Restraining Order Form 2012: Fill & Download for Free

Citizenship in a democratic republic brings with it the obligation to monitor, and express concerns with regard to, the actions of government representatives. However, we must be cognizant of the potential for tyranny of an uninformed populace, and the potential for demagoguery. As Eagleman[i] (2011) began his book on human cognition: “Man is equally incapable of seeing the nothingness from which he emerges and the infinity in which he is engulfed.—Blaise Pascal, Pensées.” And, he also stated, “Just because you believe something to be true, just because you know it’s true, that doesn’t mean it is true” (p. 53).Multiple issues were raised following the unfortunate death of Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman.Was racism involved?Was there political pressure to seek prosecution?Was the confrontation asymmetrical—man against boy?Is there evidence supporting self-defense on the part of Zimmerman?Did the “Stand Your Ground” law precipitate this incident?Was Zimmerman a rogue, self-appointed vigilante?Why does Racial Profiling exist?This essay does not attempt to answer all questions. However, it is an attempt to counsel for consideration of what can be determined and how it can contribute to an understanding of a verdict of not guilty; which is not an unequivocal judgment of innocence, but an acknowledgment that there is reasonable doubt as to guilt. What is needed is a dispassionate and objective view.Moreover, statistics (as unreliable as they sometimes are) indicate that racial profiling is not the primary threat to young Black men, that position is held by young Black men. The challenge is what can we do about that?Was racism involved?Zimmerman’s maternal grandmother, who helped raise him,was the son of an Afro-Peruvian great-grandfather. In 2004, Zimmerman entered into an insurance office partnership with an African-American (Francescani, 2012).In September 2011, Zimmerman sent an email message to the Sanford Police Chief (the same one later indicating a lack of probable cause in this case) expressing outrage over the police handling of an assault on a Black man by a relative of a White police lieutenant. This had been preceded by a public statement critical of this same incident at a public meeting in January 2011 (CNN, 2012).During his call to police prior to the contact with Martin, Zimmerman used the term “assholes," and indicated that they always eluded arrest, apparently referring to perpetrators of burglaries and robberies within his community, some of whom were identified as Black (Francescani, 2012).The testimony of a person that spoke to Martin prior to the confrontation with Zimmerman indicated that Martin stated the he was being followed by a “creepy-ass cracker” (abcnews, 2013).Was there political pressure to seek prosecution?The Sanford police chief stated that there was insufficient evidence to arrest Zimmerman (and subsequently stepped-down under pressure). And, the State’s Attorney initially assigned to the case declined to file charges against Zimmerman (Legum, 2012).The governor of Florida then appointed a special prosecutor, who chose to by-pass the Grand Jury process (Vamburkar, 2012). The special prosecutor has admitted submitting a defective affidavit that apparently omitted exculpatory information (Huckabee, 2013), failed to release photographs of Zimmerman’s injuries until after charges were filed, failed to provide exculpatory information to defense attorneys as required by law (realclearpolitics.com, 2013), submitted a request for inclusion of lesser charges at mid-trial when faced with an apparent acquittal (Huckabee), and fired the employee who reported this failure to disclose required information to the defense attorneys (realclearpolitics.com). Alan Dershowitz, a noted civil liberties attorney, a defender of civil rights, and the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, has called for the special prosecutor to be disbarred for the above acts. The special prosecutor also made a post-acquittal statement indicating guilt on the part of Zimmerman (Huckabee).After announcement of the state verdict, the U.S. Attorney General apparently implied that Zimmerman was guilty of something by describing the incident as a “tragic, unnecessary shooting” (Hallowell, 2013). Arguably, this statement could taint the pursuit of federal prosecution, not to mention amount to defamation of an acquitted individual. According to the American Bar Association (2012), Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor:“Except for statements that are necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor’s action and that serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, refrain from making extrajudicial comments that have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused.”(Rule 3.8 (f))Judge Jeanine Pirro stated the following:Almost every legal expert on both sides of the aisle agreed, in contrast to special prosecutor Corey, that the evidence presented by prosecutors was insufficient to convict. Which begs the question of whether the charges against George Zimmerman were proper or a capitulation to public pressure by the governor and that appointed state's attorney who continues to say that the public had a right to watch this trial as though it’s theater, as though criminal justice and evidence is about theater for the public’s interest. (realpolitics, 2013, n.p.)Scott (a 42-year-old Black male) confronted three young men reportedly engaged in vehicle burglary in a neighbor’s driveway in New York. Sixteen-year-old Cervini (a White person) reportedly charged Scott, who shot twice and killed him, even though Cervini made no physical contact with Scott. Scott was acquitted in 2009 (Hedeen, 2009). This is in spite of the facts that New York does not have a stand-your-ground law, and it is a general principle of law that the amount of force cannot be unreasonable (Gardner & Anderson, 2000). Presumably, most are unaware of this incident, as opposed to the Zimmerman/Martin incident.The NAACP has indicated that justice has not prevailed in this case (Novogrod, Winter, Connor, & McClam, 2013). And, there have been calls for changes in law to prevent recurrence of this incident (Trotta & Cotterell, 2013). Since the Magna Carta in 1215, our system of law has demanded credibility from witnesses. Subsequently, evaluation of physical and circumstantial evidence has enhanced our ability to judge guilt; and, our senses have been found to be frequently in error, for psychological and neurological reasons (Eagleman, 2011).In this case, according to the jury, there are insufficient credible witnesses, physical, and circumstantial evidence to overcome the beyond a reasonable doubt criteria. Changing the law to get past these purported deficiencies would violate the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of due process of law prior to deprivation “of life, liberty, or property” (Amendment V, 1992).Was the confrontation asymmetrical—man against boy?The reasonableness of self-defense can be dependent upon the relative disparity of the participants, in addition to the determination of who initiated the assault (Gardner & Anderson, 2000). At the time of the incident, according to police reports, Martin was six feet tall and weighed 160 pounds, and Zimmerman was five feet nine inches tall and weighed 170 pounds (wtsp.com, 2012; Rogers, 2012).Photographs of Martin as a younger child were widely distributed, and may have shaped public perceptions (Allen, 2013).In 2005, Zimmerman’s insurance business failed, he was arrested for resisting arrest and battery on a plain-clothes alcohol control agent, and he avoided conviction by participating in a pre-trial diversion program. Also, Zimmerman’s first engagement ended with issuance of mutual restraining orders; although he remains married to another woman (Francescani, 2012).Evidence of Martin's drug use, school suspension, eviction from his mother’s home, possession