Marissa Alexander Freed

For the first time in a long while there is good news out of Florida!!! Marissa Alexander the Florida woman sentenced to 20 years in prison after firing a "warning shot" during an argument with her abusive husband has been released on bond while she awaits retrial under a controversial part of the state's self-defense law. What a wonderful holiday gift!

The case of Marissa Alexander, who was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, touched off a furor when her supporters compared it to the self-defense case of George Zimmerman, who was acquitted earlier this year of murdering an unarmed black teenager. Some have compared these two cases and the law as simply “black and white. Whereas, no one was injured in Alexander's case, the court gave her a 20-year prison sentence under the state's mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines because she had fired a gun during the assault.

A state appeals court ruled in September that Alexander, who is black, deserved a new trial because the judge failed to properly instruct the Jacksonville, Fla., jury about her self-defense argument. She was convicted in May 2012. "This news is vindication for Marissa and all the women who have become criminalized for exercising their basic right to defend themselves and their children," Angie Nixon of Florida New Majority, a social justice organization, said of Alexander's release.

The case drew criticism from civil rights groups concerned about self-defense laws and mandatory minimum sentencing rules, but it received little attention outside north Florida until the Zimmerman case. Zimmerman was arrested for killing Trayvon Martin in 2012 and was acquitted of murder and manslaughter in July 2013.

Under the so-called "Stand Your Ground" clause added to Florida's self-defense law in 2005, people who use deadly force to defend themselves from serious injury - rather than retreating to avoid confrontation - can be immune from prosecution. Zimmerman never sought immunity under "Stand Your Ground," instead relying on a standard self-defense law. Alexander's "Stand Your Ground" claim was rejected because she left the house during the confrontation to retrieve a gun from her car, returning to fire a shot near her husband Rico Gray's head.

A slightly built woman who stands 5 feet 2 inches, Alexander said her 245-pound husband was about to attack her when she fired into a kitchen wall during the August 2010 incident. He had previously been convicted of domestic violence for attacking her. Prosecutors said the shot endangered Gray. At the time, Alexander had an active restraining order against her husband and she carried a concealed weapons permit.

Source: CBS News

The Citizens Counsel Of Sanford

This will be a short perspective concerning the disgrace rendered by the all white jury - minus one - in Sanford, Florida in support of Zimmerman. I'm stunned and disappointed. NOT GUILTY. Just like those who got off for the Bombing of the 16th Street Church in Birmingham back in '63. It’s been fifty years since the murder of Medgar Evers and nearly sixty years after Lil Emmitt Till and we can see that nothing has changed down in Dixie. It's a sad day in the history of American.

This system of justice continues to fall short of the truth, especially when a child can be going about his daily business and be killed because of a false assumption. Beatrice King, the daughter of Dr. Martin Luther King said this in a statement "We've got some difficult days ahead. Let us seek God for his guidance during this time. God is a God of Justice, mercy and grace.” I make this statement with all due respect but those were her father’s words and if I can recall his nonviolent posture got him killed.

Frankly, I just have a simple question: Why are we surprised by the verdict? The system has never worked for us. We see the dirty cops in this police state in which we live; the crooked lawyers; prosecutor’s whose job it is to fill prisons and the judges who work in concert with them. Didn’t Richard Pryor tell us that in court it is not justice – “it’s just us”. There is a statute that tells us that justice is blind.

Minister Malcolm X so eloquently talked about the crimes America inflects upon Black people and the system that covets them. He once said, “Anywhere south of Canada is in the south”. If that is true then the deep south would be the confederacy that held such strong feeling about a black man’s place. Therefore, based on that analogy Sanford, Florida is in the bawls of hell after reaching that verdict in the George Zimmerman murder case.

I will never go to Disney again!

Let me leave you with this: How is it that Michael Vick can do jail-time in prison for killing dogs when he was not there when the dogs were killed. A black woman in Florida fires 'warning shots' at abusive husband gets 20 years. Plexico Burruss shots himself and goes to jail – prison mind you. I don’t even like OJ but he got 33 years for stealing his own stuff. Lil Kim goes to prison for not cooperating (snitching) and this f***ing a**hole Zimmerman kills a child who his defense says had a weapon, which was the sidewalk gets found “Not Guilty”.

I am deeply ashamed that in our country a young boy cannot walk to the neighborhood store to buy skittles without it being a death penalty. All of black America voted and praises our president who has done virtually nothing for people who looks like him. Mr. President where are you now and did our vote count? With what the Supreme Court has done it seem more like 1963 than 2013. So for all you uppity Negro who though America has accepted you. Hmmm!!!

I will end here with a heavy heart with the message from Trayvon’s father: “Even though I am broken hearted my faith is unshattered I WILL ALWAYS LOVE MY BABY TRAY. God blessed me & Sybrina with Tray and even in his death I know my baby proud of the FIGHT we along with all of you put up for him GOD BLESS!!!”

Only in America can a dead black boy go on trial for his own murder. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

 The Verdict would have surely been different "IF"!!!

We Want Justice For Trayvon Martin

We have seen justice denied many times since African Americans were dragged onto the shores of this country. It has happened in many ways from lynchings to many other forms of terror and as we see continues today.

I will pray for justice to be served in the Zimmerman Murder Case. Therefore, Thought Provoking Perspectives will show support for the Martin family who only asks for justice to not be denied as it has throughout our sorted history.

The Black image is my way of showing my support until justice is correctly served.

