I’d hate to be a former Zimmerman juror today

I'd hate to be a former Zimmerman juror today
George Zimmerman, after he was arrested, Nov. 18, 2013, in Apopka, Fla. (Credit: AP/Seminole County Sheriff`s Office)

A friend emailed this to me.  I couldn’t resist posting it.  I had similar thoughts about the Zimmerman jurors yesterday.  My first thought was “what’s done in the dark will come to light…”


A chilling 911 call shows George Zimmerman trying to frame his girlfriend — just like he did Trayvon Martin

We already know at least one member of the jury that acquitted George Zimmerman in the killing of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin has had second thoughts about their verdict. If any of them are feeling particularly bad today about their role in setting Zimmerman free, now that he’s been arrested (a second time) for domestic abuse, I’d advise that they wait beforelistening to the chilling 911 call he made Monday afternoon. It’s extremely disturbing.

I’d give the same advice to Fox’s Sean Hannity, who tried to turn Zimmerman into a right-wing culture hero for killing Martin, allegedly in self-defense, except Hannity shows no signs of having a conscience.

The news that Zimmerman had been arrested again isn’t surprising. It’s just a matter of time before the entitled gun nut and wannabe cop hurts someone else. Just since his release from jail in July, he’s been stopped by law enforcement for speeding at least three times, and police have been called to his home by his estranged wife, who said he threatened her with a gun (she refused to press charges). He also toured the factory that produced the weapon he used to kill Martin. Zimmerman is not now and never was a mild-mannered guy who was at the wrong place at the wrong time and reluctantly killed a young thug who attacked him in self-defense; he is himself a thug with an anger problem looking for trouble.

But given that he used self-defense to evade a murder conviction, it’s appalling to hear him on a 911 call trying to use the same defense against his girlfriend. Samantha Scheibe called police to say Zimmerman held a gun to her face, shattered a glass table, then threw her out of her own house. We hear her yell at Zimmerman on the call. “You just broke my glass table, you just broke my sunglasses and you put your gun in my friggin’ face and told me to get the fuck out!”

Bizarrely, after the cops arrived, Zimmerman made a 911 call of his own, to say “my girlfriend is, for lack of a better word, going crazy on me.” The dispatcher logically suggested that since Zimmerman is calling the police, he might want to talk to the officers who are banging on his front door. But he demurs. “No, they’re pretty upset, I think,” he tells her. “They’re banging on the door and windows.” He’s calling simply because “I just want people to know the truth.”

But the call is one big lie. He goes on to claim that Scheibe is the one who smashed the table, and that she also has a weapon. He also concocts a story about her being pregnant with his baby, which the police have since denied. That’s a creepy and controlling touch. It’s not victim-blaming to say I hope Scheibe avails herself of counseling to understand why she moved in with someone like Zimmerman a month after his acquittal.

Scheibe also told police that Zimmerman had a shotgun, two handguns and an AR-15 rifle with him. It’s remarkable that he still has guns after not only killing Martin but allegedly pulling one on his wife, as well as posting a bull’s-eye with 17 bullet holes on his wife’s parents’ home.

Tuesday afternoon a judge will decide whether to charge Zimmerman, and/or to release him on bail, as well as presumably to leave him with his guns. It should be a no-brainer, but given how the Florida criminal justice system has treated Zimmerman to this point, it isn’t.

I would hate to be a former Zimmerman juror today. I’d also hate to be Sean Hannity, but that’s true every day. Zimmerman’s brother Robert is already claiming reporters and liberals are “rushing to judgment” about his brother, and I’m sure he can convince somebody at Fox to take up the Zimmerman cause again. Look for George to tell Hannity his scrap with Scheibe was “God’s plan” (yes, that’s what he said about killing Martin), this time to alert conservatives to a FemiNazi plot to take away the guns of God-fearing guys like him. Here’s hoping the justice system works this time.

Fed’s Halt Return of Zimmerman’s Gun

ABC News

George Zimmerman can’t get back the gun he used to kill Trayvon Martin, but nothing is keeping him from purchasing another gun if he wants, Florida police said today.

