Atlas Shrugs, lets go with both barrels.
“It is astonishing that Zimmerman was acquitted, considering the immense forces of the Obama administration and the institutional left working furiously to convict him. The decked was so stacked that it was nothing short of a miracle.

It’s a like a bad Victor Hugo novel.”

[…] Is The Liberal Media So Infatuated With Rachel Jeantel? All they are really doing is showing how bad public education is these days. Where did she get […]

Carol Herman | July 18, 2013 at 12:55 pm

DISHONEST! How did al Sharpton get the gig with CNN? Okay, rating whores. But their ratings have tanked, anyway.

What did people tune in to see? Diamond Eugene, and her fabrications. And, Dee-Dee’s VOODOO dance. You can bet your bottom dollar she does VOODOO.

Didn’t Larry King once have OJ on after the verdict? There, he could announce he was looking high and low for the real killers. Did this hokum ever get you to change your mind?

You know what’s wonderful? Mark O’Mara’s close, plus his entire behavior during the televised trial. CNN doesn’t want you to see this in re-runs. Perhaps, You Tube will keep it there?

Maybe, Al Sharpton, for ratings, can bring on Tawana Brawley?

Henry Hawkins | July 18, 2013 at 1:11 pm

Anybody else having erotic dreams about Jeantel?

Can anyone please explain why this witness needs her own attorney? Does anyone know who is picking up the tab for her attorney?

    Chuck50 in reply to neils. | July 18, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    A person normally brings an attorney with them to prevent making libelous statements. She hasn’t been charged with anything yet, but maybe there’s something is going on in the background that we don’t know about..

    Fabi in reply to neils. | July 18, 2013 at 5:56 pm

    When Morgan asked about TM’s pot usage, her attorney Ben Vereen (sp?) quickly interjected (couldn’t quite hear) and then RJ said something about twice per week…

    VetHusbandFather in reply to neils. | July 18, 2013 at 11:00 pm

    Perhaps Crump’s law firm, to keep her from saying things like “I think Trayvon threw the first punch.”

Here’s what I want to know:

She’s obviously receiving appearance fees for most of these shows; can this be equivalent to paid testimony? Fraudulent testimony, at that.

Just another RICO element, I hope!

Carol Herman | July 18, 2013 at 2:53 pm

For Al Sharpton, she wore her hippopotamus costume.

Fred Thompson | July 18, 2013 at 4:03 pm

In a Huffington Post interview yesterday, Jeantel admitted that she believes that TM did throw the first punch, but only after being confronted or “grabbed” by Zimmerman. She characterized the confrontation not as a fight, but as a one-sided “ass whooping” that TM was administering to GZ.

She said that she believes that TM would have eventually stopped beating Zimmerman, and that GZ should have simply taken the beating that she believes he deserved.

She also expressed surprise at the jury for finding GZ not guilty, remarking that “they have kids”.

The full 22 minute interview is on the HP site: http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/rachel-jeantel-trayvon-martin/51e5784b2b8c2a08d90000f5

The video file is directly at this address:
http://avideos.5min.com/606/5178606/517860508_2.mp4

Her above statements begin about 10 minutes into the video.

    Chuck50 in reply to Fred Thompson. | July 18, 2013 at 5:06 pm

    Rachel Jeantel ear witness testimony Version 4.2. I’m sure it will be upgraded soon once they teach her what her new lines are..

    VetHusbandFather in reply to Fred Thompson. | July 18, 2013 at 11:16 pm

    I think the whole “he like grabbed him” part was made up on the spot to justify the punch. She didn’t say that she heard Zimmerman say those things she just said “I think he was like, I got you”. Most of that explanation was also prompted by her interviewer and then confirmed by her.

      Jeantel’s testimony seemed quite credible. It would seem that the testimony of the last person to talk with Martin other than his killer would be important.

      But at least one juror agreed with you, and discounted her testimony entirely, not because she thought she was lying, but apparently because she felt sorry for her.

      VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 19, 2013 at 11:53 am

      That comment is not about her testimony,it was about her interview where she introduced this new insight about GZ that would have been very difficult for the defense to overcome if she had been asked it in court. I would venture to guess tgere is a reason it never came up in court. As for whether or not the jury believed her testimony in court, well i don’t think it matters. Other than a few minor inconsistencies, her testimony does a good job of corroborating Zimmerman’s account.

        VetHusbandFather: As for whether or not the jury believed her testimony in court, well i don’t think it matters.

        According to Jeantel’s tesimony, she heard Martin say “Get off, get off” before the first blow.

        VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 19, 2013 at 1:48 pm

        Which is also slang for lets fight. Something that would be known by someone that was a street fighter.

        VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 19, 2013 at 4:37 pm

        So that would be speculation. She is speculating about what she thinks happened based on what she heard on the phone. In the eyes of the jury this certainlyshould carry less weight then Mr zimmerman’s account.

          VetHusbandFather: She is speculating about what she thinks happened based on what she heard on the phone. In the eyes of the jury this certainlyshould carry less weight then Mr zimmerman’s account.

          Speculation should carry very little weight, but what Jeantel heard, e.g. “Get off, get off” should have been given significant weight.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 19, 2013 at 5:37 pm

          What she heard is not speculation, how you/she interpret it is. We can speculate that he meant GZ should get off of him, or that Trayvon was egging on a fight, or maybe a neighbors cat happened to jump on him. We don’t know why he said it just that she says he did. Now couple this with a few things we know for sure: TM had no injuries and RJ never mentioned that Tm had said that in any of her other statements and the jurors suddenly have a lot of cause for doubt.

          VetHusbandFather: We can speculate that he meant GZ should get off of him, or that Trayvon was egging on a fight, or maybe a neighbors cat happened to jump on him.

          Some are more plausible than others, of course.

          VetHusbandFather: TM had no injuries

          That’s funny.

          VetHusbandFather in reply to VetHusbandFather. | July 19, 2013 at 9:23 pm

          That’s funny.

          Either you are an idiot or you are being extremely pedantic. Other than the gunshot wound he had no injuries.

abbydabbado | July 18, 2013 at 5:20 pm

Why does she keep saying over and over again that she’s a teenager? What 19 year-old women do you know that call themselves teenagers? 13 year-olds maybe…

    That’s funny. With all the jibber jabber about her command of English, she uses teenager correctly.

    “They can’t walk fast. They can’t walk slow. So what do they do? How do they get home without people assuming you are doing something wrong?”

      Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 7:17 pm

      Zachriel 2.0 – now featuring a Blow talking point!

      “They can’t walk fast. They can’t walk slow. So what do they do? How do they get home without people assuming you are doing something wrong?”

      False premises. Circular logic. Sloppy.

        Have no idea what your point.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 7:38 pm

          Tu quoque. Please see my prior comment. I didn’t understand the introduction of the ‘…can’t walk fast.’ meme, nor the logic of the meme itself, as it is self-defeating.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 7:40 pm

          The ‘Blow’ reference is the NYT writer who launched the ‘proper pace’ meme, i.e., what’s the proper pace for them to walk…

          Fabi: I didn’t understand the introduction of the ‘…can’t walk fast.’ meme, nor the logic of the meme itself, as it is self-defeating.

          That wouldn’t make it false premises or circular logic.

          People have repeatedly accused Jeantel of a poor command of English—and much worse—, but abbydabbado complained when she used a word correctly. It’s a no-win, can’t walk fast-can’t walk slow, situation.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 8:14 pm

          The meme itself contains false premises and is circular logic.

          And why would you mention another person’s complaint into this argument? Take that up with abbydabbado, please.

          The meme is certainly not circular, and expresses the no-win situation many minorities find themselves in.

          We responded directly to abbydabbado. You interjected.

          Fabi in reply to Zachriel. | July 18, 2013 at 9:44 pm

          I only responded to your introduction of the meme, nothing else.

          Now you’ve qualified your meme with the word ‘many’. Different argument, but…

          Huh? You don’t seem to be making a coherent point.

    VetHusbandFather in reply to abbydabbado. | July 18, 2013 at 11:03 pm

    Cuz u no I’m a teenager an I gotta live mah life, u no like drink n smoke. I don have time to like focus on stuff an it’s like boring.

VetHusbandFather | July 18, 2013 at 11:11 pm

One thing that stands out to me is how she says that nobody wants to go to court and testify. I don’t know about you but if my friend was killed and I thought it was wrongful I would be eager to go testify against his killer. And if I was giving an honest testimony I would give it loudly and confidently. Jeantel describes it as the hot seat and complains about preparing. This tells me one of two things, either she’s being dishonest, or she’s been coached so much that she’s nervous she’s not going to give the “right” answer and the prosecution will be mad at her.

    Many people, especially young blacks, don’t trust the legal process. They find that the law always views them with suspicion, even though the vast majority of law-abiding.

    Jeantel is especially shy. She wouldn’t even go to Martin’s funeral.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend