Maddy, also known as Juror B29
Early on when I first began blogging, and after hearing Frank Taaffe defend George Zimmerman, I brought up the influence of sovereign citizenship ideology in Taaffe’s defense of Zimmerman’s actions. According to Francis (Frank) Taaffe, Zimmerman was frustrated by crime in his community and road out like Night Riders to capture Blacks walking free in that community. (As a side note, the Night Riders of the KKK have a National Office in Live Oaks, FL, and a branch office in Fort Myers, FL.) Soon, other Zimmerman supporters picked up the mantra and it extended to Zimmerman’s defense team during his trial.
Zimmerman’s frustration was to gain support of White Supremacists who stereotype all young Black males as hoodlums. If Zimmerman was not arrested it would give sovereign citizens the right formula to commit murder and walk free.
With Juror B37’s literary agent revealing that the jury found Zimmerman not guilty due to the manner in which Zimmerman was charged, it reasonably conveys that Juror B37 believes that Zimmerman is not subject to the law. That clearly conveys sovereign citizen ideology.
The Southern Poverty Law Center reports that “sovereign citizens” “believe that they — not judges, juries, law enforcement or elected officials — get to decide which laws to obey and which to ignore.” Based on statements made by Jurors B37 and B29 in the George Zimmerman case, how they reached their decision by blaming it on there being no law to convict, is classic sovereign citizenship, twisted logic.
The foundational logic behind sovereign citizen ideology is that descendants of slaves and foreigners became U.S. citizens because of the 13th and 14th Amendments, or “statutory citizens” unlike sovereigns whose citizenship is established by the Declaration of Independence. Based on comments made by Maddy, also known as Juror B29, the other jurors made her submissive to them, beginning with that age-old theory that 14th amendment citizens are slaves for sovereign citizens and not intelligent enough to understand anything and must be told what to think. Maddy was played by the cultist persuasion and White Supremacy beliefs of sovereign citizens.
Most sovereign citizens whose beliefs are not originally rooted in White Supremacy are people who have found themselves in a desperate situation, often due to unemployment, underemployment, foreclosures, unpaid taxes, etc. Frank Taaffe and George Zimmerman are ideal people to embrace sovereign citizen ideology. Taaffe has been litigating a foreclosure case for years. The federal bureau of investigation reports that some sovereign citizens impersonate law enforcement officers. George Zimmerman wanted to be a cop. Giving Zimmerman undeputized authority to kill under the color of law enforcement gives all citizens the same right.
The FBI says there are thousands of Sovereign Citizens in the state of Florida. Some simply look to make money off citizens they recruit into the movement; others use system-slowing filings on things like mortgages to drag out the foreclosure process. There is an active group in Florida whose leader operates out of Clearwater.
Policemag.com reports;
“Sovereign citizen” is a broad, general term that is often applied to any individual person or group that does not believe that the laws of the United States or the state laws apply to them. In other words, they are beyond the jurisdiction of law enforcement authority. The term “sovereign citizen” should be viewed as an umbrella under which you will find thousands of loosely organized groups or individuals that share one basic ideological principle but approach it through different paths.”
As Johnny Liberty, a sovereign citizen out of Oregon stated in 1995, his goal is to teach others how to reclaim their rights and defend those rights once they have reclaimed them. Manipulating a jury to decide that there is no law to find a murderer guilty of murder, is one way of reclaiming the rights of sovereign citizens. Due to that jury’s decision, we can bet that sovereign citizens will rely on it in the future to argue that the state lacks jurisdiction to charge them with committing a crime. I can hear their argument now – “The law is not written to convict.”
The logic and theories of sovereign citizens is just as twisted as the excuses we have heard from Jurors B37 and B29. It is likened to saying that they were asked to drive a car from one point to another. During the course of their trip, they became lost. Rather than asking for directions, they wrecked the car. Their justification? None of them could read and understand the map.
In 1999, the National Center for State Courts published “The Anti-Government Movement Guidebook” to help judges identify sovereign citizens in their courtrooms via the methods they use, including filibustering, lack of jurisdiction and common law arguments.
Although law enforcement and judges are aware of sovereign citizens when law enforcement or the courts are involved, they seldom recognize the ideologies elsewhere. Not all sovereign citizens recruit through online websites. They infiltrate churches. They regularly visit public libraries and courthouses to engage others in conversations and once getting their attention, deflect the conversation to their ideologies. It appears that they also infiltrate neighborhood watch groups.