Federal and local authorities said plans to return Zimmerman’s Kel Tec 9 pistol were put on hold after the Department of Justice announced a new investigation to determine whether Zimmerman violated 17-year-old Martin’s civil rights.

“The Department of Justice put a hold on all of the evidence in the case. The evidence will not be returned until such time as they release the hold,” said Sanford Police spokesman James McAuliffe.

McAuliffe, however, told ABC News that there is nothing legally preventing Zimmerman, who was acquitted in Martin’s murder on Saturday, from purchasing a new firearm.

“I do not believe that there is” any legal reason Zimmerman would not be able to purchase another gun, McAuliffe said.

Zimmerman was acquitted by a jury of six women who found he acted in self-defense when he shot the unarmed teenager in February 2012.

The verdict produced an outcry ranging from Martin’s parents to protests in cities across the country. Zimmerman, 29, immediately went into hiding following the verdict.

On Sunday, Zimmerman’s lawyer Mark O’Mara said Zimmerman was entitled to get the gun back and needed it “even more” than before his acquittal, given the controversy surrounding the case and frequent threats to his life.

“I think that he feels truly in his heart that if he did not have that weapon that night he might not be here…. [He] would have continued to get beat even though he was screaming for help,” O’Mara told ABC News in an exclusive interview last week.

Earlier this week, Attorney General Eric Holder called Martin’s death “unnecessary” and vowed to proceed with a federal case.

Zimmerman’s attorney was travelling and not available for comment on the decision to retain all evidence pending DOJ orders. Zimmerman’s brother, Robert, also declined to talk about the gun.

Long Before He Was President, Obama Led Fight Against Racial Profiling

Barack Obama as a State Senator in 1999

Some left-wing news pundits like Dr. Michael Eric Dyson a Georgetown University professor, feel that President Obama needs to discuss the racial divide in this country which exacerbated after the Zimmerman verdict.

What they failed to remember was how his innocuous statement about the shooting death of Trayvon Martin drew right-wing ire .  The President of the United States cannot address issues like the jury verdict, the racial divide in America and the perpetuation of such a divide.   Given the visceral reaction and sharp divide by both political sides during the mostly peaceful demonstrations across the nation, this is not the time for such a speech.  At least not by the POTUS.

When he made his infamous “race speech” in 2008 he was a presidential candidate.  Today, if he made a similar speech it would certainly be divisive though not intentionally.

On the other hand, Attorney General Eric Holder became the POTUS surrogate on this matter when Holder made his speech about race and draconian gun laws to the NAACP earlier this week.

Associated Press

n 1999, a fresh-faced state senator on Chicago’s South Side heard constituents complain that police were free to pull over drivers because they were black. So Barack Obama proposed a bill to tackle racial profiling. When it failed, he revised it and proposed it again and again.

“Race and ethnicity is not an indicator of criminal activity,” Obama said when his bill finally passed the Senate four years later. He said targeting individuals based on race was humiliating and fostered contempt in black communities.

More than a decade later, Obama’s efforts to pass groundbreaking racial profiling legislation in Illinois offer some of the clearest clues as to how America’s first black president feels about an issue that’s polarizing a nation roiled by the shooting death of black teenager Trayvon Martin.

Obama has spoken only rarely about his own experience with incidents he perceived to be race-related. In his 2006 book “The Audacity of Hope,” he described his struggles with the injustices of “driving while black” and the vigilance he felt was still necessary for him and his family.

“I can recite the usual litany of petty slights that during my 45 years have been directed my way: security guards tailing me as I shop in department stores, white couples who toss me their car keys as I stand outside a restaurant waiting for the valet, police cars pulling me over for no apparent reason,” Obama wrote.

Obama’s administration has treated gingerly the acquittal of George Zimmerman, the man who fatally shot Martin. Burned in the past by injecting himself into racial flare-ups, Obama is wary of taking sides this time after, in his words, “a jury has spoken.”