of a firearm, and past fighting were judged not admissible in the trial (Schneider, 2013).Is there evidence supporting self-defense on the part of Zimmerman?A physician’s report disclosed that Zimmerman had a fractured nose, two black eyes, two lacerations on the back of his head, and a back injury on the day after the fatal shooting.Dr. Vincent Di Maio[ii],a forensic pathologist, testified that in his expert opinion, the wounds suffered by Zimmerman were consistent with the statements of Zimmerman (Alvarez, 2013a).Di Maio also testified that the gunshot wound suffered by Martin was consistent with the statement of Zimmerman. The examination of the clothing worn by Martin and the body of Martin indicate that Martin’s clothing was pulled away from the body, as would be expected if Martin had been straddling Zimmerman and leaning forward; and, the estimated distance of the gun muzzle from the clothing was consistent with Zimmerman’s account.Zimmerman ignored the advice of a police dispatcher to not follow Martin; although, Zimmerman claimed to have been returning to his vehicle when confronted by Martin, with prosecutors being unable to indicate otherwise (Alvarez, 2013b). It is not a criminal violation to follow another person, less any menacing remarks or behavior. And, “all people … may use deadly force, if necessary, to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to themselves or others” (Gardner & Anderson, 2000). And, the distinction between a six foot tall child weighing 160 pounds, and an adult who is five feet nine inches tall and weighs 170 pounds is irrelevant in a rapidly unfolding confrontation.Did the “Stand Your Ground” law precipitate this incident?Included in the judge’s instructions to the jury was the advisement as to the parameters of the stand your ground law. However, Zimmerman’s defense team did not raise this issue. The self-defense claim was based on the inability of Zimmerman to retreat or otherwise prevent his own death or serious bodily injury (Zimmerman was reportedly on his back under Martin); and, although Zimmerman was injured, the Florida law does not require an individual to actually suffer injuries in order to claim self-defense, merely that it this reasonably likely (Alvarez, 2013b).Was Zimmerman was a rogue, self-appointed vigilante?Francescani (2012) provided a detailed description of the evolution of Zimmerman from passive resident to neighborhood watch captain, from being repeatedly menaced by a pit bull in the Fall of 2009; to June 2011, when multiple robberies within the community led the homeowners association to ask him to create a neighborhood watch. A Black neighbor indicated that demonstrators should recognize that, at the time of the incident, numerous crimes in that community had been committed by young Black males.Francescani is a Reuters journalist who provided a lengthy and fairly detailed review of Zimmerman’s background, and it is recommended reading (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425).Why does Racial Profiling exist?Despite the fact that it has been established that there are more intra-racial biological differences than there are differences between races (Banton, 1998), there are cultural differences. Access to health care and education (as it pertains to diet and exercise) are apparent contributors to this situation. In recent decades, health differences between Blacks and Whites have decreased; however, gaps still exist.Hypertension, diabetes, and stroke are much higher in the U.S. Black population, and these ailments are acquired at a younger age (WebMD, 2011). Black men are 35% more likely to die of cancer than Whites, and the disparity for Black women is 18% (WebMD, 2007). In the U.S., Blacks, at about 14% of the population, account for 44% of the new HIV infections, with Black females having rate of infection 15 times higher than White females (WebMD, 2012). According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Blacks have a significantly shorter life expectancy; which is attributed to increased cancer, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and murder (as cited in DeNoon, 2007).When factors contributing to the likelihood to be arrested for crimes are considered, racism must be included; however, there is statistical support for the argument that Blacks are more likely to engage in criminal behavior. Crime statistics are a relevant consideration in the arena of bias and reality, with about one in three Black males being convicted felons, as opposed to about one in 17 White males (statistics cited below). And, several variables are taken into consideration during the decision-making process regarding prosecution and sentencing; these include prior convictions, employment history, and education level. These considerations contribute to the determination of whether or not the individual will be a contributing member of society, or will return to criminal behavior if not prosecuted and incarcerated.Education plays a major role in employability, and employment can counteract pursuit of criminal activities. The national average for completion of high school by White students is about 75%, and the average for Black students is about 50% (Swanson, 2004). It seems possible that a lack of education, lack of cultural appreciation for education, and a lack of parental expectations perpetuate the problem of black crime; even though racial profiling is a prominent argument for this situation. Empirical research indicates a link between low socio-economic status, poor education, and anti-social behavior (Baron-Cohen, 2011). Lack of employment apparently stems from poor education, which may result in criminal behavior being needed to supply income.In addition to the contribution of familial socio-economic status to deviance, crime can be inter-generational. Studies of repeat offenders indicate that 37% have fathers with criminal records, while 8.4% have non-deviant fathers; and, and research indicates that juvenile delinquents eventually tend to parent deviant children. Moreover, divorce and separation rates are higher in Black homes, and these rates are significantly associated with murder rates (Siegel, 2006).Police must rely on the community as their eyes and ears in areas inaccessible to police in order to address criminal predation. The world of black music provides examples of the Black community’s failure to provide witness information that could reduce crime. Jam Master Jay, Biggie Smalls, and Tupak Shakur were murdered by unidentified perpetrators, and in all of these cases witnesses have been uncooperative. Likewise, rapper Busta Rhymes refused to cooperate after witnessing the murder of his bodyguard, as did 50 other witnesses (Hampson, 2006). Hampson also reported on the nation-wide “Stop Snitching” movement in the Black community. This billboard graced the Houston Montrose area in 2013:Based on then current incarceration rates, about 32% of Black males will be imprisoned during their lifetime, along with 5.9% of White males (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2007). In 2005, one victim and one offender homicides were mostly intra-racial, about 93% for Black victims (with 49% of all homicide victims being Black) and 85% for white victims (Harrell, 2007). Black offenders accounted for more than 50% of the offenders arrested for murder and non-negligent manslaughter (U.S. Department of Justice, 2009). The 2000 census indicated that 77.1% of the U.S. population was White (Census, 2001a), and 12.9% was Black (Census, 2001b). And, Blacks on federal pretrial release had a significantly higher history of failures to appear for court hearings and engaging in escape behavior than Whites (Fennessy & Huss, 2013).Hickey (2006) reported on an extensive study that indicated that out of the 249 serial killers studied, 72% were White, 23% were Black, 3% were Hispanic, 1% were Asian, and 1% were “other.” Since more than 20% of the serial killers have been Black, there is an over-representation of