Although sovereigns believe they are superior to Blacks and other minorities, they are not opposed to using them to accomplish their goals of challenging laws. Used as sacrificial guinea pigs, they are encouraged to raise challenges in the courts. For instance, actor Wesley Snipes was duped into using sovereign citizenship tax arguments. He ended up sentenced to prison for tax evasion. Had he been successful in the argument of sovereigns that federal taxes are unconstitutional, sovereigns would have taken advantage of that “win.” If not, then it was just another Negro who was Negro rich going to prison.
Sovereign citizens also engage people in positions of authority or influence in hope that they will promote and practice their agenda. Tampa Bay news reports that in 2011, Tom Laughlin, a detective with the Sarasota police department, was convinced by his brother to file papers declaring himself sovereign and immune from the laws of the State of Florida and the United States. He was subsequently terminated from his job.
Tom Laughlin’s defense applies to the Zimmerman jury. His defense was, “I’m ignorant. I’m stupid.”
Juror B29 plainly stated that Zimmerman committed murder, but she relies on the way the law was read to her to decide that there was no law in which to convict Zimmerman. That is classic sovereign citizenship ideology. Who on the jury convinced her that there is no law that convicts an initial aggressor who kills another from being convicted of murder or manslaughter? Who on the jury practiced law by interpreting the law to other jurors?
What sovereign citizens accomplished by the Zimmerman verdict is to give sovereign citizens the right to murder 14th amendment citizens without answering to the law. The Department of Justice would do well to investigate each member of the Zimmerman jury in effort to find who used sovereign citizen persuasion tactics to convince at least 3 other jurors that there is no law setting forth that murder is a crime. You see, the jury’s verdict in the Zimmerman case is not about Zimmerman. Rather, it’s about rebelling against the government and furthering sovereign citizen agendas.
Other research source: http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/september-2011/sovereign-citizens
I think a huge problem, too, and one that made it easier for Juror B29 to be swayed, was that the judge’s instructions and response to the question about manslaughter were confusing. I read it twice and still wasn’t sure exactly what she was explaining. She never said what manslaughter was, just what it wasn’t.
It would be like a student, when faced with a page of math problems, trying to decide whether or not it includes algebra. She asks the teacher for clarification about what algebra is. The teacher says, “It’s not the math of shapes; that would be geometry. It’s not the math of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division; that would be arithmetic.”
So the student looks at the page and sees, for example, the Pythagorean theorem, a2 + b2 = c2. But because it involves a triangle, the student concludes, “Well, that can’t be algebra, because shapes means geometry.” And she sees a problem such as x2 + 2xy + 12, and concludes that because it involves addition, that can’t be algebra either. The problem is that the teacher never defined algebra at all, and made things more confusing rather than clearer.
Sanford Police tase man in the back of his head. The cop was so close to him that he fell on the man and became tangled in the wires.
http://youtu.be/i8DaCdcU6zU&rel=0
UH UH UH
Makes me wonder if this is how the Sanford cops are retaliating for now having a Black chief of police? Cecil had better wake up and realize he’s not in Elgin, IL anymore.
Attorney Natalie Jackson represented the family of an Orlando man who was shot at 137 times by the police. The case was settled for $450,000.
http://youtu.be/TKdl2xlDrI0&rel=0
TEST
Why Zimmerman Juror B29 Believed in His Guilt But Still Voted to Acquit
http://baystatebanner.com/news/2013/jul/31/why-zimmerman-juror-b29-believed-his-guilt-still-v/
The lone Latina juror in the George Zimmerman murder trial flatly said that she thought Zimmerman was guilty.
Yet juror B29 still voted to acquit. She gave out mixed signals as to why she did. The first reason was that the evidence wasn’t there. But she also quickly added that she held out for a few hours trying to hang the jury presumably because she felt the evidence really wasn’t there for a clean acquittal.
This second signal is far more revealing as to why a juror that believes one thing, in this case that Zimmerman is guilty, but still went along with the majority, the white jurors, and voted to acquit him. The key to understanding why she did can be summed up in two words: juror pressure. This is far different from juror intimidation. That’s a crime and is severely punished.
Juror pressure is far more subtle and amorphous but poses an even bigger challenge to getting a just and fair verdict in a trial than outright intimidation, which can be documented in only a tiny number of cases.