While Martin’s family has said the teenager was racially profiled, race was barely mentioned during the nationally televised trial. Now that the state trial is over, the Justice Department is looking into Martin’s death to see whether civil rights charges can be filed. Federal prosecutors would have to show evidence Zimmerman was motivated by racial animosity to kill Martin.

The president, in his only public comments on the verdict, looked to the future, urging Americans to ask themselves how such tragedies can be prevented.

These days, it’s gun control that Obama cites. But as a young state senator, he and a few colleagues led a fight to require police to keep track of the demographics of drivers they pulled over — race, gender and age — then have those records analyzed to root out any patterns of bias. Diversity training was also part of the package, and another bill Obama pushed sought to prevent wrongful convictions by requiring police to videotape interrogations for crimes like homicide.

Emil Jones Jr., the state Senate’s president at the time, said he told Obama he was counting on him to shepherd the profiling bill, part of a broader judicial overhaul involving death penalty reform that Jones said was his top priority.

“It called on him to work with legislators on both sides of the aisle,” Jones said in an interview. “There was strong opposition from law enforcement on these issues. He was skillful enough to be able to get them on board.”

One of Obama’s key arguments to woo skeptical police groups was to say his legislation could actually exonerate fair-minded officers. Those unjustly accused of racial profiling would, for the first time, have evidence to show that wasn’t the case.

Both the racial profiling and videotaped interrogations bills eventually passed through the Legislature in 2003.

When it first became law, the data showed blacks and other minorities were being pulled over about three times as often as whites, said Craig Futterman, who sits on the statewide panel that oversees the law. These days, it’s down to about twice as often, he said.

“The fact that this data was being collected and monitored actually dramatically reduced racial profiling in Illinois,” said Futterman, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, where Obama once taught. “It didn’t eliminate it — there are still unacceptable racial inequalities.”

In the Zimmerman case, civil rights leaders say Zimmerman racially profiled the unarmed teenager when he followed him through a gated community and shot him. But Zimmerman says Martin physically assaulted him and he shot the teenager in self-defense.

But across the U.S., as rallies crop up filled with protesters demanding justice for the teenager whose quest to buy Skittles ended in death, it’s not clear what steps the administration may take.

“I don’t have any process to announce today going forward,” said Jay Carney, Obama’s spokesman. He noted Obama’s work on the issue in Illinois and said Obama “believes it’s an issue worthy of consideration and action.”

Zimmerman Juror Decides Not To Write Book About Trial

It’s official…


Intense and immediate backlash apparently changed the mind of Juror B37 — and her agent. “I have realized that the best direction for me to go is away from writing any sort of book and return instead to my life as it was before …”  posted on July 16, 2013 at 12:52am EDT

Late Monday night, Sharlene Martin of Martin Literary Management LLC told BuzzFeed that Juror B37 will no longer pursue a book deal.

The juror’s statement, via Martin:

“I realize it was necessary for our jury to be sequestered in order to protest our verdict from unfair outside influence, but that isolation shielded me from the depth of pain that exists among the general public over every aspect of this case. The potential book was always intended to be a respectful observation of the trial from my and my husband’s perspectives solely and it was to be an observation that our ‘system’ of justice can get so complicated that it creates a conflict with our ‘spirit’ of justice.

Now that I am returned to my family and to society in general, I have realized that the best direction for me to go is away from writing any sort of book and return instead to my life as it was before I was called to sit on this jury.”

The juror’s announcement came after Martin — who has also represented Amanda Knox’s ex Raffaele Sollecito — decided to drop her following hours of outrage on social media.

“After careful consideration regarding the proposed book project with Zimmerman Juror B37, I have decided to rescind my offer of representation in the exploration of a book based upon this case,” Martin said in an email at the time.

Earlier Monday, when the partnership was first announced, Martin said she hopedJuror B37’s book would help the public “understand the commitment it takes to serve and be sequestered on a jury in a highly publicized murder trial …. It could open a whole new dialogue about laws that may need to be revised and revamped to suit a 21st century way of life.”

