Trayvon Martin, Michael Lindsey: Different Colored Skin, the Same Good Old Boy System.

The Trayvon Martin issue has captured national attention, and the outrage is as strong in the white community as it is in the black community. Many whites are outraged that there is no charge in this crime, while others are in a tizzy because they say black on white crime is not considered a hate crime when racial slurs are used, and they are right about that, but most of the black on white crime that has been passed around are crimes that have been prosecuted.  The issue here is that Zimmerman is not being prosecuted.

     Zimmerman's story did not add up to police, and police wanted to make an arrest, but it was put on hold by a judge. New evidence brings to light the witnesses’ account of what happened, and it does not reflect the story Zimmerman is telling.  http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/29/trayvon-martin-witness-casts-doubt-on-shooters-self-defense-claims/

It is my personal belief there should not be a hate crimes bill because all it does is cause division.  Crime is crime, it does not matter the color of the victim.  I happen to think if you kill someone you hated them at the moment, and the reason why you killed them is irrelevant to the fact of murder. If you committed a crime, you should be charged, and it should be sorted out by a jury.  

     Zimmerman is claiming he is covered under the stand your ground, "Castle Doctrine" which states that if you feel your life or the life of someone close to you is threatened you have no duty to retreat.  Zimmerman is using  Castle Doctrine to escape prosecution, but Castle Doctrine also states if you have a lawful right to be somewhere and you feel threatened, you do not have a duty to retreat, and it is obvious that Trayvon Martin had a right to be where he was, and  had no duty to retreat when he felt threatened by Zimmerman, and it is obvious from his phone conversation with his girlfriend he felt threatened, and he also had the right to do what he felt he need to do in order to feel safe.  So here we have a catch 22 when it comes to "Castle Doctrine".

     Castle Doctrine is being used more and more as a defense for what is cold blooded murder, and it is also allowing people that commit crimes to escape accountability for their actions. I'm not saying Zimmerman is guilty or innocent, I'm saying his guilt or innocence needs to be determined in a court of law.

     Most young men have been in a fight at some point in their life.  So let me give you something to think about.  If your son and another boy get into a fist fight, and your son is getting the best of his opponent, does that give his opponent the right to shoot and kill him?  If you, as a parent, are watching the fight, and the other boy is winning, does that give you the right to shoot and kill the other boy or if your son is getting the best of his opponent, does that give the other parent the right to shoot and kill your son? 

     If your son was white, and he was walking through a gated community wearing a hoodie, and a man followed him in his car at night, and then started following him on foot, and your son started running, and the man continued to follow him, and your son decided to stop running, and a fight broke out, and the man shot and killed your son, would you think it was justified? The fact is, most children would be afraid no matter who was following them, I know I would have been, and I am an adult.

     Would you think you at least would have the right to see a trial to determine whether it was justified or not.  I can assure you I would.  I would want to see a jury determine the truth about what happened. Not the media, not the KKK, not the NAACP, but a fair and impartial jury made up of your peers.

    More often than not, whether there is a charge or not, depends on who you know, and who you are friends with.  If there was nothing to hide, then why was the boy’s body held in the morgue for three days before anyone tried to contact his family? Why does there appear to be no blood or serious injury on Zimmerman?  If he was hurt so bad, as to fear for his life, why was there no hospital visit? Why could you hear someone yell in the background on the call Martin made to his girlfriend right before it sounded like someone hit Martin and his phone went dead? Why was there no bruising on Martin's hands if he was involved in such a horrific fight as portrayed by Zimmerman?  These are all questions any reasonable person should ask, and questions we all deserve to hear answers to.

     Zimmerman's father is a former judge, and Zimmerman was a familiar name to the police, had he been someone they did not know, there would probably have been an arrest, and a charge of manslaughter, at the very least. This is just another example of how the Castle Doctrine is used to protect the connected in society from prosecution, while a poor man would have been stripped of his rights and hauled before a jury.

     Another case in Mississippi that should have been covered by "Castle Doctrine" is the Michael Lindsey case in Pearl, Mississippi.  Let’s contrast the Trayvon Martin case and the Michael Lindsey case for a moment.

