Obama Takes Over White House Press Briefing To Speak On Trayvon Martin

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama made an unexpected appearance at Friday's White House press briefing to talk about the outcome of the Trayvon Martin case and, more broadly, how the United States continues to grapple with racial bias.

"When Trayvon Martin was first shot, I said that this could have been my son. Another way of saying that is, Trayvon Martin could have been me 35 years ago," Obama said.

Obama said he understands why people are so upset that George Zimmerman was found not guilty for shooting and killing Martin, an unarmed teen who was walking down the street in Sanford, Fla., in February 2012. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, pursued Martin for no clear reason and ultimately shot him in what he said was self-defense.

The president urged the nation to accept the court's verdict, saying the judge conducted the trial "in a professional manner" and that the jury had made its decision.

But in an unusually personal moment, he began talking about the broader context of the case and the need to better understand the experiences of black men in this country.

"I think it's important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn't go away," Obama said. "There are very few African-American men in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me."

He went on to recount instances when he had heard "the locks click on the doors of cars" as he walked down the street. African-American men are used to getting into an elevator and seeing a fellow passenger "clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off," he said.

"I don't want to exaggerate this, but those sets of experiences inform how the African-American community interprets what happened one night in Florida," Obama said. "And it's inescapable for people to bring those experiences to bear."

Obama also pointed to the fact that young African-American men are disproportionately involved in the criminal justice system, both as perpetrators of violence and as its victims. And that violence, he noted, often takes place in poor black neighborhoods that are "born out of a very violent past in this country." The poverty and dysfunction in those communities "can be traced to a very difficult history," he said.

Obama said he's going to be thinking about what steps he can take as president in the wake of the ruling. He put forward the idea of meeting with local and state officials to come up with ways to provide more training to law enforcement on racial bias, and he also suggested that he plans to examine certain states' Stand Your Ground laws.

More generally, Obama lent support to the idea of creating a coalition -- of business leaders, elected officials, celebrities, athletes -- to address the need for African-American men to feel that they are "a full part of this society."

Obama's decision to speak on the verdict was a bit of a surprise. Several days had passed since it was issued on Saturday, and he had already put out an official statement. The conventional wisdom was that the president was wary of bringing more politics to an already sensitive issue. But both he and his advisers wanted to offer a bit more.

Speaking after the president finished his remarks, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said that the process behind putting the impromptu speech together wasn't all that complicated. The president had been prepared to address the jury verdict in Zimmerman's trial had he been asked about it in one of the interviews he did this week, but he wasn't asked. Eventually, Obama met with the press office and decided to just address the issue. A Friday statement before the press corps was as good a time as any other.

"This is not hard at all," said Carney. "The president wanted to say something, and he opened the briefing today so he could say something."

ALSO ON HUFFPOST:



Trayvon Martin Timeline





1 of 85





GlobalGrind





• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• Next

HuffingtonPost

Microsoft's Surface RT Didn't Have To Be A $900 Million Disaster

In some unknown warehouse presumably sits a pile of millions of beautiful, unused Surface RTs, the tablet computer that was supposed to resurrect Microsoft. Late Thursday, the company revealed for the first time that it has failed to entice many people to buy the product, and the software maker made an unexpected, $900 million writeoff on its unsold Surface inventory. The losses don't end there: On Friday morning, Microsoft shed $30 billion in value after its stock tumbled 10 percent.

According to one calculation, that loss translates to nearly 6 million sleek and rather stunning machines that consumers have decided they don't care to own. No matter how the math works out -- the company would not provide exact sales numbers -- that heap of Surfaces just burned a nearly $1 billion hole in Microsoft's pocket.

The irony of the Surface debacle is that Microsoft actually managed to design a product that many reviewers admired, but it failed anyway -- underscoring the degree to which this once-dominant technology company appears to be past its moment. Good, bad or mediocre, the Surface was apparently doomed on arrival because that arrival was way too late, with the market already claimed by Apple’s wildly popular iPad.

How did such a powerful company manage to engineer such a colossal loser?

A number of factors conspired -- each the result of a miscalculation from the company executives, which probably explains why CEO Steve Ballmer reshuffledleadership in Redmond and put one person, Julie Larson-Green, in charge of all hardware. Let's break down a few numbers on why this tablet bombed so badly:

• 30 months, or the amount of time between the release of Apple's first iPad and that of the Microsoft Surface. That, apparently, was all the time Apple needed to extend its walled-off ecosystem of apps and music to tablets. Had Microsoft foreseen that the world was ready to use slabs of glass as computers -- andhaving made an ahead-of-its-time tablet in the early 2000s, it should have -- it could have beat Apple to the punch.
• $100, or the difference between the cheapest full-sized iPad and the cheapest Surface RT (with cover) when it first arrived. Say you're the sort of luddite who hadn't gotten around to buying an iPad, and had to choose between it and the Surface. Advantage still goes to Apple if you own an iPhone with a bevy of purchased apps or own an iTunes account full of purchased songs. Microsoft could have still swayed that customer with a lower price point -- but decided that its tablet should be significantly more expensive. It took until this monthfor Microsoft to finally lower prices and undercut the iPad.
• 20 stores, or the number of physical retail locations Microsoft had open when it first announced the Surface. Taking a major cue from Apple, Microsoft now has a retail strategy of opening Microsoft-branded stores. Initially, the stores were going to be the only physical place where you could buy a Microsoft-branded tablet. But Business Insider counted only 20 Microsoft stores after the Surface was first announced. Even though the tablet could be ordered online, people often want to feel and test out something in real life before putting down hundreds of dollars to buy it.