But on Monday evening, Juror B37 went on CNN to defend the jury’s decision to find George Zimmerman not guilty.

“I think both were responsible for the situation they had gotten themselves into,”she said. “I think they both could have walked away.”

Not long after the interview aired, calls for Martin to drop the juror intensified. A Change.org petition by Genie Lauren circulated, asking Trayvon Martin supporters to not “allow this person to profit off of the injustice that they’ve served to the American public.” By 12:30 a.m. on Tuesday, it had more than 800 signatures.

Continue here to read Twitter comments about the book proposal


Breaking News: No Book Deal from Martin Literary Management for Juror B37

Just an FYI:

I was so outraged at the news that one of the jurors was going to write a book about the Zimmerman trial verdict that I wrote to Martin Literary Management like  so many others have done since the news of the book deal:

May I respectfully say that I will not purchase said book.  I’m sure it will be a best seller among the Zimmerman supporters, but to profit off of the death of a young teenager is not only ghoulish and wrong, it’s actually “creepy”.

Sheila A. Bryant
Mother and Grandmother
I received a rather prompt, short reply from the literary agent:
After careful consideration regarding the proposed book project with Zimmerman Juror B37, I have decided to rescind my offer of representation in the exploration of a book based upon this case.
Thank you for taking the time to write to me.
All the best, 
Sharlene Martin |Literary & Media Manager
Martin Literary Management LLC
Of course it doesn’t mean that B37 won’t get her book deal, but at least not from this particular literary agent.

CNN’s Anderson Cooper Interviews Anonymous Member Of Zimmerman Jury Who Defends Acquittal Decision



CNN’s Anderson Cooper landed the first “exclusive” interview with one of the six women who sat on the George Zimmerman murder trial jury for the last month. Seated in darkness and identified only as Juror B-37, the woman told Cooper is “seems like it’s been years” since the trial began and shared which moments of the proceedings had the biggest impact on her.

Speaking about the opening statements, the juror called defense attorney Don West‘s knock-knock joke “horrible.” She said, “nobody got it. I didn’t get it until later, and then I thought about it, and I’m like, I guess that could have been funny, but not in the context he told it.” She told Cooper that in general she found the witnesses to be “credible” and said when it came to the 911 call audio of the screams, she believed those who said it was Zimmerman’s voice “because of the evidence that he was the one that had gotten beaten.” All but one of the six jurors agreed with that assessment. “I don’t think there was a doubt,” she said, “that everybody else thought it was George’s voice.”

If there was one witness who the juror didn’t find entirely credible it was Trayvon Martin‘s friend Rachel Jeantel. “I didn’t think it was credible, but I felt sorry for her. She didn’t ask to be in this place. She wanted to go. She didn’t want to be any part of this case. I think she felt inadequate toward everyone because of her education and her communication skills. I just felt sadness for her.” She added, “she was embarrassed by being there, because of her education and her communication skills, that she just wasn’t a good witness.”

Cooper asked the juror specifically about Jeantel’s “creepy-ass cracker” statement that drew wide attention during the trial. She said she thought it was “probably the truth” and that “Trayvon probably said that” but said she didn’t “think it’s really racial. I think it’s just every day life. the type of life that they live, and how they’re living, in the environment that they’re living in.”    (Emphasis are mine)

Watch part 1 of Cooper’s interview below, via CNN:

In the second part of the interview, the juror told Cooper she thought Zimmerman’s “heart was in the right place” on the night he shot and killed Martin and the only thing he is guilty of is “not using good judgement.” She said she thought he had “every right so carry a gun,” adding, “I think it’s everyone’s right to carry a gun.”

When Cooper asked if the juror thought Zimmerman “really felt his life was in danger” she responded. “I do. I really do.” When he asked if she thought Martin “threw the first punch,” she said, “I think he did.” Despite those assertions she admitted that among she and the other jurors, “nobody knew exactly what happened.”