Not too long ago, a black person’s “place” was in the field or in the back of the bus. If a black man was found “out of his place,” he could be jailed or lynched. In Martin’s day — in our day — a black person’s “place” is in the ghetto. If he is found “out of his place,” he may be treated with suspicion, frisked, arrested — or in this case DEATH.

Rest In Peace Trayvon! And that's my Thought Provoking Perspective...

The End Is Near

The George Zimmerman murder trial has put race front and center in the American conversation. The opinions of guilt or innocence are split right down the middle alone racial lines. Those of the other hue feel the assassin, in my view, is innocent and had every right to shot the young black man – dare I say, just because he was black; even though the young man was doing nothing wrong. On the other hand African Americans and parents or should I say sane people see it as crime as an outrageous act of a monster.

The question, if you believe in the justice system to be fair and just, will be answered in a few days as the case nears a close. This case reminds me of the attitudes of many during the OJ Simpson trial, the Rodney King atrocity, or I could compare this to the immoral actions of the monsters that killed Emmitt Till.

In Till’s day, a black person’s “place” was in the field or in the back of the bus. If a black man was found “out of his place,” he could be jailed or lynched. In Martin’s day — in our day — a black person’s “place” is in the ghetto. If he is found “out of his place,” he may be treated with suspicion, frisked, arrested — or worse.

When you look at the killing Trayvon Martin and all the lies that has been exposed I am fearful of what may happen next. After the Emmitt Till murder the Civil Rights Movement was launched. The OJ case showed us in many ways how justice can be served with enough money. Then we saw Rodney King on video beaten nearly to death by the so-called authorities and the thugs were found innocent, which by the way often happens to blacks at the hands of the law.

There is a lot of evidence to suggest that the scales of justice is unbalanced. African American’s know when it comes to justice – “it’s just us”. Because we are most often not the recipients of anything fair or just. In fact, it has been that way since people of African descent were called colored and Negros, whereas this is no secret as it is recorded even in His-story.

I remember the results of each of the mentioned situations. I can particularly remember Simi Valley’s outcome and the horror that followed. I hope, if the murderer, who bragged that killing an innocent black child was God’s will, gets the verdict he deserves. If not, we could well see a devastating outcome that America may not be prepared for, in that the violence would be unprecedented.

I, for one, pray for peace and ask that the outcome also be God’s will. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

The Meaning Of The Cross

Words that ring true - "injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere".

http://johntwills.com

Unfairly Treated Rachel Jeantel

This post serves one purpose, which is to say SHAME on those who have been so cruel to the nineteen year-old young woman who was thrust into a world-wide media circus.

She is not a Hollywood actress, obviously has language, cultural and educational barriers. The disrespect many have demonstrated on social media reached an unbelievable low. I have about sixty thousand social media connects and most have discussed me. We expect this behavior from those of the other hue and racists but I am shocked that it has come from the African American community.

This woman did not ask to be the last person to hear the voice of her young friend who was brutally murder by, in my view, a monster. She is not well versed in the arena of a courtroom. I am sure many of you know the emotional impact of a death; have had a family member or friend to die, which should allow you to understand the emotional trauma of such an event. You should be ashamed of your comments about how this young lady looked; as if she not one of God’s children.

I think she held her own and stood her ground under very difficult circumstances. Understand that she was there as a witness to her friends murder. I, for one, found her testimony creditable. I will not go on and on about this but to say I am proud of this young woman for having the courage to come forth with the truth as she understood it to be.

I am particularly ashamed of the African American community who wore those hoodies professing their support for the murdered of Trayvon Martin, particularly black women, who claims to be strong black women. Your disrespect of this sister is reprehensible. Those who are guilty know who you are and should be ashamed!

I say to you, all of you, put yourself in her place and for those who say God or Jesus in every sentence. He or she who is without sin cast the first stone. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

WHAT IF?

We have heard for nearly a year and a half every pundit and pontificator give their opinions on the Trayvon Martin’s death and the Gorge Zimmerman second degree murder trial.

Let me be clear; everyone has a right to their point of view and by all accounts the reactions are usually split along racial lines. A Fox News anchor commented that Zimmerman has suffered enough. I suppose implying that Trayvon’s death means he suffers no more or his family. SHOCKING!

I’ve seen a half century of history and witnessed what many African Americans see as the scales of justice being unbalanced – just look at the scales held by Lady Justice. We know the system is designed to protect the system and since slavery that system has existed in one form or another. As a result, often times people of color receives what might be called justice deferred!

This place Sanford Florida has a long history of recorded racial intolerance going back to the days of Jackie Robinson and beyond. I am reasonably confident that if that police department had come to the scene of that crime there is no doubt that there would have been an immediate arrest for murder. In fact, there may well have been and additional death or a beating of the suspect, which occurs often times for lesser crimes all the time.

Let’s go back to the Rodney King situation not long ago – need I say more. We watched him beaten nearly to death and he did not kill anyone. Yet, the system found the culprits not guilty! I am very afraid, if history is any indication, the charged man in this case will be found not guilty and the consequences of that verdict will be disastrous.

Let’s look at this from a completely different perspective.

WHAT IF ZIMMERMAN HAD BEEN BLACK AND SHOT AN UNARMED WHITE CHILD? WHAT SAY YOU?

A wise-man once said, “When you control a man’s thinking you do not have to worry about his actions. You do not have to tell him not to stand here or go yonder. He will find his ‘proper place’ and will stay in it. You do not need to send him to the back door. He will go without being told. In fact, if there is no back door, he will cut one for his special benefit. His education makes it necessary.” (Carter G. Woodson)

And that's my Thought Provoking Perspective...

