The Back Alley Archives

I'm starting to think this guy's gonna walk. The grand jury might indict him, but I could easily see a judge or a jury buying the self-defense argument. If that happens, do we have a repeat of the reaction to the Rodney King verdict?

Yep.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

Not too long ago, my father offered to leave me his guns in his will, because he believed that I'll need to protect myself during the inevitable race war.

Who knew that he might be right?

^^^^^

DAT. I know if my head was banged against the side walk I'd like to go to the hospital to check for a concussion.

Wouldn't the EMT's more than likely strap you down and transport you if you had your head bashed in?

They can't treat you against your consent - he said he didn't want to go to the hospital.

I don't think he's ever claimed that the kid "bashed his head in." I don't know if they were on the street, sidewalk or grass (although the police report indicates he had grass on his back).

Guess they did take him to the dry cleaners to get all the blood off his clothes.

Here you go Doc. About the sidewalk.

http://polipundit.com/?p=36802

^^ Well, okay then. I still don't think it changes much.

at the end of the day, who gives a shit about all this...chuck this guy in the pokey for being incredibly dumb

because good people don't find themselves in incredibly dumb situations

[quote=radbag]because good people don't find themselves in incredibly dumb situations[/QUOTE]

I know you don't beloved that

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

I say let's see what happens when the investigation and trial is over. Nowadays in this media saturation, you can't get fairness for either side. My guess is that he will be exonerated due to something like "conflicting witness" statements.

[quote=rock8591]I say let's see what happens when the investigation and trial is over. Nowadays in this media saturation, you can't get fairness for either side. My guess is that he will be exonerated due to something like "conflicting witness" statements.[/QUOTE]

In all likelihood, you are correct...

though, splitting hairs - conflicting witness statements would not "exonerate" you...just prevent a conviction.

Welp, the Today show got caught creatively editing the audio of Zimmerman's 911 call:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/post/nbc-to-do-internal-investigation-on-zimmerman-segment/2012/03/31/gIQAc4HhnS_blog.html?hpid=z6

The version that aired:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.

The actual audio:

Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic

Zimmerman: He looks black.

Nice job, NBC!

I love the use of an ellipsis. It would go something like this:

"Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good...He looks black"

I have not seen the video, but I did read somewhere that ABC News enhanced the video they aired of Zimmerman going into the jail and it does show gashes and welts on his head.

Anybody able to confirm this?

Haven't heard that but I did read that the Orlando Sentinel had audio experts review the audio and they came to the conclusion that the cries for help weren't Zimmerman.

[quote=TheTodd]Haven't heard that but I did read that the Orlando Sentinel had audio experts review the audio and they came to the conclusion that the cries for help weren't Zimmerman.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I read that today. Not sure how much confidence I place in that. Sounds like a lot of voodoo mumbo-jumbo to me.

One of the experts said the voice was only 48% likely to be Zimmerman. But they didn't test it against Martin's voice because they don't have any samples of his voice. I haven't listened to the audio tape, but I would imagine that there are significant differences between screaming for help and carrying on a normal conversation.

[quote=DocZaius]Yeah, I read that today. Not sure how much confidence I place in that. Sounds like a lot of voodoo mumbo-jumbo to me.

One of the experts said the voice was only 48% likely to be Zimmerman. But they didn't test it against Martin's voice because they don't have any samples of his voice. I haven't listened to the audio tape, but I would imagine that there are significant differences between screaming for help and carrying on a normal conversation.[/QUOTE]

I was kind of thinking the same thing.

No Grand Jury...interesting.

Means two things, IMO.

Going to charge him w/ Second degree or some other lesser crime.

Or, IMO more likely,

No charges, period.

I wonder when we will find out.

Speaking of Angela Corey, would you charge a 12 year old as an adult?

[quote=TheTodd]I wonder when we will find out.

Speaking of Angela Corey, would you charge a 12 year old as an adult?[/QUOTE]

Depends.

1) Would have to be a murder

2) Would depend on the facts.

Wow, no Grand Jury? That's surprising. Seems like a no-brainer to let the GJ decide - that way, the prosecutor is off the hook.

Then again, you don't need a grand jury if it's not a capital case. And in this case, I don't know of any facts that put the death penalty into play. No premeditation or other aggravating circumstances.

Still, it's all on Angela's head. I vaguely know her from my days as an intern in the Jax SAO, but not really, so I don't have any insight as to what she'll do.

So what do you all think of the latest news?

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/10/justice/f ... ?hpt=hp_c1