The Ghost of Medger Evers is Alive and Well

Before we do anything else let’s review the court procedingas as of late involving the George Zimmerman trial.  So far the prosecutor gets an F in presentation.  First of all George Zimmerman did not say “Fucking Punks” he said “Fucking Koons”.  I heard it plain as day.  They were SO concerned about putting vocal analysis experts on the case for fear it would prejudice the jury and yet they did it themselves in this “Koons’ thing.  The next thing is making it clear that the “they” in “They always get away” were Niggers.  Clearly Zimmerman was deluging the 911 lines with reports about “those people’ or whatever that “always get away”.  Clearly the path was set right there to say in Zimmerman’s mind that Trayvon Martin was one of those “they” people that this one time HE was not going to allow to “get away”.   Clearly the PD told Zimmerman “We don’t need you to do that” in terms of pursuing him himself.  It was pointed out that if Zimmerman WAS functioning in his capacity of “Neighborhood Watch” all he needed to do was to identify himself and ask Trayvon what he was doing there, and that would have ended the thing right there.  That Zimmerman did not do this and that the prosecutor did NOT point this out to the jury, is dereliction of his duties.  But then we come to the first three witnesses he put on the stand.  This is prosecutor legal mal practice in the first degree.  Every prosecutor knows the very FiRST thing you hit the jury with is the foul bloodiness of the crime.  You show photos of the bloody victim- - and you put on all of your forensic experts on.  And you mention that Zimmerman was not given any sort of drug test himself.  You point out that Zimmerman lied and said he needed to go to the hospital- - when the paramedics cancled the trip for Zimmerman because he was NOT in need of medical attention that way.  You show the photos - - video of Zimmerman at the plice station “whistling Dixie” as David Cruise s aptly put it- - clearly looking pretty healthy and not bleeding anywhere.  But no- - two of the three of the prosecutions first witnesses actually testified contrary to the case- - almost in Kato Kayland fashion in the OJ case out here.  Two witneses said that the Black man was on top and the white man was on the sidewalk.  But I never heard testimony that this was the configuration WHEN the fatal shot was fired.  Nobody ever pointed out that neither witness testified to THAT.  They did make the point about nobody saw anybody banging someone’s head into the concrete- - .    This point WAS made pretty clear.  Also Zimmerman testified that AFTER his nose had been “broken” by Martin- - that Martin put his hands over Zimmerman’s nose.  Yet- - Zimmerman’s blood was not found on Martin and Martin’s blood, more significantly was not found on Zimmerman- - not so much as a single DNA drop, if I’m getting this correctly.  But then we come to the stupidest thing the prosecution did.  We all know the defense grilling that they gave the girlfriend that Martin was talking to on the cell phone.  How can it possibly take a full day to cross examine a witness involving a fifteen minute phone conversation?    Numerous legal rules were violated here.  You CANT cross examine a witness about material NOT in direct testimony.  So here the whole bit about whether she can read cursive writing- - or how well she knows English is completely immaterial.  Her literacy or the lack of it is NOT on trial.  Having gone into it they fail to mention that the eighteen year old was tri-lingual in Hatian and Spanish and English- - but her education level was low.  The girl was NOT on trial for her lack of education or that she didn’t know cursive writing.  But now we come to the stupidest blunder of the prosecution of all.  This whole bit about the “Perverted ass cracker” who was following Zimmerman.  It is Completely immaterial what the lady thought of whether the remark was racist.  She was REPORTING someone someone told her.  Had she said anything different she would have been guilty of purgery- - and everybody knows that.  But then the defense attorney goes on to say “How do you teel about what is racist and what is not.  Do people in that neighborhood use racist terms.  Do you think that is a good idea to use racial terms?   I’d have moved to strike this Entire line of questioning.  Her was not to function as some Socialogist giving some expert societal commentary on various neighborhoods.  The notion that she was “combative’ is a silly one.  ANYONE would be combative if they were grilled about the content of a fifteen minute phone conversation for a full day.  Then for Moe Kelly to get on the radio and say “The prosecution blew it” is sickening.  And finally may I submit that this whole idea of “reasonable doubt” and the ‘burden of proof” is completely mis stated in ALL the media commentary.  Nobody is Disputing WHAT happened.  There WAS a shooting and someone was killed and the defendant DID it.  So there no longer is ROOM for any “reasonable doubt” argument to be had.  If you are going to raise a self defence argument- - that’s one thing.  This defendant DIDN”T .  He did not even DARE to claim the “stand your ground” law- - because the defendant would have purgered himself all over the place, and for this reason Zimmerman could never be put on the stand.   But this sick idea of Moe Kelly and others that the defendant doesn’t HAVE to tke the stand because there is “reasonable doubt” is silly.  If you or I shoots someone in the dead of night, a burglar who enters our house- - you know damn well we will be grilled about it no end.  The burden of proof at that point shifts to US to prove that it WAS self defense.  Everybody knows that, even in Florida.  We have to prove that we honestly thought our lives were in imminent danger.   Even on this soap opera- - Samantha will have to prove self defense in her case about appearing from a bathroom and firing away shooting an apparently unarmed man in the back and killing him.  Samantha can not then say “If there is the slightest glint I might be justified you have to let me go”.  It doesn’t work that way.  Unfortunately in Samantha’s case we know the shooting WAS absolutely necessary and that she was being set up by dirty cops stealing the murder weapon- - the perp was going to use against an unconscious and helpless Officer Hernandez as he lay in a hospital bed.  In that case the only thing that will save Sammy was the fact that she did not know the victim and for this reason there is no apparent motive for the crime.  In Zimmerman’s case  the MOTIVE is obvious.  The victim was Black.  Just as with President Obama the tea party people feel justified in lodging the most erratic of charges against President Obama because of that one malody that outshines them all- - he’s Black.  Now they have cases where white Cops pull over Blacks for speeding and conthiscate their drivers licenses and promise to give them back later.  But in the mean time that black party can’t use that ID to register to vote.  This is the latest stunt they are using in the South.  Of course- - they had to eliminate the Voting rights law because of the VERY fact that the President won with black votes last time.   OK, I guess we’re done.

