Scruit

My father-in-law has been having trouble with his lymph nodes for a couple of years and he just recently found out that he may have cancer. He's going for a biopsy in a couple of days to find out for sure.

One of the comments on the news report is "This could easily happen to you." Well, I have to say that 11 outstanding warrants a 5 prior DUI's does not "easily happen" to anyone. You gotta WORK at being that much of a loser.

I had already assumed it was Hamilton County and checked the state crash report database for fatal accidents on St.P's day. Didn't find it. The state must not be done with the investigation.

If they passed a uk-style "No interactiing with handheld electonic devices" law here (rather than simply a texting/talking ban) then the interlock would become illegal.

I think the reference is to a short-lived show called Keenan and Kel? One of them was obsessed with orange soda. That show is too new for me to have appreciated it. When I was growing up Thundercats and He-Man were the newest shows on the TV.

There was a case in Dublin a few months back where the black box data from one car was obtained after a crash where high speed was suspected as a major factor and there was a vehicle occupant that suffered life-threatening injuries. The police report stated that the EDR was downloaded pursuant to a court subpoena.

While driving? Or do you have to pull over? It would be unsafe if you have to pull over on a freeway. I'd say the interlock should only request a retest if one of the doors opens.

Any time someone runs from an accident I'm glad they got him. Having said that, who was the first to leave their vehicle? That's a disorderly conduct charge. Who was first to use/threaten violence? There's a charge. Did the car aim fro the rider or did the rider get in the car's way as the driver was leaving? Aiming for the rider would be an aggravated or felonious assault. If the rider intentionally got in the way of the driver while the driver was trying to break off the confrontation could create an opening for a self-defense claim - however the rider would have to have dome kind of weapon and the driver would have to be blocked in (couldn't go the other way) Any self-defense claim would likely be scuppered by the driver nto reporting the incident to the police himself. Road rage is not worth it. Just like trying to defend your right-of-way against a car... You may be right - you may even be dead right.

That same bill declares that the data contained in the Event Data Recorder belongs to the vehicle owner or lessee, but is subject to court subpoena in the event of a medical event or fatal accident investigation. Oh, and 64% of 2005 model year cars have them already. Senate Passes Bill Requiring "Black Boxes" for New Cars in 2015, But Many Cars Already Have One

Which county was the crash in?

Same goes for if she can't spell "soda".

What are they sitting on?

But... Linux runs on PCs, no? The "PC" category should be "Windows"

She doesn't need to pull her pants down to go bathroom?

Can't comment on that. But she definitely had a face like a bulldog licking piss off a thistle.

Can't comment on the sex, but she had a face like a hippo's ass if that answers your question.

I thought colonel mustard did it with the candlestick in the library? Or am I confusing this with my pr0n collection?

I don't hink he's saying it is - I think he's saying that you simply cannot predict any case for sure. OJ went free because the investigation was botched. And they told the jury that "the killer wore *these* gloves" - but the gloves didn't fit OJ.

I'm hoping that the right decision is made. I haven't made up my mind on if he's innocent or guilty. I will say, though, that the investigator saying they don't know who started the fight is huge. They are going to try to convince a jury that Zimmerman is responsible for the violent confrontation yet they are on record as saying they don't know if Zimmerman started it. What are they going to tell the jury then? If they are basing their 2nd degree murder charge on the fact that Zimmerman followed Martin to talk to him then they are smoking crack. Verbal confrontations don't justify a violent response. They need to identify who started the fight. But they don't know who started the fight. I've been a fence-sitter since day one, but I'm struggling to see how the prosecution will meet its burden of proof.

Hmmm... Compare that pic with the "enhanced" cctv images showing what the video enhancer claims was contusions on Zimmerman's head. Is this the same person with the same injuries? If so, then things are looking very dicey for the prosecution.

Zimmerman got bond. $150k. He's still in jail now while they finalize the details of the bond that would have GPS monitoring of his location, but may allow him to be outside of Florida for his safety. RE: Injury photo... I wonder how the Martin family attorney will respond to that - they had already stated that the lack of visible injury in the police booking cctv video was proof that he was not attacked. If this image is as is purports to be then will they have to concede that Zimmerman was attacked by Martin? (Of course these injuries could be a result of Martin being attacked first and defending him self successfully. What is extremely telling are these two quotes: and Again - if there was an injury then there will be police photographs that the court will trust. The picture included above could be of anyone. If there ARE *proven* injuries then the only way the prosecution could have evidence that indicates Martin did not slam Zimmermans' head into the ground would be to assert that the injuries were from something else - such as self-inflicted injuries as part of an attempted cover-up.

Ruger M77 Mk.II. in 22-250.

Protection and varmints. If it was about the cool factor I'd be taking out groundhogs with a .50BMG

Self Defense is an Affirmative Defense ("Yes I did it but here is my justification...") It CAN be argued in front of a judge, but a prosecutor would be wasting everyone's time taking a case to trial when it is clearly a valid self-defense case. In this case the prosecutor believes the family's version of events 100%, stating that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation that resulted in the shooting. If they truly believe that they they are duty-bound to take it to trial. Zimmerman would have to show that any confrontation he initiated was ended and that a second confrontation was started by Martin at a time and/or place that was sufficiently removed from the first confrontation that a reasonable person would have had the opportunity to calm down and depart. The standard of evidence is different for an Affirmative Defense - it is by preponderance of the evidence (It was probably self-defense) rather than beyond reasonable doubt (No reasonable person would disagree). Without a doubt, this trial will hinge on the "second confrontation" theory. Was there only one confrontation or two? Who was the first to use or threaten violence? I can walk up to anyone I want to and start talking to them. I can follow them around all day long as long as I stay in places I am allowed to be. Following someone does not justify them using violence against me - so the prosecution will have to show that Zimmerman not only followed Martin but actually put Martin in enough fear of his own safety that Martin was justified in using self defense against Zimmerman. Some argue that that Zimmerman following Martin disqualifies Zimmerman from self defense (during the encounter that resulted from being followed). Some also that the same goes for Martin - if there WAS a second confrontation where Martin turned around and followed Zimmerman then Zimmerman is the victim and Martin can no longer claim self-defense. Both these theories are flawed in that they assume following someone justifies violence. There has to be a threat or use of violence to justify self-defense. Did Zimmerman "run after Martin with a gun in hand" as widely assumed by people not connected with the case? That would certainly be a threat that would put Zimmerman as aggressor and Martin as victim. Did Zimmerman simply follow Martin and Martin overreacted, sought out Zimmerman down after Zimmerman left the area, then attacked Zimmerman with no additional provocation? Was there only one confrontation but Martin overreacted to being followed by using violence? All this will come out in the trial. I *do* have a problem with those folks who argue that trials should be used in place of investigations. The investigation is supposed to determine if a trial is warranted.

In Dublin today there was a funeral procession for Capt. Nicholas Rozanski. About 50 of use from my work stood outside along Post Road to pay out respects for his final journey. The guy stood next to me talked through the whole thing. "I bet that jeep gets bad gas mileage" etc. And he is a born citizen, ex-military. He left before the end of the procession because it was taking too long. I've never been in the military, and I wasn't born in this country, but I sure as hell know that this man risked, and gave his life for his country and the least I could do is stand still and shut the fuck up for 30 minutes.