It Could Be A Long Hot Summer

I wrote a post last week reminding my readers that the murder trial of George Zimmerman is finally upon us and to support the Martin family in their quest for justice. I was surprised by some of the comments and emails I received and yes, the pros and cons were split right along color lines. One guy commented that “we should pray for Zimmerman” the accused murder of this child. Another sent a message saying I was playing the race card.

I know there is freedom of speech and everyone has a right to their opinion. But most reasonable people would take umbrage to such remarks particularly in light of the defenses unethical behavior, in my view, to fabricate information about the dead child. As widely reported the defense produced what they called evidence in a brash attempt to alter the image of Martin by linking him to guns, drug use, and a propensity for violence.

The defense team, in prior press conferences and interviews, revealed images on Trayvon’s phone of him smoking marijuana and allegedly holding a gun. Being that they lied about these things should make everyone question their ethics and trustworthiness on any issue or evidence in this case. Particularly, when the court agreed that none of this is admissible.

The there were also statements made recently by Zimmerman’s brother about “voodoo forensics” is more evidence of their desperation. They want to discredit as much evidence in the public eye prior to trial regardless of foundation or truthfulness. Should we discount his statement as the man’s feeble attempt to help save his brother from prosecution of killing an unarmed teenage boy? YES!

Despite the posturing from the Zimmerman defense team and a defiant and nationally supported stance from the Martin family, the trial could play out in a variety of ways once jurors are presented with the mounds of evidence in the weeks ahead.

We have not come as far as we think and if history is any indication we might be in for a long hot summer as the Trayvon Martin murder trial proceeds to conclusion. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

 

Poll Tax Rejected in Florida

A federal judge has said he will permanently remove recently enacted voter registration restrictions in the state of Florida. According to Talking Points Memo, Judge Robert L. Hinkle has declared that he will grant a motion to permanently strike down the new rules once the state of Florida has dropped its case against the federal government in U.S. appeals court.

Voting rights activists have welcomed the decision, which makes permanent an temporary injunction that Hinkle granted in May, in which Hinkle called the restrictions forbidding third party groups from organizing to register voters “harsh and impractical” and said they would impose unnecessary burdens on organizations trying to ensure voter participation.

New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice has issued a press release calling the ruling “a decisive victory for Florida voters.”

“Florida’s anti-voter law created impassable roadblocks for our volunteers, who have been bringing fellow Floridians into our democratic process for over 72 years,” explained Deirdre MacNab, President of the League of Women Voters of Florida, one of the three groups who filed suit against the state in December of 2011. “Thanks to today’s ruling, we can finally put these roadblocks behind us and concentrate on getting Floridians registered to vote. We are grateful the court recognized that the Constitution does not tolerate these types of barriers to civic participation and voter registration.”

The League of Women Voters was joined by Rock the Vote and the Florida Public Interest Research Group Education Fund in the suit, which was filed separately from a Justice Department inquiry into the stringent new regulations, which have been revealed by a former Republican Party member to be an effort to "keep black people from voting" by conservative Republicans.

As reported by Talking Points Memo

You can read Judge Hinkle’s ruling here (.pdf).

Thankfully there is someone who agrees that what the Republicans are trying to do is no more that a "Poll Tax". And that's my Thought Provoking Perspective...

http://johntwills.com

Twenty First Century Slavery

I suppose everyone has an opinion on the prison system and incarceration. Some view it as the New Jim Crow and of course there are others who see nothing is wrong with the system at all. My view is that it makes you wonder about the fairness received by some, namely minorities, whether it works for those unable to afford justice and I think everyone will agree that it is a cash cow.

As it is report in news reports daily people are released after spending years incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. Then, there is the sad irony of people being put to death who may fall into this category and more shameful; executions of the mentally disabled and life sentences for minors. In addition, there is the fact that once released the convicts voting rights are taken away forever - in most cases.

There is a long history of lynching’s, chain gangs, and the free labor derived from this system in this country. It was not until recently that the disproportionate sentencing in crimes such as cocaine and crack clearly was unfair! Let me say again that it is not my position that laws and punishment is not necessary. What is disparaging is that it disproportionately affects the minority population of the citizenry.

I read an article recently where a Vermont man is suing the state under the 13^th Amendment for the labor he was forced to perform while awaiting trial. A one-time grad student, Finbar McGarry, was arrested for allegedly firing a gun in his home and threatening to kill his family and an official at the university. In a lawsuit McGrarry alleges that the state violated his rights under the 13th Amendment -- which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude after the Civil War -- when he was forced to work in the laundry for minimal pay as an inmate.

In his $11-million lawsuit pro se, said he was forced to work three days a week for six weeks washing other inmates' laundry. He was paid a wage of 25 cents per hour and developed a bacterial infection on his neck because he was not provided sanitation in the laundry room. He says, prison officials threatened to put him "in the hole," where inmates are shackled and locked up for 23 hours per day in solitary confinement, if he refused to work.

Portions of the following was reported by Alon Harish and Alexis Shaw for ABC.

It is important to note that McGarry was released in June 2009, and all charges against him were dropped. McGarry's anti-slavery case was thrown out in November 2009 by a federal court in Brattleboro, Vt. In his opinion, U.S. Magistrate Judge John Conroy wrote that McGarry's 13th Amendment claim was without merit because his laundry work "was nothing like the slavery that gave rise to the enactment of that amendment."

But on Friday, a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit overruled the lower court's dismissal of the case, arguing that McGarry did not have to prove that his experience was akin those of African slaves before abolition.

