George Zimmerman Gets Negiligible $150,000 Bail in Trayvon Martin Case

The bail should have been set sufficiently high to keep Zimmerman locked up.

The following has been cut and pasted from the "Intersection of Madness and Reality" blog, which is where you will have to go if you wish to tell Rappa that his opinion is backward on this issue of Zimmerman's bail.  

Why?  Contrary to what Rappa says at his blog (quoted below), George Zimmerman admits he killed a young man (a child under law) and presumably would do the same thing again if the same circumstances arose again.  His defense is going to be that he had a legal right to act exactly as he did, when he followed and confronted an unarmed Black child in the dark and then shot the unarmed Black teenager to death.

Zimmerman simply should not be on the streets, free to engage in the same activity again, until a judge and a jury determine whether it is lawful and proper to kill Black children under these circumstances.  Because he has a long-time habit of engaging in the activities that led to the death of Trayvon Martin, there is a very real and imminent danger and reality that he could do the same thing again while out on bail.
 
Bail should be based on the danger a man poses to the community.  Zimmerman has acknowledged that he killed a man under circumstances that most people believe were unnecessary.  So, he poses an unacceptable risk today because he might do the same thing again.

Now, here's Rappa's information, community observation, and unfortunately misguided opinion:

George Zimmerman Granted $150,000 Bond: Disappointment Falls On Black Community

Apr 20, 2012 3 Comments by Rippa

This morning I watched George Zimmerman’s bond hearing as I’m sure everybody black in America did. No word on if they’re as pissed as I am with all the friggin’ commercial interruptions; but, I’m pretty certain that many of my skinfolk are upset at the outcome. Yes, George Zimmerman’s bond hearing lasted about two hours, and in the end, the judge decided to grant him the ability to post a bond to the tune of $150,00. So, how disappointed are some of my cousins about this decision? Well, I’m not sure if there are any plans to riot as of yet; when businesses in Sanford, Florida starts boarding up windows like they do in anticipation of a hurricane, then I’ll say that we’re pretty close. But until then, we can all take to social media as many are doing currently, to vent their frustrations. You know, sorta like my man Dr. Boyce Watkins did at yourblackworld.com:

What do you do when your municipality is holding arguably the most hated and notorious killer on earth?  You grant him bail.  That’s exactly what Judge Kenneth Lester did for George Zimmerman, the man who killed Trayvon Martin.  As a condition of his bail, Zimmerman is not allowed to have possession of firearms, drink alcohol or use drugs.  He must also maintain a curfew.  How nice.
Zimmerman won’t be released on Friday, but the details of his release are going to be worked out between his attorney and law enforcement.   Zimmerman has been charged with second-degree murder for the killing of Trayvon Martin, but he claims that he shot him in self-defense.
If the city of Sanford wanted to embarrass itself any further, it just did.  The justice system that has obtained international prominence as one of the most inept, irresponsible, racist and unprofessional organizations in the country has set a new standard for judicial indecency.  The family of Trayvon Martin worked hard to get Zimmerman arrested because he was a flight risk, now he’s a flight risk all over again.
Granting bail for George Zimmerman, for the most part, is a slap in the face to those around the world who worked for his arrest.  It simply says that without regard to the will of the people, those possessing the power of the state have no obligation to answer to anyone or even share whatever information they are using to come to their illogical decisions.  Granting bail to Zimmerman renders meaningless all the rallies, petitions and hard work done around the world to bring him to justice.  It effectively communicates defiance within the Sanford judicial system to say, “We don’t care what you think.  We’re going to do whatever we choose to do.”

Now when you listen to Dr. Boyce and some of the people commenting on his thread via Facebook. You get the impression that the judge allowed George Zimmerman to be released on his own recognizance. From what I’ve seen, some are upset that bond wasn’t set at a higher amount. Heck, I’ve even heard comparisons made to Michael Vick who had a much higher bond amount for basically killing some dogs. A pretty stupid comparison if you ask me. Last time I checked and as far as the court heard today, Zimmerman is no multi-millionaire NFL athlete. Plain and simple: in the eyes of the court George Zimmerman is indigent, He doesn’t own a home; his wife is a student; and, I’m not sure if an employer would want to hire Ole’ Georgie Porgie right now, or whether him punching the clock in the face of death threats would be a good idea. I don’t know about you, but it’s kinda hard to shake $150,000 out of the couch when you’re unemployed and people are trying to kill you.

So why would Zimmerman be allowed to even have a bind hearing after killing a 17-year-old Trayvon Martin armed with Skittles and ice tea? Oh I dunno, but I think there’s this thing called the Constitution that guarantees him to such a hearing as part of the process of justice.

Yes, Zimmerman has a right to a pro forma bond hearing.  No, Zimmerman is not eligible for bond because his participation in armed vigilantism and his belief that he had a legal right to act as he did in this particular situation make him an imminent risk to other Black men wherever Zimmerman goes.  Likewise, a man who admits that he had violent sex with a woman but who claims that the sex was consensual and therefore just (a potential defense) is not necessarily entitled to sufficiently low bail so that he can walk the streets, and potentially commit the same act again, while society awaits his trial.

The effects of color-aroused thinking on the Zimmerman case are already evident.  Can anyone remember an example in which the safety of a Black man was a concern in the question of whether he should be allowed bail?  No, because it is assumed that Blacks will pose a danger to Zimmerman while whites would not pose a danger to O.J. Simpson, or if they did then who cares?