The problem of juror pressure on a dissenting juror has long been known by defense attorneys and prosecutors. In a study as part of the National Center for State Courts project on hung juries, researchers conducted post-trial surveys that covered 367 trials, all of which resulted in unanimous decisions, and surveyed nearly 4,000 jurors in several states. They found that in nearly 40 percent of the cases there was at least one juror who thought that the defendant was either innocent or guilty but still went along with the majority and made the jury verdict unanimous.
The researchers went further and tossed in cases where the jurors were faced with multiple charges against a defendant. The number of juries with jurors who wanted to convict or acquit on one or more of the charges, particularly the lesser charge, leapt to more than half of the juries that brought back unanimous verdicts on all counts. And since studies have shown that few trials wind up with hung juries, the disturbing conclusion is that there are a lot of jurors that simply cave to the majority in a lot of trials.
The Zimmerman trial then was no aberration and fit the pattern in which a juror that truly believed that he was guilty but could go along with the pack anyway. Her rationale that the evidence wasn’t there doesn’t square with research that shows that dissenting jurors often go along with the majority not because they are convinced about points of evidence but because they bow to what’s been called “normative pressure.”
Put simply that means that a juror who stands as the lone holdout is under relentless and harsh pressure from other jurors to knuckle under. The pressure from the push for speed, verbal battering and the threat of social ostracism is virtually impossible to resist.
The problem is made worse by the notion in many trials that it’s virtually impossible for a dissenting juror to say with absolute certainty whether the position of the majority for the guilt or innocence of the defendant is the right one, and whether the verdict would do horrible legal damage or be an unpardonable injustice.
Last night while watching O’Mara’s July 10th press conference, I caught where he referred to the jury’s verdict in past tense.
http://youtu.be/lUuhv4k4XTA&rel=0
This comment is in response to a hateful, threatening, rude, and insulting comment sent to this blog by Bob Hurt. For those who read the above article, they might recognize his name as the leader of the sovereign citizen group in Florida.
Bob, your approximate 15 page comment about “Negroes” is not going to get posted here. We don’t want your filth. Your statement that “Caucasians should stereotype and profile Negroes” is dangerous. Sterilization? Killing all “Negroe” children? Your opinions promote hate and violence, and I hope that the FBI has you on their radar.
For you personally, I understand that hurting people hurt others. Get therapy, please.
I pray that Mr. Hurt will open his heart and allow God to put love in his heart. His life and the world will become a better place if people do put a little love in their hearts.
Change doesn’t come easy. However, love makes it possible.
Look what happened in this 1950’s woman’s heart:
Maddy was doing a classic CYA. She tried to appease the black community by saying she believed GZ murdered TM. She then tries to appease the white community by saying she had follow the law “as it was read to her.” At the same time, she’s hoping the black community will understand she had no choice. She distances herself from that verdict as much as she can. The problem is that if she truly in her heart of hearts felt he was guilty, she would have hung that jury and championed a manslaughter charge as if her life depended on it. And the only reason I suspect she showed herself to the public was as a preemptive measure. At some point someone would have connected the dots and identified her. If she didn’t say her piece now, she might not have gotten a chance later and hope it to sound credible.
I agree, kansaschik. There would have been no way I could have been on that jury, thought Zimmerman was guilty, and gone along with the other jurors and voted to find him not guilty. The other jurors would have had a very ugly fight on their hands. She caved to the other jurors who were probably focused more on going home to their families than they were on holding Zimmerman accountable for killing an unarmed teenager, and besides, the death of another black teen didn’t affect their lives one way or another.
majiir! Nice to see your fonts. I concur; I would have FLIPPED that FAKE sequestration room on it’s head.
B29 is trying to figure out a way to sleep at night free of guilt for her part in the not guilty verdict of gz. She is full of dung. I stand on my comment without a doubt.
Not backing down either Granny. B29 and the rest of the clowns in that 3 ring circus can all go straight to HELL.
BRAVO, Xena!
Expose the shadow worlds of America’s RACISM, disguised as law.
This sheds light on why a 28 year old man was tight with a bunch of old men.
