Home » Uncategorized » Open Thread – Dec. 3rd

Open Thread – Dec. 3rd

Open Discussion

Advertisements

252 thoughts on “Open Thread – Dec. 3rd

  1. http://www.therealfranktaaffe.com/donate-george-zimmerman-defense-fund/

    I went ahead and donated to Frank’s fund for George. I was holding off because I had just donated to Robert Sr’s a day or so before I found out about Frank’s. I hope his fund is successful. I do hope to see George able to restore his life.

    I wonder if the manager of the site should remove the discussion option. It is dominated by very hateful Traybots and there’s only a couple of us who have been putting in a good word for george. I imagine that anyone who would consider donating would not be influenced by Traybots there, but still.

    • Sharon ~ I too hope Frank’s fund is successful, kind of you to donate to GZ’s legal fund for Jayne W. I keep reading about “donor fatigue” for Americans, I guess everyone has the place they donate as the one closest to their heart.

      Since there was never any real explanation to where the last Legal Defense Money went in the criminal trial or how it was disbursed, maybe you might suggest to Taaffe since you donated he consider being more forthcoming in telling those he is soliciting for donations & those kind enough to donate, how much has been donated to JW’s bill. It would seem imo, the more transparent Frank is, the better.

      Just a thought, Frank sounds humble when asking & has appeared to be a good friend to GZ.

  2. Funny story quick. We got new neighbors from Florida. They hung a Confederate flag at their door(as a curtain). I laugh because…. really? You are in Pennsylvania! The Yankees won the US Civil War…but shhhhh… dont tell the Confederates.

    • I live in the South and occasionally see a house close to the Interstate with big confederate flags flying. That seems so stupid. Why fly something that will make some people angry when you live in a vulnerable position.

      • I think it is funny. It doesn’t offend me. But it is stupid to hang them today considering why they hang them.
        “Save your Confederate money, boys. The South’s going to rise again.”

        Considering if they did they would be deemed domestic terrorists. Just sayin!

        But I do suppose some in the South do not really think they lost the war. They should read the Battle of Gettysburg at least!

        • Those flags make blacks in the South very angry. It seems rather dumb to wave them around and insult people. Not safe, either, if you live where your flag can be seen from an Interstate highway. People do dumb things, though.

          • Yeah some fly em to offend blacks, or to notify racists they are racist as well. More dangerous for them then it is for those who are offened for sure. But the way I see it, it is a mockery of the Southern people. I know the flag is a part of American history and I am fine with that.
            But to hang it as a window curtain on your front door, in PA. is funny as hell considering you are not very far from where the deadliest battle of the war was ended and the Confederates withdrew. Its like what is the point? Are you trying to say the Confederation back? What an idiot!

            • As someone who lives in La., it’s common to see the rednecks cover the rear window of their trucks w/a Confederate flag. LOL, I agree, they are notifying the racists as well.

            • I don’t understand it and I’m in the South. I think it might have something to do with group identity. People can feel a false sense of power when they’re part of a group that is being aggressive. That’s part of what drives the Traybot movement. A large group of people wear hoodies in protest. A poor man who had to defend himself gets arrested. They feel a false sense of power. They were a part of a group that made something happen. The Confederate flag people don’t get much done except wave the flag around. African American groups try to keep them from doing it and they do it in defiance. It seems to be a stupid thing to do. I don’t think all of the people who do it are racists. I think they’re just rebellious because people are trying to prevent them from flying the flag and they do it just to show they can. Keeps them from feeling powerless and run over.

              I find the Confederate flag offensive except when displayed at history exhibits. It doesn’t belong on bumper stickers, flag poles in people’s front yards, government buildings, or curtain rods in PA.

              • I find it offensive they cant even afford a curtain rod to hang it on…..LOL. It is the first time I ever saw someone hang a Confederate flag here.
                We hang American and the State Flag here in PA.
                I support their freedom of speech. It is just ignorant though being many homes where we live are historical. The home I live in was a meeting place of the Knights of the Golden Eagle. In fact in the attic the members names are still written on the wall where they hung their coats. Two Golden Eagles are stenciled on the walls.

                I just think it is ignorant and disrespectful to hang it here in this community. It is counter to everything historical and I think that is why they hung it.

            • I dont know why they are so proud to hang those flags. 620,000 Americans died in the Civil war. We fought the red coats to gain our Independence and only 7 decades later we are at war with one another.
              If they hang them in a pro-succession stance…that is pretty dumb because we are the UNITED States of America. If they hang them to be bigots and racists, there’s NO ‘pride’ in utter stupidity!
              The South had only 5.5 million. The North had 22 million, hence the South never stood a chance and yet they went ahead and did it anyway for the Emancipation proclamation that didn’t really end slavery!
              So I guess hanging a flag is remembrance of just how DUMB they are!

  3. More & more links are being shared by friends here of statements that Jayne W. has made on the GZ’s criminal case, especially about guns & racism.

    Besides being a media presence on CNN/HLN, I continue to wonder WHY GZ has “hired” Jayne W. since her personal views of guns don’t reflect GZ’s rights/personal views. CNN/HLN will have on any attorney representing a defendant that is high profile, such as George/Cindy Anthony had pro bono attorneys that did countless interviews defending them on HLN/CNN & was their spokesperson when the media made statements about the couple, he responded, neither Brad Conway or their last attorney was high profile..

    Some argue that Dowdy worked for the State, BUT, just a reminder it was a PUBLIC Defender that won a new trial for his client on APPEAL against Judge Nelson, it wasn’t a “private pay” attorney, just a Public Defender that fought & won for his client. Dowdy is said to be one of the best, imo, it’s puzzling.

    • I knew who she was the second she made a statement about representing GZ. I closely follow everything anti-2nd amendment.

      I am unsure if he dropped Dowdy or it was a mutual agreement. May have been a conflict because he was associated with RZjr. on his racist rant on twitter.
      Maybe they needed the distance. But there was another attorney on the case. I smell opportunistic Taaffes hand in this one.
      Yet, it is GZs choice. So who knows what is going on. Really I care less. I never saw GZ as the poster boy for stand your ground because it was not a stand your ground case. It was clear self defense. I helped him because he was railroaded. And afterwards he helped NOTHING for gun rights advocate causes, except those who wanted hm to buy his stiff and raise money to arm his silly ass who reaches for it when a cricket chirps anymore!

        • Do you REALLY want me to go back through all the stories in that time frame and point out every single story RZjr. avoided that dealt with a black facing the same fate his own brother had that he not one time mentioned? If his brother was not racist and shot TM in defense as was the case there was no reason to point out black on white crime or any type of racist crime that was not in ANYWAY similar to GZs self defense case.

        • David ~ I only pulled up a few links, Google RZ Jr. Racist Twitter Rant, this article has other links, twit messages, videos, etc.

          ARTICLE:
          George Zimmerman’s brother apologized Wednesday for a racially fueled Twitter rant that paralleled shooting victim Trayvon Martin to a Georgia teen accused of killing a baby.

          “I made a mistake,” Robert Zimmerman Jr., 32, told CNN’s Piers Morgan after a series of controversial tweets Sunday that also blasted the media. “Unfortunately (it) may not have helped George.”

          Although Robert Zimmerman had posted an earlier mea culpa on Twitter, saying he was “sincerely sorry my tweet offended many,” he didn’t completely recant his message on CNN.

          http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/zimmerman-apologizes-racially-charged-twitter-rant-article-1.1301109#ixzz2mRXby5Bq

        • Robert Jr did not go on a racist rant. He posted a more recent picture of Trayvon looking aggressive and said “a picture is worth a thousand words.” The NAACP called it racist because it wasn’t flattering to Trayvon like picture of him when he was 12 were.

          • Sharon ~ as GZ supporters, we feel differently, perception spun in the MEDIA/BGI feel differently than we do & that encompasses a lot of American’s that DON’T share our view.

            If it’s one thing GZ’s case taught us: Racism is in the eye of the beholder reading about it, yet they may be uninformed, their opinions carry the same equal weight as ours do & that’s what has kept the racism aspect going imo.

    • Funny thing is after this Schiebe incident people started saying she was planted by Holder…. now people are wondering if GZ was planted by Holder! Well, Holder is known as the gun runner! I just think everyone was played in this whole thing. A very simple self defense case has become a Hollywood production. I am almost embarrassed to be a part of it anymore. I think the real victims are the people who ever supported either side! Money makes people do crazy things!

        • Thanks David. But the media and BGI antics and manipulation have been occurring way before the GZ case. It was just never national or as big before. GZ is not the only victim of the railroading. I think for some like us it was the biggest opportunity we have had to date to expose those manipulations. Unfortunately after the fact the many degrees of manipulation have yet been touched. There was divides even amongst supporters.
          I feel there is a movement in BGI and the Anti-media crowd to use pretty much every case and make similarities out of them. That is a mistake. It is a mistake for the second amendment, for any type of gun regulations that do make sense, and in the end most of all self defense laws that are being attacked based on color when there are so many other influences that need to be tackled.
          Self defense laws were not created in a box. Each case must be looked at on an individual basis. There never should be precedence even though we experienced the GZ case.

          eventually, like it or not the only changes to reduce black crime and secure self defense laws will be both sides understanding each have their own responsibilities.

          • I have been slowly reading John Lotts “Dumbing Down the Courts”. Great, informative book BTW. Way more to it then one would anticipate about our judicial system both past and present. He is a numbers guys so the proof is there. But he does not just offer numbers, stats that is what I like about him.

            There is a culture to culture difference in America. Much like the Confederate flag neighbor I was talking about.
            There are so many reasons NOT to apply one standard for all. There are so many variables beyond a black and white issue. Sure we can bitch about stats but who is doing anything about it but bitching? If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. Making people aware is only part of the solution. Obviously handing GZ money was successful in who he could be represented by but then people bitched just for the sake of bitching! On one hand supporters would say it was a classic case of self defense but point out black on white crime like it had ANYTHING to do with the case. IT DID NOT. So why point it out ? GZ and TM obviously came from two different cultures. That is it. Sure one was lighter then the other. But perception about each other made the difference in how one may have avoided a confrontation verbally or physically. Now, before anyone gets their panties in a bunch I am not suggesting there was any type of racial animus between either party. I am suggesting both came from very different cultures that deal with and approach a situation in very different ways. Has nothing to do with color. A white person could totally approach the situation as TM did because they come from a violent culture. An Hispanic and Asian, and even American Indian all are stereotyped in what we “expect”. But stereotypes are an illusion. And whites especially are stereotyped and disillusioned. Making it a black and white issue versus a violent culture vs. non violent culture issue.
            Not ALL blacks are violent. And not ALL whites carry a gun and are ready to shoot anyone who is not white!

            • I’d just like to point out that GZs culture wasn’t a white culture. His father was white, but his mother was from Peru. His mother’s mother was half Peruvian and half black. That is the grandmother who helped raise GZ. She babysat George along with 2 African American children.

              This was not a black and white issue and George was not carrying a gun ready to shoot anyone who was not white. Had he been doing that, he would have had to shoot himself.

            • They’ve been around a long time, but Crump has taken them to a new level. Unless he’s stopped, he will have more victims. GZ was found not guilty but Crump wasn’t stopped from continuing to try to destroy him.

      • I am not sorry I supported and still support GZ. I was for awhile after I learned he’d had an affair. He’s still being railroaded and his life is destroyed. I don’t like to watch something like that happen and just be complacent about it. Its just not right.

        • I do not feel the same. Sorry. The railroad is over. Traybot talking heads are nothing but talking heads. He was acquitted. He did not spend his trust fund money wisely and to me he is like the majority of everyone else in America, a man with debt!
          It is time for him to pick up his boot straps keep his romance novel for a later date and secure HIMSELF!

          It is up to you to donate if you feel compelled. Nobody can tell you who to give money too. If you feel that passionate about it then that is your decision. I am not giving him another dime. I will just double up on the NRA donations to counter his attorneys gun grabbing efforts.

            • I spoke about that yesterday on the GZ thread. I do not want to waste the space here being it an open thread.
              It all results in the initial lying about the paypal funds. It became an expensive lie no matter how you look at it. Whether it being a trust issue with the system, prior representation, BGI, or MOM.

            • I do not perceive him as spending funds unwisely. I believe yesterday, Danny pointed out the expensive living expenses he had for just a few months and someone else pointed out that it as because O’Mara had him in a safe place out of state that was very affordable. When his bond was revoked, and he had to return to jail, they still had to pay for that house. Then when he was released on bond the second time, he could not leave Seminole county. He could not live in the safe house that was rented for him but had to rent another place. It cost more to find a safe place for him to live in Seminole county.

              That expense did not reflect his bad decisions but the courts making it more difficult for him to stay safe. If not for the death threats, his defense funds would have gone much farther.

              He is still being railroaded. He can’t work and can’t even apply for welfare because that would reveal his location. He no longer has funds for a body guard and is not allowed to have guns. If he gets involved with a woman and she gets angry at him, all she has to do is call 911 and say, “George pointed a gun at me.”

              It will be a miracle if he even survives. If he goes to prison, there are plenty of people waiting to kill him and torment him. Until his trial, he cannot leave the state and he isn’t safe in the state. His angry wife is adding fuel to the fire by siding with the media and selling information to a woman who wants to make him and his family look bad.

          • The railroad is not over. His life has been ruined by the first railroading. Now if he gets a speeding ticket, it’s national news. He’s still in hiding from death threats and security is becoming increasingly difficult for him. Donations are needed more than ever.

    • That surprises the hell out of me. How could they possibly deny it? What reason could there be considering the man has no job or significant assets and is 2.5 million in debt?

        • I was considering his previous bond hearing and ‘hiding money’ may have been part of the decision to deny. Maybe it was the existence of a defense fund? I don’t have any support for the theories, though.

      • Coreshift ~ It’s not what you owe, imo, GZ didn’t qualify for “indigent status” because there could be some money left in the past Defense Fund that was designated to be used for the criminal case. Technically, that money belongs to GZ, or a part of it since SZ is suing for 1/2 as of the date she filed for divorce. Like qualifying for Medicaid, it’s not what you owe, it’s your total access to any monies in your name such as IRA’s, retirement, savings accounts, or in this case, a past donation fund. Anything over $ 2,000.00 disqualifies an applicant in my state. It would seem, imo, GZ would have stated how much money was in the Criminal Defense Fund when applying because it is considered an “asset.”

        Because the DV case is a different donation fund, those monies can’t be rolled over to help GZ out in this case because MOM stated clearly what the donations were for when soliciting donations, but it doesn’t mean GZ is penniless or having only $140.00.

        In the interview MOM did w/AC360, MOM stated others haven’t been paid that worked on the case, remember when MOM stated some would put off being paid until after the trial & work at a reduced rate? Those previous donations would have to pay off others that have outstanding invoices involved in the criminal case first.

        GZ is apparently paying his truck insurance, since he wasn’t cited for a ticket for non insurance, but has more money than the State allows. No doubt, GZ has access to some money imo.

          • coreshift ~ this is the copy of PART of the Fla. Indigent Status application, but you can read if interested at the link I provided.

            APPLICATION:
            3. I have other income paid ( ) weekly ( ) every two weeks ( ) semi-monthly ( ) monthly ( ) yearly ( ) other _____________.

            Other kinds of income not on the list ………………….. $ __________

            http://www.flcourts.org/gen_public/family/forms_rules/indigent_application.pdf

            coreshift ~ The Legal Defense Fund is considered “income” because the money is in GZ’s name & he in the past has paid all of his living expenses from it, he has access to that money. The “other income paid” is money GZ has access to in his name, & he pays for his bills, truck insurance etc.

            If you read under # 3, they ask about ANY monies no matter how the applicant got it, as long as the applicant has the monies in their name, it is considered an asset of value, especially since it is monetary.

            • coreshift – if you notice on GZ’s application, GZ filled out “NO” on any income & when it listed “other” he too filled out “NO.” Clearly this is untrue, there is apparently still monies in the Legal Fund, in GZ’s name.

              The problem is, it disqualifies GZ for “indigent status,” YET, although GZ has access to the money for living expenses, he does NOT have access to that money to pay another attorney.

        • He’s in a precarious position. He can’t work because he has to hide. He can’t even apply for welfare because that would reveal where he lives. In order to survive the death threats, he has to stay hidden. To stay hidden, he needs funds. If he has access to some funds. Those wanting to murder him hope his funds will run out so he will be flushed out into the open like a fox chased by hounds. Sometimes when I’m on this site, I feel that I’m talking with those people.

    • coreshift ~ that does explain a & thanks for your dogged pursuit f getting to the bottom of “indigent status for GZ & his change of attorney’s.

      Now if we could just understand why Jayne W., why her w/her negative views of GZ in the past.

      • Maybe he believes her personal beliefs won’t affect her professionalism. Maybe GZ didn’t know about her comments. Maybe she came recommended. Maybe she’s the only one who would take the case. I’m sure there many other possibilities.

          • David ~ Jayne W. has said a lot, have you read he links Danny shared in which she stated her opinions on guns, etc.? There a ton of links where the opinionated Jayne W. has shared on the TM case.

            We’ll just have to see how good JW is when representing GZ, despite her personal opinions that are everywhere in the Media, I worry they will come back to bite her in the butt.

    • I think these decisions are made by a clerk, aren’t they? If so I want to know who denied it and whether or not they considered GZ’s history in doing so. I’m guessing there is some means to appeal the decision or re-apply.

