So, all those who want to say, “If Zimmerman had been black, and Trayvon Martin had been white, the verdict would have been different” can shut up! In fact, you have not heard anything about this case. President Obama did not come onto national TV or send DOJ people to protest in the victims town. In fact, the black neighborhood watchman was not even being beaten up by the white boy. He claims the teen charged at him when he told him to wait for the police, and then shot him twice, once in the back and once in the hand! Where is the media circus? Where are the race baiters? Where is the 24/7 coverage on CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, and where are the protesters?
The neighborhood watchman says he saw two teens trying to break into cars, and called the police. He says he told the young men to stay here, that he had a gun and to wait for the police. He says, Chris Cervini charged at him and he shot him in self defense twice! Now, tell me more about how blacks are not treated equally in court. Tell me just what would have happened if Scott were white and Cervini were black!
Greece Teen was Shot in the Back
By: Virginia Butler
Court papers revealed the teenager killed in Greece was shot in the back.
District Attorney Mike Green confirmed that Christopher Cervini, 17, was shot in the back from about 20 feet away on Baneberry Way in Greece on Saturday, April 4.
Another bullet struck Cervini’s hand, went through his chest and out his armpit.
A grand jury on Thursday rejected Roderick Scott’s claim of self-defense, finding enough evidence to send the case to trial. Scott told investigators that Cervini charged him after Cervini and two other teens were confronted about going through a neighbor’s car.
Judge Patricia Marks set bail for Roderick Scott at $25,000 cash, $50,000 bond. SOURCE
Is this young man’s life not worth what Trayvon Martin’s was? Does our President not feel anything for this young man or his family? Does the black community not give a damn when it’s a white teen killed? Imagine what Zimmerman’s verdict would have been if Martin had never touched him and Zimmerman shot him twice, once in the back! Come on you racist liars. Come and and tell me that this case with Scott is different or you were not there and cannot judge! Come on and start your riots like your masters want you to! When will you people stop falling for the propaganda and realize you are being played by the politicians, media and the race baiters!
For the record, if this kid did charge this man he had every right to defend himself. I don’t know if the shot in the hand was first or the one in the back. If it was face first and the kid spun as the other shot was fired, then it’s self defense. Maybe young men will learn not to attack people and think they can play the “I’m just a kid” routine. If the kid tried to run and Scott shot him in the back then that is murder and he got away with it.
I found this article about the case that seems to show that Mr. Cervini was not this innocent child either and was legally drunk at the time of his death. You decide if you think the watchman was in his right to shoot based on what we know. Personally, I would want to see the court transcripts. If a 16 yr old boy was breaking into my car and I went outside with a gun and he charged at me, I would shoot him. I hope to God I never have to shoot anyone, but if my life or my families life is in danger I will use lethal force to defend myself and believe you have that same right. I am a firm believer in being judged by 12 than carried by 6!
His name is Roderick Scott. He’s a 42-year-old black man with the build of a football player. He also holds a New York State Pistol Permit, or he did until recently. In fact, until April of this year, he kept a .40-caliber semiautomatic pistol readily to hand. Whether that pistol has been returned to him by now, and whether he still holds his permit (or will again) is anybody’s guess. I don’t know Mr. Scott and have never spoken to him.
Roderick Scott is, to his misfortune, a resident of Greece, New York — a suburb of the crime-ridden, crumbling city of Rochester, NY. I say this is to Roderick Scott’s misfortune because, were he a resident of a state that leans less perilously to the left, he might not just have endured several months of legal torture, followed by the longest 19 and a half hours of his life.
Back in April, after an argument with his common-law wife, Scott was asleep on the couch in his home. At 3:00 in the morning he heard a disturbance outside, looked out the window, and saw three teenagers trying to break into his car. Shoving his gun into his waistband, he went outside to see what in hell was going on.
He caught one Christopher Cervini, then 17, in the driveway across the street. With Cervini were his cousin, James, and their friend Brian Hopkins. They were busily rifling through the neighbor’s car when Roderick Scott confronted them. These teenagers, you see, are (in Cervini’s case, he was) petty criminals. They were working their way through all the cars in the neighborhood in order to find things to steal.
The teens had also been drinking earlier in the evening. A toxicologist’s report confirmed that Christopher Cervini was legally drunk at the time of his death. (All three teenagers had, as at least one of them admitted, been drinking stolen gin before the incident.) This fine, upstanding young man, who (we were repeatedly informed during the trial) had no criminal record, also had marijuana and amphetamines in his system. The marijuana traces were consistent with a history of such use, while Cervini had been perscribed no drugs that would have accounted for the positive amphetamine results.
Under oath, James Cervini claimed that he and Christopher were standing still with their hands up when Christopher was shot — an assertion James never made prior to the trial. If it seems strange to you that he never brought this up before taking the stand, you aren’t alone in your incredulity. This seems to me an obvious lie — last-minute perjury intended to damn Roderick Scott by false witness.
