Mark Dankof discusses the George Zimmerman acquittal in the Treyvon Martin case with Anisa Abd El Fattah, President of the National Association of Muslim American Women (NAMAW).
Special emphasis will be placed in the discussion on the article entitled, “Black Conservatives for Treyvon Make Best Case Ever for a Zimmerman Conviction.”
Mr. Dankof’s past article, “The Zionist Media Plot and the Treyvon Martin Tragedy“, will also be referenced. Special interest in Dr. David Duke’s new video, “How the Media Incites Violence and Racism in the Zimmerman Case,” may also prove relevant to the discussion. Show-page
Download
Sad to hear that Dankof drank the retard kool-aid on this one.
ReplyDeleteDankof and the guest spend a lot of time discussing whether Zimmerman had probable cause to call the police. This is all nitpicking and a waste of time. We are not discussing a police arrest. All of this discussion is trying to make a guess at Zimmerman's intent. But it is clear that Z thought Tray was suspicious and that he called the police. This does not show an intent to murder, which is what the trial is supposed to determine.
Oh my goodness! I just got to the part where the guest is referring to the part of the 911 recording where Zimmerman reportedly called Trayvon a "coon". If you listen to the audio, it is unclear whether Z said "punks" or "coons". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZLIZOM32I4
I think the stronger case can be made for Z having said, "punks". But Dankof and the guest are saying that the court wrongfully kept this out of evidence. They are wrong. In order to admit evidence into court, it must first be weighed to determine its relevance, and then whether its probative value outweighs its prejudice to the defendant.
1. It would be relevant if Z said "coons", as this would show animus.
2. Probative value is zero because it is not clear that Z said "coons", and it is probable that Z said "punks".
3. The prejudice to the defendant is very high because it makes Z look like a racist, and it provides incentive to do violence upon Tray.
Conclusion: The probative value is clearly less than the prejudicial harm, and therefore this evidence was rightfully kept out of the trial.
The guest is making a case that Z should be charged with violating Trayvon's civil rights. This is doubly retarded. The 5th Amendment of the Constitution protects us against being tried twice for the same crime:"[N]or shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb."
Aside from violating the clear intent of the 5th Amendment, any prosecution of Z for violating Trayon's civil rights would also be wrong because the federal government is not supposed to have police powers. Any "hate crimes" legislation (e.g. Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 (H.R. 1913, HCPA)) is a violation of the 10th Amendment because congress does not have the authority to enforce this sort of law.
-- Next retarded point: the guest is saying that the judge should have declared a mistrial after it was determined that Z's brother was following a witness on Twitter. Pure retard.
ReplyDelete-- Guest says that Z left his car with his loaded gun and this proves that he had an intent to kill Trayvon, and that the defense did not prove this was not so. Retard guest has the burden of proof reversed.
--Guest offers proof that Z studied the "stand your ground" statute as evidence that Z planned to use it as a defense.
--Guest is saying that Z initiated the fight with absolutely no proof. She says that Trayvon did not have injuries to his hands, but she is actually lying here. The autopsy showed that Trayvon had injuries to his hands. Z did NOT have injuries to his hands, but he did have injuries to his head and a broken nose. The physical evidence shows that Trayvon was beating the living crap out of Z.
-- Guest is saying that Zimmerman is Jewish, but provides absolutely zero proof of this. Let me tell you: if Z was Jewish, you never would have heard of this case.
-- guest says that the "stand your ground" law is not Christian, and that it allows a person to kill someone just because the gunman decided that his victim was a bad person. But this ignores the evidence that Trayvon was on top of Z, betting him senseless. Beating someone senseless might cause a reasonable person to conclude that the violent person is a bad person.
I am saddened by the severe retardation expressed by Mark Dankof in this interview. Dankof has otherwise shown himself to be an able thinker. But PressTV and Mark Glenn's bunch have really missed the boat on the Trayvon trial. They appear to have been caught up in the sensationalized (Jewish) media that painted the picture of the innocent black boy shot by the angry white man. But they have ignored the evidence that the independent media has uncovered:
1. That that the skittles Trayvon was fetching from the market are a key ingredient to "Purple Drank" or "Lean", a cough syrup concoction that Trayvon was using.
2. That Trayvon's autopsy showed some liver damage, likely due to overuse of this "Drank".
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/
3. That people who overuse "Lean" are often susceptible to violent psychotic breaks.
4. That Trayvon had previously been arrested and found to possess items indicating criminal behavior (women's jewelry and a tool for breaking open lockers).
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/05/01/m-dspd-cover-up-the-curious-case-of-trayvon-martins-backpack-with-stolen-jewelry-and-burglary-tool/
--Z had said that Trayvon had been acting suspiciously, and Z was anxious to prevent burglaries in his housing complex. The Guest was criticizing Z for calling the police without justification, but failed to note that the arrest report which states that Trayvon had been "hiding and being suspicious", and that he had been in possession of physical evidence of a burlgary; and that a burglary had been committed in a nearby home, and those same items in Trayvon's possession, except for the burglary tool, were reported missing from the home.
5. That Trayvon had a history of violent behavior. http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-05-23/news/os-george-zimmerman-trial-trayvon-20130523_1_zimmerman-case-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman
ReplyDelete6. If anything, this case history shows that the police had been overly lenient with Trayvon because there was a bureaucratic effort to stem the high statistics of blacks being arrested. In fact, Trayvon should have been prosecuted for burglary, but was instead shunted off into psychiatric help, under the Baker Act. http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/12/22/was-trayvon-martin-another-example-of-political-correctness-run-amock-subject-to-baker-act-by-miami-dade-school-police-dept-subsequently-removed-from-home/
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2013/07/04/why-did-they-kill-trayvon-martin-he-really-was-profiled-only-not-by-george-zimmerman/
In conclusion, the presentation of facts that support a murder charge were sorely lacking. Instead we got a bunch of unsupported allegations, hypothesis, lies, and assorted crap. The only reason that the murder charge was brought was because the black community had perceived itself under attack, and that was because the Jewish media had created this image. In reality, the statistics prove that black on white crime is much more prevalent than white on black crime. But there are no protestors in the streets threatening violence to correct this situation. White on black violence is a non-issue. Period. This case should have never come to trial, but it did because of the manipulation of the Jewish media. It is clueless and retarded for Dankof and guest to pretend that the Jewish media thrust a Jewish man into this situation. The facts show that the a violent criminal was beating Z to death, and that Z defended himself with a gun. It is ridiculous to aver that Z planned to kill Trayvon be getting Trayvon to climb on top of Z and bang Z's head against the ground. There is zero evidence of Z committing a crime, and so this case should not have been brought to trial.