[Peace-discuss] Fw: [socialistdiscussion] The Zimmerman case

Mon Jul 15 21:15:02 UTC 2013

>From a list-serve discussion list I am on in the U.K.
They find the Zimmerman case of not-guilty of anything unbelievable.

David J.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: RSilver100 at aol.com 
To: socialistdiscussion at yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: [socialistdiscussion] The Zimmerman case

Thanks to John, Stu and others for all the shocking examples they have given of the monstrously biased, corrupt, racist and sexist judicial system in the USA.

I was puzzled by an earlier remark of John's: "Zimmerman is a racist who provoked Martin by stalking him. But this was legally irrelevant. And in different circumstances, socialists would want similar issues to be considered irrelevant.... In a system whose state is rightfully considered the enemy of the masses of people, you have to keep every safeguard possible against state persecution in the courts. The problem is that this means that violent racists like Zimmerman will also often go free." 

Obviously, John didn't intend to imply that the exoneration of a racist murderer is part of the price we have to pay for a legal system which allows safeguards against persecution of workers; but it seems to me that that formulation could be open to misinterpretation. 

Even under Florida's notoriously corrupt legal system, surely Zimmerman's bad faith could have been challenged with reference to his repeated racist comments, even (I believe) only minutes before the killing? And couldn't any CCTV evidence, or forensic evidence, be found to refute his claim that he was under attack? And even if Martin did attack him, could it not have been successfully argued that Martin himself was only "standing his ground", believing (quite rightly, as it turned out) that his own life was in danger? Since we know that the police were adamant that they weren't going to bring charges against Zimmerman, isn't it crystal clear that they must have withheld evidence that would have damaged his case (for instance, disproving his claim that he was the victim of an attack) and fabricated evidence in his favour? 

This case brings to mind the Rodney King case, when absolutely definitive video proof of the police officers' guilt was wilfully ignored by a white jury; let alone the cases of Joe Hill, Sacco and Vanzetti, the Black Panthers and a long list of heroic martyred militants. 

I am surprised that so far there have been no outright riots, as followed the Rodney King verdict and the murder of Martin Luther King. Maybe they will still come. But I am interested in knowing how far public outrage at this travesty extends to the non-black population.

Roger Silverman

In a message dated 15/07/2013 19:30:41 GMT Daylight Time, 1999wildcat at gmail.com writes:

  This country is going absolutely insane. Here is a case of a man in Texas who was acquitted of murder after he shot a woman who was a paid escort who refused to have sex with him. He assumed that being a paid escort meant having sex and after she said she was leaving and refused to give him his money back he shot and killed her.

  On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:29 AM, stu <stuart60625 at yahoo.com> wrote:

    John is right about the limits of the capitalist legal system. It says justice is blind and it shouldn't be. Example:  your house is broken into and some valuables are taken. The burglar is caught and you find out (a): they had lost their job and did this because their kids were hungry or (b): they were trying to get money to party with or (c): they did it to show their friends they are big shots. Capitalism treats them all the same at least for guilt ( the first one may have mitigation for sentencing). A socialist system wouldn't.
    As for Zimmerman, I am not familiar with Florida law but in Illinois the defense is not allowed. You can't use deadly force to confront non-deadly force.
    When John says "I think that what this shows is the limitations of the capitalist legal system. Zimmerman is a racist who provoked Martin by stalking him. But this was legally irrelevant. And in different circumstances, socialists would want similar issues to be considered irrelevant." He is right although under certain circumstances that information would be brought out at trial.
    John says: "If somebody had a history of conflict with police and had demonstrated a dislike of police and was at one point attacked and beaten by the cops, socialists (and others) wold want this victim's past to be kept out of the case. " It might be kept out unless there was an issue of who attacked whom. We also can, under certain circumstances bring in a cop's record for attacking people or false arrest. There are greater protections for the defendant as to what can be introduced against her.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From: John Reimann <1999wildcat at gmail.com>
    To: socialist discussion <socialistdiscussion at yahoogroups.com> 
    Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 8:19 AM
    Subject: [socialistdiscussion] The Zimmerman case

    I'd like to raise some points about the Zimmerman case. 

    In the US court system, the accused is innocent until proven guilty, and he or she must be so proven "beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt."

    Zimmerman's claim was that he was attacked by Martin, who had him down on the ground and was hitting him. Under Florida law, in that situation he had a right to use a gun to defend himself. His claim was never disproven.

    I think that what this shows is the limitations of the capitalist legal system. Zimmerman is a racist who provoked Martin by stalking him. But this was legally irrelevant. And in different circumstances, socialists would want similar issues to be considered irrelevant.

    If somebody had a history of conflict with police and had demonstrated a dislike of police and was at one point attacked and beaten by the cops, socialists (and others) wold want this victim's past to be kept out of the case. 

    I think that the deeper problem, therefore, is that in a system whose state is rightfully considered the enemy of the masses of people, you have to keep every safeguard possible against state persecution in the courts. The problem is that this means that violent racists like Zimmerman will also often go free.

    John

    -- 

    "Poems don't belong to those who write them; they belong to those who need them" - from movie "Il Postino"
    Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com and //www.facebook.com/WorkersIntlNetwork?ref=stream 

  -- 

  "Poems don't belong to those who write them; they belong to those who need them" - from movie "Il Postino"
  Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com and //www.facebook.com/WorkersIntlNetwork?ref=stream 

        Reply via web post  Reply to sender  Reply to group  Start a New Topic  Messages in this topic (9)  

.

__._,_.___Reply via web post  Reply to sender  Reply to group  Start a New Topic  Messages in this topic (10)  

Recent Activity: a.. New Files 1 
Visit Your Group 
 Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback .

__,_._,___
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20130715/e55c99eb/attachment-0001.html>