She reiterated that she did not think race played a role in the case. “I think if there was another person, Spanish, white, Asian, if they came in the same situation where Trayvon was,” she said, “I think George would have reacted the exact same way.” The juror hedged a bit when Cooper asked her whether she would feel comfortable having Zimmerman on “neighborhood watch” in her community saying it would be OK “as long as he didn’t go too far.” She eventually said she thought he’d “learned his lesson” and after the trial “would be more responsible than anyone else on the planet right now.”

Watch part 2 of Cooper’s interview below, via CNN:

On The Killing Of Trayvon Martin By George Zimmerman – By Ta-Nehisi Coates

Ta-Nehisi Coates, the author of this piece makes a compelling and reasonable argument about the Zimmerman case.   However, is it enough to take away the feeling by many in the African American community that the verdict was a gross miscarriage of justice?  

The Atlantic

By Florida law, in any violent confrontation ending in a disputed act of lethal self-defense, without eye-witnesses, the advantage goes to the living. 

I interrupt your regularly scheduled programming to offer some thoughts on the verdict of innocent for George Zimmerman:

1.) Last year–after Zimmerman was arrested–I wrote something hoping that he would be convicted. A commenter wrote in to object, saying that arguing for his arrest was justifiable. Arguing for his conviction was not. I acknowledged the point at the time. The wisdom of it seems even more appropriate today.
2.) I think the jury basically got it right. The only real eyewitness to the death of Trayvon Martin was the man who killed him. At no point did I think that the state proved second degree murder. I also never thought they proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he acted recklessly. They had no ability to counter his basic narrative, because there were no other eye-witnesses.
3.) The idea that Zimmerman got out the car to check the street signs, was ambushed by 17-year old kid with no violent history who told him he “you’re going to die tonight” strikes me as very implausible.  It strikes me as much more plausible that Martin was being followed by a strange person, that the following resulted in a confrontation, that Martin was getting the best of Zimmerman in the confrontation, and Zimmerman then shot him.  But I didn’t see the confrontation. No one else really saw the confrontation. Except George Zimmerman. I’m not even clear that situation I outlined would result in conviction.
4.) I think Andrew Cohen is right–trials don’t work as strict “moral surrogates.” Everything that is immoral is not illegal–nor should it be. I want to live in a society that presumes innocence. I want to live in that society even when I feel that a person should be punished.
5.) I think you should read everything my friend Jelani Cobb has written about this case.
6.) I think the message of this episode is unfortunate. By Florida law, in any violent confrontation ending in a disputed act of lethal self-defense, without eye-witnesses, the advantage goes to the living.
An intelligent, self-interested observer of this case, who happens to live in Florida, would not be wrong to do as George Zimmerman did–buy a gun, master the finer points of Florida self-defense law and then wait.
7.) Circling back to the first point, it’s worth remembering that caused a national outcry was not the possibility of George Zimmerman being found innocent, but that there would be no trial at all.  This case was really unique because of what happened with the Sanford police. If you doubt this, ask yourself if you know the name “Jordan Davis.” Then ask yourself how many protests and national media reports you’ve seen about him.



The Huffington Post

After deliberating for more than 16 hours, a jury of six women on Saturday evening found George Zimmerman not guilty in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old in Sanford, Fla.

Zimmerman had pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder with an affirmative defense, claiming he had shot Martin to save his own life after being attacked by the teen on Feb. 26, 2012. The trial, televised nationally on cable networks and streamed live across the Internet on various sites, kept the country captivated awaiting a verdict on the tragic events that took place that rainy night.

Following four weeks of testimony, more than a dozen witnesses and a host of controversy, Zimmerman walked out of court a free man.

The case first drew national attention during the 44 days the Sanford Police Department took to decide that Zimmerman should be arrested and charged with murder. During that tense period, protests were held across the country calling for Zimmerman’s arrest. Those protests were buttressed by the controversy’s strong presence across the Internet, with hashtags like #JusticeForTrayvon becoming mainstays on Twitter. Celebrities including LeBron James and his Miami Heat teammates and Jamie Foxx were photographed wearing hooded sweatshirts like Martin had been wearing the night he died.

