Thursday morning links

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Thursday, July 11. 2013

Opium, gin, and Soma: There’s a Pill for That

Roger Kimball goes fishing

Documents Detail the Department of Justice’s Role in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests

Small town America: Remington, U.S.A.

How to answer questions like a White House press secretary

Failure to Rescue: How FDR hurt Jewish would-be immigrants

'The Collaboration: Hollywood’s Pact With Hitler’

Obama's Sex Harassment Policy for Colleges:
Unauthorized,
and Very Likely Unconstitutional - See more at:
http://www.mindingthecampus.com/originals/2013/07/obamaharrasspolicy.html#sthash.fyFhWTAA.dpuf

Dr. Carson: Restoring plain and civil speech to politics - Breaking speech taboos reinforces the power of
persuasion

Just when you think that the EPA cannot possibly get any more idiotic…

Britain set to privatize its Royal Mail postal service

Posted by Bird Dog in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 05:40 | Comments (50) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

By means of the Zimmerman trial, I hope the race pimps don't undermine or erode "self defense" and "stand your ground" for women, who are the largest subset afforded cover by these provisions.

#1 Exasperated on 2013-07-11 07:35 (Reply)

I'm not sure what you mean? Just because the implied statte narrative is that Zimmerman legally carrying a firearm is indication of a depraved mind?

But don't worry, the riots will increase the public's opinion of self defense, RKBA and guns in general. Nothing destroys a Prog idea like it coming tearing down the holder's urban street.

#1.1 JKB on 2013-07-11 08:42 (Reply)

Travesty deescribes Zipperhead's depraved mind armed stalking a boy in the dark.

Bambi would have been kickin' his ass for being such a sicko.

Zipperhead perhaps, may transfer to Pelican Bay, CA for security.

#1.1.1 Leag on 2013-07-11 12:27 (Reply)

Truthy

QUOTE:

Byran Preton: Documents Detail the Department of Justice’s Role in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests

Community Relations Service: The Community Relations Service is the Department's "peacemaker" for community conflicts and tensions arising from differences of race, color, and national origin. Created by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, CRS is the only Federal agency dedicated to assist State and local units of government, private and public organizations, and community groups with preventing and resolving racial and ethnic tensions, incidents, and civil disorders, and in restoring racial stability and harmony.
http://www.justice.gov/crs/

#2 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 10:03 (Reply)

Yes, everyone can read the official blub. But actions speak louder than words. Seems some believed "peacemaker" to mean gin up a protest to vent frustrations.

In other news, re: Zimmerman, the state is pulling a fast one in the jury instruction. Suddenly, child abuse is in play.

If ever there was a political prosecution, this is one. Governor is on the hook for this as well. And apparently, there was lots of political pressure to arrest without probable cause.

If Zimmerman is acquitted as the evidence indicates, I hope there is a comeuppance for the city, state and Obama for this travesty.

#2.1 JKB on 2013-07-11 10:56 (Reply)

They pulled Murder 3 out whole, had it waiting. Fine, if the defense gets reasonable time to answer. That judge thinks otherwise. The clip Fox is showing is indelible. The Prog is committing itself to the asylum.

#2.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 12:38 (Reply)

The Community Relations Service was established in the 1960s. The Community Relations Service didn't have to "gin up a protest". The protests were already occurring. The job of the Community Relations Service is to help local governments provide a proper venue for legitimate protests while protecting the public peace.

#2.1.2 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 13:21 (Reply)

The Community Relations Service didn't have to "gin up a protest". The protests were already occurring.

DOCUMENT YOUR CLAIM, Z-TEAM. DOCUMENT TO US THAT THERE WERE PROTESTS BEFORE THE CRS ARRIVED ON THE SCENE.

#2.1.2.1 Gringo on 2013-07-11 13:32 (Reply)

March 6, 2012: Family demands justice in deadly Sanford shooting of teen
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/man-who-shot-killed-teen-sanford-neighborhood-has-/nLPgL/

It was quite apparent there was a lot of anger in the black community over the lack of an arrest. People have a right to protest, but only if they do so within the law. The Community Relations Service helps local communities organize for protests, protecting the right to peaceably assemble without degenerating into riots, while protecting the rights of other citizens. It's about managing protests to keep them from spinning out of control.