      • He is NOT going to appeal because see there will be a hearing. All we saw was an application. He had to file an affidavit and give the court permission into ALL of his finances. Somewhere they saw he was not indigent.
        He can reapply but again he will have to reveal his income including his trust which he can NOT touch because Shellie claimed it in the divorce.
        He has unsecured debt. I told you yesterday it is just a bill, MOM and West only put GZ ON NOTICE of their intent to collect.

        • I know Jordan and I were curious to the rest of the funds accounting for some time. Over 20% of the $500,000 has not been accounted for. And we have no clue from before trial what was raised. We do know Mark and Don were NOT paid.
          But there was a request to raise at least some money for experts for trial. So where did all the money go?

          Sundance would have you think it was mismanaged but only GZ and the accountant had control!

          Is this bond lie redux?

        • Perhaps ‘appeal’ was the wrong word. Re-apply may have been a better choice. Or perhaps take the issue before the judge. Thinking about it more it seems that any ‘re-application’ would have been done by the public defenders. Or maybe they couldn’t do anything because he wasn’t declared indigent.

          Anyways, Weintraub may need him to have indigent status in order to pay for some expenses. Maybe she can and will work on it. Guess we’ll have to see how it goes.

          BTW, I questioned whether or not GZ was given an official bill in the latest GZ thread. If he wasn’t billed then obviously that debt wouldn’t matter

          • I stated he can reapply but when I am not sure. When his funds are depleted most of the time down to $5 gs liquid. But he obviously is not a dependent and has income. By law he can live off of his half of the fund during divorce but he can not deplete the fund.
            So he obviously has an income. An income where he is not indigent and an income where MOM feels he can be paid.

            • Where do you get $5 from? LOL

              How much money is in the fund and how much is donated per month? We don’t know. I seriously doubt that post trial the contributions would be more than a trickle. I guess we may find out eventually.

              • The fund obviously had budgeting because it had an accountant? GZs choice the second go around. The budgeting went to security and living expenses. The majority anyways right? So be it 500 or 400 gs. as some report as a total…. where did it go? They had to raise money for experts and depos BEFORE trial right?

                • That doesn’t really address my question. How do you know there’s currently significant funds in the trust or that there is a significant influx of money into the trust? Just because you aren’t aware of how all the money was spent, doesn’t mean it wasn’t spent. It seems you’re making assumptions.

                  • http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/statutes/2011/0027.52
                    2.a. There is a presumption that the applicant is not indigent if the applicant owns, or has equity in, any intangible or tangible personal property or real property or the expectancy of an interest in any such property having a net equity value of $2,500 or more, excluding the value of the person’s homestead and one vehicle having a net value not exceeding $5,000

                    • TY, but that seems to be talking about property specifically. And net equity value is the difference between assets and liabilities. Regardless, it seems he was determined not indigent for some reason.

                    • Which is why I said he has no collateral. His only ties are WHO IS PAYING HIS BILLS. AND HIRED JW.

            • “So he obviously has an income. An income where he is not indigent and an income where MOM feels he can be paid.”

              MOM doesn’t feel he can be paid unless something ‘good’ comes to GZ. 5:20. I believe the ‘possibilities’ he’s referring to are civil suits. MOM and West would hardly expect to get paid via donations to the trust.

              • (3) APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL ON INTERIM BASIS.—If the clerk of the court has not made a determination of indigent status at the time a person requests appointment of a public defender, the court shall make a preliminary determination of indigent status, pending further review by the clerk, and may, by court order, appoint a public defender, the office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, or private counsel on an interim basis.
                (4) REVIEW OF CLERK’S DETERMINATION.—
                (a) If the clerk of the court determines that the applicant is not indigent, and the applicant seeks review of the clerk’s determination, the court shall make a final determination of indigent status by reviewing the information provided in the application against the criteria prescribed in subsection (2) and by considering the following additional factors:
                1. Whether the applicant has been released on bail in an amount of $5,000 or more.
                2. Whether a bond has been posted, the type of bond, and who paid the bond.
                3. Whether paying for private counsel in an amount that exceeds the limitations in s. 27.5304, or other due process services creates a substantial hardship for the applicant or the applicant’s family.
                4. Any other relevant financial circumstances of the applicant or the applicant’s family.
                (b) Based upon its review, the court shall make one of the following determinations and, if the applicant is indigent, shall appoint a public defender, the office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, or, if appropriate, private counsel:
                1. The applicant is not indigent.
                2. The applicant is indigent

              • (f) The provision of due process services based upon a determination that a person is indigent for costs under this subsection must be effectuated pursuant to a court order, a copy of which the clerk shall provide to counsel representing the person, or to the person directly if he or she is proceeding pro se, for use in requesting payment of due process expenses through the Justice Administrative Commission. Private counsel representing a person declared indigent for costs shall execute the Justice Administrative Commission’s contract for counsel representing persons determined to be indigent for costs. Private counsel representing a person declared indigent for costs may not receive state funds, either directly or on behalf of due process providers, unless the attorney has executed the contract required under this paragraph.
                (g) Costs shall be reimbursed at the rates established under ss. 27.425 and 27.5305. To receive reimbursement of costs, either directly or on behalf of due process providers, private counsel representing a person declared indigent for costs shall comply with the procedures and requirements under this chapter governing billings by and compensation of private court-appointed counsel.
                (h) The court may not appoint an attorney paid by the state based on a finding that the defendant is indigent for costs if the defendant has privately retained and paid counsel.
                (i) A defendant who is found guilty of a criminal act by a court or jury or enters a plea of guilty or nolo contendere and who received due process services after being found indigent for costs under this subsection is liable for payment of due process costs expended by the state.
                1. The attorney representing the defendant, or the defendant if he or she is proceeding pro se, shall provide an accounting to the court delineating all costs paid or to be paid by the state within 90 days after disposition of the case notwithstanding any appeals.
                2. The court shall issue an order determining the amount of all costs paid by the state and any costs for which prepayment was waived under this section or s. 57.081. The clerk shall cause a certified copy of the order to be recorded in the official records of the county, at no cost. The recording constitutes a lien against the person in favor of the state in the county in which the order is recorded. The lien may be enforced in the same manner prescribed in s. 938.29.
                3. If the attorney or the pro se defendant fails to provide a complete accounting of costs expended by the state and consequently costs are omitted from the lien, the attorney or pro se defendant may not receive reimbursement or any other form of direct or indirect payment for those costs if the state has not paid the costs. The attorney or pro se defendant shall repay the state for those costs if the state has already paid the costs. The clerk of the court may establish a payment plan under s. 28.246 and may charge the attorney or pro se defendant a one-time administrative processing charge under s. 28.24(26)(c).
                (6) DUTIES OF PARENT OR LEGAL GUARDIAN.—A nonindigent parent or legal guardian of an applicant who is a minor or an adult tax-dependent person shall furnish the minor or adult tax-dependent person with the necessary legal services and costs incident to a delinquency proceeding or, upon transfer of such person for criminal prosecution as an adult pursuant to chapter 985, a criminal prosecution in which the person has a right to legal counsel under the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of Florida. The failure of a parent or legal guardian to furnish legal services and costs under this section does not bar the appointment of legal counsel pursuant to this section, s. 27.40, or s. 27.5303. When the public defender, the office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, a private court-appointed conflict counsel, or a private attorney is appointed to represent a minor or an adult tax-dependent person in any proceeding in circuit court or in a criminal proceeding in any other court, the parents or the legal guardian shall be liable for payment of the fees, charges, and costs of the representation even if the person is a minor being tried as an adult. Liability for the fees, charges, and costs of the representation shall be imposed in the form of a lien against the property of the nonindigent parents or legal guardian of the minor or adult tax-dependent person. The lien is enforceable as provided in s. 27.561 or s. 938.29

              • Here is the kicker..
                (7) FINANCIAL DISCREPANCIES; FRAUD; FALSE INFORMATION.—
                (a) If the court learns of discrepancies between the application or motion and the actual financial status of the person found to be indigent or indigent for costs, the court shall determine whether the public defender, office of criminal conflict and civil regional counsel, or private attorney shall continue representation or whether the authorization for any other due process services previously authorized shall be revoked.

                • What we do know is GZ is not equal or below the 200% federal poverty line required to be indigent. Which would be a person making an income of at least $22,980. Or is a dependent or tax exempt of person who is equal or below the 200% poverty line.
                  (a)1. An applicant, including an applicant who is a minor or an adult tax-dependent person, is indigent if the applicant’s income is equal to or below 200 percent of the then-current federal poverty guidelines prescribed for the size of the household of the applicant by the United States Department of Health and Human Services.
                  2. There is a presumption that the applicant is not indigent if the applicant owns, or has equity in, any intangible or tangible personal property or real property or the expectancy of an interest in any such property having a net equity value of $2,500 or more, excluding the value of the person’s homestead and one vehicle having a net value not exceeding $5,000.

