The program takes place on a university campus where a diversity of opinions is expected and encouraged, that is how we exchange ideas, learn and grow.
Please attend!

Quote:

You're entitled to your opinions like everyone else and I'm entitled to vehemently disagree with them. Implicitly, not expressly by the 4 corners of the statute, SYG can mean "be trigger happy, shoot first and ask questions later." There's no duty to retreat when one has a lawful right to be some place and you're entitled to use force, including deadly force, if you're in imminent fear of your life, even when that fear is irrational. I don't trust Zimmerman's story and Trayvon isn't here to refute it. I think Zimmerman got his ass kicked and didn't like it and shot the kid ("Tonight you die!" is what he said Trayvon said to him, not believing it). Likewise the cop in the movie theater shot the dad and Michael Dunn said he THOUGHT he saw a gun in the car of the kids in the convenience store parking lot. All these cases emanate from the South where people are zealots about their guns/second amendment rights and want to be dirty harry. And implicitly this deals with race when you juxtapose these cases with Melissa Alexander (the domestic violence case where NO ONE was actually shot and she's still in jail) and not being able to fathom black people being exonerated for shooting white kids out of fear.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum ... play-role-zimmerman-trial


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2 ... -zimmerman-trayvon-martin

Quote:

Have fun. I realize that my opinions, though supported by the court, should not be stated publicly.

Wow, quite a lot of opinions- I am definitely attending- I hope you all come on the 17th, to join in the sharing of perspectives and ideas on this issue.

The program is free of charge and open to the public- as are most NJCU programs.

Quote:

This is some phenomenal nonsense. SYG doesn't mean "I'm scared, I get to come out shooting." It means if you are attacked by someone you can defend yourself with whatever you have. The latter is reasonable and sensible, the former is not. I would actually love to have SYG here in NJ. By the way, you may or may not realize this, but SYG was NOT used in the Zimm case. It was used in the other case and failed fantastically.

The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She has no more authority than a Dominos pizza dispatcher. Zimmerman had a right to investigate (though I note it appears he was attacked as he was leaving). Trayvon Martin did NOT have a right to attack even if he was scared (unless that fear was somehow accompanied by some action that would put him in reasonable apprehension of imminent and significant bodily harm, which isn't applicable here). If Trayvon did (and it seems that this is what happened), then Zimmerman had the right to defend himself.

As for the fees, they are the primary motivation for a lawyer taking on the lawsuit. And that is fine, a job is a job. But realize that the rest is showbiz. Though I note in this case there's the potential for money coming from selling the story, speaking engagements, etc.

I take it you didn't watch the trial. If you did you would have seen the prosecution witness end up supporting the defense's position or hurting the prosecution's case in other ways (examples):

Jane Sudkya who seemed mental, devolved into histrionics, and testified multiple shots fired (only one bullet was fired).

Rachel Jeantel - committed perjury on the stand. Couldn't even read the letter she supposedly wrote.

Selene Bahadoor - admitted on the stand deliberately withheld information during her deposition. Admitted motive for doing so as she signed a petition to have Zimmerman arrested.

Zimmerman was walking back to his car when Martin attacked him, breaking his nose, and then proceeded to bash Zimmerman's head into the pavement. 'Stand Your Ground' doesn't even apply in this case since Martin was already assaulting Zimmerman.

There will be no lawsuits bankrupting Zimmerman. He is immune from civil suits in regards to the shooting of Martin.

In the beginning the Skittles in the pocket were construed to be a weapon from what I read. Zimmerman was told to stay in his car and he didn't, he went in hot pursuit like a vigilante/wannabe cop, he instigated the entire thing, Trayvon likely didn't feel safe with a man after him while he went to a convenience store (I don't like strange people following me). SYG laws allow people to be provocateurs and then say "well, I was scared, sorry" (see the one about the cop who shot the dad over popcorn in the movies).... Yes, the lawyer gets a percentage of the recovery/settlement in a civil suit but that's hardly news. And money is your recourse when a criminal trial fails. I think you would likely sue someone if your spouse or child was killed rather than say "Oh, the criminal trial failed, oh well, just the way the cookies crumbles" http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly ... your-ground-culture-death

Quote:

No one claimed he thought Trayvon had a gun. Zimmerman said he was attacked by Trayvon, which seems to have been pretty well supported, and because of that he was justified in using the gun in self defense. This is the argument that resulted in his (in my view, just and appropriate) acquittal. The lawyer is primarily involved because he smells money.

The Dunn matter is an entirely different case and that man will (also appropriately, in my view) spend the rest of his life in prison.

His legal "prowess?" I guess today is Opposite Day! He's good at getting publicity but a fool of a lawyer, haha.

And what exactly is your point. The criminal trial was lost and if George Zimmerman can't be put in jail, he can at least be made penniless in a civil trial unless you feel he should just be scot-free with no repercussions for his reckless actions (you know, "kill an unarmed teenager, oops, thought he had a gun, my bad, time to move on") Same thing applies to that other fool Michael Dunn.

Oh yes, he is a real crusader (for $$$s).

Benjamin Crump, Esq, the civil rights attorney who represented the family of Trayvon Martin will speak at New Jersey City University on Monday, March 17th.


The Lee Hagan Africana Studies Center proudly presents:
EMANCIPATION 2.0, STILL FIGHTING FOR JUSTICE

Lecture by Benjamin Crump, Esq.

March 17, 7:00-9:00 p.m.
Michael B. Gilligan Student Union Building Multipurpose Room B
New Jersey City University
2039 Kennedy Blvd.
Jersey City , NJ 07305-1597
http://www.njcu.edu/Maps_and_Directions.aspx



Attorney Benjamin Crump and his legal prowess and success have created a significant legal legacy that ensures that the promise found in our nation?s constitution is indeed real in every state, municipality and neighborhood. Benjamin Crump and his law partner, Daryl Parks have provided legal representation and recovered millions of dollars for their clients in some of the most high profile cases in the United States.

He readily shares his professional and personal talents with local, statewide and national causes and charities. Over the years Mr. Crump has dedicated his areas of practice in serious personal injury, wrongful death and medical malpractice matters. Throughout his career he has handled civil litigation matters in state and federal courts throughout the State of Florida. He is currently serving as a Board Member for the National Bar Association as well as a Board Member of the Florida Bar Foundation. He is a member of the American Bar Association, American Association for Justice, The Florida Justice Association, American Board of Trial Advocates and William Stafford Inns of Court.

This event was originally scheduled for last month but had to be rescheduled due to bad weather.

Produced by NJCU?s Division of University Advancement

COME and be part of the discussion!