#2.1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 13:54 (Reply)

I guess there's not much anger in the black community about all the black on black murder. During the lifetimes of those in the black community who are angry about the death of a black teenager by a white man, the likelihood that that scenario - regardless of who was "right" - happening is MUCH less than the other way around.

Will the DOJ fund similar ops when a black man kills a white teenager "in self defense"? When that happens, will the press post pictures of the white "victim" when he was not even a teenager be spread around? Will the press edit 911 tapes of the black man to make it sound like he was after the white man because he was white? Will the white president declare that if he had a son, he would look like the white victim? I rather doubt it. In fact, I'd lay money on it so spare me about the anger of the "black community".

I don't doubt that there was anger in the "black community" but race hustlers have been hard at work convincing blacks they are an aggrieved group who would be able to get ahead if it weren't for the racism of whites. It has nothing to do with justice.

#2.1.2.1.1.1 mudbug on 2013-07-11 23:06 (Reply)

Since you have cherry picked some boilerplate from the DOJ's web site, I'll do precisely the same:

"It shall be the function of the Service [CRS] to provide assistance to communities and persons therein in resolving disputes, disagreements, or difficulties relating to discriminatory practices based on race, color, or national origin which impair the rights of persons in such communities under the Constitution or laws of the United States or which affect or may affect interstate commerce."

So, it appears that by law the CRS's involvement is limited to cases that implicate possible civil rights violations or interstate commerce. AFAIK, there's no evidence at this stage that anyone's civil rights were violated. So why did the CRS get involved? Do they think their role is open-ended, that they have the authority to intervene whenever they please? I would think it takes an official finding by the AG of a violation before the CRS could step in. So far, the DOJ has not publicly announced such a finding...though would anyone be surprised if they had done so in secret? If the jury finds Zimmerman Not Guilty on all charges, will the DOJ file federal charges of civil rights violations against him? You betcha' ! Zimmerman's legal battles have just begun. We know that intimidation which brings the full weight of the state apparatus down on opponents is the favorite tool of this White House.

#2.2 Agent Cooper on 2013-07-11 13:27 (Reply)

Continuing,

§ 2000g-1: "The Service may offer its services in cases of such disputes, disagreements, or difficulties whenever, in its judgement, peaceful relations among the citizens of the community involved are threatened thereby, and it may offer its services either upon its own motion or upon the request of an appropriate State or local official or other interested person."

#2.2.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 13:37 (Reply)

May meself interject, the boy killed had his right to life terminated.

What is it about yanks that yall are so against civil rights but are first in line to blah about same, me wonders.

#2.2.2 Leag on 2013-07-11 16:11 (Reply)

QUOTE:

Jordan Hoffman: 'The Collaboration: Hollywood’s Pact With Hitler’

Quite the exaggeration, however, Hollywood did downplay both the Jewish question and the Nazi threat. The Roosevelt Administration was trying to aid Britain through Lend-Lease without causing a political backlash, as most Republicans were very much isolationist at the time.

One of the first movies with an explicit anti-Nazi tilt was The Mortal Storm with James Stewart and Margaret Sullavan.

Nazi youth: "If he's not with us he's against us!"

Jewish professor: "I've never prized safety, either for myself or my children. I've prized courage."

#3 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 10:14 (Reply)

--yup, the GOP isolationists --vs the Democrat patriots, eh? Such as FDR's ambassador to the Court of Saint James, who was quietly escorted (by the seething British diplomatic corp) out of London and back to Massachusetts, for advocating surrender to Hitler. Meanwhile the Mob liked Mussolini enough that both Frank Nitti (with Saul Alinsky in tow) and Ambassador Joe Kennedy were buying into Hollywood studios, with something in mind, wonder what. Joe was buying, but Nitti of course was extorting his way in, in early 1943, when during his evening stroll he --according to the police report --inexplicably shot himself.

#3.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 13:02 (Reply)

PS, more on them Patriot Democrats here in this link-laden Freeper thread. Carter comes up at the bottom (of the thread, in this case). This material is well-documented, it's not just a 'freeper thread'. Freebers just always got really good links.