Now, here’s something relevant, something you need to know about Christopher Cervini’s cousin James. James, at 15, has been on probation not once, but twice, for assisting in a burglary and for holding a knife to the throat of a ten-year-old boy (reportedly over a dispute involving marijuana). Roderick Scott’s defense attorney, a brilliant lawyer named John Parrinello (to whom Scott owes his freedom), argued during the trial that it was very likely Christopher rushed Roderick Scott in an attempt to help his cousin James escape. Both “kids” knew that James would be in trouble were he caught committing more petty theft.
Roderick Scott took the stand in his own defense, explaining that he “looked outside the front door to see what was going on,” identifying “three individuals walking out of [his] driveway.” He “intended to go out and stop the criminal act or detain them.” He then chambered a round in his weapon. “I had no idea what was going on,” he said, ”so I had to protect myself.” He was, he testified, aware that he was outnumbered, and that is key to this issue as a self-defense scenario. When outnumbered, even if those facing you are unarmed, you are generally justified to use a force multiplier — a weapon — to defend yourself.
“I wanted to stop them before they could get away,” he admitted. “We live so far away, they would have been gone before police got there.” When Scott told the three teenagers that he had called the police, Christopher Cervini broke from the group and ran at him, shouting either, “I’ll get you” to Scott or “I’ll get him” to his fellow thieves. Scott fired two shots in response.
John Parrinello shrewdly released Scott’s 911 call following the shooting. On it, Roderick Scott and his girlfriend can be heard; Scott’s statements to the operator come without hesitation. His account of the incident is consistent with his testimony, and his tone and demeanor are anything but that of a trigger-happy vigilante.
Monroe County Assistant District Attorney Julie Finnochio, by contrast, ruthlessly and relentlessly prosecuted Scottt. She got the last word during closing arguments, too, and tried to tell the jury that, regardless of the circumstances, the shooting was not justified. After the jury came back with their verdict of not guilty, she couldn’t resist the chance to twist the knife in Scott’s guts — or to further the propaganda that has been spewing from her office from the outset. “I just hope it’s not a message to this community,” she sniffed, “that you have the right to shoot an unarmed 17-year-old kid for breaking into a car.”
This is intellectually dishonest. The woman is still trying to paint Scott, now a free and vindicated man, as a cold-blooded murderer. These “kids” — these teenaged, drunken, drug-addled, sometimes knife-toting petty criminals — were not shot at for breaking into a car, but for trying to assault Roderick Scott when he caught them committing theft.
Cervini’s family, for their part, had the gall to shriek that Christopher was “brutally murdered” — that poor, innocent Christopher Cervini was essentially on trial alongside Roderick Scott. In the Cervinis’ eyes, Scott “was the judge, jury, and executioner.” Never you mind that Scott himself just sat before a jury and a judge whose job it was to pass sentence over him. In the twisted, unreal world of those who make excuses for drug-abusing, potentially violent thieves, it is a law-abiding citizen defending himself with a legal weapon who must prove his innocence after the fact.
Even the dead boy shared his family’s sense of entitlement — their indignant cries of “murder” after their boy died a victim of his own criminal stupidity. By Roderick Scott’s own testimony, we know that, as Christopher Cervini bled out into a gutter on that suburban street, he uttered the words, “I’m just a kid.” Those words will probably haunt Roderick Scott. They should bother all of us, for Cervini clearly thought that, to the end, he should not be held responsible for either theft or attempted assault.
Worse still is the fact that there are plenty of people in Roderick Scott’s neighborhood, and in the greater Western New York area, who wrongly think he’s a murderer. The local AM talk shows featured many Monday morning quarterbacks, newly minted firearms experts pontificating from ignorance on why the shooting could not be justified.
Why, after the fact, we learned that those teenagers weren’t armed this time, so clearly Roderick Scott could not have feared for his life. After all, the man dared to leave his home and confront those committing a crime. Has he learned nothing from living in modern society in New York State? You’re supposed to cower in your home, hiding under the couch, praying dearly that those terrible, mean people outside won’t choose to come inside. You’ll have plenty of time to pray while you’re on hold with the 911 operator, waiting for police who can’t possibly get there in time.
This is what’s wrong with the culture of New York State. Our state values victims over victors. It enshrines passivity over direct action to preempt or thwart criminal activity. It excuses the acts of teenaged thugs, revising history to absolve them of blame for their petty crimes, while pillorying good citizens who dare to defend themselves with legally permitted arms.
In a state with the strictest gun control in the union, to own a legal handgun is no small thing. Roderick Scott is a decent person who did everything legally and correctly… yet in the minds of many, he is the villain simply because he dared not to do nothing. Had this shooting occurred in another state with less liberal hand-wringing underlying its legal code, it’s possible Roderick Scott would never have stood trial. It is, quite frankly, a miracle that the jury — deadlocked just a few hours before it came to the “not guilty” verdict — eventually granted Scott his life back.
Fortunately, Roderick Scott is not bitter. “I feel that justice was served today,” he said after his legal ordeal.
His lawyer was diplomatic but more pointed: “I just want to say that I hope this case sends a message to families out there to watch their kids, to know where they are and what they are doing.”
That lawyer’s message is clear: If your kids live like garbage, trade in garbage, and contribute nothing to their community but garbage, they very well may die like garbage. If that happens they have no one to blame but themselves… though their parents ought to think good and hard about whether they share responsibility. SOURCE