Black serial killers. Hickey reported that, between 1995 and 2004, about 44% of identified serial killers were Black. Walsh (2005) reported serial killing ratios similar to those of Hickey, and commented on the mythological nature of the popular conception that serial killing is a White phenomenon. Hickey also reported that serial killing has been generally intra-racial; however, serial killers do kill people of other races.Safarik, Jarvis, and Nussbaum (2006) studied elderly female sexual homicide and their research population of offenders was found to be 44% White and 42% Black. Safarik et. al determined that, in their elderly female sexual homicide research, "Blacks offend interracially 77% of the time … and Whites only 4%" (p. 113).In attempting to maintain an empathetic frame of mind when interacting with minorities, one must acknowledge that being defensive due to past experience of discrimination has been empirically supported. Research on prejudice (in this case with Jewish males) has indicated that those who have been the subject of prejudice, or perceive that they have been subjected to prejudice, were reportedly more aggressive, sadder, more anxious, and more egotistical than those not perceiving such prejudice (Dion & Earn, 1981). In other words, once a person has been discriminated against, it is more likely that the person will be hypersensitive to perceived discrimination, possibly seeing it where it does not exist. And, more importantly, their perceptions of prejudice interfere with their accepting the culture of the majority group, and encourage differentiation in speech, fashion, and resistance to the adoption of majority group goals.Moreover, our brains are hardwired to be xenophobic (fearful and hateful toward strangers/foreigners or anything that is strange/foreign), according to Eagleman (2011). Therefore, people of different races, ethnicities, cultures, and religions are viewed with suspicion instinctively; and this suspicion can only be overcome by intentionally altering these subconscious reactions, facilitating conformity with societal expectations for acceptance of diversity.While this current discussion concerns self-defense in general, the greater implication concerns the criminal justice system. The problem with racial profiling is that it subjects innocent people to unwarranted suspicion and accusations. No matter what percentage of an identifiable group of people can be considered criminal, there is an additional, and apparently larger, percentage who cannot be considered criminal. And it is a violation of the civil rights of all of these people to make an assumption that is not based on evidence, as opposed to statistical or biased assumptions.It is a display of prejudice (pre-judgment of a person or act without facts of the particular situation) to make a statement such as that of President Obama with regard to the arrest of a Black professor (“Cambridge police acted stupidly,” as cited in Baichwal, 2010, para. 5); for, as the President later admitted, he was not in possession of all of the facts. And, it is a display of prejudice for police to confront minorities based only on the fact that they are minorities. An exacerbating factor to be overcome by police is the instantaneous nature of the decision-making process in the public safety arena.“The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is interpreted by the Supreme Court that sets the legal standard for Use of Force in the United States. … The early application of a reasonable amount of force will result in less force having to be used; less injury to suspects, less injury to officers. … Officers have to use force that’s objectively reasonable based on the totality of the facts and circumstances confronting the officer at the time of the seizure. … Holding the officer to the least intrusive or minimal amount of force is a subjective standard. … Imposing such a requirement would inevitably induce hesitation by officers, and thus deter police from protecting the public and themselves. It would also entangle the courts in endless second guessing of police decisions made under stress and subject them to exigencies of the moment. … The court went on to say that officers … do not have to avail themselves of the least intrusive means of responding to an exigent situation; only a reasonable one.” (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, n.d.)Decades ago, the Supreme Court ruled that:The wholesale harassment by certain elements of the police community, of which minority groups, particularly Negroes, frequently complain, [n11] will not be [p15] stopped by the exclusion of any evidence from any criminal trial. Yet a rigid and unthinking application of the exclusionary rule, in futile protest against practices which it can never be used effectively to control, may exact a high toll in human injury and frustration of efforts to prevent crime. No judicial opinion can comprehend the protean variety of the street encounter, and we can only judge the facts of the case before us. Nothing we say today is to be taken as indicating approval of police conduct outside the legitimate investigative sphere. (Terry v. Ohio, 1968, para. 19)Presumably, the expectations of police officers as to the increased probability of Black people being engaged in illegal activities (as supported by available statistics) affects how they deal with Black people, hence the “driving while Black” scenario and the existence of racial profiling. Unfortunately, this fuels the negative responses of the Black community, perpetuating a negative spiral contributing to the arrest and incarceration statistics.This state of affairs cannot be cured by emotional calls for “justice” in this specific case. Subversion of due process by popular demand to conform with faulty perceptions is equivalent to vigilantism, nothing more.What must be done is to focus attention on altering the roots of the problem, the underlying precipitators of criminality, like low socio-economic status and low educational achievement, and ensuring equitable treatment and negating bias [color-blindly providing due process (equality under law, based on individual circumstances, not perceived equality of outcome)].This can be done in law enforcement by review processes that evaluate enforcement actions by requiring that officers specifically articulate the circumstances used to determine that an appropriate level of suspicion was reached, such that a reasonably prudent person drawing on relevant experience would agree, according to the U.S. Supreme Court (Terry v. Ohio, 1968), would reach the same conclusion. This is the current standard, and while it can be questioned by the public, it is not public opinion that determines the outcome.As Dr. King indicated, people must be judged on individual character, not skin color; and that includes those defending themselves.Daniel L. Robb, Ph.D.Special Agent, Retired, U.S. Department of Homeland SecurityPrivate Investigator and Personal Protection Officer (Texas License No. 15531)Certified by the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, Peace Officer (inactive)References:abcnews.com. (2013). Trayvon Martin's friend: 'Creepy-Ass Cracker' comment not racist. Retrieved from: http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/creepy-ass-cracker-is-not-racist-says-trayvon-martins-friend-19506887Alcindor, Y. (2013, July 10). Pathologist supports Zimmerman's description of attack. USA Today. Retrieved from: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin--marijuana/2501293/Allen, J. (2013, June 4). Trayvon Martin: How pictures have told his story. http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2013/6/4/trayvon_martin_how_p.htmlAlvarez, L. (2013a, July 9). Martin Was Shot as He Leaned Over Zimmerman, Court Is Told. The New York Times.Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/10/us/teenager-was-over-zimmerman-as-he-was-shot-expert-says.