It ain't ''Hollywood & Hitler'' --it's H&H's spawn, "Democrats & Totalitarians".

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2326939/posts

===

(& just for fun)
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=3946

#3.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 13:27 (Reply)

There's a long history in the U.S. of avoiding entanglements in European affairs. That there was solid support for isolationism in rural American and among Republicans after the Great War is not a secret. But these were not the only supporters, which included some progressives and peace activists, as well. Because there was no organized internationalist movement, the isolationists exercised considerable political influence, at least until the late 1930s.

#3.1.2 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 14:11 (Reply)

--a good deal better this time, Zach. But it's a shame someone has to call you down before you'll change your tune. Your practiced phrasing,

The Roosevelt Administration was trying to aid Britain through Lend-Lease without causing a political backlash, as most Republicans were very much isolationist at the time

directly claims that 'all' the political backlash (amounting to de-facto Axis support) would've come from 'most' Republicans.

For shame, Zach. What about the children, what do you think happens to their hold on reality when they read adulterated history?

#3.1.2.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 15:23 (Reply)

buddy larsen: "The Roosevelt Administration was trying to aid Britain through Lend-Lease without causing a political backlash, as most Republicans were very much isolationist at the time" directly claims that 'all' the political backlash ... would've come from 'most' Republicans.

The Republicans, especially in the Senate, represented the center of isolationist influence, especially with regard to the political situation in Washington. As we said, this is not a secret.

buddy larsen: (amounting to de-facto Axis support)

There were historical reasons for isolationism, but it was misplaced in this instance. It doesn't imply support for the Axis powers.

#3.1.2.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 15:43 (Reply)

No, it doesn't 'imply' it, it IS it.

That's why it was 'world' war already. And the items you patronizingly inform are 'no secret', i don't believe any one would claim they are --they're as well known as the part you're avoiding, the abrupt 180 degree turn that your people, the left, made from Doves under the Hitler/Stalin Pact alliance, to Hawks the exact moment the summer of '41 when Uncle Adolph surprise-attacked Uncle Joe the dear old Communist.

I was waiting to see, when you straightened me out on the 'no secret', if you'd remember ALL of the 'no secret'.

But darn it, you forgot the biggest part!

Reminds me of the guy saying to his doc,

"Say, doc, I'm having a short-term memory problem"

...to which the doc asks "How long have you had this problem?"

...and the guy answers, "How long have I had WHAT problem?"

#3.1.2.1.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 18:48 (Reply)

Zachriel: There were historical reasons for isolationism, but it was misplaced in this instance. It doesn't imply support for the Axis powers.

buddy larsen: No, it doesn't 'imply' it, it IS it.

Don't agree. Many isolationists just wanted to keep the U.S. out the seemingly endless European wars per George Washington's advice to avoid foreign entanglements.

#3.1.2.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-11 19:35 (Reply)

--and many frogs wish they had wings, so they wouldn't bump their ass on the ground when they jump.

Seriously, you can't be serious about taking the Know-Nothings as anything more then than what they've always been, are now, and will be tomorrow.

George Washington spoke of entangled alliances such as those that had so recently dragged Europe thru the Thirty Years War. Tangled treaties such as led to an Austrian electress with the duty to king the Three Kingdoms and her 'langue' solution is what put the non-langue German aristocrats on the throne --the German line whose George III had so cost GW, inter alia, the prime of his commercial life.

Don't think for a moment that he was advising the ignoring of proximate, exigent foreign threats. His own record in the French & Indian War belies any such assertion.

For one example, the mid-eastern oil, a major root of WWII as well as since then and now, as well as a major root of the perpetual attack on Israel, which in the example is the powerful western democratic guardian army with the short overland run onto the global fuel tank.

What's the big mid-east oil deal? A monopoly on sweet crude (almost ready to put in a gasoline tank) at $2/bbl lift (vs ten to fifty times that for shale oil) would run an industrial economy that will swamp the rest of the world.

So world peace as well as world liberty BOTH need a global open auction market with universal access.

Let a dictator put KSA behind a missile shield strong enough to kill or intimidate another D-Day landing somewhere in the Iraq area we just quit, and you will see in a generation that power will have all the world's real sovereignty to itself.