That night, Martin was walking back to the home of his father’s fiancee from a local 7-Eleven convenience store after purchasing a can of iced tea and a bag of Skittles. He was spotted by Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer, who thought Martin looked suspicious because of what he described as an unnaturally slow and meandering gait. Zimmerman called the police and proceeded to follow the teen through the Retreat at Twin Lakes, the gated community where Zimmerman lived and where Martin had been staying. A confrontation ensued, Zimmerman shot Martin, Martin died, and six weeks later, Zimmerman was arrested and charged with second-degree murder.

On March 16, 2012, police released audio of the 911 calls made by Twin Lakes residents who were witness to the altercation between Martin and Zimmerman occurring near their homes. In one chilling call, a voice can be heard screaming for help in the background. The wailing ends as the loud crack of a gun shot rings out. Those screams and the question of who was making them would become pivotal for both the prosecution and the defense, with the implication being that the person screaming was the one being attacked.

As attention around the case mounted before the trial, details emerged about the teenager and the man involved in the fatal confrontation.

It turned out this wasn’t Zimmerman’s first run-in with the law. He had previouslybeen accused of domestic violence by a former girlfriend, and he had also previouslybeen arrested for assaulting a police officer. More controversially, in July 2012, an evidence dump related to the investigation of Martin’s death revealed that a younger female cousin of Zimmerman’s had accused him of nearly two decades of sexual molestation and assault. In addition, she had accused members of Zimmerman’s family, including his Peruvian-born mother, of being proudly racist against African Americans, and recalled a number of examples of perceived bigotry.

The national focus on the case also brought into question, for some, the character and life history of Trayvon Martin. As time passed, websites like The Daily Caller found Martin’s posthumously scrubbed Twitter page, which featured the teen at times tweeting profanities and showing off fake gold teeth. To some, these behaviors, along with the hoodie Martin wore the night he was killed, were an indication that he was something other than an innocent teenage boy who was shot while walking home from the store. To others, the attention paid to Martin’s tattoos, gold teeth and hoodie were symptomatic of the same kind of stereotyping and profiling that led to Zimmerman’s assumption that the teen was “up to no good.”

While much of this background information proved inadmissible at trial, the characterizations of the two men helped drive an often racially charged polarization on the issue at the heart of the case — whether the killing of Trayvon Martin was self-defense or murder.

The prosecution argued that Zimmerman had profiled Martin, deeming him “suspicious,” as indicated by Zimmerman’s description of the teen to the non-emergency hotline he called for police assistance. The prosecution said that he then stalked Martin, initiating an unnecessary confrontation that led to his shooting the 17-year-old in the chest at point-blank range.

The defense maintained that Zimmerman was just walking back to his car when Martin confronted him, punching him in his face and knocking him to the ground. According to the defense, Martin then mounted Zimmerman and smashed his head into the concrete pavement multiple times, forcing the older man to shoot the teen in order to save his own life.

Testimony at the trial was, at times, contentious. Defense attorney Don Westaggressively questioned Rachel Jeantel, the friend to whom Martin was talking on the phone just before he was killed. Jeantel, who speaks English as a second language, kept her answers tersely short and stuck to her understanding of what had transpired that night, despite the defense’s attempts to undermine her account. Her perceived lack of polish on the stand, though, thrust the teenager into a national conversation about whether she had hurt or helped the state’s case.

The testimony of Dr. Shipping Bao, the medical examiner who performed the autopsyon Martin, was also highly contested. Bao often clashed with the defense as he repeatedly made sure that everyone in the courtroom understood the difference between what he saw as facts and what he considered opinions related to the case.

Both the prosecution and the defense went to great lengths to show who was screaming for help in the background of that 911 call. The prosecution called Trayvon Martin’s mother, Sybrina Fulton, and his brother, Jahvaris Fulton, who testified that it was Martin. The defense called George Zimmerman’s mother, father and a host of friends to testify that it was Zimmerman screaming.