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0Alvarez, L. (2013b, July 12). Zimmerman Case Goes to Jury, With Defense Urging It to Remove Emotion. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/zimmerman-trial.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0American Bar Association. (2012).Model rules of professional conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents.htmlBaichwal, R. (2010, July 22). Obama comments on arrest of Harvard prof. Retrieved from: http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=6930219Banton, M. (1998). Racial Theories (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Baron-Cohen, S. (2011). The science of evil: On empathy and the origins of cruelty. New York: Basic Books.Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2007). Criminal Offenders Statistics. Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm#prevalenceCNN. (2012, May 24). Tape showed Zimmerman's anger over black man's beating. Retrieved from: http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/24/justice/florida-teen-shootingDeNoon, D. J. (2007, February 1). Black cancer death rate higher: Late diagnosis, less access to treatment cuts cancer survival for Blacks, report says. Retrieved from: http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20130718/us-blacks-still-lag-whites-in-life-expectancy-studyDion, K. L., & Earn, B. M. (1981). The phenomenology of being a target of prejudice. In E. Aronson (Ed.), Readings about the social animal (3rd ed.) (pp. 281-292). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman. [Reprinted from The journal of personality and social psychology 32(5), 1975]Eagleman, D. M. (2011). Incognito: The secret lives of the brain, New York: Random House.Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. (n.d.). Use of force. Retrieved from: http://www.fletc.gov/training/programs/legal-division/podcasts/hot-issues-podcasts/hot-issues-transcripts/use-of-force-myths-and-realities-part-i-podcast-transcript.html/?searchterm=use of forceFennessy, M., & Huss, M.T. (2013, January). Predicting success in a large sample of federal pretrial offenders: The influence of ethnicity. Criminal Justice and Behavior, vol. 40 no. 1, 40-56.Francescani, C. (2012, April 25). George Zimmerman: Prelude to a shooting. Retrieved from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2000).Criminal law: Principles and cases (7th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Hallowell, B. (2013, July 15). Eric Holder speaks out on Zimmerman case: Trayvon’s killing an ‘unnecessary shooting’ and calls for ‘difficult’ national dialogue. Retrieved from: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/07/15/eric-holder-speaks-out-on-zimmerman-case-says-trayvons-killing-an-unnecessary-shooting-and-nation-must-have-difficult-dialogue/Hampson, R. (2006, March 29). Anti-Snitch Campaign Riles Police, Prosecutors. USA TODAY. Retrieved from: http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2006/03/antisnitch_camp.phpHarrell, E. (2007, August). Special report: Black victims of violent crime. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/bvvc.txtHickey, E. W. (2006). Serial murderers and their victims. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.Hedeen, M. (2009, December, 18). Jury Finds Roderick Scott Not Guilty. Retrieved from: http://rochester.ynn.com/content/top_stories/490926/jury-finds-roderick-scott-not-guilty/Huckabee, M. (2013, July 14). Dershowitz: Zimmerman Special Prosecutor Angela Corey should be disbarred. Retrieved from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/14/alan_dershowitz_zimmerman_special_prosecutor_angela_corey_should_be_disbarred.htmlLegum, J. (2012, March 28). Sanford police recommended charging Zimmerman with Martin’s death, but police chief claimed ‘no probable cause.’ Retrieved from: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/03/28/453675/sanford-police-recommended-charging-zimmerman-with-martins-death/?mobile=ncNovogrod, J., Winter, T, Connor, T., & McClam, E. (2013, July 13). Jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty. Retrieved from: http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/13/19441838-jury-finds-george-zimmerman-not-guilty?literealclearpolitics.com. (2013, July 14). Judge Jeanine Pirro rips Zimmerman Special Prosecutor Angela Corey. Retrieved from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/14/judge_jeanine_pirro_rips_zimmerman_special_prosecutor_angela_corey.htmlReinberg, S. (2013). U.S. Blacks still lag Whites in life expectancy: Heart disease, cancer and murder main contributors to four-year disparity, experts say. HealthDay. Retrieved from: http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20130718/us-blacks-still-lag-whites-in-life-expectancy-studyRogers, K. (2012, March 28). George Zimmerman weighs 170#; Trayvon Martin 160#. Retrieved from: http://www.examiner.com/article/george-zimmerman-weighs-170-trayvon-martin-160Safarik, M. E., Jarvis, J. P., & Nussbaum, K. E. (2006). Sexual homicide of elderly females: Linking offender characteristics to victim and crime scene attributes, in R. D. Keppel (Ed.). Offender profiling (2nd ed.) (pp. 107-125). Mason, OH: Thompson. (Reprinted from Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 17, No. 5, 2002. Sage Publications, Inc.)Schneider, M. (2013, May 23). New Trayvon Martin case evidence: Defense team releases photos, texts that teen had on his phone. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/trayvon-martin-evidence-photos-texts_n_3327658.htmlSiegel, L. J. (2006). Criminology (9th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson.Swanson, C. B. (2004). Who graduates? Who doesn’t? A statistical portrait of public high school graduation, class of 2001. Urban Institute. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=410934Terry v. Ohio. 392 U.S. 1. 67. (1968) Retrieved from: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZO.htmlTrotta, D., & Cotterell, B. (2013, July 17). Zimmerman juror: Self-defense laws should be changed after Trayvon Martin killing. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/17/zimmerman-juror-self-defense-laws_n_3612130.htmlU. S. Census Bureau. (2001a, August). The White Population: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-4.pdfU.S. Census Bureau. (2001b, August). The Black Population: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-5.pdfU.S. Constitution. (1992). Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America.U.S. Department of Education. (2005, February 23). President's New High School Initiative, Other Proposed Programs Tackle Issues Important to Hispanics [Press Release]. Retrieved from: http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2005/02/02232005a.htmlU.S. Department of Justice. (2009, September). 2008 Crime in the United States: Table 43: Arrests by race, 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_43.htmlU.S. Department of Labor. (2008, February 1). Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htmVamburkar, M. (2012, April 9). State Attorney decides against using Grand Jury in Trayvon Martin case. Retrieved from: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/state-attorney-decides-against-using-grand-jury-in-trayvon-martin-case/Walsh, A. (2005), African Americans and serial killings in the media: The myth and the reality. Homicide Studies, 9(4), 271-291. Retrieved from: http://hsx.sagepub.com.ezproxy.apus.edu/cgi/reprint/9/4/271WebMD. (2011). High blood pressure in African-Americans. Retrieved from: http://www.webmd.com/hypertension-high-blood-pressure/guide/hypertension-in-african-americansWebMD. (2012). HIV and AIDS in African-Americans. Retrieved from: http://www.webmd.com/hiv-aids/hiv-aids-in-blacks-alarming-crisiswtsp.com (2012, Mar 29). Trayvon Martin pictures shape our perception on the case. Retrieved from:http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/247690/8/Trayvon-Martin-pictures-shape-our-perception-on-the-casewtsp.com. (2012, March 29). Trayvon Martin pictures shape our perception on the case. Retrieved from:http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/247690/8/Trayvon-Martin-pictures-shape-our-perception-on-the-case[i] Dr. David Eagleman directs the Laboratory for Perception and Action and the Initiative on Neuroscience and Law, Baylor College of Medicine.[ii] Dr. Vincent Di Maio, is a forensic pathologist with more than 40 years of experience (editor-in-chief of the Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology, Professor--Department of Pathology at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, and fellow of the National Association of Medical Examiners and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences), and author of Forensic Pathology and Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques, among other works.