     Michael Lindsey was getting ready for bed when he heard a commotion coming down the street; he stuck his head out to see what was going on.  It was a neighbor that had broken the window out of Mike's vehicle earlier in the day.  Mike retaliated by breaking the window out of his vehicle.

     Lindsey tried to calm the guy down, and told him, lets talk about this.  The guy did not want to talk, he wanted to fight.  He took a beer bottle from his back pocket and broke it over Michael Lindsey's head, and then proceeded to grind the broken beer bottle into Lindsey's face that required 50 stitches, broke two of his ribs (Lindsey thought he had been stabbed) and partially collapsed two of Lindsey's lungs, and pulled huge chunks of Lindsey's hair out with the clumps falling on Lindsey's doorstep.  

     Lindsey begged and pleaded for someone to call an ambulance.  When he tried to break free, his attacker ripped off his shirt as he was trying to get into his house.  He made it in his house with blood streaming into his eyes, his contacts out ground out by the beer bottle; he glanced outside and saw his attacker with his arm around his roommate, and thought he was attacking him.  He saw a knife lying on the kitchen counter, grabbed it and went outside and stabbed his attacker once to disable him, and hoped he would call an ambulance, because Lindsey felt he was bleeding to death.  His attacker died from internal injuries. 

     Lindsey was listed by emergency personnel as a priority one life threat, and they thought he had been shot because of the amount of blood he lost.

     Lindsey, according to law, should have been covered under "Castle Doctrine", but he wasn't.  Instead he was charged with murder, and because he had a felony conviction over 30 years old, was threatened under the habitual offender law with life in prison unless he accepted a plea deal for manslaughter.  He was given the maximum sentence, and is now in prison serving a twenty year sentence.

     If Michael Lindsey, with life threatening injuries, was not covered under "Castle Doctrine", why should Zimmerman, who did not even need to go to the hospital, be covered? 

     Regardless of whose side you are picking on this issue, don't you think it at least deserves to go before a jury and be heard?

     These two cases not only highlight the inequities of "Castle Doctrine", but they also highlight the inequities in our justice system.  

     Who is charged and who is not, more often has more to do with a person's connection's in society; their connections to law enforcement, their standing in society, how much money they have, or the color of their skin.

     We have watched as high profile killers go unpunished, and people like Lindsay Lohan, who is in and out of trouble, always escapes the same punishment those without connections receive for the same crime. 

     Whites and blacks have a lot more in common on this issue than race, and we all need to come together to demand better from our justice system.  As long as we allow the news media, and others, to divide us by race, we will be divided.  We are one nation, under God, and it is time for us to come together and demand justice and fairness in our court systems, regardless of the color of ones skin, social or economic status.

     It is also time for the people to demand that, if the state is going to provide paid expert witnesses against a defendant, they should also have to provide a paid expert for the defense, or else it is not a fair, impartial trial, because the prosecution's expert witness never goes against what the police say, they say what they are paid to say, and many times it is refuted by other experts, but the defendant does not have the money and resources the state has to hire those experts.

     Maybe it is time to repeal the Castle Doctrine and the hate crimes bill, and get back to the basics of our judicial system.

Voice experts have determined that the voice heard in the video below, crying for help, could not be Zimmerman's.  That leads me to the conclusion they belong to Trayvon Martin. 

Heartbreaking to listen to.  I just hope justice prevails.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/31/trayvon-martin-shooting-911-call-screams_n_1394224.html?ref=mostpopular

You can read more on the Michael Lindsey case at  http://muddymississippijustice.blogspot.com/

  

Innocent Man to be Put to Death in Mississippi? The Jeffrey Havard Story.

Jeffrey Havard was 22 years old, working on an oil rig, and doing very well in life.  He had plans of going to college,  and making an ever better life for himself, but all of that changed when Jeffrey did something most of us parents have done many times.  Give a baby a bath.

The day 6 month old Cloe Madison Britt passed away, Jeffrey's girlfriend, Rebecca Britt,  picked Cloe up from the day care, and rode around with her for a few hours. When she finally made it home, Jeffrey gave her some money, and sent her to buy some groceries, while he watched the baby.  She bought groceries and then returned home for a few hours. Rebecca then left the house and went to the local video store to rent a video for them to watch at home.