This was true, tho less so, in the 1940s, too.

So, you're free to ''don't agree'', but you should be aware that you're ventilating nonsense.

#3.1.2.1.1.1.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-11 21:34 (Reply)

Might want to lookup "You Natzy Spy" on any video site. It was released in January 1940 by those esteemed social commentators, the Howard brothers.

Then compare that to MGM's Peace on Earth released in 1939 which is also easily findable.

#3.2 walt moffett on 2013-07-11 13:24 (Reply)

re Martin:

"Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents proving that the Department of Justice played a major behind-the-scenes role in organizing protests against George Zimmerman. Zimmerman is on trial for second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in February 2012."

This is a disturbing abuse of power, the government persecuting and trying to railroad a private citizen like this.

We have a lawless administration and no one seems to care.

#4 feeblemind on 2013-07-11 10:52 (Reply)

George Zimmerman will walk.

TC

#5 Garry on 2013-07-11 12:23 (Reply)

The point of introducing lesser charges at this point is to allow the jury to "compromise" on some charge short of murder 2. The prosecution knows it has lost the case and the judge seems exasperated by the prosecution's incompetence, which is why IMO she continues to push the envelope on her discretionary authority--doing enough to help the state get a conviction but not doing it so overtly that the defense would have a slam dunk on appeal for overturning any adverse decision by the jury. I hope the jury sees through this cynical maneuver. It should be obvious what the state is up to. Some of the lesser charges being mentioned include long jail time and are not a slap on the wrist. Funny how we've sunk to the point where the state wants the fear of riots to determine the outcome of the jury's deliberations. Sort of reminds you of how the Liberals behave towards Muslims.

#5.1 Agent Cooper on 2013-07-11 12:55 (Reply)

AC,

While I have no qualifications to say this...from what I saw and the defense councils reactions, I think this judge was/is skating very close to the line, during the creation of the final "Instructions to the Jury", which would lead to a viable appeal.

JMO. Time will tell.

TC

#5.1.1 Garry on 2013-07-11 13:49 (Reply)

Long jail time? How about more jail time once they add in the gun enhancement.

But I'm hopeful. Reports were the jury was taking notes. This to me indicates they are trying to stay tied to the facts in the midst of all the emotional appeals the prosecution is trying.

Also, if there were men on the jury, would the prosecution try this emotional appeal route? If not, isn't that sexist to think women are easily manipulatable in their emotions and cannot decide a legal case on the facts? I seem to remember an argument like that before Women's suffrage. Not personally, of course, but I read about it.

#5.1.2 JKB on 2013-07-11 15:29 (Reply)

JKB,

Good points. I'm watching the "State's Closing Arguments" and I can't believe what I'm seeing with this "supposedly seasoned" Prosecutor. He's yelling at the Jury like an "out of control" parent.

Bizarre

TC.

#5.1.2.1 Garry on 2013-07-11 16:15 (Reply)

Not'all, women are easily manipulateded as yall aver and certainly, Founding Father's wouldn't think women able to dtermine law by fact.

Hopefully, these chicklettes will hand Zipperhead his on a platter and avoid ignoring preceding historical dances.

Let the girls be girls.

Whatever the outcome of the chicklettes verdict Zipperhead is
toast.

#5.1.2.2 Leag on 2013-07-11 16:30 (Reply)

I've been thinking about this child abuse ploy the prosecution tried. Apparently, the feel that it is child abuse to use force to stop a child of say, 16 or 17, from bashing your head in or causing you serious injury, oh, or death.

The teenage criminals in Florida apparently have an open season on adults until that nasty 18th birthday. Now, don't worry, the state will, maybe, try them for your murder....try them as adults?

#5.2 JKB on 2013-07-11 16:12 (Reply)

JKB,

IMO...Mr. Zimmerman will walk. This is turning into to "quite a case". At least, certain details (that weren't allowed to be talked about and/or entered into evidence) will now be discussed in public. It appears that Mr. martin enjoys fighting, smoking/growing "weed" and possibly, interested in owning a "piece" or, at least, maybe "going 2-fers".