We *DO* have societies in the US attempting to have no guns. We do have places individuals go to be safe (“gun free zones”), and cross metal detectors to enter.These gun free, safe societies do not work.One gun-free society is the entire City of New York, now accepted as a Supreme Court case (which may or may not end up being heard).”Supreme Court Will Review New York City Gun Law””New York eased gun law hopeful Supreme Court would drop Second Amendment case — but that hasn’t happened yet”Another one of them is the State of California. (Just for fun, we refer to it as the PRK, the People’s Republic California.)(Of course, California hasn’t entirely eliminated guns, but they are working darn hard:- Making magazines progressively smaller and smaller- Requiring registration to have a gun, whether bought or made- Requiring ID, registration, and background check to purchase ammunition. *- Requiring a registered gun of the same caliber, to purchase ammunition- Eliminating classes of guns- Gun Violence Restraining Orders **- Making random gun features outlawed by calling them “assault weapons” ***- Prohibiting any guns or ammunition being brought into the state from less regulated states unless directly sent FFL to FFL, delivered to a California licensed FFL and then re-issued in conformance with California law to the gun owner- and so on)Shockingly, the Attorney General of California has discovered thatThe Gilroy Garlic Festival murderer ignored California’s laws about importing firearms and ammunition from other states!Gun Used In Gilroy Shooting Couldn't Be Sold In California, Becerra Says ****Oh, by the way, the Gilroy a$$#ole also ignored the carefully run bag search and metal detection systems set up at the festival entrances.It is almost as if a whacko a$$#ole bent on murder doesn’t even care about gun control laws and border inspection laws.I am not really sure why we even need to speak this out loud, butit is only the law abiding people who will abide by the laws.Even gun laws into which the Assembly put its heart and soul.The California Assembly is now expected to explore what additional gun elimination laws would prevent the next whacko a$$#ole from breaking the law.One proposal under consideration would make any part for any gun only obtainable through a licensed California FFL. Including springs. You wouldn’t be able to buy a spring, except from an FFL, if that spring happened to fit into some model of some gun. I’m not sure the Internet spring suppliers are prepared to implement California’s next laws.It’s a very interesting world, inside the heads of these people who think more gun laws will make everyone safer.NOTES:The Assembly is adding so many gun laws that the state Department of Justice guide to firearms laws that identify assault weapons was issued in 2001 (3th Ed), promised for an update in 2017 (4th Ed, still waiting), and would be obsolete if issued today at only the 2017 standards.The state government LITERALLY can’t implement the laws as fast as they are written.California Department of Justice, Bureau of FirearmsCalifornia Assault Weapon Identification Guide: https://oag.ca.gov/sites/all/files/agweb/pdfs/firearms/forms/awguide.pdf?Here is a DOJ flowchart to help decide whether a gun is an assault weapon: http://gusslers.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/AssaultGunFlow7-14-2012.pdf(It is from 2012, and is, of course, out of date with respect to recent laws; DOJ hasn’t published it in years because they can’t keep up.)* Oddly, for ammunition purchases, CA DOJ only accepts the Federal-standard CA drivers license, not the Regular CA drivers license. So illegal aliens can get a drivers license and health care, but no ammunition.* I like GVROs, and think they’ve worked well so far. Although, of course, there could be confiscatory abuse in the future — but it seems working well to date.** Assault weapon definitions:OK, a bayonet lug I get. But a certain shape stock that you can get your thumb into a hole in it?? Or the ability to adjust the length of the stock to fit the arm size of the owner?**** In the article, let’s just skip right over Governor Newsom’s discovery that an AK-47 style weapon is a “weapon of mass destruction”. Saddam Hussein would be surprised to learn he really DID have weapons of mass destruction.

He didn ’t get away with anything. He was strip searched in 1993 and he was not even indicted. He would not have submitted to a humiliating strip search had he been indeed guilty , especially , if he had by then molested three kids, not only Jordan Chandler , but James Safechuck and Wade Robson as well , who denied any misconduct for 20 years and they changed their story in 2012/2013 when they both reportedly hit financial hardship.The Chandlers were extortionists and there is a tape recording of Evan Chandler with Jordan Chandler’s step father David Schwartz during which Evan Chandler clearly threatened to ruin Michael Jackson if he didn’t get what he wanted , which was money.The Chandlers wrote in their book ALL THAT GLITTERS (2004) , which ironically completely exonerates and vindicates Michael Jackson , that if he had paid the 20 million $ Evan Chandler , who owed his ex wife June 68000 $ on unpaid alimony, demanded from Michael Jackson in August 1993 instead of January 1994 they would never have accused him , instead they would have left him alone. If anything this proves they were extortionists.The settlement in 1994 was paid by Michael Jackson ‘s insurance carrier, not himself , in spite of his protests , and it was over negligence , NOT sex abuse and it was agreed by both parents that it was not an admission of guilt on his part. Nobody / Nothing precluded the Chandlers from testifying in a court of law. These two aren’t legally related. The Chandlers never wanted a trial, they played smart to get money. Bert Fields and Anthony Pellicano resigned then because they both disagreed with Michael Jackson’s decision to settle the civil trial out of court which apparently he later regretted too, which is exactly the Estate refused to settle out of court with Robson and Safechuck in 2013 because they learned from their past mistakes as it was Howard Weitzman, the Estate’s attorney, who insisted Michael Jackson settled out of court then, which was clearly a mistake as it opened the Pandora’s box for further extortion attempts. Anyone who tries to use Latoya to boost the credibility of Leaving Neverland are at best and at least hypocritical. Latoya was in abusive relationship with a Genovese Mafia connected lunatic by the name Jack Gordon who forcibly married her against her will in Las Vegas in 1989, turned her against her own family, beat her to death daily, was twice arrested for assaulting her , made her strip for Playboy, made her pretend she was a psychic, write a tell all book degrading her family, he took all her money, threatened to kill her if she didn’t do as she was told , made her sell sordid stories to the tabloids about Michael Jackson in 1993 for money. Latoya is a real abuse survivor, there are many pictures of her which clearly show she was badly bruised, no one has the right to twist her experience to back up the bogus allegations of two proven liars. Latoya never went