What happened next would change both of their lives forever, and result in the death of a precious 6 month old baby girl, Chloe Madison Britt, and put an innocent man on death row. 

According to Paige Sullivan, Jeffrey Havard's sister, Jeffrey had dated quite a few girls that had children, and had never had a problem.  When Jeffrey met Rebecca,  she and little Cloe were living in a Meth house (the mother denies this), and although they had not been dating long, Jeffrey was ready to settle down, so he moved Rebecca and baby Cloe  in with him, and gave the baby her own room.

A month before the accident, Jeffrey took Rebecca and Cloe to Tennessee with him to visit his sister Paige and her newborn baby, and celebrate New Years with his family.

"He wanted to make a family video of all of us celebrating New Years together, and he brought Rebecca and Cloe along", says Paige.  "The first thing I noticed was that Rebecca was really stressed, uptight and fidgety.  They were at my house for two days, and Jeffrey primarily took care of the baby; changing her diaper and such, and Rebecca did very little, and acted like she didn't want the baby around.  The baby seemed a little sick, and Rebecca gave her some benadryl".

"When we got ready to do fireworks, Cloe, started crying.  Jeffrey took her, and sang to her, as he walked her back and forth to calm her.  He then laid down on the couch with her, put her on his chest, and they both ended up going to sleep.  As long as Jeffrey was holding Cloe, she wouldn't cry." says Paige.  Cloe was just an adorable baby."

"Imagine my shock", says Paige,  "When Rebecca Britt, Cloe's mother, looked at me and told me she and Jeff wanted to go to the mountains, and leave 5 month old Cloe with me. I had just given birth to my second child, who was only a day old. Jeff insisted on keeping Cloe with them, and said there was no reason anyone should keep Cloe, that she could just go with them."

"Jeffrey, Cloe and Rebecca left my house and went to get a hotel room in Chattanooga to watch the fireworks from up on the mountain, and that was the last time I would see my brother outside a prison cell."

After Jeffrey and Rebecca returned to their home, according to Paige, Jeffrey was giving the baby a bath inside the garden tub, inside another baby tub.  As Jeffrey was bringing her out to dry her off, 26 pound Cloe wiggled and slipped from Jeffrey's hands, and hit the toilet tank with her head.  She gasped for a minute, but seemed fine so he put lotion on her, patted her, and loved her all up for a few minutes, and put her to bed. When Rebecca returned, about half an hour later, and went to check on Cloe, she found her blue, but still breathing.  Rebecca tried to give her CPR.

Jeffrey and Rebecca rushed little Cloe to the hospital where Rebecca's mother worked.  She or one of the other nurses noticed baby Cloe's anus was dilated.

This started the investigation and charges against Jeffrey for rape and murder.

Police went in and searched the home and found sheets in a basket near the washing machine.  Jeffrey told them he was washing the sheets because they were dirty and had food on them.  The police took the sheets into evidence and presented them in the court room to show what a vile person Jeffrey was, insinuating the stains were semen, and the baby died from Shaken Baby Syndrome, in the process of a rape.  However, when the lab did test on the sheets the stains came back from the lab as Gerber bananas.

Although Jeffrey could afford a lawyer, he said he was innocent, and wasn't worried, so he let a public defender represent him.  (After trial the public defender was arrested for Cocaine possession.)

Paige says, "Jeff had no defense what so ever, not even an objection, and none of the witnesses on his behalf were allowed to testify. He had a public defender, and that is where it all went wrong. no criminal record.  He was a very loving and giving person."

Paige says, "The hospital said the baby's anus was dilated, but there was no tearing, no blood, no DNA evidence in the swabs they took.  My brother ask for a lie detector test, but was denied.  Although rape charges against Jeffrey were dropped, because there was no evidence a rape occurred, they brought it up at trial, and used it against him, and  he was given a capital offense, because they said he committed murder in the process of another crime, rape, and as a result Cloe died from shaken baby syndrome.  There was a 1 centimeter bruise, on the baby's leg on the back side, they wanted Jeffrey to explain how the bruise got there."

The family of Jeffrey requested James Lauricson of Alabama to look over the autopsy, and he found absolutely no evidence of a sexual assault or Shaken Baby Syndrome.