A bunch of old “WHITE” men at that. I have said just like the author of this article, “THE DOJ NEEDS TO INVESTIGATE EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE JURORS AND, THEY ALSO NEED TO SLAP THIS FAT SON OF A BITCH WITH A HATE CRIME!” I mean, how much more could these IGNORAMUSES DISLIKE OBAMA ANY WAY? FOGEN DOES NOT DESERVE TO BE WALKING FREE AMONG LAW ABIDING CITIZENS. PEOPLE LIKE THE FOGENS, TAAFFE’S AND OSTERMANS OF THIS COUNTRY, ARE THE VERY REASON FOR 9/11 TAKING PLACE IN THIS COUNTRY.
I also am waiting to hear why the 2 other jurors that wanted Manslaughter changed their mind.
Why were the 3 that wanted him to go free win out? There was enough evidence. ALL that they had to hear was that GEORGE pursued and killed Trayvon, FOR WHAT??? I am not satisfied that they didn’t get it right and blame it on the judge and evidence, That is total bullshit. GEORGE’s 911 call said it all.
Why didn’t the 911 dispatcher ask GEORGE what exactly is he doing besides walking in the rain.
I believe GEORGE knew Trayvon was visiting there, IF NOT, grow some balls and ask Hi, my name is GEORGE ZIMMERMAN, can I help you? And ask Trayvon his name.
NO, GEORGE acted creepy and just kept getting creepier.
They say it isn’t against the law to follow someone, I want to know WHY.
@Lolypop. Glad to see your fonts! Welcome to 3Chics.
During trial when the attorneys for both sides said it is not illegal to follow someone, I gagged. The motive for following someone can indeed be illegal, and Zimmerman clearly followed Trayvon so that he would not get away. You’re right, Lolypop. It’s all there on Zimmerman’s 911 call.
I believe he knew Trayvon stayed there too. They had dogs in that neighborhood and dogs will bark like crazy if they pick up someone’s scent that does not live in their neighborhood. Another reason why I know without a doubt that gz, Goode, and Laure were liars. I also believe that gz, Goode, Laure, and Taafe were part of a subtle redlining scheme as well.
George Zimmerman belongs in PRISON for MURDER.
I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT WAS CONSIDERED “STALKING” IF YOU FOLLOWED ANOTHER PERSON. BUT, I GUESS IT’S NOT ESPECIALLY IS YOU ARE STALKING AN AA. IS THE FUNKY CESSPOOL STILL WEARING HIS BULLET PROOF VEST, IN AN EFFORT TO PROTECT HIS THUMPING GIZZARD BECAUSE, LORD KNOWS THE SOB HASN’T GOT A HEART. HE BLEW A CHILD’S HEART APART AND, HE HAS THE AUDACITY TO WEAR A DAMN BULLET PROOF VEST.
DOES HE ALSO WEAR A BULLET PROOF HELMET? ALSO, WHAT IS GOING TO BE DONE ABOUT THE MONEY LAUNDERING AS WELL AS THE VALID HIDDEN PASSPORT THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THIS CASE? DOES THE TEFLON COATED BASTARD GET A PASS ON THAT ONE AS WELL. THE DOJ HAS GOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE IN MAKING THE DECISION TO CHARGE HIM WITH A HATE CRIME, JUST HAVE SOMEONE WHO CAN MIX MUSIC OR AUTO TUNE THOSE WHO DOESN’T SING VERY WELL, TO ISOLATE ON THE FUCKING COON THAT HE MUTTERS UNDER HIS STINKING BREATH. ALSO, UNSEAL HIS EMAILS, ESPECIALLY THE ONE WHERE HE USES THE WORD NIGGERS.
JAMES BYRD, AND THE GUY WHOSE LAST NAME WAS MATTHEW WHO WAS BEAT TO DEATH, BECAUSE OF HIS SEXUAL ORIENTATION BOTH GOT JUSTICE SO WHY NOT FOR TRAYVON?
The bottom line is that B29 ….is weak. George confessed that he impulsively shot a child because his head was slammed 25 times into concrete while being smothered. A damn high school student could figure out that he was lying. His only true statement was immediately after firing the fatal shot when he told the told the first person that arrived on the scene “he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him”. It wasn’t white supremacy in that jury room that intimidated weak ass B29 it was good old fashion “hyena activity”. The woman was weak and didn’t stand her ground when even to this very day…she has an abiding conviction of guilt. Just….pitiful.
@blkheavyweight. What the jury missed, as well as some of Zimmerman’s supporters, is that Zimmerman said he wiggled his head off the sidewalk, and that is what exposed his gun. When he shot and killed Trayvon, Zimmerman was in no danger of having his head bashed on concrete, if he indeed had it bashed at all.