          • Checking in… Wonder if the fact that he has the pending civil suit with NBC would have any effect on indingency consideration?

        • Danny ~ if you will note GZ listed “NO” to “OTHER INCOME” r “Trust” on coreshift’s link of the form GZ filled out up thread. Clearly he did have access to monies & I agree, GZ doesn’t want an accounting to become public of how the Legal Trust Fund was spent & how much is left.

          What is for certain is that when GZ answers SZ’s filing for divorce, the amount of monies IN the Legal Defense Fund the day the suit was filed will be disclosed BECAUSE SZ is suing for 1/2 of the monies, GZ is now accountable to SZ/atorney about the monies in the Legal Fund since she too was living on that money.

          MOM has stated repeatedly that GZ has “agreed” to pay the debt, watch AC360, others too haven’t been paid from trial it seems.

          • I know he has agreed and I said earlier IF sued paying even an minute amount is admittance enough to be in debt of the total of a bill collection notice.

            Why do you think people even avoid a debt collection call as a it can confirm receipt of a debt?
            I think Coreshift is looking at those legal things but this is different. GZ is filing indigent.

          • yet all the traybot media is desperately trying to suggest Zimmerman is refusing to pay his debt. I find it odd that many media outlets seem to not understand why Zimmerman has this legal bill when their actions propogating crumpsters narrative helped cause the debt

            • He refused to pay the security debt from a plan we heard he made on the jailhouse tapes. He had a credit card case prior to the shooting where he was sued. And he paid off prior debt from defense funds so maybe there is truth to that.

                • It was price. It was stated in the suit that MOM sent in email that since GZ got a new accountant he and the accountant wanted to cut down on cost. MOM initially told the security company he would take the bill in care of GZ but further bills should be sent in GZs name. The security company stated it was a verbal agreement made on behalf of GZ. They never stated who exactly made the agreement though. But what happened was the new accountant and GZ refused to pay the remainder of the bill.
                  I heard that the GZs refusal to pay the bill was tacked onto the legal bill but I have not yet confirmed it. Shellie settled part of it MOM the other part. I suppose so it would not become more costly or affect their credit.

      • coreshift ~ the reason GZ was denied is because GZ has CASH available to him through his last Legal Defense Fund, it is a classified asset, it’s money, it’s in GZ’s name, GZ clearly has a way to get money he just can’t pay another attorney w/the funds.

        When the form ask for “other” ways of getting money, GZ put “No,” which was clearly dishonest on GZ’s part, GZ isn’t stupid, the form was easy to digest & GZ should have had no problem understanding it.

        GZ should have at least been honest on the application form, GZ has assets, especially the Defense Fund that he uses to live on, it pays the car & truck note, car insurance, rent etc. Ifd GZ had been honest when filling out the form, he would have been disqualified immediately & Dowdy would have never shown up for the first hearing.

        • “coreshift ~ the reason GZ was denied is because GZ has CASH available to him through his last Legal Defense Fund, it is a classified asset, it’s money, it’s in GZ’s name, GZ clearly has a way to get money he just can’t pay another attorney w/the funds.”

          Maybe that’s the case, but I’d like to see evidence of it. I’d like to see an explanation as to why he wasn’t declared indigent. We’re guessing until we do.

          • coreshift ~ I can promise you that is correct. I used to volunteer to help individuals apply to the State for Medicaid r for their disabled children to get social security benefits, the forms are the same. Anytime you ask the State for money, in any State, you have to provide a listing of your “assets” & “debts.” The State is not interested in your debts! WHY? Because the State isn’t providing money to you to pay your debts, that’s your problem. Most of those people file bankruptcy at some point to escape their debt.

            GZ is not “indigent!” WHY? Because GZ has access to money, look at all the things GZ pays for. The State doesn’t tolerate that, they help people that have absolutely no access to any monies from anywhere, that are truly desperate, that is not the circumstances of GZ.

            coreshift ~ you’ve seen evidence of it. Why you forever suspect something sinister when you clearly understand GZ blatantly with held his assets is baffling to me on the “indigent form.” It’s common sense, I know you understand that GZ has monies inthe legal defense fund. How do you think GZ is paying his truck note, his truck insurance, buying food, & was paying rent until he/SZ separated. He will again likely pay rent! GZ sustains because he can. GZ’s truck hasn’t been re-possessed because he couldn’t pay the note & pay insurance on the truck. GZ has an asset of a $ 2,000.00 alone in an AR-15 that LE now has. People w/money & assets don’t get assistance from the Government, period.

            • coreshift: The rules for having “indigent status” revoked.

              (7) FINANCIAL DISCREPANCIES; FRAUD; FALSE INFORMATION.—

              (a) If the court learns of discrepancies between the application and the actual financial status of the person found to be indigent, the court shall determine whether the status and any relief provided as a result of that status shall be revoked. The person may be heard regarding the information learned by the court. If the court, based on the information, determines that the person is not indigent, the court shall revoke the provision of any relief under this section.

              http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/statutes/2011/0057.082

            • As I commented to Coreshift up thread, haven’t been here in a few days, but I am wondering if the Civil Suit has any play on this, the fact that there is I mean.

        • according to you. I know plenty of democrats and liberals who understand well that the GZ case was an abuse of government.
          I wish the treehouse style indulgences in partisan bashing would stay there. I do not appreciate broad sweeping judgements and pigeon holing, I think it lazy and disrespectful. I grew up in a house of republicans and democrats, we all share the same moral and ethical core values.

            • In classical logic, the law of non-contradiction (LNC) (or the law of contradiction (PM) or the principle of non-contradiction (PNC), or the principle of contradiction) is the second of the three classic laws of thought. It states that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time, e.g. the two propositions “A is B” and “A is not B” are mutually exclusive.

            • What is the core philosophy of liberalism? What is the core philosophy of conservatism? Is is possible that a lot of leftist/socialist or (self-described) “progressive” ideas are mislabeled as being liberal?

          • Nobody made a definer of liberalism and your suggestion as such is beyond absurd. Those who identify liberal/conservative/libertarian etc each have certain defined core tenants. To hold a postion contrary to the core tenant violates non contradiction. Something cannot be both A and not A at the same time.

            • If there’s anyone who has posted in the lounge in say the last 6 months or so under the name unitron or similar, it ain’t me.

              (Prior to that, it mostly was.)

              But it wouldn’t be the first time I’ve been impersonated over there.

              (I’ll have to go see if my imposter is back and what kind of reaction they’re getting and whether Fred is honest in pointing out that it’s impossible for it to be me, or if he’s letting it slide to up the post count)

              And regardless of what site it is, I’ve always commented from a position of trying to sort out what are the actual facts and analyze them with logic, rather than decide what I believe (or want to believe) first, and only then look at the evidence.

              And once I figured out (had it explained to me, actually) that one can use whatever screen name one wishes with WordPress.com, even if one had to settle for a different actual account name because someone in Germany got it first but never used it, I’ve consistently been unitron, week in and week out, regardless of the site as well.

              • unitron ~ it may be that someone is impersonating you because you are so good looking as your avatar shows!

                You stated:
                And regardless of what site it is, I’ve always commented from a position of trying to sort out what are the actual facts and analyze them with logic, rather than decide what I believe (or want to believe) first, and only then look at the evidence.

                I agree wholeheartedly w/your approach to forming an opinion, sometimes facts trickle in slowly & my opinion can change w/new information, but I form my opinion on the facts, not emotion.

                • Actually it was inconsistency of the avatar (I was using whatever one WordPress assigned by default at the time) that gave my imposter away.

                  You can change your screen name as often as you like, but all of your comments will have whatever avatar is attached to your account, and if you change that avatar, it’ll show up attached to your previous comments as well next time someone loads the page they are on.

                  And someone else using the same screen name from a different account will have to keep changing their avatar to match whatever changes you make in yours in order to maintain the deception.

    • In that article, you will note the careful “forum shopping” for the right court to which to make this plea. This is why the appointment of judges function of the executive branch of our government is so vital in determining which direction our country goes.

      Activist judges who in effect make law, as opposed to judges who apply the law to the facts before them, are most amenable to lawsuits of this kind.

      All it takes is one judge to get the ball rolling.

        • From the link you provided:

          The hearing today took place in the courtroom of Chief Judge James Ware, who took over the Prop 8 case after Walker’s retirement. Both were George H.W. Bush appointees. Ethics experts were quick and nearly unanimous in opining that this effort to overturn Walker’s decision on the basis of his relationship is specious as well as desperate. No claim that a federal judge should have been barred from hearing a case because of race, gender, or religion has ever succeeded, a point made by California Attorney General Kamala Harris in her brief opposing the motion to vacate this ruling: “Just as every single one of the attempts to disqualify judges on the basis of their race, gender, or religious affiliation has been rejected by other courts, this Court should similarly reject Defendant-Intervenors’ effort to disqualify Judge Walker based on his sexual orientation.”