to the Police Station to report her brother molested kids as she ought to have done if that had been true , which wasn’t . Her ex husband tried to profit from the allegations but since they had zero proof MJ molested anyone the media paid them nothing because they were lying for money. Latoya left Gordon in 1996, she got a divorce in 1997, he died from cancer in 2005. She set the record straight in her book Startin Over.Regardless the settlement, there was a 14 month criminal investigation, before and after the settlement , and it concluded in zero evidence to get a single indictment. Two Grand Jury , from 2 different jurisdictions , Los Angeles and New York , did not even indict , let alone charge Michael Jackson with a crime in 1994 , after 400 witnesses , a strip search during which his entire body was photographed and filmed and unexpected raids by the Police to his 3 houses, Neverland, Hayvenhurst and a condo he had in Los Angeles. They found nothing , de rien , nada , niente , zip on him. Anyone who mentions MJ FACTS garbage hate site must be promptly ignored. Anyone who mentions OJ Simpson ‘s acquittal again must have brain transplant. OJ Simpson was acquitted because the trial took place in Los Angeles two years after the Rodney King riots and for the black and hispanic jury OJ Simpson was payback time for Rodney King and all the injustice the black community endured at the hands of the LAPD due to racism , prejudice and bigotry with Marcia Clark . Clark foolishly chose only black jurors who could have seen a video of OJ Simpson committing those murders and they would still have acquitted him. Michael Jackson however did not use the race card, the jury were not black, they were not frustrated with the Santa Barbara County Police Department, they were not sequestered, they were not low IQ , starstruck and uneducated like in the OJ Simpson trial , who was found indeed guilty in the civil trial in 1997.If Jordan Chandler had indeed described Michael Jackson’s penis accurately then Michael Jackson would have been immediately arrested. That was not the case however. Michael Jackson was clearly uncircumcised , which is confirmed in his autopsy report. Jordan Chandler , being Jewish on his father’s side ( and thus circumcised) described a circumcised penis. If he had seen Michael Jackson naked as many times as he said he did , if he had performed oral sex on him , if he had given him hand jobs , as many times as he alleged he did , then , he would have known that Michael Jackson ‘s penis was not circumcised, unless one is stupid enough to believe that Michael Jackson had an erection non stop. The Chandlers’ were Jewish , in fact , their real name was Charmaz , and they changed it to Chandler because Evan wanted to pursue a career in Hollywood as a screenwriter, though he was a dentist by trade, which career Michael Jackson refused to finance, hence, he used his son to extort money from Michael Jackson. Evan Chandler admitted he administered a psychiatric, barbiturate drug (sodium amytal) to his son in the pretext he took out his wisdom tooth , which is known for creating false memories , and it is , needless to say , not even used in dentistry and it is not even allowed in court. This video says it all.“It’s a psychiatric medication that cannot be relied on to produce fact,” says Dr. Resnick, the Cleveland psychiatrist. “People are very suggestible under it. People will say things under sodium Amytal that are blatantly untrue.” Sodium Amytal is a barbiturate, an invasive drug that puts people in a hypnotic state when it’s injected intravenously. Primarily administered for the treatment of amnesia, it first came into use during World War II, on soldiers traumatized—some into catatonic states—by the horrors of war. Scientific studies done in 1952 debunked the drug as a truth serum and instead demonstrated its risks: False memories can be easily implanted in those under its influence. “It is quite possible to implant an idea through the mere asking of a question,” says Resnick. But its effects are apparently even more insidious: “The idea can become their memory, and studies have shown that even when you tell them the truth, they will swear on a stack of Bibles that it happened,” says Resnick.To even consider celebrity worship or the settlement as the reasons Michael Jackson was not charged in 1993 or he was acquitted in 2005 , after a 4 month public, jury trial , which concluded a month early due to complete lack of evidence and 10 of the 12 jury ( two of them wanted to profit from a guilty verdict as they were offered book deals for thousands of dollars but it backfired , they never made a cent ) were ready to vote not guilty before the Defense even put on a case as the Prosecution’s witnesses either crumbled under cross examination or defended Jackson and the accuser’s family had zero credibility, is beyond ridiculous. If they had found anything on him they would have convicted him right then and there. To actually believe that Robson was the first Defense witness , albeit MJ allegedly molested him for 7 years , and he lied either to protect Michael Jackson or because he feared he might go to jail (depending on which version he is spinning each time ) is beyond ridiculous. No guilty person would ever have their own abuse victim testify for them and there is no way Robson , a High School graduate , could have fooled top and experienced attorneys like Mesereau and Yu and an overzealous prosecution like Sneddon and Zonen. Robson never wavered in 2005 because he was 100% truthful and he is lying now for money. When he lied under oath to get past the statutes in 2016 he got caught by the judge who threw away his entire witness statement and dismissed his lawsuit ( twice). Robson and Safechuck kept their story straight for 20 years ( that they were never molested ) without any financial motive and since they made these allegations in 2013 they have been caught in numerous lies , they have repeatedly changed their stories , which are contradicted in every single way, and they have filed civil lawsuits for hundreds of millions $ , hence they have a massive financial motive to lie and undeniably they have lied big time for money. Their lies in the one sided, bias , slanderous hit piece, which is entirely copied from a pro paedophilia book written by Victor Gutuirrez ( a gay peadophile and NAMBLA member ) and in fact promotes the NAMBLA agenda, have already been debunked since day one , hence they rushed to edit it and delete scenes from future airings , which were called out for being utterly false.The lie which completely dismantled their story was Safechuck’s daily abuse from 1988–1992 in the Neverland train Station , which was not even constructed until May 1994 , two years after his claimed abuse supposedly ended. They are both perjurers and profiteers , they both had their frivolous lawsuits thrown out of court and they ended up owing the Estate’s legal expenses as well as their own.Robson and Safechuck share the same legal firm since 2013 exactly like the Arvizos accused Michael Jackson after they were referred to the same civil attorney, named Larry Feldman , who got the 15 million $ settlement for the Chandlers in 1994. Safechuck joined Robson in a multi million dollar claim against the MJ Estate in 2013 after he was contacted by Robson ‘s lawyers , Henry Gradstein and Marianne Marzano, who were since his as well, until Robson’s case was dismissed in 2016 and they resigned , realizing of course there was zero chance to win the case. Then, Robson and Safechuck hired Stewart and Finaldi , who are known for fishing victims and winning sex abuse cases with outlandish lies in the media.Larry King testified in 2005 that Larry Feldman, Evan Chandler’s lawyer in 1994 and Janet Arvizo’s civil lawyer in 2005, told him that Janet Arvizo , who prior to Michael Jackson falsely accused of sex abuse a JC PENNEY security guard who caught her kids shoplifting , was a psychopath who was only after money. Had Michael Jackson