@Xena my favorite racist AA sista LOL, there is no damn way that any head banging took place that night. if Fogen’s head had been slammed on concrete for five times, let alone 20 or even 25 times, this lying bastard would have “NEVER” been in any condition to refuse hospital transport. which one of the liars of RTL, helped him acquire his fake script for the events of that night? also, those photo shopped pictures, had no damn business being entered into evidence.
While the DOJ is hopefully conducting an investigation, may I suggest that they investigate the prosecution as well.
@ladystclaire.
Now, now. Use the full Zidiot description — “racist, hate-filled, moron, senior citizen, race-baiter.” If I can remember other names they’ve called me, I’ll come back and edit. LOL!!
This is a case of not looking at how the prosecution neither defense proceeded, but how the jury reached its decision. In the AC360 interview, juror B37 made it clear that she decided beyond the scope of what was presented at trial and also her refusal to disregard testimony that the judge ordered disregarded.
I totally agree with your comments. B29 will never ever get any sympathy from me, until she tells the truth about what else went on in that jury room.
B37’s husband concentrates in space law, so there could very well be a connection.
A racial divide lingers after the Zimmerman verdict.
http://wapo.st/14bCyp7
In two Americas, one white, the other black, Dave Muth and Angelo Henderson have entirely different views on a Florida jury’s verdict that found George Zimmerman not guilty in the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin.
Their deep racial divide is in lock step with public opinion polls released during the past week showing that African Americans overwhelmingly disagreed with the verdict, compared with a narrow majority of white Americans who agreed with it.
One poll also showed a stark difference of opinion in the role of race in the case, which exploded into the public consciousness last year when Zimmerman, then a 27-year-old armed neighborhood watch volunteer for his gated community, confronted and killed Martin, an unarmed 17-year-old who was walking back to the home of a family friend after a trip to the store.
Zimmerman’s acquittal of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges by a jury of six women was accepted by Muth, who is white, and rejected by Henderson, who is black, reflecting a wider racial rift.
Even the jurors were split in their views of whether justice was served. On Thursday, the lone minority on the panel, a Puerto Rican woman, said in a television interview that Zimmerman “got away with murder,” but based on Florida law she had no choice but to vote for his acquittal. Earlier, a white juror said in a television interview that she accepted Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense and that he was justified in shooting Martin.
Since the verdict, Martin’s parents and activists have held rallies around the country urging the Justice Department to consider federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman and calling for reforms to gun laws such as “stand your ground” that jurors and legal experts say played a role in Zimmerman’s acquittal.
‘Stand your ground’ protects criminals
Saturday, July 28, 2012 4:30am
Florida’s “stand your ground” self-defense law should be titled the Criminals Relief Act. When the controversial law was enacted in 2005, law enforcement officials warned it would be invoked by people prone to violence and mayhem. Seven years later, it’s clear those fears have been realized. Gang members, drug dealers, domestic abusers and other criminals have walked away from killings thanks to “stand your ground,” and it’s clearer than ever that the law should be repealed. Lawmakers who suggest a tweak can fix the problems are putting politics over sound public policy and the safety of Floridians.
The most recent analysis of more than 100 fatal “stand your ground” cases by Tampa Bay Times staff writers Kameel Stanley and Connie Humburg found that nearly 60 percent of people claiming the self-defense legal protection had been previously arrested, and one in three were accused of a violent crime. All told, 119 people who invoked “stand your ground” after killing someone had been arrested 327 times, not counting traffic violations or other minor arrests.
This is a far cry from the scenario lawmakers envisioned when passing the most expansive self-defense law in the country at the urging of the National Rifle Association. The law expands the “castle doctrine” to give people the right to use lethal force without the duty to retreat whenever they feel at great bodily harm. The thinking was that law-abiding people should be able to defend themselves against an unprovoked assault.
http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/stand-your-ground-protects-criminals/1242570
Cue howls of derisive laughter. How many more criminals will get away with murder before they finally drop this stupid idea? Staying away from Florida is also a personal safety issue as well and as a moral choice.
SYG LAWS= NRA $ANCTIONED FOR WHITES TO BUY MORE GUN$ TO KILL BLACKS & GET OFF $COTT FREE!