      • In fact i will even go so far as to say that the entire reason Kagan and Sotomayor were appointed to the SCOTUS is their willingness to engage in such activism from the bench. It has long been my belief that Kagan and Sotomayor were specifically appointed to ensure Obamacare made it past any SCOTUS challenges.

        • I do know Sotomayor believes the Constitition is not “settled law.” She believes it is fluid.
          This is epic. During her testimomy before the senate……
          Democrat Herb Kohl, who before becoming a constitutional scholar was the owner of a professional basketball team, quizzed Sotomayor on her views about privacy as relates to the U.S. Constitution. …….

          “As you know Judge,” he asked Sotomayor, “the landmark case of Griswold v. Connecticut guarantees that there is a fundamental constitutional right to privacy as it applies to contraception. Do you agree with that? In your opinion, is that settled law?”

          “That is the precedent of the court, so it is settled law,” she said.

          A moment later Kohl asked, “All right. Judge, the court’s ruling about the right to privacy in Griswold laid the foundation for Roe v. Wade. In your opinion, is Roe settled law?”

          Sotomayor replied, “The court’s decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed the court holding of Roe. That is the precedent of the court and settled, in terms of the holding of the court.”

          Soooooo according to Kohl and Sotomayor views of the the Constitution, things apparently are over only when the Supreme Court says they are! So to the appointed activist Judge see things as…..like say……the importance of Constitutional law are settled because well…..they said so. They do not get that when the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law” it means just that. But they get away with it because the House and Senate let them.

  4. interesting murder case being discussed on leatherheads blog:

    The Orange County District Attorney said Monday that the behavior of former Fullerton police officers was “unwarranted and unreasonable” in the violent beating of Kelly Thomas, a mentally ill homeless man who died days after the confrontation. The prosecutor’s remarks came as part of his opening argument on the first day of the trial against Manuel Ramos and Jay Cicinelli. In its opening argument, the defense challenged the prosecutor’s contention that Thomas was not a threat the night of the altercation, saying Thomas made “bad, violent choices.”
    http://www.scpr.org/news/2013/12/02/40633/trial-begins-for-ex-fullerton-cops-charged-in-deat/

    the entire incident was captured on video

    • I couldnt watch the whole thing. But I am glad these police officers are off the street and I hope justice is served for that innocent soul. This is worse then the Bart cops!

      • wth, clearly you know nothing about the Oscar Grant incident to make that statement. Oh yeah, you live on the other side of the country so you know all about BART police and the issues we have in the bay area.

          • Annette,

            thanks for the blogging activity, now that Danny and David dominate with their unique bias I am signing out. Calling Californian fruits and nuts, anti-gay attitudes and the tone is not my idea of reasonable dialog.

            • Cassandra,
              I think you just come here to nit pick. You read the thread and usually find something to disagree with usually with me. Way back on my blog I asked you not to bring the BGI stuff there. I was very very clear in my very first post I was not getting on the topic of race relations during the trial. I even explained why. Ever since then there has not been one time you agreed with me.

              I am not a homophobe. I have met some really great gay people who are not so far left as many make them out to be. One of my daugheters best guy friends is gay. He and his family are great people. He had to go intobcyber schooling because he was bullied.
              But, not all gays walk around expecting preferential treatment from hetrosexuals, or the government. They just want to live their lives like the rest of us.
              In fact they make fun of those “gay crusaders” (their words not mine) who cause homosexuals that smacked all gays with that sterotype. They see what affirmative action did for blacks and they want nothing to do with gay crusaders. I agree for the most part with these middle ground political views of theirs. It certainly will help many hetrosexuals become tolerant of and educated that not all gays are gay crusaders.

              I do not believe I ever portrayed myself as an intolerant individual with anything other then extreme politcs of both the far left or the far right.
              Intolerence is as intolernce does and you dear are nothing more then a double standard. People like you are no different then a black calling a white a racist just because the obvious is pointed out!

                • You certainly are entitled to your opinions. I am as well.
                  It is your choice to see me as personally attacking you, however that is not my intention. You are taking my opinions way too personally. The fact that you believe your disagreeing with me as a single hand attempt to “ruin” this blog because you choose to leave or continue to debate against a point most agree with is a red herring attempt to avoid the loss of a debate that was never directed at you personally what so ever.
                  I made a statement in how a video was harder to watch then another video. You personally attacked my knowledge about a case. You completley and INTENTIONALLY left out certain facts, which I submitted and now you end as you began with no facts but yet again an opinion and personal experiences to attempt to back up the facts of a case. You made it personal, not I.

                • Singlehandedly?

                  Danny?

                  Are you sure you weren’t thinking of someone else who shall remain unnamed as it will probably change a time or two before you see this?

                  • I already named both David and Danny for disruptive tone, and yes Danny is particularly tiresome for me. Danny keeps David going, and together they have damaged this blog.

                    • Thanks. I appreciate your nomination as leader. But, actually David and I really do not mesh well. He has more similiarites with you then he does to me.

                      When the cats away…the mice will play….. 😦

                  • Well, I suppose I may be single handed in my attempts to not make this blog a “hate on all blacks….even if it is as clear as day and legally wrong police brutality and …that .. every single young black male is not a thug….. and as long as it can be done..I do not support racial tensions…..nope…. not on that train. If that is how I am “ruining the blog” then, wow, I can see the future you both envision and request. All we have to do is look at the OutHouse.

    • Cassandra says KTs harrassment and brutal beating by cops who crush his thorax and beat his face in, and smothered him is no comparison to the Oscar Grant shooting. And because some of us do not live in California we could not possibly have know of Grants murder. Nor of any other police brutality except locally.
      Here is Grants murder. Watch both murders. Either is right. But my statement that watching KTs video is much worse then Grants stung her. Both sting me. But one man at least had mercy upon him while the other was brutally beaten to death and was mentally ill. She obviously did not watch KTs murder.

      http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2LDw5l_yMI&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DQ2LDw5l_yMI

      • Wow…. provocative yet wrong. Mesherle clearly expressed shock immediately upon realizing he fired a gun not the tazer.
        The jury found former BART officer Johannes Mesherle guilty of involuntary manslaughter, which is not an intention homicide, therefore NOT murder.

          • She has no clue what she is talking about. Only two months before this cop shot Grant he was accused of using exessive force during the 2008 arrest of Kenneth Carrethers at the Coliseum/Oakland Airport Station. Carrethers car was broken into and he got upset and called them useless used profanities. Cops are trained to handel those situations but some cops use unnessessary force that most of us would go to jail for.
            Carrethers sued Mesherle, the case was on hold until the Grant case was over and the cop was released from jaik, but Carrethers lost the suit. The Judge never even looked at the video that documented the police brutality.

          • Grant was resisting arrest because he was violating parole and did not want to go back to prison or jail. He was high on drugs and alcohol, impaired judgment, and had just been in a fight on the train.

            I will not respond to Danny at all, he makes no sense.

            I am a local neighborhood crime prevention leader, and just yesterday was in conversation with a deputy chief in the BART police dept because of a gun battle in the BART parking lot in our neighborhood.
            Not only do I know what I am talking about, I am one of the primary sources of keeping the solutions in focus.
            After the last murder near the same station, I got the BART board to approve surveillance cameras in key locations, those cameras are still not installed, hence my conversation with the deputy chief.

          • There was never any dispute about the taser. The tragedy was not the result of police brutality, Grant’s friends had no problem remaining seated against the wall when ordered, Grant escalated tensions in a mob situation. Grant would not have been shot if he cooperated. Mersherle had no history of brutally, quite the opposite, he was a mild person, and he was devastated by his mistake. BART cops have to drive to stations to respond to calls, he had only arrived to Fruitvale station from west Oakland station minutes before the tragedy/error. At west Oakland he had responded to another fight involving a teen with a gun and had chased that suspect from the station. Danny is wrong about how the community views the incident. Law abiding folks in general understand the death was the result of a grave law enforcement error and not police brutality. BART did not provide adequate taser equipment and training, that has changed.

            Mersherle had requested not to work New Years night because his girlfriend was going into labor with their first child and was having medical issues. He was required to be on duty and was working overtime, I think to be fair, one needs to take account of his status. Tired, worried, and had just chased an armed offender fighting on the same train at a different station. Any fair minded person who viewed the video the next day saw the horror on his face when he realized he fired a gun not a taser. Grant was told he would be tased if he did not cooperate, he was overheard by his friends saying don’t tase me. Grant had a history of fighting with cops, being armed and running from police. Grant is not the person portrayed in the lame movie fictionalizing the tragedy.