been convicted in 2005 then Feldman would have represented Gavin Arvizo in a civil action against Michael Jackson for money because based on the legislation at the time any civil lawsuit would have been inactive without a criminal trial first. The Arvizos however were completely discredited in court , no juror believed them , they had a history of shoplifting, perjury , extortion, welfare fraud and hustling celebrities for money. They were caught in many lies and contradictions and they were refuted by almost all witnesses. In 1993, however, Michael Jackson tried to postpone the civil trial and get the criminal trial go first but the Judge sided with the Chandlers and did not allow the criminal trial to go first under CA speedy trial law, which was Chandlers’ plan all along. However , under 1108 prior bad acts , the jury , who were all white and conservative , after they saw evidence and testimony from both 93 and 03 cases, they completely cleared Michael Jackson on all counts and they could not even nail him on a single misdemeanour ( lesser charges) in 2005 . The not guilty verdict was not a racially motivated verdict like the OJ Simpson travesty and OJ Simpson was completely found guilty in the 1997 civil trial. Michael Jackson was never found guilty at any trial either criminal or civil.Anyone who actually believes that a civil settlement prevents Prosecution or that a criminal trial can be settled out of court should not be answering this question. If that were the case then Bill Cosby with his at least 400 million $ net worth , maybe more, would not be in jail now. Andrea Constand received a 3 million dollar from Bill Cosby in 2005 , yet , she pursued a criminal trial because she was a real rape victim, not a gold digger. The Chandlers on the other hand took the money in 1994 and ran. They never cared to testify in a criminal court yet they kept making further extortion attempts until 2001 which were all thrown out of court . The alleged victim refused twice to testify against Michael Jackson , both in 94 and 05, and requested legal emancipation from his parents in 1996 ,he refused to speak to either of them since 1996 ( his own mother June Chandler Schwartz testified it in the 2005 trial ) , sued and took a restraining order against his own father in 2005 because he assaulted him and tried to kill him and did not even attend his own father ‘s funeral in 2009 who killed himself only 4 months after Michael Jackson died and no one attended his funeral because he was a rotten to the core mental sociopath. Journalist Mary Fisher did an extensive research in 1993–1994 and she revealed a lot of exculpatory evidence for Michael Jackson, which was included in her GQ article , but is was buried in the anti Jackson media propaganda.James Brown , Bobby Brown , Bill Cosby, Jerry Sandusky , Mike Tyson , and Harvey Weinstein , R Kelly ( not yet , but soon ) , Tupac, Oscar Pistorius all went to jail. If there was evidence against Michael Jackson he would have gone to jail too. The jury in 2005 were all educated , middle class , conservative, family people. If they believed he was actually guilty they would have convicted him accordingly. Michael Jackson went through the due process as he should have. They found nothing. He is only guilty in the court of the public opinion because the media have been lying about him for 35 years. The difference between Jerry Sandusky and Michael Jackson is that Sandusky had at least 35 accusers , none of whom had mentally ill parents who asked for money, like Gavin Arvizo and Jordan Chandler , none of them defended Sandusky under oath like Robson and Safechuck who have repeatedly , especially Robson, tried to profit from these allegations , which is not an attitude or behavior consistent of abuse survivors.Wade Robson , after he was not hired by the Estate to direct the MJ ONE show in 2012, which debuted in Las Vegas in 2013, and since he was reportedly in financial trouble , hence he ’d already sold to Julien’s Auctions’ all his MJ related items in 2011, before any ‘’ abuse ‘’ disclosure or realization, he unsuccessfully tried to shop a book deal about his alleged abuse for which he asked a huge amount of money but there was no interest in his book. However, during legal proceedings, during which he perjured himself , he was ordered to present a draft of his book in court , in which he referred to himself as a ‘’master of deception’’ and he wrote that his ‘’ abuse experience and its effects will make me relevant and relatable again. It ‘s time to get mine’’. What abuse victim says that?In Michael Jackson ‘s case there was never a single accuser who ever filed a complaint without first consulting a high profile civil attorney for money. They all consulted and contacted civil attorneys for money. Every single one. None of them ever went to the Police to file a complaint ever. They all wanted money.To believe Michael Jackson was given a free pass because he was a celebrity is beyond unfair and ridiculous. The media deliberately sensationalized his 2005 trial for ratings and thus profit. The media coverage of the 2005 trial , which was the most media covered and highly publicized trial of all times , was extremely unfair and the only journalist who admitted the error of her ways was Aphrodite Jones who, though she was once Michael Jackson’s detractor, she started defending him once she looked into the evidence and realized that Michael Jackson was framed for money and the criminals were in fact the plaintiffs, not him. To right the wrong she wrote a book , which no one wanted to publish because it was pro Jackson , under the title ‘’Conspiracy’’, in which she writes in detail the Arvizos’ absurd and ludicrous testimonies as well as the media hypocrisy , which deliberately misstated facts to vilify Jackson for ratings. Geraldo Rivera, an investigative journalist also stated publicly then , after he looked into the 05 case that Michael Jackson would be acquitted and if he hadn’t he would have shaved his moustache. Geraldo Rivera was right. Michael Jackson should have been acquitted and he was. The 2005 trial was a travesty and it should never have taken place. It was a waste of time and money. That joke ended on 13 June 2005 with MJ’s acquittal.This is Mike Smallcombe , a UK journalist who completely and easily exposed ‘’Leaving Neverland’’ as a fraud.I would like to borrow a part from another Quoran’s answer who incidentally is an attorney.Any lawyer would take the two compromised protagonists of the Leaving Neverland documentary apart at the joints. They have a long history of contradictory statements (prior inconsistent statements, we call them). They had cases against the Jackson Estate dismissed, and owe it over $100K in attorneys fees, so they have interest in making money at the Estate's expense. They are making uncorroborated claims (which, as noted, they previously repeatedly denied) charging a dead man with offenses for which he was actually tried and acquitted. In addition, the FBI conducted a decade-long investigation into similar claims and came up with goose egg, nothing, nada, zip. And probable cause is a low standard. The documentary is deliberately one-sided, telling only the men's stories in the most sympathetic possible way and not subjecting them to any critical interrogation. Pardon me if I'm less than impressed. You should be unimpressed too. I'll believe it if is there is real evidence. A preponderance, even. The problems with this documentary, which I have barely scratched here, indicate that the evidence doesn't remotely support its claims.And this is what Roger Friedman wrote about Leaving Neverland , Robson and Safechuck.Sneddon knew the names of Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck, the two men who claim in the documentary to have been molested. If Sneddon had thought there was any real story there, he’d have gone after it. He never did. Meanwhile, Robson has started a not for profit foundation and is soliciting donations. There can be no