CitizenBBN
09-10-2013, 10:31 PM
For those not following, George Zimmerman was back in the news this week. his wife and he are divorcing, no shocker given the strain of his situation, it's turned their whole family upside down.
Well there was some kind of domestic argument at a house between him and her and her father. She claimed he was talking threateningly with his hand on his weapon, but both she and her dad signed papers of non-prosecution. Apparently no gun was ever found and isn't involved in any investigation, so that part may have been made up by the wife.
Anyway, I see this headline on CNN tonight:
"Attorney Mark O'Mara drops George Zimmerman
Mark O'Mara, the attorney who successfully defended George Zimmerman in his second-degree murder trial this year, will no longer represent his notorious client.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/10/justice/zimmerman-lawyer/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Makes it sound like the attorney has refused to represent him for some reason, doesn't it? "Drops" implies a negative "I'm done with this guy" connotation.
The real story is that O'Mara is now an analyst for CNN and is no longer practicing law as a lead attorney. In the 2nd paragraph, after they've established a connotation, we find out that he said he's not representing Zimmerman in the divorce or this domestic case. No surprise, why would he? He's not a divorce lawyer, he's a trail attorney. Even if he were practicing he wouldn't be Zimmerman's divorce lawyer.
In fact there are still pending cases related to the trial, like the civil suit of NBC. B/c he's now with CNN another attorney has also taken over those cases, but not b/c he's "dropped Zimmerman", b/c he's "dropped his law practice in favor of being a media personality", at least as it relates to this set of cases.
Subtle, making it look like Zimmerman "must really be guilty, even his attorney dropped him", when in fact any changes in legal counsel having nothing to do with Zimmerman's domestic situation at all.
That is how you maintain bias and pitch your side regardless of facts but without actually lying.
Well there was some kind of domestic argument at a house between him and her and her father. She claimed he was talking threateningly with his hand on his weapon, but both she and her dad signed papers of non-prosecution. Apparently no gun was ever found and isn't involved in any investigation, so that part may have been made up by the wife.
Anyway, I see this headline on CNN tonight:
"Attorney Mark O'Mara drops George Zimmerman
Mark O'Mara, the attorney who successfully defended George Zimmerman in his second-degree murder trial this year, will no longer represent his notorious client.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/10/justice/zimmerman-lawyer/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
Makes it sound like the attorney has refused to represent him for some reason, doesn't it? "Drops" implies a negative "I'm done with this guy" connotation.
The real story is that O'Mara is now an analyst for CNN and is no longer practicing law as a lead attorney. In the 2nd paragraph, after they've established a connotation, we find out that he said he's not representing Zimmerman in the divorce or this domestic case. No surprise, why would he? He's not a divorce lawyer, he's a trail attorney. Even if he were practicing he wouldn't be Zimmerman's divorce lawyer.
In fact there are still pending cases related to the trial, like the civil suit of NBC. B/c he's now with CNN another attorney has also taken over those cases, but not b/c he's "dropped Zimmerman", b/c he's "dropped his law practice in favor of being a media personality", at least as it relates to this set of cases.
Subtle, making it look like Zimmerman "must really be guilty, even his attorney dropped him", when in fact any changes in legal counsel having nothing to do with Zimmerman's domestic situation at all.
That is how you maintain bias and pitch your side regardless of facts but without actually lying.