            Danny is also wrong about the complaint by Carrethers, anyone familiar with Oakland knows that cops are the most heavily scrutinized dept in the country, we have any semblance of brutality is taken quite serious in the courts.
            We have the most intense citizen oversight of police possible.

            I enjoyed learning from most of you, but Danny is on my nerves and I have no interest in either responding to correct him or participating in a blog that allows covert gay bashing.

              • Well I get that too David. But if cops are called to a brawl in a train station, cops, white at that, should not be calling the ones they want under control “Niggers.” If you want control you do not create or instagate their behaviors and then when chaos ensues not take part of the blame either!

                • Pirone testified that he punched Grant in the face while trying to apprehend him and admitted to using a racial epithet during the ordeal.

                  “Why are you fucking with me? You aren’t even real cops,” he said Grant barked at him. Pirone testified in court that Grant called him a “bitch ass nigger,” prompting the officer — who is white — to respond with identical language. He then kneeled on Grants neck and attempted to restrain him seconds before the fatal shot was fired by Mehserle.

          • The tazer claim was at least considered by the jury and the appeals court due to the officers attorneys argument to over turn the conviction.
            (Complete white jury btw)

            The appeals court said, “We find sufficient evidence that his conduct of mistakenly drawing and firing his handgun instead of his taser constitutes criminal negligence.”

            The court said Mehserle’s handgun was “peculiarly distinguishable from his taser for a number of reasons”: the handgun was more than three times heavier; the gun was black and the taser was bright yellow; the gun was on his right side and the taser on his left; and the two devices were kept in their holsters in different ways.
            Appeals court:
            “The jury could have reasonably found defendant’s conduct rose to the level of conscious indifference to the consequences of his acts, and was not a mere mistake,” Justice James Marchiano wrote for the court.

    • Yes, I’m there feeling like the little boy in Holland trying to plug the hole in the dam with his finger. I’m outnumbered. There’s just a couple of other people who defend GZ. Would welcome some help.

      • i find it fascinating that the excat same nutcases who rant and rave about ZImmerman not being gainfully employed in the open marketplace are the exact same psychopaths making death threats against Zimmerman making it impossible to do as much

        • They’re just full of hate and use whatever they can think of to smear him. They have to know that they’re the ones keeping him from being gainfully employed. Some are just idiots that spout the party line but the ones making the threats know the effect it’s having and have even commented that they’re happy that he has to hide.

          A lady in my church group made a comment about her brother’s killer. My sister was murdered and her brother was murdered. She commented that she prays for the rehabilitation of her brother’s killer because if he eventually gets out on parole, she doesn’t want him to hurt anyone else. My sister’s killer is serving life without parole, but if he was eligible for parole, I would also want him to be in a good mental state before he was released so he wouldn’t hurt anyone else.

          The Traybots are doing the opposite. They want GZ’s spirit to break. The poor man just defended his own life and has been put through Hell for it. What the Trayvon supporters are doing only make it more likely that he will have to kill in self defense again. Everything they’re doing makes it more likely he will perceive his life as being in danger at the slightest hint. They could end up getting someone killed. They are totally reckless.

        • The Conservative O ~ I agree that the nut jobs are reckless, irresponsible, dangerous and completely self righteous in their actions.

          Sadly, those that hate “are gonna hate” & imo, nothing will change that. We know that from observing OJ Simpson & KC Anthony, when a large segment of American’s/society rejects a verdict in a high profile case. Those that walked free have miserable lives, although they are free, they can’t get jobs, ever, OJ sustained before his incarceration by his NFL retirement but since he is in prison, I assume it ceased as his home in Fla. is in foreclosure. 85 % of the American Public thought KC was guilty of the murder of Caylee & she walked on the murder charge, KC filed for bankruptcy, she is unemployable, her parent’s supported her until they have completely exhausted all of their money & are facing another foreclosure on their home.

          GZ has entered the unique group that has been awarded a “not guilty verdict,” although he is free, he may never experience the freedoms we all enjoy just as OJ & KC won’t, society won’t allow it because they can choose to employ or not employ. KC still gets death threats & she was found NOT Guilty in July 2011, the hatred has not subsided, she continues to be in the news weekly for Civil Cases & bankruptcy. IDK what would make things different, imo, it would take someone willing to give GZ a chance, a job possibly at a small company, but imo, if someone would leaked that GZ was employed there for profit by selling the story, the employer would suffer blow back, & he would be let go from their employment.

          Remember how long ago Duke Lacrosse was? Remember Twana Brawley, the accuser that made the accusations that was found to be a liar? Twana was to pay $ 400,000.00 in a defamation suit in 1998 to Mr. Pagones. She changed her name, moved & has been gainfully employed, Mr. Pagone’s sued to have her wages garnished this year, she was exposed for who she was, people NEVER forgot the Duke Lacrosse case & Twana has lost her job. Twana’s case wasn’t a murder case, but it was high profile & still angers Americans. That case was 14 or 15 yrs. ago.

          http://nypost.com/2013/08/11/tawana-loses-job-and-bed/

  5. ALEC facing funding crisis from donor exodus in wake of Trayvon Martin row!

    • Right wing lobby group appealing to major donors to return

    • Internal documents reveal so-called ‘Prodigal Son Project’

    • Network lost almost 400 state legislators over past two years

    Alec, ( American Legislative Exchange Council), was embroiled in the controversy surrounding Florida’s 2005 “stand-your-ground” law under which George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who shot and killed the 17-year-old Martin, initially claimed self-defense. The Florida law was picked up by Alec, and, working in partnership with the National Rifle Association, used as a template for one of its “model bills”, which was then taken up by other states across the country.

    The Guardian has learned that by Alec’s own reckoning the network has lost almost 400 state legislators from its membership over the past two years, as well as more than 60 corporations that form the core of its funding. In the first six months of this year it suffered a hole in its budget of more than a third of its projected income.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/alec-funding-crisis-big-donors-trayvon-martin

    Yet here we are, It seems that SYG is here to stay. imo, those nit wits that protested at the Capitol made no difference at all, but if someone ask those that participated, “if they made a difference,” they would likely say they did, but the law is still in place.

    Although the author of he Guardian article may think they have made a difference politically,imo, I guess they aren’t reading the headlines in the National News, even by liberal media outlets, on stories reflecting the damage Obamacare has done to the Democrats & the crisis it faces w/possibly losing the Democratic Senate to the Replications in 2014,

    There is a bigger picture that is lost on the author of the Guardian article.

    From what I am reading, the test of SYG for GA. will be the case of the Alzheimer patient that was shot 4 times:

    Shooting of Georgia Alzheimer’s patient reignites ‘Stand Your Ground’ debate

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/12/04/shooting-georgia-alzheimer-patient-reignites-stand-your-ground-debate/

    • I have been saying for awhile now that the Obamacare rollout was Obama’s gift the the GOP that if played correctly will bring an end to the Obama/Reid/Pelosi machine in 2014.

      That being said…. Meg Whitman had a golden opportunity to take out Jerry Brown in the California Gubernatorial election when Brown raised the issue of Whitman’s undocumented housekeeper. Had Whitman said ok Mr Attorney General, then do your job and deport this woman Brown would have been forced to either alienate the hispanic block and deport or alienate everyone else by showing he refuses to do his job and follow the law.

      • The Conservative O ~ I too agree, Obamacare is the gift that keeps on giving to the GOP, the GOP was down double digits down after the shut down of the government, but NOW! The GOP is ahead by a wide margin & may possibly take the Senate too from the Democrats.

        The latest Obama drama is the “security of the site has been breached,” or “applicants aren’t really even enrolled,” there was NOT an application for security built into the site to protect applicant’s from having their social security #’s stolen as well as personal information! Obama WON’T TELL Congress how many people this will effect so he is going to pretend this is something else he wasn’t aware of imo.. LMAO!

          • hooson1st ~ I agree, but look at what Obama has done: Lied to the American people about “keeping their Dr.’s/plans, but AFTER 3 years, the site failed, no security measures planned to protect privacy, no fore thought about he millions that lost their coverage. HAD Obama been honest as to the consequences, it would have never passed imo BUT because he lied, he sounded so great, it passed. The BIG LIE has been exposed & the public is angry, I can’t see the backlash subsiding for the Democrats through another election cycle. Obama moved the “small business owner’s required date to adopt Obamacare!” WHY? Because it would have outraged voters in next falls elections & surely guarantee huge losses for Democrats so he is praying voters don’t find out until AFTER next falls elections, but, the GOP will be educating the voting public.