Blood sacrifice: The wages of white supremacy
‘So far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.’
Last Modified: 28 Jul 2013 11:09
The prosecution in the trial of George Zimmerman said repeatedly that the trial was not about race. Zimmerman’s defence disagreed: It was about race, they argued repeatedly, and Trayvon Martin was guilty…of being black. He caused his own death, didn’t he? That’s what Zimmerman’s lawyer Mark O’Mara urged his own mother to admit on the stand. And it wasn’t just a bizarre aberration. It was the heart of Zimmerman’s defence to put Trayvon Martin on trial instead – and to do it, essentially, for the same reason that Zimmerman targeted him in the first place: because he was black.
Of course, murder defences often try to put the victim on trial, regardless of who they are. But when they are black in America, their race inevitably plays a role – it just requires a bit more subtlety than it used to…but not a whole lot. And so we got a neighbor called to testify that a black man burgled her house. Why was that relevant? What was she doing there, testifying in a totally unrelated trial?
A tweet from The Nation magazine explained it perfectly: “White supremacy: the idea that some black men must be killed with impunity to keep society at large safe.”
The logic of white supremacy perfectly explained why that neighbor was allowed to testify. The logic of white supremacy perfectly explained why Trayvon Martin had to die. And the logic of white supremacy perfectly explained why Zimmerman had to get away with it.
…………………………
Americans talk a good deal about race and racism, but not so much about white supremacy.. One reason is that getting rid of the worst forms of old-fashioned white racism has made it easy for most white people to think racism has nothing to do with them. “I’m not a racist,” they’ll say, without even thinking about it. “I treat everyone the same.” However, research into implicit bias shows that most people have unconscious biases they know nothing about: bias doesn’t have to mean either animus, or intent.
What’s more, field surveys have repeatedly shown that blacks are rejected far more than equally-qualified whites, whether for job interviews or apartment rentals. In one study, whites were offered jobs at about twice the rate of blacks, and whites with a prison record were treated as well as blacks with a clean record.
Zimmerman found not guilty of killing 17 year old
Beyond that level of discrimination, we encounter more dire impacts. Black and white drug use is virtually identical, for example, but the war on drugs is disproportionately a war on blacks, with more blacks stopped for random searches, more arrested for possession, more arrestees sent to trial, and more of those tried sent to prison.
At every single step of the way, blacks are treated more harshly than whites. And in many states, they lose the right to vote as well – long after they’ve paid the price of years in prison and on parole.
What’s happening in America is not just some random mish-mash of racial and post-racial attitudes. There are massive historical and structural forces at work. Individual attitudes matter, of course, but they are only one facet of a much more complicated story – a story whose scope and essence is much more readily grasped through the lens of white supremacy, a system of racial group dominance, rather than racism, which most folks conceive of primarily or entirely in terms of conscious individual attitudes.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/07/201371511515880981.html?utm_content=automate&utm_campaign=Trial6&utm_source=NewSocialFlow&utm_term=plustweets&utm_medium=MasterAccount
Star Jones Gives Her Take on Zimmerman Verdict
http://youtu.be/svdBjqavskE
Don’t support the Zimmerman verdict and certainly DO NOT LIKE IT.
NO GO, StarrJones.
Marchers in Sanford demanding Angela Corey’s resignation after George Zimmerman verdict
After a six-day march from Jacksonville, roughly 50 protesters spent Saturday in Sanford, calling attention to what they say is an unjust verdict in the George Zimmerman trial and a racially based criminal-justice system.
The diverse group of protesters came from across the South, upset with the July 13 not-guilty verdict in Zimmerman’s trial and about the outcome of a different case in North Florida — a black woman in Jacksonville who was sent to prison for a shooting that injured no one.
State Attorney Angela Corey’s Jacksonville-based office handled both cases.
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-zimmerman-trayvon-angela-corey-20130727,0,4253908.story
Angela Corey is a good start, Judge Nelson should be next.
I concur. Get the ROTOR ROOTER in there and ream out the CORRUPTION.
Xena,
you knocked this out of the park. thank you for breaking it down.
but, that simple minded weak heifer was just that – simple minded. she had no fucking spine, and I have no sympathy for her in the least.
@rikyrah. I agree that Maddy is weak and suspect, with her being a newcomer to Florida, that she was intimidated by the “natives” who were probably name dropping and telling horror stories during their sequestration.