transparency, as he’s parked his 501 c3 very cleverly under something called the Hawaii Community Foundation. That way, Robson doesn’t have to file a form 990. We’ll never know if the makers of “Leaving Neverland” have donated money to it, for example. This was done on purpose. Leonardo DiCaprio does the same thing with his Foundation. It’s hidden. Safechuck, meantime, is accused by Jackson fans of creating his story from a very disgusting book published years ago by a man named Victor Guitierrez. Jackson sued Guitierrez and won a $2.7 million judgement against. The writer has never paid up, and now lives in Chile. I threw my copy out a long time; I didn’t want it in my house. “Leaving Neverland” can’t be taken seriously, and I’m surprised the press in Sundance– who didn’t cover Jackson — was so swayed by it. The movie offers no independent evidence, or third parties, just the claims of Robson and Safechuck. Just because it’s graphic, doesn’t mean it’s true. The rush to judgement here is alarming, and dangerous.So, which version of the Arvizos’ , Robson’s, Safechuck’s, Chandler’s ever changing story should have Michael Jackson been convicted for , none of who can keep their stories straight to save their lives?These are only a few of Robson’s and Safechuck’s lies. They have provably lied and anyone who still denies it is clearly disconnected from reality.James Safechuck claimed abuse from 1988–1992 in the Neverland Train Station where there was a room on the second floor. The Neverland Train Station provably did NOT even exist until 1994, two years after his alleged abuse ended. That alone proves he is a liar. The permit for the Railway Train Station was ONLY given in September 1993, one and a half year after the claimed abuse supposedly ended. It was constructed several months later.James Safechuck claimed he was pressured by Michael ‘s lawyers to testify in 2005 but he refused. Safechuck’s testimony was rendered irrelevant months before the trial even began. He was a non entity , for purposes of the 2005 trial Safechuck did NOT even exist. Nobody asked him to testify , let alone pressure him.James Safechuck claimed he ONLY realized his alleged abuse and disclosed it in 2013 after he saw Robson on the Tonight Show in May 2013. His mother however claimed in the film that she danced when Michael Jackson died in 2009 even though she supposedly did not know about her son’s alleged abuse until 2013.James Safechuck claimed in the film he cried himself to sleep in a condo in L.A. in September 1992 because Michael Jackson supposedly preferred another kid to him. Michael Jackson was reportedly in Europe performing on his Dangerous Tour then.Wade Robson claimed in the film that Michael Jackson taught him to hate women yet he forgot to mention that he set him up with his niece Brandi Jackson who dated Wade for at least 7 years. Robson mentions Britney Spears in the film but he forgets to mention that he cheated on Brandi with Britney who dated Wade’s supposed friend and lead singer for N sync Justin Timberlake , hence he got fired. He also forgot to mention that Britney fired Robson and his wife from her Circus promotion tour and replaced him with Jamie King , who Branca also chose to direct the MJ ONE show , a job Robson begged Branca to give him in 2011. In 2016 Robson lied under oath to get past the statutes and claimed he did not know about the administration of the MJ Estate until 03/2013. The same people he contacted and negotiated a job he provably applied for in May 2011 he claimed UNDER OATH he didn’t know until 2013 at which point judge Beckloff threw away his entire witness statement.Wade Robson claims that he was convinced to testify for Michael Jackson in 2005 during a dinner in Neverland which in fact took place after he had already testified , NOT before. He also claims he was subpoenaed to testify but in fact he was not , he willingly testified , as did his mother Joy and his sister Chantal.Wade Robson claims that he was sexually abused for the first time in Neverland when he was 9 years old in 1991 and his parents went to the Grand Canyon but he stayed alone in Neverland where Michael Jackson sexually abused him. However , this story is contradicted by his own mother’s 1993 sworn deposition where she said that the whole Robson family went to the Grand Canyon , including Wade, and they all returned to Neverland together the following weekend. In addition, in his own lawsuit as well as a deposition Robson gave recently for his appeal he gave an entirely different version of the same story , he said that he was sexually abused for the first time with his entire family also in Neverland and in fact his own sister sleeping in the same room. Two entirely different versions of the same story.Wade is seen burning MJ related objects at the end of the film but according to Julien’s Auction’s he had already sold all his MJ memorabilia by 2011 because he needed cash. He tried to do it anonymously but Julien’s Auction’s didn’t agree to that. Neither Wade Robson or James Safechuck ever owned the original Thriller Jacket , which was sold for almost 2 million $ to a rich guy from Arizona in 2011 and Harrison Ford never gave Safechuck the Indiana Jones bull whip as there was only one which was in fact donated to the Institute of Archaelogy in 1990.Robson implies in the movie that Brett Barnes and Macauley Culkin replaced him and thus they were groomed and molested albeit they have repeatedly said they weren’t even under oath. Barnes was harassed by people who told him to come forward and admit he was molested too , he is completely distraught and he is considering to take legal action against HBO for including him in the film.However , i am not afraid to admit when i ’m wrong. When i watched Leaving Neverland ( after reading the court documents in which they non stop contradicted themselves and the entire Robson family contradicted each other ) and i thought ‘’ oh, my God , this can’t get any more unbelievable ‘’ they got to the part where Wade Robson was astra abused at the Grand Canyon and James Safechuck was phantom abused at a nonexistent train station and i thought ‘’ my God, they are so stupid’’. Post traumatic stress syndrome does not explain/ justify time traveling. You don ’t even need evidence to trash Michael Jackson but just the most ridiculous claims , one can ever fabricate, any unjustified rumor about Michael Jackson is considered the universal truth by haters / gullible sheep who are spoon fed by the media and conditioned to believe anything without the least critical thinking. Basic rules of the world which apply to every individual on earth doesn’t come into play when it comes to Michael Jackson. Smear him, accuse him , disrespect him without any evidence or due process.Michael Jackson was 1. insulted for his skin disorder, 2.mocked for his torments, 3. his generosity is labelled as grooming, 4. his artistry is disrespected for no reason and is compared to objectively overrated artists 5. he was a victim of false allegations 6. his supporters/defenders who have done extensive research and gone through thousands of pages of court documents are labelled as crazed fans/blinded by his celebrity / songs/ dance moves yet people who know nothing about him but only what the ( tabloid ) media reported think they are experts on Michael Jackson and make a case he was a paedophile on the basis of a deeply flawed, proven false, one sided , agenda driven , manipulative hit piece by two people who denied any wrongdoing for 20 years , have been caught in numerous lies and they stand to make millions by changing their story with zero evidence to prove their claims. Unbelievable.Those who should however be immediately arrested for slander, perjury and extortion are Dan Reed , Wade Robson and James Safechuck. Robson, Safechuck, Adrian McManus and Victor Gutuirrez can start by giving back to his Estate the money they owe him. They are all court ordered to compensate him/pay his legal expenses and they have not paid a penny.