Leaks suggest that Microsoft is expected to sell its second line of Surfaces within the year. Microsoft is one of the few companies rich enough to blow nearly a billion dollars selling a product and continue full-steam doing the same thing -- which, it should be noted, is some people's definition of insanity. Get ready to watch, GIF-like, Microsoft stumble again.

Or maybe not. As Yahoo News' Jason Gilbert points out, there was considerable excitement for the Surface when it was previewed at a hush-hush media event last year. When it finally went on sale, there were swarms at Microsoft Stores -- as if it was made by Apple! Reviews were mixed, but certainly not bad enough to scare away diehard Microsoft fans.

Even if sales didn't meet that stir, the hype showed a pent-up desire for a tablet that doesn't run on software made by Apple or Google. Microsoft is hoping the same thing is true of smartphones, and is having more success is that category. Windows Phones have edged out BlackBerry as the No. 3 operating system.

HuffingtonPost

Al-Bashir: Nigeria acted in order -Anyaoku

FEMI OYEWESO

The Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Dr. Emeka Anyaoku yesterday absolved Nigeria of any wrong doing for refusing to arrest the Sudanese President, Omar Al-Bashir, when he attended an AU summit in the country.

Anyaoku, who was speaking with newsmen during the funeral services of Madam Maria Taiwo Abati, mother of the Special Assistant to President Goodluck Jonathan on media and publicity, Dr. Reuben Abati which held in Abeokuta, the Ogun state capital declared that it was unrealistic for Nigeria to have handed over the Sudanese president to the ICC.

It would be recalled that the International Criminal Court (ICC) had issued a warrant of arrest on Al- Bashir Al-Bashir on what they called charges of genocide in Darfur. Al-Bashir however, recently came to Nigeria to attend the African Union (AU) summit on HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.

His presence in Nigeria had also generated local and international reactions as Human Rights Watch, an international organisatio, had also condemned Nigeria for not handing the Sudanese president over to ICC.

The organisation recently said in a statement that “Nigeria has the shameful distinction of being the first West African country to welcome ICC fugitive, Sudanese President, Al- Bashir”.

Anyaoku, however, argued that Nigeria’s action and her refusal to handover Al-Bashir was in line with the already taken position of the African Union.

The former Secretary General of Commonwealth also emphasised that AU did not only rejected the warrant, but also accused the ICC of targeting only African offenders.

“The idea of Nigeria handing the Sudanese president over to the AC or the ICCT was unrealistic. He was not Nigeria’ guest but the AU’s guest and Nigeria was only a host to the AU”.

“There is no room for AU or any international body to sanction Nigeria because there is no procedure preventing member state on an issue like that.

Nigeria was hosting AU summit, there is no way that Nigeria should have said a member of the AU should not attend the summit”.

NationalMirror

Al-Mustapha: We’ll prosecute him if necessary, Lagos insists

AYO ESAN AND MURITALA AYINLA

• Says it has just got copy of verdict

• Appeal is waste of resources –Fasehun

The Lagos State government yesterday insisted that it would appeal against the verdict setting Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, former Chief Security Officer to the former Head of State, late General Sani Abacha, free, if it finds it necessary.

The decision, the government said, would be based on the outcome of its study of the judgement. But in opposition to the possible appeal of the judgement, the founder of the pan Yoruba sociocultural group, the Oodua Peoples Congress, OPC, Dr. Fredrick Fasehun, called on the Lagos State government not to appeal the judgement declaring that it would amount to a waste of resources and time.

Speaking yesterday in an exclusive interivew with Saturday Mirror, the State Solicitor-General , Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN), who spoke on behalf of the government, disclosed that the government had just got the official reports of the Appeal Court yesterday.

According to him, the verdict would be critically looked at and appropriate action taken. Stressing that an appeal against the Appeal Court verdict would strictly be based on the conviction that the judgement was wrong, he said the state government is not a persecutor but prosecutor with integrity. His words: “I personally just got the copy of the judgement today (Friday).

What Nigerians should know is that Lagos State government, especially the state Ministry of Justice, is not a persecutor, we are prosecutors and we do it with integrity. “If there is any reason for us to appeal, we will. Not only on this judgement alone but also any judgement that is made against us whether in the High Court or Court of Appeal.