I was especially amused with the "State's" "sloughing off" the "Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea...or whatever it was". This was repeated a coupla times. He also was yelling at the Jury like an "out of control Parent". (plse see #5.1.2.1 abv).

Any thoughts?

We now know that Trayvon Martin had marijuana in his system, so George Zimmerman was correct when he suggested that Martin was high.

We also now know that it wasn’t Ice Tea and skittles, but Arizona Watermelon juice and skittles. Both are ingredients in a drug cocktail used in the southern rap/hip-hop scene. Messages that Trayvon Martin posted on twitter suggest that he was abusing codeine in a concoction known as “lean,” “watermellon sizzurp,” “purple lean,” “purple sizzurp,” and other names. Other versions of the drink are made with Sprite.

The drink is made using Arizona watermelon juice, Robitussin, and a few skittles or jolly rancher candies.
(Yahoo! Answers)
I'd start by asking for your thoughts and then...True Or False?

I seem to remember that the rage (in the 19-oh-55's) was dropping a few aspirin into a 16oz bottle "Royal Crown Cola" ($CDN 0.15) + aspirin cost ($CDN 0.00) if pinched from the "family medicine cabinet".

TC

#5.2.1 Garry on 2013-07-11 16:39 (Reply)

Yall keep avering upon some fantasies and calling it evidence.

Young Martin had no criminal record.

Zipperhead was the criminal in this episode, stalking a teenager with a loaded weapon and Trayvon was defending hisself, me thinks.

Bambi would have exercised right to self defense and kicked Zipperhead's ass, too.

#5.2.2 Leag on 2013-07-11 16:40 (Reply)

"Young Martin had no criminal record"

Neither did Zimmerman, so what's your point? And to characterize Zimmerman's actions as "stalking", as if he was hunting prey, is just silly, silly, silly. Talk about having fantasies---and ignoring evidence!

I don't know what really happened in the dark of night down there, but I do believe there is more than enough reasonable doubt that this case should not have gone to trial. And the fact that Alan Dershowitz says the same on the legal merits makes me think the police and the prosecutor's office got it right the first time when they said there were no grounds for indicting Zimmerman.

#5.2.2.1 Agent Cooper on 2013-07-11 18:44 (Reply)

One minor correction to what I just wrote: Zimmerman was charged once for resisting arrest in a DUI stop. The charge was later dropped. AFAIK, he has not been convicted of any previous crime and has no criminal record.

#5.2.2.1.1 Agent Cooper on 2013-07-11 18:51 (Reply)

AC,

Recently heard the background to this 'incident'...quite minor, actually and overblown by those "wanna be 'cops' of the ATF Squad. Where have I heard that "wanna-be-thingy" B4? Oh!...right...

Where's Barney Fife when you might need him.

TC

#5.2.2.1.1.1 Garry on 2013-07-11 19:27 (Reply)

You really need to read up on the law. I see many making the ignorant comment about Martin kicking Zimmerman's ass as an exercise of self defense.

But it cannot be self defense because Zimmerman was not a physical threat to Martin at the time he attacked Zimmerman. You cannot jump or punch someone who is walking in a public area even if you believe and it is later confirmed, they are following you. There is no evidence Zimmerman intentionally approached Martin but rather was surprised and struck by Martin.

There were no criminals in this incident. Although, had Martin not been killed but rather had been pummeling Zimmerman when the police arrived, he would have been arrested for assault and battery due to his legally unprovoked attack (following is not a provocation that justifies battering someone) on Zimmerman.

But back to no criminals. Martin may have had no real intent to do serious harm to Zimmerman. However, once the concrete sidewalk became involved the "fight" had the capability of being a imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.

But keep in mind, beating someone who has not laid a hand on you will get you an assault and battery charge. Being afraid or offended is not justification for physical violence.

#5.2.2.2 JKB on 2013-07-12 00:25 (Reply)

JKB: There is no evidence Zimmerman intentionally approached Martin but rather was surprised and struck by Martin.

Jeantel's testimony was that Zimmerman was following Martin, Martin was trying to stay away, and Martin said "Get off" at the beginning of the fight.