            An estimated 50 million people are going to lose their insurance from small businesses & forced onto Obamacare at higher prices which was always Obama’s plan. I have LMAO at Mary Landriau from my State La., she is from a long line of corrupt politicians, & although my State didn’t want Obamacare, she was the deciding vote. She is running around NOW trying to make amends to save her sorry butt/job, she wasn’t interested in the taxpayers before, it is predicted the taxpayers will repay Mary Landriau in kind in the next fall election, she is said to be the 3rd most vulnerable to lose her seat.

            It seems American’s can tolerate a lot from either party they support, BUT when the Democrats repeated the :LIE over & over causing some people to lose their coverage, THEN, costing them more when forced onto Obamacare, imo, the public has a long memory when it COST them directly more money monthly. Most Americans aren’t getting raises, so to have to pay more for insurance because the insurance you had was canceled will remain in the memories of the voters every month when that payment is made. jmo.

            • Art, you may well be correct as to the outcome. But this is now, and that will be then.

              The Democrats can win in November just by adopting Hillary Clinton’s famous words to the Senate Committee post-Benghazi, “What difference does it make now”. Just those words and the Democratic base will forgive all.

    • Art,
      I do not think SYG is going anywhere. There is not any reasonable cause to repeal. However, since it is a compelling public interest the complaints need be heard no matter how irrational they are. Even if is emotional appeal. This is a democracy. A Republic. That is what helps these laws stand against the emotional, and color coordinated attempts to remove them. They generalize the issue the ones who want it repealed. When in fact the law itself has saved many many lives.
      Yet, there is room for improvement and if we want to retain self defense laws we can not make excuses for those who use it when it was not required to save a life. Saving a life does sometimes require taking one. But if there are some using the law as a defense to murder without punishment we as supporters of self defense need to make it clear what we support and what we do not. I think that is the first step to stop the emotional appeal of the color coordination involved.

      • Danny ~ I too think SYG is here to stay in the 23 or so States that have a form of SYG, my state of La. included. The people want SYG despite the negative National agenda of the BGI/Sybrina/Tracy wanting to tie GZ’s case to SYG. No doubt the Law can be tweeked, but it’s here to stay.

          • “What about that needs tweaking?”

            They need to do away with the immunity clauses (which of course are separate and independent from SYG) that prevent civil suits.

            If you don’t see that as necessary, you aren’t an attorney in civil practice.

  6. Finally got my intro book out of storage (currently a 3rd semester paralegal student). The “do you know what time it is” exercise is something they hammer into your head from day one. It’s something I tried to explain to Traybots over and over on debate forums. None of the scheme team or traybots talking points they hammer away at over and over even today have anything at all to do with the legal question before the court. The only legal question was ” During the time Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman beating him, was George in reasonable fear of injury or death”. Skittles and Tea, Got out of the car, hoodies, walking while black, following, disobeyed dispatch, etc, etc, etc are all completely irrelevant.

    http://imgur.com/lU71suH

      • …..To the best of my ability anyways…….

        I had not noticed the rule where I can not discuss facts in a case where the victim is black.

            • Apparently all facts are subjective here to the object of the groups goal. My fault. Should have known better. Problem solving is limited.

              • I am not quite sure what you mean. Facts are facts, regardless of who brings them to our attention. There may be disagreement, therefore discussion, as to the degree of relevance or application to the issue.

                I don’t see where you bear any fault from presenting facts.

          • I am confused. None of these cases are similiar. Trayvon was killed in self defense. Alexander did not kill anyone. And Kendrick was not killed.

            The cases I am discussing deals with illegal deadly force used by police concerning both a white and black man. If some can get past the color of the victims there is a point I attempted to touch on. Totally different topic that some seem to be tying a similiarity to that I am not, that somehow makes me guilty of ruining a blog.

            There are other blogs I can discuss this topic on with other open minded people who are interested in results. Since some here seem offended I wont discuss any facts that may offend your views. My apologies.

            • Two of the cases, Trayvon and Kendrick, are directly linked via Crump. All three are linked because protests and publicity by primarily black activists and leaders, have caused them to be national news. None of them should have been, IMO. It seems to be becoming trend for the legal system to be bent, if not broken, by political pressure when a black person is involved in an incident. Sometimes for profit and/or political gain. I find that to be reason for concern.

        • I do not really watch the news. I read the news so I can avoid talking heads and opinions. Yet, again, I read blogs so….. Lol. Same difference I guess but much easier to avoid opinion and get facts.

      • Danny ~ Martin Bashir is the POS that said “someone should defecate in Sarah Palin’s mouth.”

        Outrage from FOX & others were complaining at the bitch slap by Bashir & MSNBC did nothing! BUT! When Alec Baldwin went into another “homophobic rage” on the paparazzi in the past couple of weeks, it made ALL the National news for days as did MSNBC. At first others. FINALLY, MSNBC announced the show had been canceled, in other words, Baldwin had been fired. I like many movies Baldwin stars in & I separate that from the person Baldwin actually is, but imo, he’s a scary guy w/an uncontrollable rage.

        Baldwin wouldn’t let his firing go WITHOUT Bashir being held accountable for his inappropriate comments & the same behavior forever,, Baldwin writes for the liberal Huffpo & more BAD publicity was heaped on Bashir/MSNBC. Now Bashir has resigned probably to prevent his firing like Baldwin’s. Is this a great country or what?

        I no longer have cable, but I keep up online. LMAO! This should be a warning to the other nut jobs at MSNBC including Sharpton, they are so low in the ratings, IF MSNBC BECOMES the news story, heads will roll. The CEO of MSNBC challenged the ratings of Megan Kelly’s new show when it first aired claiming “it was impossible for Kelly’s ratings to be so much higher that Rachal Maddows overnight.” MSNBC AGAIN made National News & PROVEN wrong, the poll lnumbers were provided to MSNBC & to the National Media also, the CEO has shut up looking like a moron.

          • The Conservative O ~ that was a good article, I like FOX & Megan Kelly, it is somewhat of a double standard I guess in some statements but imo, the behavior of Bashir/Baldwin has hurt MSNBC or they would not have taken action. FOX has consistently remained in the # 1 slot in nearly all their shows because America likes what they have to say.

            I like Rush, no doubt he can be over the top but he has NEVER been over the top more than Sharpton/j Jackson. The thing is, Rush is worth $ 370,000.00 at last count, Rush could buy/sell MSNBC over & over, American’s either like him or hate him, he has produced consistently for over 20 yrs. the # 1 talk radio show in his time slot, the advertisers pay a bundle to run their adds during his show, I love to hear him imitate J Jackson.

            • One thing i cannot stand to this day is i still have college professors who spend 50% of the classroom time pontificating on their liberal agenda, yet the exact same school had a conservative professor who issued an assignment that involved using the bible to answer a class question on health and the conservative professor was immediately terminated.

  7. Kruidbos case begins two weeks from today. We shall see how Corey’s motion to dismiss on the basis of immunity works out. We could potentially see quite a bit of further deconstruction of the myth of saint trayvon.

    14 — 10/16/2013
    10/17/2013
    NOTICE OF HEARING DECEMBER 18, 2013, AT 11:00AM RM 740

    • Please post updates on that, La Trine!
      I don’t understand anything going on any more, and fear that the surreal topsy turviness in FL, media, US is now so entrenched that nothing can happen to Corey, and the bizarre saga will continue. GZ will keep screwing up, and the masses will keep behaving like frenzied peasants being incited to a pogrom or something.

      • I hear ya. I wracked my brain with this one but who knows its Flordia the state in competition with California.
        I really wish other States take it upon themselves anymore to not follow Florida and Californias legal precendence. Yet, the bigger issue is the Supreme Court activists.
        I anticipate and only hope my assumptions to be true, that in the future she shows Prosecutors what not to do. She prides herself and others do as well on being an educator. So lets just hope any one who proceeds her does not attempt to out do her in the future no matter the outcome of this case.

          • I am somewhat uncomfortable with the maligning of California fruit.

            I love oranges and melons of all kinds that California produces and have a very close attachment to the Haas avocado.

            At a time when the California fruit industry is threatened by the waves of foreign fruits invading our markets, I think that some civility is not too much to ask for when referring to California fruits.

            • I am not sure when the land of fruits and nuts became a gay derogatory term.
              But it initially never was used as homophobic statement.
              The fruits were termed for the the production of its citrus fruit. an the nuts were termed for the hippies. Hence…..The Land of fruits and nuts. From my understanding as it became a liberal state the fruit part was to define the acidic nature to the states spearheaded political efforts in liberalism. And of course the nuts still hippies.

              Somewhere along the line homosexuals began owning the word fruit. But how so, I am unsure.

              • But in the end I do suppose it always was a derogatory term. But it never was intended as homophobic. The name was given because of Haight and Ashbury because of the 60s free love hippies and potheads that hung there. Since then I guess it has had variations because it always was always the very progressive state in America. I never saw it as a homophobic term though. More political.

              • GLBT folks do NOT ‘own’ the word fruit, again you are making shit up. California is a very diverse state, seems you really are more interesting in being an obnoxious than processing knowledge.