Ultimately, there are only two people who ever knew for sure who was screaming for his life that fatal night. One of them is dead, and the other has been acquitted in his killing. And with that acquittal, this chapter of the Trayvon Martin case, one that has captivated and divided a country for almost 17 months, has been brought to a close.


Fake photo of Trayvon Martin still making the rounds

Trayvon Martin Pic – Taken a week before his death according to his family and their attorney.

See the unrelated video below this post to see how some people “stack the deck” when they want to overwhelm the “system” with their propaganda.

The Root

The Washington Post‘s Jonathan Capehart says it’s despicable that people are circulating a photo of tattooed Los Angeles rapper The Game and saying it’s Trayvon Martin. He’s says it a vicious attempt to defame the slain teen by portraying him as a thug.

People! Listen, and listen closely. The photo you’re still passing around via e-mail is not that of Trayvon Martin. Not even close. The man in that photo is a rapper named Game. The picture was used in a May 6, 2010 story for XXL magazine. Game was 31 years old at the time.

In the last 24 hours, a friend and a reader separately forwarded me the e-mail making the rounds. “Recognize this guy? I didn’t,” the text reads, “[W]hy would the media show us a picture of a little boy instead of a current picture?????” The people who persist in peddling the Game picture as Trayvon are despicable.

They say the smiling Trayvon in the Hollister t-shirt is 12 years old. And they complain that the media are guilty of a liberal bias for showing it rather that what they think is a more up-to-date image. I asked Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump about this in February.  Trayvon was 16 when that photo was taken in August 2011. If folks want a more current picture before the teenager was killed by a single shot to the heart they ought to look at the one of him on a horse.  It was taken about a week before he was killed.

Read Jonathan Capeharts entire piece at the Washington Post.


Training Tea Party Activists In Guerilla Internet Tactics

Rush Limbaugh Compares Suspected Boston Bomber To Trayvon Martin

It’s too easy to say that the Limbaughs, Coulters and Hannitys of the world merely seek and need attention.  These people are simply unadulterated evil

Think Progress

Conservative radio prognosticator Rush Limbaugh used his nationally syndicated show on Tuesday to try and tie Dzhakar Tsarnaev, the captured suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings last week, to murdered teenager Trayvon Martin.

Last March, weeks after 17-year-old Martin was shot and killed, Limbaugh and the rest of the conservative echo chamber spent a considerable amount of time attacking Martin’s character and pushing back against a widely circulated photograph of the teen, claiming that the media was trying to gin up sympathy for the murdered boy.

On Tuesday, Limbaugh compared the media’s portrayal of Trayvon to the treatment of the captured Tsarnaev, citing the media’s use of slightly outdated photographs in both instances:

Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh called out a variety of media outlets on Tuesday for trying to [do] “to Dzhokhar [Tsarnaev] what they did to Trayvon Martin.” He said that showing images of Tsarnaev at 14-years-old is an effort to humanize him and frame him as a “normal” or “mixed-up kid,” rather than an accused murder[er] and terrorist.

‘The news media are doing to Dzhokhar what they did to Trayvon Martin,”Limbaugh observed. “They’re regularly showing a photo of Dzhokhar that was taken when he was about 14. Soft, angelic, nice little boy. Harmless. Cute. Big, loveable eyes.”

“Not at all what he looks like today,” Limbaugh added. “The way, when we’re shown Osama bin Laden, it’s in his shepherd pose with his walking stick, walking through the mountains or whatever.”

The implication, subtly made, is that the liberal media is somehow supportive of Tsarnaev, who is responsible for the murders of three people and the injuries of more than 170 others. In reality, the outdated photograph of the younger Tsarnaev brother is one of several photographs in constant rotation on every news network since he was first identified late last week.

The comparison is also deeply offensive for Trayvon Martin and his family. Martin was a victim of gun violence in a state that remains lenient towards gun owners who turn their weapons on other Floridians.

HT: Mediaite