In addition to his findings,  The Clarion Ledger of Jackson Mississippi requested world-renowned pathologist Dr. Michael Baden of New York city to review the autopsy report filed by Mississippi Medical Examiner, Steven Hayne, and Baden said he does not believe a sexual assault or a murder took place. That there was no shaken baby syndrome and the bruising on the head and other areas is totally consistent with the baby having been dropped.

Baden also stated that a dilated anus can occur during a coma or death, and Cloe's eyes were fixed and dilated when she arrived at the hospital.  Since the trial, Hayne has acknowledged in a sworn statement that dilated anal sphincters also may be seen on a person prior to death without significant brain function.

"My brother told me when I visited him, "I just want my freedom back, if they can just admit they were wrong, that is all I want, I don't care about money or anything else."

No defense, no objections, an uncertified medical examiner; the same medical examiner that has testified in Mike Lynzy's case that the cut marks on the man's hands were from defensive wounds, totally ignoring the fact that the guy had just busted a beer bottle over Mike Lynzy's head and ground it into his face, the same medical examiner that has sent at least three Mississippi men to death row that were later proven innocent, the same medical examiner that does three times as many autopsy's  as is recommended, and some say testifies to whatever the police tell him happened.

 "A CSI investigator said he did not see any evidence of sexual abuse either, and got very upset when he saw the autopsy report. A blind man can see my brother is innocent, and this is ridiculous.  If they have done this to my brother, they have done it to many others", says Paige.

" It was really sick, how they did things, and things they said in court with no evidence."

"This was the first capital murder trial in Natchez Mississippi in ten years.  The public defender had never tried a capital murder defense before.  It was all about the good old boy system, it didn't matter what the evidence said, they decided he was guilty without any evidence and proceeded that way.  The public defender that represented Jeff was busted for cocaine right after the trial, and the mother of the childs' brother was busted for his meth lab."

"The only witness against him were the people at the hospital, the grandmother and others that were with the baby at the hospital. People drop kids and all kinds of accidents happen.  The garden tub has two steps and the toilet is right there, and they are so close, and slippery, and she was a large baby, and her wiggling around, it all happened so fast.  The jury was prejudiced by the rape that was brought up that didnt' occur." says Paige.

In this case absolutely no evidence exist to show that Havard sexually abused Cloe or murdered her.

If Jeffrey's post-conviction appeal is denied by the Supreme court, he will most assuredly be put to death by execution. One appeal has been denied on ineffective assistant of council, the constitution just guarantees you can be represented by a lawyer, it doesn't mean he has to be a good lawyer, and if he fails to object when he should, that is just your tough luck.

When I first looked at this case I read the appeal, and based on what I read about the sheets, I was hesitant to write this story, just the evidence that was presented in the appeal against him, like the sheets being changed, made me leery. However, once I heard the rest of the evidence, or lack of evidence, I changed my mind. If a two year old child was raped by a grown man, I would think there would be sever internal injuries,  and there were not, and there is absolutely no evidence that a rape or murder occurred.

Cases like this have made me against the death penalty. I tend to agree with John Adams, one of the founders of our great constitution, "It is better that three guilty men go free than one innocent man be sent to prison."

To sentence a man to death without any evidence of guilt, a lousy public defender, and junk science, should turn the stomach of any human being that values life. All of us, as citizens of this great country, should demand better from our court systems.  If we do nothing, then the blood of innocent men is on our hands, as well as the hands of any person in our judicial system that withholds evidence of innocence, or denies turning over a ruling of guilty, when there is evidence that says otherwise.

You never know, it could be you on trial, totally innocent and sentenced to death.

For more on this story check out The Clarion Ledger's link to the story on Jeffrey below, and Jeffrey's website, where you can sign a petition

 Join me on tsū, they are sharing social revenues with all of us #tsunation https://www.tsu.co/Sweettea2u

Jeffrey's appeal has been denied, you can read about it further at:  http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20120314/NEWS/203140329

http://www.clarionledger.com/article/20120130/NEWS/201300323/Testimony-death-row-inmate-s-trial-contradicted?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7C


http://www.mississippi-justice.com/Jeffrey_Havard.html