"Contrary to the district court's conclusion, it is well-settled that the term 'involuntary servitude' is not limited to chattel slavery-like conditions," appellate judge Barrington Parker wrote in the court's opinion. "The amendment was intended to prohibit all forms of involuntary labor, not solely to abolish chattel slavery." Supreme Court precedent has established that the constitutional rights of pretrial detainees are distinct from those of convicted inmates, because criminal convictions can justify certain punishments, Parker argued.

The appellate panel remanded McGarry's case to the district court, where he will get a new trial. The state has 90 days to appeal the panel's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. "If you haven't been convicted at all, your pretrial detention is not a form of punishment," said Columbia Law School professor Jamal Greene. "The degree to which his liberty can be restricted is directly tied to the needs that required him to be detained. So if he was detained only to secure himself for trial, he can't be detained for punishment."

McGarry pointed to a 1986 policy under which the department developed employment programs designed to help inmates gain employable skills and reduce the cost of incarceration. The policy did not distinguish between convicts and pretrial detainees.

"At that facility, that's what was happening. It was a 'rehabilitative' labor policy, and all inmates were expected to participate in it," he said. "It was a practice that affected a lot of pretrial detainees."

In a separate lawsuit he filed while he was in jail, McGarry's chief concern was not the Constitution; it was getting injunctive relief to prevent the state from forcing him to do more labor. During his 14-hour shifts, he said, he was unable to contact his public defender, causing him to fear that his case would not be handled properly.

While all inmates may be expected to clean up their cells or wipe down tables in the mess hall, Greene said, the poorly paid, unsafe work McGarry alleged he was forced to do may have crossed a legal boundary.

Did you know the clothing worn by our soldiers are made by the cheap labor of the incarcerated? In closing, let me suggest that you read Michelle Alexander’s book “The New Jim Crow”. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

http://johntwills.com

On Wednesday, September 5^th at 8:00 PM (EST), The Book Tree Radio Show is pleased to announce its re-launch on BlogTalkRadio!

The Best Reason To Reelect Obama

Sanity prevailed today as the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) let stand what is known as Obama-care. This is a great day for us all. Now, the more important question in my mind is the age of SCOTUS. I guess I should qualify the phrase United States by saying the States are not all that united considering the state of our political divide.

I read an interesting article by Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Times who quoted Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, known for delivering laugh lines, recalled how Justice Elena Kagan, 52, had suggested during an oral argument before the Supreme Court that people born before 1948 were old. Justice Ginsburg said, “Next year I will turn 80, God willing… I’m not all that old”.

This speaks to the current state of the Court. Justice Ginsburg is the eldest member of a court that includes four justices in their 70s, making it among the oldest courts since the New Deal era. Its decisions during this historic “flood season,” as Justice Ginsburg described the end-of-term rush, are likely to make the panel — and the tenure of some of the justices — a significant issue in the presidential campaign. This is the most significant reason to reelect President Obama because “If she dies or leaves soon and Romney wins, the Supreme Court will be the most conservative in history.”

Today, the court is announced its decision on President Obama’s health care law, one of the most consequential cases in decades, with an overwhelming affirmation – it stands. As good as this decision is for the president and the American people – it is not over yet. There is another major case looming this fall, the court will take on an affirmative action case that could end preferential treatment at public universities, and it might hear a case involving same-sex marriage.

The winner of the race for president will inherit a group of justices who frequently split 5 to 4 along ideological lines. That suggests that the next president could have a powerful impact if he gets to replace a justice of the opposing side.

It is, of course, impossible to predict when a vacancy will occur. (Justice John Paul Stevens spent 35 years on the court and retired at 90, while Justice Robert H. Jackson, who served in the 1940s and 1950s, died of a heart attack at 62.) A 2006 study in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy found that the average retirement age for justices was 78.7.

Justice Ginsburg, a stalwart of the court’s liberal bloc, has been treated for pancreatic cancer. Justice Antonin Scalia, the court’s most visible conservative, is 76. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, frequently the swing vote, is 75. And Justice Stephen G. Breyer, like Justice Ginsburg a Democratic appointee, is about to turn 74.

The New York Times provocative article mentioned an interview with Professor Kennedy who said the suggestion that a justice should retire for purely political reasons was “viewed as somewhat unseemly” by many of his colleagues. Those close to Justice Ginsburg say that while she may appear frail, she is in fact in good health.

Of course, Justices leave for a variety of reasons. Sandra Day O’Connor, for instance, left the court at 75 to take care of her husband. Professor Kennedy insists it was “not accidental” that, having been appointed by Ronald Reagan, a Republican, she resigned while George W. Bush was president.

What I want to leave you with is that the next president will have the opportunity to appoint at least two, maybe three, Justices. Only Obama will appoint sanity or dare I say Justices who will have the American people at heart. So this is the best reason to vote, and for the president. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

http://johntwills.com

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Two of a Kind

Let me start by give Webster’s definition of perjury. It is the voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath. In other words LYING!!!

Today the Seminole County Sheriff’s Department arrested Shellie Zimmerman, wife of George Zimmerman, charged with murdering Trayvon Martin, on one count of perjury after they were advised by the office of State Attorney Angela Corey that a warrant had been issued.

The crux of the case against the assassin who murdered young Trayvon Martin rest upon creditability because Zimmerman is the only one and no one else can testify to the events of that evening. The murders supporters expect us to believe that what he says is true.