#5.2.2.2.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-12 07:45 (Reply)

--yep, i can see it clearly. Zimmerman's gun proves he was planning to shoot Martin, but cunningly he first physically assaults Martin instead of just shooting him, and then he beats Martin's fists with his nose and face, then throws himself backwards onto the ground, leading with the back of his head. THEN, he shoots Martin, his very cooperative marionette.

Yessirree, Zach --THAT's the color-blind even-handed way to defeat racism alright!

#5.2.2.2.1.1 buddy larsen on 2013-07-12 10:33 (Reply)

buddy larsen: --yep, i can see it clearly.

Zimmerman followed Martin.

JKB said there was no evidence Zimmerman approached Martin, but that is not correct.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-12 10:58 (Reply)

Following, almost by definition is not approaching. It is hard to follow someone when you intersect with them.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.1 JKB on 2013-07-12 18:10 (Reply)

According to Jeantel's testimony, Martin said he was being followed by a "creep", and was avoiding him. When the alteration occurred, Martin said "Get off! Get off!" and dropped the connection.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-13 09:11 (Reply)

And which evidence is it that shows Zimmerman approached Martin? I don't recall hearing or reading about any such evidence. As for the testimony by the (girl)friend he was talking to over the phone, it was all---literally--hearsay. She was not present at the scene of the fight. Martin could have told her he had been hit by a meteorite and she would not have known whether it was true or false. I'm surprised the jury even got to hear her testimony. (I saw only about the first 15 minutes of her testimony. I thought she was a decent enough person. I did not detect any of the allegedly bad behavior on the stand for which she has been much criticized by others.)

As for Martin not having a criminal record, that's not quite the same as saying he was an innocent child. It's been reported that Martin had been arrested once by (school) police for theft, and at the time of his death he was suspended from school because (school) police had found burglary tools and stolen jewelry in his possession. Add to that the photos, emails, and text messages recovered from his phone about street fighting and guns and you see a kid that was about to get himself into some serious trouble with the law.

BTW, has anyone found a full sized picture on the Web of Martin standing up so that you can tell how tall and big he was compared with Zimmerman? All I see are cropped head shots, from which you can tell nothing---which is the whole point, I guess, if the idea is to portray him as a young child rather than as a grown-up teen-ager with a budding interest in guns, marijuana, and street fighting.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2 Agent Cooper on 2013-07-12 21:33 (Reply)

Agent Cooper: As for the testimony by the (girl)friend he was talking to over the phone, it was all---literally--hearsay.

Also known as admissible evidence. Our only point was to correct JKB's statement there was no evidence. The other witness to the event was shot dead.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-13 09:08 (Reply)

AC,

Also known as admissible evidence but, because of the source...not credible evidence which essentially is no evidence. It would be ditched by a Jury who "hasn't imbibed the PC Koolaid". It does appear the judge was a little thirsty.

TC

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2 Garry on 2013-07-13 09:57 (Reply)

Garry: Also known as admissible evidence but, because of the source...not credible evidence which essentially is no evidence.

There's no reason to think it's not credible. Jeantel was the last person to talk to Martin, she talked to him for some time during the period in question, and says she heard the onset of the altercation.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-13 10:06 (Reply)

"There's no reason to think it's not credible. Jeantel was the last person to talk to Martin, she talked to him for some time during the period in question, and says she heard the onset of the altercation.

I rest my case.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1 Garry on 2013-07-13 10:25 (Reply)

Garry: I rest my case.

You haven't provided any reasons why Jeantel's testimony shouldn't be given consideration by the jury.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-13 10:29 (Reply)

You haven't provided any reasons why Jeantel's testimony shouldn't be given consideration by the jury.

We think you're a coupla sandwiches short of a good picnic. Give your collective heads a shake and fish/troll somewhere else.

btw Jeantel's admissable testimony provided all the reasons needed. Bye.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1 Garry on 2013-07-13 10:42 (Reply)

For most jurors, testimony concerning Martin's last minutes of life would be important. You've provided no reasons to suggest otherwise.

#5.2.2.2.1.1.1.2.2.1.1.1.1.1 Zachriel on 2013-07-13 10:46 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Thursday, July 11. 2013

Thursday morning links