Actually no I'm not.  It has come to my attention on the Chris Matthews show that this West defense attorney fellow asked the witness to speculate that "Perhaps the entire conversation of Trayvon to you was a gigantic ruse so that YOU wouldn't know what he was planning on doing to Zimmerman.  This question was COMPLETELY improper and should have been flagged immediately.  This is not a "zealous defense" it's legally stepping over aboundary line.  You never ask a witness to speculate on something they would have NO IDEA of the answer to.  The purpose of testimony is to illicit facts and not wild "what if" speculation.  It was legal mal practice on the prosecution's part not to immediately Flag this question.  Also - - there is an objection that can be used "This question has been asked and answered".  Clearly this notion was a stranger to this court.  This was obviously a case of "bagering the witness".  Neither is it the attorney's job to illicit some kind of cultural prejudice or bias against the witness.  Indeed this is supposedly why juries are screened in the first place.  This trial is a complete sham- and the Prosecution is definitely rigging it so that they will lose.  You do that in baseball boxing and guess what?  They bring you up on gambling charges.  Think about it.

Wednesday was a decidedly warmer day than was Tuesday.  Thursday was a hotter day than Wednesday and yesterday was way warmer than Thursday.  Today they are predicting it will get to 96, which was warmer than yesterday and they are predicting 100 degrees even for tomorrow.  Yesterday on some playground with metal equipment it got up to 162.  And on the Las Vegas pavement it got to 164 degrees.  Death Valley may be challenging its alltime record of 134 degrees, the highest in the nation and second highest recorded in the world at 136 in Saudi Arabia.  Yesterday in Death Valley it was 126 degrees and that was not necessarily even the hottest reading of the day.  There were predicting 129 for today.  There was a couple from Finland there and they said “This place is about as warm as a malfunctioning sauna in my own country”.  That doesn’t even qualify as a bad joke.  The President is concerned about the rash of droughts and fires in the West and flooding in the heartland caused in part by the “wet snow’ engendered by warmer climates that melts faster.  The President pointed out in his Saturday morning address on KNX that this global warming thing costs all Americans money in fire fighters and emergency workers - - and lost worker productivity.   But all John Boehner can see as far as pollution regulations in coal mines is concerned is "loss of jobs" - - not that Speaker John Boehner would vote for ANY jobs bill- - of which the President has submitted many.  

The US Senate on Thursday passed the immigration bill 68 to 32.  But John Boehner says he won't allow any bill to come to the floor without the ability to carry a Majority of Republicans on the final vote, assuming the speaker even ALLOWS one.  We all know these people's propensity for not even ALLOWING votes to come up on bills, which if a vote WERE allowed, would pass handily.  And these people contradict themselves.  Arguing against the immigration bill the other day the republicans were making the argument that now we will spend TOO MUCH on border securety and now we can't afford it.  Amazing!   John Boehner says the Senate immigration bill is Dead On Arrival.   Senators from Utah, Texas, and Alabama told so many lies about this immigration bill that over their objections Passed in the Senate 68 to 32 - -  they told lies saying it wouldn't really reduce the numbers of illegals here- - or that it would balloon the federal deficet, or that felons who had been kicked out of the country once would be voted back in.  And they spoke of "granting instant legal status' to illegal aliens.  But also in the host of charges, and this Utah guy was the most articulate in this area- was the idea that amendments were not allowed in the bill even though dozens of amendments, seemingly - have been submitted- most of them being "poison pill' amendments to sabotage the thing.  And there were the usual allusions of some "secret agenda" writers of the bill had.  Just as last summer that Obama movie spoke of a "secret agenda for the president to conthiscate our guns.

They say that the power grid is OK and they are preparing for “worse than we have now” should it come.  The AC is working good in here, thank God.  The United Farm Workers has regulations about giving workers in the field water, and even giving them shade now and then, should they need it.  They say that symptums of heat stroke can cascade into a major crisis on not really that much warning- - so beware.  Apparently the job overseers have not been too dilligent to give the migrant workers these rights and are being sued.  But now they are running this Anti United Farm Workers adds saying "The Farm Workers Union is trying to take away worker's right by taking three percent of worker's salaries.  And has the gall to add "This provision is in direct contradiction to everything Caesar Chavez stood for".  Can you believe that?   Obviously if your salary under Union sponsorship doubles, and other worker conditions are improved- - you will gladly pay the three percent.   I don’t know how these people who drill holes in the asphalt do it - - in this heat.