Yet, from all that I have heard and read there is no truth to nothing he has said and by revoking his bond, and now this, how can anyone believe anything the murder says. Today, Shellie was booked into John E. Polk Correctional Facility and released on $1,000 bond, officials said. I suppose this means the two of them were temporary together again.

George Zimmerman, 28, was charged with second-degree murder in the Feb. 26 shooting of Martin. He pleaded not guilty. Police say that he claimed on the night of the shooting that he acted in self-defense. The murder’s $150,000 bond was revoked after allegations that during an April 20 bail hearing that he and Shellie Zimmerman misled the court about their finances, neglecting to disclose they had raised at least $135,000 in a PayPal account.

The order issued Tuesday by Assistant State Attorney John Guy charged Shellie Zimmerman with knowingly making false statements during the April hearing. Also today, the court released Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester’s order revoking George Zimmerman’s bond. "There are several factors that weigh against his release ... Most importantly, though, is the fact that he has now demonstrated that he does not properly respect the law or the integrity of the judicial process."

 I can only suggest that justice be served and we as citizens lift our voices to repeal the “Stand Your Ground Laws” because, as this shows, next time it could be your child to which justice is deferred. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

VOTE!!!

http://johntwills.com

Bail Revoked!!!

So it is, justice I mean, a Florida judge did the responsible thing by revoking bond for the assassin George Zimmerman, who is charged with second-degree murder in the death of Trayvon Martin. Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. ordered Zimmerman to surrender to the county sheriff within 48 hours.

Most observer in the case or I should speak for myself believed Zimmerman misrepresented himself from the very beginning, particularly how much money he had when his bond was originally set in April when he claimed to be indigent. I will go further and say about everything!

The murderer according to the prosecution cited as evidence recorded telephone conversations that Zimmerman had with his wife prior to the hearing. The conversations were recorded while Zimmerman was being held in the Seminole County Jail after being charged with second-degree murder on April 11. Now, everyone knows when you call someone from jail or receive mail the jailers are listening or will read the correspondence.

This, in my mind, gives reason to question anything that Zimmerman has said throughout this ordeal. Is charged with fatally shooting Martin, 17, on February 26 while he walked in a Sanford, Florida, neighborhood where he was staying during a visit with his father. Zimmerman, 28, a neighborhood watch volunteer claimed he shot the teenager in self-defense.

The trial prosecutor stated accurately that "The defense, through Mrs. Zimmerman, lied to this court about the amount of money that they had… I don't know what words to use other than it was a blatant lie." Outside the courthouse, the lawyer for the family of Martin said Friday's decision is significant. "Judge Lester's finding that George Zimmerman was dishonest is very important because his credibility is the most important thing in this entire case," said Benjamin Crump.

"Remember, this is only George Zimmerman's testimony that says Trayvon Martin attacked him. All of the evidence suggests that George Zimmerman pursued and confronted Trayvon Martin. Therefore, that's why this is such an important ruling today." In court documents, State Attorney Angela B. Corey acknowledged she was making the strongly worded assertions in describing how Zimmerman's wife represented his finances.

Zimmerman's defense team stated during an April court hearing that Zimmerman's "family members misinformed the court (the state would use a much stronger and accurate word to describe what occurred -- defendant's wife lied to the court) about defendant and his family's finances," Corey wrote in court papers.

She went on to say that Zimmerman had two passports, and the passport that he surrendered to the court at the April hearing was one that Zimmerman had reported stolen on March 8, 2004, court papers said. That passport was valid until May 2012, Corey said. Zimmerman was issued a second passport on March 26, 2004, and that one is valid until 2014, she said. The prosecutor asked the court that Zimmerman be ordered to surrender the second passport to authorities.

Prosecutors have informed federal authorities about Zimmerman's second passport in case he attempts to use it "to flee the country," Corey said. Regarding Zimmerman's finances, Corey alleged that recorded phone calls in April between Zimmerman, while he was in Seminole County Jail, and his wife showed that the couple "spoke in code to hide what they were doing" regarding more than $135,000 in a credit union account belonging to the couple.

The money was apparently donated by members of the public to Zimmerman's website that Zimmerman "fully controlled and participated in the transfer of money from the PayPal account to defendant and his wife's credit union accounts," Corey said in court records. "This occurred prior to the time defendant was arguing to the court that he was indigent and his wife had no money." But Corey stated in court documents Friday: "The money still belongs to defendant and he can demand it at any time."

The prosecutor said the judge "relied on false representations and statements" by Zimmerman and his wife when the court set his bond at $150,000. He was required to post only 10% of that. Corey argued that the court should revoke the bond or increase it "substantially." Lester appeared angry that the court had not been told about the money. "Does your client get to sit there like a potted palm and let you lead me down the primrose path?" he asked Zimmerman's lawyer. "That's the issue."

The facts for this writing are attributed to news reported by CNN. I wanted to make sure my readers around the world were informed and know that we stand for justice, we will not relent until justice is served. And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

http://johntwills.com

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This Court!!!

The Supreme Court is shaping up to be very significant in terms of issues involving race, at least the way I see this session. The justices are poised to decide some high-profile cases that could have long-term effects and certainly a huge impact on African and Hispanic Americans.

This is very serious because Ray Charles can see that the Roberts court is more conservative than any of its recent predecessor which surely does not bode well for minorities. Can I remind you that they do wear robes, which are more dangerous than the folks who wear the white ones.

Their decisions will have a huge impact on the president who suddenly finds himself running for reelection not only against Mitt Romney and the House Republicans, but now against the Court as well. The influence of the four conservative justices has already been witnessed in the January decision on Texas' redistricting maps.

