Tag: Dan Calabrese

Had George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin in Michigan, the outcome of the trial would have been different.

....

But the case, says William Cataldo, "would not have played out the way it did."

....

Not here, says Cataldo, the chief of homicide for the Macomb County Prosecutors Office. In Michigan, by statute and by precedent, "If you are the aggressor in a fight, you cannot then claim self defense when you use deadly force."

We'll never know who actually shoved or punched first on a rainy night in Sanford, Fla. In this jurisdiction, it wouldn't matter.

After prosecutors and defense attorneys finished lobbing pretrial motions at one another, Cataldo says, "it's clear that a defendant who acted as Mr. Zimmerman did would be defined as the aggressor."

Besides William Cataldo talking out his a$$ about our Law in comparison to Florida's Law.  Why yes, how dare George batter Trayvon's fists with his nose, then make poor li'l Tray sit on his chest while George bashed the back of his skull repeatedly onto a sidewalk.  Clearly, that would be "defined as the aggressor" by... Cataldo's office.  Yannow, after a cursory once over of William Cataldo's background, the following quote is fitting and appropriate.

"The function of the law is not to provide justice or to preserve freedom. The function of the law is to keep those who hold power, in power." - Gerry Spence

At least according to Ivory Tower editor Stephen Henderson.  Apparently mr Henderson is not happy about the verdict, and is one of those who would foment violence against another human being because HIS VERSION of justice is not served.

H/T to Dan Calabrese of the News, and writer for Cain's politics blog, who opines:

" ..  how out-of-control the media has gotten on the Zimmerman story that anyone would even think about writing what Stephen Henderson, editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press, wrote yesterday. And it's all the more so because it was Stephen Henderson, who in my experience is a thoughtful liberal ..

Calabrese is of course, objecting to Hendersons rant:

"My job is typically to make policy sense of news events. But here, I'm at a loss. As a parent, as an African American, I can't get much past thinking Zimmerman has earned every day of the hell his life should be from here on out. Injustice? I hope it visits with him often."

Zimmerman was tried, the media tried like hell to convict him in the court of public opinion, the president's administration has ORGANIZED rallies in an attempt to 'threaten' the court that a not-guilty verdict would be a not-so-acceptable result, and then we have the ivory tower ginning up hate via soy ink. While hundreds of murders have happened in Detroit, Chicago, DC in the meantime, the focus is on a man who was found to have defended himself against a real physical threat and assault.  And a publication that bears the name of one of the principle murder capitals in our nation cannot see the irony of his racial screed.

Normally, we should not pretend to understand what is in the hearts of men, and motivations which move them with regard to their acts and deeds, but we can certainly witness the failure of an editor to couch his hatred a little more carefully.

I mean it. If ever I get so self centered with my writing that I make the left turn towards apologizing for the actions of my fellow Republicans, whack me upside the head. Particularly when it is for behaving like Republicans.  Particularly on issues that go further into the book than a simple cover.

Hit me if I ever write stuff like this:

"But Michigan Republican can't seem to stop there, largely because they have a determined constituency of social conservatives and angry knee-jerkers who want what they want, regardless of whether it accomplishes anything. So along with the economic changes the state badly needs, we get proposals to mandating the Pledge of Allegiance, drug-testing welfare recipients, and banning domestic partner benefits for some public employees."

Regardless if it accomplishes anything?  Of course it accomplishes something.  In fact, when looking at drug testing for welfare, does it not encourage those who wish to receive assistance, to take a little ownership of their situation?  At the very least they can transform themselves into non drug abusing recipients, and at best it might encourage them to seek help and social redemption.

"Umm sorry we won, Mm-k you poor Dems? Like I apologize for all the extremism my friends are going to unleash, all right?"

Never heard of 'hard love' I guess, huh? Of course, never mind.  The key to mom's door is still under the ceramic frog .. just in case.