                • I NEVER do this but for you I will send to wiki….
                  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_California_1900_to_present

                  California was a national leader in the Progressive Movement from feminisim and unions ……
                  During the 1960s, under Chief Justice Roger J. Traynor, the California Supreme Court became more liberal and progressive. Traynor’s term as Chief Justice (from 1964 to 1970) was marked by a number of firsts: California was the first state to create true strict liability in product liability cases, the first to allow the action of negligent infliction of emotional distress (NIED) even in the absence of physical injury to the plaintiff, and the first to allow bystanders to sue for NIED where the only physical injury was to a relative.

                  Starting in the 1960s, California became a leader in family law. California was the first state to allow true no-fault divorce, with the passage of the Family Law Act of 1969. In 1994, the Legislature took family law out of the Civil Code and created a new Family Code. In 2002, the Legislature granted registered domestic partners the same rights under state law as married spouses. In 2008 California became the second state to legalize same-sex marriage when the California Supreme Court ruled the ban unconstitutional.

                  Schools in California are now required to teach homosexuality, dredging has been banned because salmon ….even if you own mineral rights down stream and there is no proof dredging affects salmon at all….. You cant smoke in a car with anyone under 18, you can not use a certain lawnmower, have to use specific gasoline, You cant get rid of Fienstien…….
                  Continued paralysis in state government and the inability of the Legislature and Governor to work out the fundamental funding questions resulted in voter disapproval of both the legislators and the Governor whose approval rating was among the lowest ever recorded pending the election of a successor in November 2010
                  I could go on…….

              • Fruit has been a derogatory term for male homosexuals at least since World War II and has nothing to do with California produce, although perhaps a tenuous connection with actual fruits and vegetables sold from hand wagons in the streets of London.

                • California is the unfortunate test~bed for almost every new lunatic idea promulgated by the radical left. All around.
                  It did not start with homosexual equality.

                  With 16 states making same sex marriage legal or offering same sex unions, it is silly anymore if anyone uses it as a homosexual derogatory term.
                  This reminds me of progressives attemping to make the use of the term “Illegal Aliens”, as derogatory. And blacks wanting to change African American to blacks because it is now an offensive term because they are not from Africa. With so many generations cohabitating together seems someone is always going to be offended. Many words and sayings have been turned into slang terms and meanings but they did not originate as such.
                  But the question still is,
                  When did the evolution of “The Land of Fruits and Nuts,” become a derogatory homosexual term?
                  Did people just take fruit to mean fruitcake or as a for another symbol of their trademark rainbow? Did they take nuts…..well you know…. and turn it into the meaning of a male homosexual?
                  And if so, who?

                  This is alot of ownership of words here in one term. I am kind of jealous. Damn California progressives are at it again!
                  They took the Rainbows, Fruitloops, Every single fruit, & nut, the word that use to mean happy, a cigarette, cant shorten the word homosexual, religious unions, the traditional family unit……
                  This is getting ridiculous.

                  • Leaving the issue of fruits and nuts aside, you mention that the “progressives” are at it again.

                    I would suggest that appellation “progessive” is where the battle over word meaning should be centered.

                    Are the self-named progressive, in fact, progressive.
                    And if so, progress towards what?

                    • In America I view Progressives as those who push for radical changes under the guise of equality, through social liberialism. And whos philosophies are that there is one universal application to all societies, and cultures and if applied then we can retain social order and equality.

                    • Now hooson, social liberalism has worked to an extent and in the past when we were not as diverse.
                      Progressive social liberalism differs in that it believes and gives a legitimate role of the government power to address all economic and social issues. This causes various issues. It affects our economic market and causes a minority group to have majority powers.
                      There is no equality.

                    • Social liberalism was characterized by cooperation between big business, government and labor unions.
                      So I can only speculate that Progressive social liberals are comfortable with bigger government to supply them with cash flow for whatever goal it is they try to reach.

                      A bigger government to them secures an economic status without having to work their way up the ladder for it. It supplies them with the ability to cry foul when they fail. It supplies everyone else around them with responsibly except themselves.
                      Look at all the tax breaks, grants, loans, and funding all these organizations get. It benefits the goverment, a corporation, and union who supports a social cause that seeks “equality” for the public they serve, IF they have any connection to the government.
                      And of course it allows them to file federal lawsuits claiming discrimination in the work place, in school, against any public servant who they feel has discriminated so they can set a Constitutional precedence.

                    • Hey you asked 😉 No quizz. Not every liberal is progressive. And even a moderate can believe in limited social liberalism. To an extent a very small extent it does help our mixed economic market.

            • I agree hooson! Im right smack in the center of california fruit basket and alothough Mrs Conservative Outhouse was an MD in Mexico she has labored in the fields of California harvesting grapes, peaches, pistachios, and plums by hand

    • This is fantastic news concerning Ben K. I can’t wait to see “Fiona Shrek” w/her bright red lipstick snorting/sweating through that case, I guess BDLR the grunt will there w/something to fan her vapors with.

      GREAT NEWS thanks David for sharing!

      • the complete case docket as of today for kruidbos:
        Dockets
        Line Count Effective
        Entered Description Image
        1 — 8/1/2013
        8/1/2013
        COVER SHEET
        2 — 8/1/2013
        8/1/2013
        COMPLAINT
        3 — 8/1/2013
        8/1/2013
        AUTO NEGLIGENCE CASE
        4 — 8/1/2013
        8/1/2013
        CASE FEES PAID: $401.00 ON RECEIPT NUMBER 1896776
        5 — 8/2/2013
        8/5/2013
        SUMMONS ISSUED ANGELA B COREY
        6 — 8/2/2013
        8/5/2013
        SUMMONS ISSUED FLORIDA DEPT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES-DIV OF RISK MGMNT
        7 — 8/2/2013
        8/5/2013
        SUMMONS ISSUED DFS SERVICE OF PROCESS OFFICE
        8 — 8/5/2013
        8/5/2013
        CASE FEES PAID: $30.00 ON RECEIPT NUMBER 1898200
        9 — 9/4/2013
        9/5/2013
        NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL LEN T. HACKETT, ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT
        10 — 9/4/2013
        9/6/2013
        DESIGNATION OF CURRENT MAILING AND E-MAIL ADDRESS LEN T. HACKETT, ESQ. FOR DEFENDANT/JAXFILING@FLORIDA-LAW.COM
        11 — 10/2/2013
        10/4/2013
        MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FROM ANGELA B. COREY
        12 — 10/8/2013
        10/8/2013
        STIPULATION FOR SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL ROBERT RIEGEL JR., VANESSA HODGERSON AND FOWLER WHITE BOGGS
        13 — 10/10/2013
        10/14/2013
        ORDER ON SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL/ATT FOR DEFT
        14 — 10/16/2013
        10/17/2013
        NOTICE OF HEARING DECEMBER 18, 2013, AT 11:00AM RM 740

        • OMG! Dr. Boa or “I work so hard, I work Saturday, it not my job, medical examiner was glaringly incompetent, WHY didn’t Corey/BDLR see it because just about the rest of the Nation watching the trial saw it; Dr. Boa’s case seems, imo to be a “frivolous case” & possibly dismissed, but hey, he was a State employee, it’s almost impossible to fire a State Employee. It could too be that Dr. Boa wanted a “severance package,” one he did not deserve imo, Corey/BDLR didn’t need Boa’s help in heaping more stupidity onto them, but he did.

  8. It’s time for me to rant and rave like a lunatic (more so than usual). As a result of Obozocare my two year old daughter had her high quality comprehensive private insurance plan canceled. I mentioned this on facebook and some uber liberal mental midget Obama apologist launched into attack mode saying how dare i purchase an inferior garbage policy for my child and that instead of being outaged i should be grateful for the replacement Obozocare policy that has half the benefits for twice the cost. What planet are these idiots from?

    • I am so sorry. There are many people who will be hurt. It must make the blow of that news even worse to have someone on your facebook account insult you about it. The only people on my facebook are family and friends. I hope this wasn’t one of your relatives or friends.

    • That sucks! I do not understand how anyone in the senate thought this would help people. It is going to put many people in debt if they go on the exchange or not.

  9. Despite liberal protesters’ claims that Florida’s so-called “stand your ground” gun law demonstrates that Republican policymakers are responsible for the February death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, an analysis of its legislative history shows that it was a bipartisan effort — and that no Florida Democratic state senator voted against it.

    One Democrat, Fort Lauderdale state Sen. Mandy Dawson, missed the vote. But the rest of the Senate chamber supported it, 39-0.

    The Florida House vote was 92-20. Twelve Democrats voted in favor.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/01/stand-your-ground-laws-not-just-gop-policy-records-show/#ixzz2mZAtCcgB

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s