The big thing before them is the future of Healthcare, which is critical but there is another hot-button issue - anti-immigration laws. The top court will hear oral arguments April 25 on the Obama administration's challenge to Arizona's controversial law. The administration says such laws are irreconcilable with federal laws. Should the court uphold Arizona's law, Latinos would feel the effects nationwide as other state will surely follow with more to do the same.

More serious, in my opinion, is the court's ideological shift on affirmative action in an upcoming case that could undo the compromise reached in Grutter v. Bollinger. That 2003 ruling barred public colleges from using a point system to boost minority enrollment, but allowed race to be taken into account to achieve academic diversity. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a key swing vote, wrote the majority opinion is not there this time and her replacement, Justice Samuel Alito, reflects the court's extreme rightward turn.

Another indication is that Robert’s made this statement that should provide some insight to his thinking: "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race". He wrote this regarding a 2007 decision striking down school desegregation programs in Seattle and Kentucky. If the issues of race and education or poverty were that simple!

The way this court has rendered decisions harkened back to a time I thought was long past. Maybe you can remember the Dread Scott Decision during slavery or Plessey v Ferguson which ushered in what history has recorded as “Separate but Equal”. If that does not ring a bell how about calling it as it was –Apartheid American style.

I am going to go out on a limb and say the fate of Obamacare is not as dire as it appears at this moment. I think it is possible, even likely, that the Court will uphold part if not all of the legislation because the Court is keenly aware of public opinion and hopeful still has a bit of sanity. With the public’s trust of the judicial branch tying a historic low of 63 percent, down thirteen points from just two years ago, it’s doubtful that Roberts—who has wanted to be seen as an impartial “umpire”—would choose to imperil that trust even further with a ruling that would place the Court squarely in the election-season crossfire.

Overturning Obamacare would be a political decision but this is the court that thinks – corporations are people. With that said, the other two issues – all bets are off! And that’s my Thought Provoking Perspective…

http://johntwills.com

The New Miranda Rules

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that criminal suspects should speak up if they want to preserve their right to remain silent. This is a stunning shift concerning the latest test of the court's famous Miranda rule and shifts the burden to suspects to invoke their right to refuse questioning. If we can go back to 1966 and remember why the original decision was rendered, it is hard to understand the court’s reasoning today. When we consider law enforcement practices prior Miranda it was necessary for the court to require law enforcement to make what became known as the Miranda rights part of routine police procedures to ensure that suspects were informed of their rights. This decision is widely viewed as a huge setback to citizen’s rights.

This is a drastic shift from the spirit of the 1966 law that says; “statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination prior to questioning by police, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them”.

The newest member of the court, Justice Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion that "Today's decision turns Miranda upside down," while accusing the majority of casting aside judicial restraint. "Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent … which, counter intuitively, requires them to speak. At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so."

Justice Sotomayor, a former prosecutor who some had speculated might be less protective of the rights of suspects than other liberals on the court, called the decision "a substantial retreat from the protection against compelled self-incrimination." She was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy who wrote for the majority said, "Where the prosecution shows that a Miranda warning was given and that it was understood by the accused, an accused's uncoerced statement establishes an implied waiver of the right to remain silent.” Kennedy was joined, of course, by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

A little history about the landmark Miranda v. Arizona 384 U.S. 436 (1966) case with its 5–4 decision of the 1966 Court, which revolutionized the way the nation's police departments were required to interrogate arrested persons by informing a suspect of their rights under the ruling, termed a Miranda warning. The Miranda decision was widely criticized when it came down, as many felt it was unfair to inform suspected criminals of their rights, as outlined in the decision.

President Nixon and many conservatives denounced Miranda for undermining the efficiency of the police arguing that the ruling would contribute to an increase in crime. Nixon, upon becoming President, promised to appoint judges who would be “strict constructionists” and who would exercise judicial restraint. Many supporters of law enforcement were angered by the decision's negative view of police officers. The federal Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 purported to overrule Miranda for federal criminal cases and restore the "totality of the circumstances" test that had prevailed prior to Miranda.

The validity of this provision of the law, which is still codified at 18 U.S. Code 3501, was not ruled on for another 30 years because the Justice Department never attempted to rely on it to support the introduction of a confession into evidence at any criminal trial. Miranda was undermined by several subsequent decisions which seemed to grant several exceptions to the "Miranda warnings," undermining its claim to be a necessary corollary of the Fifth Amendment.

In this case the court ruled 5 to 4 that a Michigan defendant who incriminated himself in a fatal shooting by saying one word after nearly three hours of questioning had given up his right to silence, and that the statement could be used against him at trial. In the case before the court, suspect Van Chester Thompkins was read his rights and, at police request, repeated some of them out loud. But he did not sign an offered waiver of the right, and he did not acknowledge that he was willing to talk. Nor did he say that he wanted the questioning to stop.

Detectives persisted in what one called mostly a "monologue" for about two hours and 45 minutes, until one asked Thompkins whether he believed in God. Then a follow up question - "Do you pray to God to forgive you for shooting that boy down?" Thompkins answered "Yes" and looked away. The statement was used against him, along with other testimony, and Thompkins was convicted of killing Samuel Morris outside a strip mall in Southfield, Mich.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit said that Thompkins's prolonged silence "offered a clear and unequivocal message to the officers that Thompkins did not wish to waive his rights." "The fact that Thompkins made a statement about three hours after receiving a Miranda warning does not overcome the fact that he engaged in a course of conduct indicating waiver." Today the conservative arm of the Supreme Court disagreed making the case a president and now law. This decision, I believe will have a far reaching dangerous impact on a society that is becoming largely more diverse.

I am not a lawyer but I was around prior to the 1966 ruling and I will tell you that there was significant reason to establish that law because of what police departments were able to do to suspects in custody, and get away with it. So I would encourage you to advise you children and young people how to conduct themselves once they have been detained by police, and to be aware yourself that anything you say can and will be used against you.

The John T. Wills Chronicles

Brown v Board of Education - fifty five years later

This year we will celebrate the fifty fifth anniversary of the landmark Brown v Board of Education case successfully argued before Supreme Court of the United States. It is also very appropriate at this time to also take this opportunity to recognize the skill of the late great Thurgood Marshall who brilliantly won this case and more than fifty other cases before the Supreme Court - winning all of them.

This case changed the face of America in away unlike any other decision. The Brown case, as it is known, was not the first such case regarding civil rights argued before the court it is worth mentioning. It was just the most significant of what some would say was the final battle in the courts that had been fought by African American parents since 1849, which started with Roberts v. City of Boston, Massachusetts. It is also important to note that Kansas was the site of eleven such cases spanning from 1881 to 1949.

The case was named after Oliver Brown one of 200 plaintiffs. The Brown case was initiated and organized by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) leadership who recruited African American parents in Topeka, Kansas for a class action suit against the local school board. The Supreme Court combined five cases under the heading of Brown v. Board of Education: Delaware, Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. The ultimate goal sought by the NAACP was to end the practice of “separate but equal” throughout every segment of society, including public transportation, dining facilities, public schools and all forms of public accommodations.

The Brown Supreme Court ruling determined racial segregation in public education was unconstitutional in Brown I, the first opinion. The court’s implementation mandate of "with all deliberate speed" in 1955 is known as Brown II. In 1979, twenty five years later, there was a Brown III because Topeka was not living up to the earlier Supreme Court ruling, which resulted in Topeka Public Schools building three magnet schools to comply with the court's findings. As had been the case since Homer Plessy, the subject in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 when the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a Louisiana law mandating separate but equal accommodations for blacks and whites on intrastate railroads was constitutional. This decision provided the legal foundation to justify many other actions by state and local governments to socially separate blacks and whites.

Now that I have provided some history related to the case let me add my commentary. It has been said that as sure as things change they remain the same. First, it took 60 year to overturn Plessy with Brown and it took “with all deliberate speed” 13 years for integration to begin fully. During this period of time from 1954 to 1967 Governors blocked school entrances and actually closed schools rather than comply with the law of the land. I am not going to touch on the violence that caused President’s to send the US Army and National Guard troops to schools in order to protect the safety of those the ruling was intended benefit as a result of the Brown decision.

Since then and over time many scams have been devised to disenfranchise minorities and African Americans in particular – need I only remind you of “No Child Left Behind”. This brings us to where we are today. Schools are equally as segregated, poorly funded, dilapidated facilities, and a police presence to save, often times, the kids from themselves. The dropout rate averages 2 to 1. These are just a few issues and by any measure of academic standards or common sense – is a failure.

Let’s make sure we understand that public education was not created to develop minds rather it was intended to simply teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. It was created to maintain a permanent underclass. Now maybe the word “class” is the operative word in all of this – the haves have and the have not’s will have not. So as sure as things change they remain the same. That is why it is imperative for us to celebrate this milestone and continue to the struggle as the ghosts of so many who died for the principle that “education is the single most important ingredient necessary to neutralize those forces that breed poverty and despair”.

JUST A SEASON

Grand Ol’ Party v Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor = WTF

I am going to start by saying I am appalled by the actions of the Grand Ol’ Party’s treatment of Supreme Court Nominee Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Since I’ve lived through segregation, Jim Crow and have experienced racism - I should not be surprised. Actually, this behavior was reminiscent of days long past when the likes of Strom Thurmond and George Wallace espoused their vision of America. The tone used against the justice during nominating hearings was such a sad commentary on the part of these “Senators” and most right wing misfits in general. I suppose the reasons for this behavior, other than the obvious, is simple: President Obama, the first black president picked her and that she is the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robe of a justice on the high court.

Many people of this ideology, who are practicing identity politics (race baiting), have attacked Judge Sonia Sotomayor personally, professionally, and in a sense all minorities. Of course the GOP’s main issue is the 10 year old remark: a Latina’s “experiences as women and people of color" are factors that "should affect our decisions, can make better decisions than a white man”. This remark caused white men/people to call her a reverse racist but it seems to me that they are afraid of extinction as a result of this new day in American politics. As an example or maybe to prove their point they trotted out the firemen who had their reverse discrimination claim rejected by Sotomayor and two other appeals court judges. The Supreme Court overturned that ruling late last month.

Some of the words, code words, used to belittle and disrespect her were “militant, a welfare queen, racist, liberal, activist, left-wing, affirmative action baby, temperamental, nasty, and a bully”. In addition, they believe she would bring her biases and a political agenda to the bench supporting minority positions that conservatives like to use to arouse their base. They even went so far as to use Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. to beat up on her. One Senator went so far as to say during the confirmation hearing – “you got lots to splain” mocking a famous Cuban American comedian. But, the worst and most disrespectful of their insults was calling her “unqualified”.

Just a little about Judge Sonia Sotomayor who has, arguably, lived the American dream. Born to a Puerto Rican family and grew up in a public housing project in the South Bronx. Her father was a factory worker with a third-grade education, and died when Sotomayor was nine years old. Her mother raised Sotomayor while working as a nurse. After her father's death, Sotomayor reportedly turned to books for solace, and she says it was her love of Nancy Drew books that ultimately led her to the law.

Judge Sotomayor graduated as valedictorian of her class at Blessed Sacrament and at Cardinal Spellman High School in New York. She won a scholarship to Princeton where she continued to excel, graduating summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. She was a co-recipient of the M. Taylor Pyne Prize, the highest honor Princeton awards to an undergraduate. At Yale Law School, Judge Sotomayor served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal and as managing editor of the Yale Studies in World Public Order.
After law school, Sotomayor spent five years as Assistant District Attorney in Manhattan, trying dozens of criminal cases. Robert Morgenthau chose her for the position and described her as a "fearless and effective prosecutor." She entered private practice in 1984, working as an international corporate litigator handling cases involving everything from intellectual property to banking, real estate and contract law.

In 1998, Judge Sotomayor became the first Latina to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, one of the most demanding circuits in the country. Serving as a federal judge for 17 years, the last 11 on the appeals court in New York, participating in over 3000 panel decisions and authored roughly 400 opinions, handling difficult issues of constitutional law, to complex procedural matters, to lawsuits involving complicated business organizations. If, no when, confirmed to the highest court in the land, Judge Sotomayor would bring more federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice in 100 years, and more overall judicial experience than anyone confirmed for the Court in the past 70 years... Enough said, I could go on an on. UNQUALIFIED???

Frankly, I am vexed because the last eight years of gangsta politics, all the lies and bad decisions about Iraq, W.M.D.’s, domestic surveillance, looted the treasury, torture, rendition and secret hit squads, Katrina, running the economy into the ground, use of fear, paranoia and revenge. Not to mention the only minority faces surrounding the Grand Ol’ Party were people who reminded me of my uncle whose name was Tom. Mind you, this is the same group that championed a governor from the wilderness who embodied the definition of irrational, volatile and a scattered country-music queen without the music as the their savior. Let’s not forget that it was the last Grand Ol’ Party leader who refused, would not accept, and did not attend any of the NAACP annual conferences – that would be eight. WTF!!!

Lastly, of the 111 Supreme Court Justices to date - all have been white men but four. So I say having a court as well as all areas of government representing the faces of America is America the beautiful. God Bless America…

Brown v Board of Education fifty five years later

This year we will celebrate the fifty fifth anniversary of the landmark Brown v Board of Education case successfully argued before Supreme Court of the United States. It is also very appropriate at this time to also take this opportunity to recognize the skill of the late great Thurgood Marshall who brilliantly won this case and more than fifty other cases before the Supreme Court - winning all of them.

This case changed the face of America in away unlike any other decision. The Brown case, as it is known, was not the first such case regarding civil rights argued before the court it is worth mentioning. It was just the most significant of what some would say was the final battle in the courts that had been fought by African American parents since 1849, which started with Roberts v. City of Boston, Massachusetts. It is also important to note that Kansas was the site of eleven such cases spanning from 1881 to 1949.

The case was named after Oliver Brown one of 200 plaintiffs. The Brown case was initiated and organized by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) leadership who recruited African American parents in Topeka, Kansas for a class action suit against the local school board. The Supreme Court combined five cases under the heading of Brown v. Board of Education: Delaware, Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. The ultimate goal sought by the NAACP was to end the practice of “separate but equal” throughout every segment of society, including public transportation, dining facilities, public schools and all forms of public accommodations.

The Brown Supreme Court ruling determined racial segregation in public education was unconstitutional in Brown I, the first opinion. The court’s implementation mandate of "with all deliberate speed" in 1955 is known as Brown II. In 1979, twenty five years later, there was a Brown III because Topeka was not living up to the earlier Supreme Court ruling, which resulted in Topeka Public Schools building three magnet schools to comply with the court's findings. As had been the case since Homer Plessy, the subject in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 when the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a Louisiana law mandating separate but equal accommodations for blacks and whites on intrastate railroads was constitutional. This decision provided the legal foundation to justify many other actions by state and local governments to socially separate blacks and whites.

Now that I have provided some history related to the case let me add my commentary. It has been said that as sure as things change they remain the same. First, it took 60 year to overturn Plessy with Brown and it took “with all deliberate speed” 13 years for integration to begin fully. During this period of time from 1954 to 1967 Governors blocked school entrances and actually closed schools rather than comply with the law of the land. I am not going to touch on the violence that caused President’s to send the US Army and National Guard troops to schools in order to protect the safety of those the ruling was intended benefit as a result of the Brown decision.

Since then and over time many scams have been devised to disenfranchise minorities and African Americans in particular – need I only remind you of “No Child Left Behind”. This brings us to where we are today. Schools are equally as segregated, poorly funded, dilapidated facilities, and a police presence to save, often times, the kids from themselves. The dropout rate averages 2 to 1. These are just a few issues and by any measure of academic standards or common sense – is a failure.

Let’s make sure we understand that public education was not created to develop minds rather it was intended to simply teach reading, writing, and arithmetic. It was created to maintain a permanent underclass. Now maybe the word “class” is the operative word in all of this – the haves have and the have not’s will have not. So as sure as things change they remain the same. That is why it is imperative for us to celebrate this milestone and continue to the struggle as the ghosts of so many who died for the principle that “education is the single most important ingredient necessary to neutralize those forces that breed poverty and despair”.

What do you think???