The only one we can’t appeal against is the Supreme Court’s final decision. Pedro, who is also the Permanent Secretary, Lagos State Ministry of Justice, added that the state is not only interested in high profile case but any case against any citizens in the state.

He said, “Crime is crime; whether one steals N1 or N1billion, they are all offences. Whether one kills an old man or kills a baby, it is still murder. So, the way I will probe the person who murders a roadside mechanic, is the same way I will prove the case of a billionaire that was murdered. But if we have a good reason, definitely, we are going to appeal the judgement.”

Speaking on the allegation that Al-Mustapha was prosecuted for political reasons , Pedro described the allegation as unfounded.

Meanwhile, speaking with journalists at a press conference in Lagos yesterday, Fasehun said the Lagos State government “must stop wasting taxpayers’ money by pursuing the case further”. He said the government must “immediately dismantle the team it assigned to prosecute the case”.

“Although it is the government’s right to pursue the case to the Supreme Court, not only will such cause waste of time and money, it will further fan the embers of hatred between the North and the South and prolong the psychological torture inflicted on an innocent man,” he said.

He said a fresh hunt must be launched to unmask Kudirat Abiola’s real killers saying, “The real killer of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola is still at large, out there.

A fresh hunt must be launched to unmask her real killers, as well as those responsible for killing: Bola Ige, Harry Marshall, Alfred Rewane, Funsho Williams, Odunayo Olagbaju, Ogbonnaya Uche, Theodore Agwatu, Barnabas and Abigail Igwe, Bisoye Tejuosho, Aminasoari Dikibo, Philip Olorunnipa, Ayo Daramola, Olaitan Oyerinde and M.K.O. Abiola”.

Fasehun also called for the sanction of Justice Mojisola Dada of the Lagos High Court who convicted Al- Mustapha to death before the Appeal Court set him free.

His words: “For her own part in this Theatre of the Absurd, Justice Mojisola Dada must be probed and sanctioned by the National Judicial Council, NJC”. Fasehun described last week judgement that set Al-Mustapha free as long expected adding that it had resuscitated people’s confidence in the Judiciary.

NationalMirror

Al-Mustapha’s freedom: Justice or perversion?

KAYODE FALADE

Murder is a crime many people seek justice for. They crave for the day when a tooth will be pulled for a tooth and an eye for an eye. As great their eagerness for justice is, so is their aversion to its miscarriage?

When the duo of Major Hamza Al-Mustapha and Alhaji Lateef Shofolahan were convicted for the murder of Alhaja Kudirat Abiola on 20 January, 2012, the judgement was greeted with both knocks and kudos. And so was their discharge and acquittal on 12 July, 2013. What actually is justice?

The crowd at the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal on Friday 12 July, 2013 were ambivalent about where the pendulum would swing in the appeal of Major Hamza Al-Mustapha and Alhaji Lateef Shofolahan against the death verdict passed on them by a Lagos High Court on 30 January 2012.

But the voice of Justice Rita Pemu who read the lead judgment soon made it known that a dichotomy existed in the gathering.

The eminent panel of appeal presided over by Justice Amina Augie and which also had Justice Fatima Akinbami and Justice Rita Pemu discharged and acquitted Al-Mustapha, former Chief Security Officer to the late maximum ruler, General Sani Abacha, and Shofolahan, an aide Alhaja Kudirat Abiola, one of the wives of Chief MKO Abiola, the acclaimed winner of the 12 June, 1993 presidential election whose murder they were being tried for.

One group in the court erupted in wild jubilation, while the other slunk away looking forlorn and bewildered. Al-Mustapha and Shofolahan had suddenly become free after 13 years of gruelling trial and detention of almost 15 years.

Justice Pemu who read the lead judgment held that there was no direct circumstantial evidence that Al-Mustapha and Shofolahan conspired with anyone as claims of prosecution witnesses in that regard were contradictory and that the prosecution in totality failed to establish the charge of conspiracy and murder against the appellants.

She further held that based on facts and evidence before the court, it is certainly neither Al-Mustapha nor Shofolahan who pulled the trigger and murdered Alhaja Abiola.

Justice Augie also concurred with the lead judgement, while the third Judge on the panel, Justice Akinbami also toed the line of the lead judgement thereby making the ruling unanimous.

“In a criminal trial the burden of proof is to proof beyond reasonable doubt and this is a chain that cannot be broken. “The prosecution listed four witnesses PW 9, 10, 11 and 12 as witnesses which it intended to call in the trial, but never called any of them.

“PW 1 (Dr Ore Falomo) testified before the lower court that the bullet extracted from the forehead of the deceased, was white and of a special kind, but the prosecution failed to tender the bullet as exhibit and this is fatal to their case.

“The prosecution also called Pw 4 (Investigating Police officer) who investigated the death of the deceased, but this witness was never produced for cross examination by the defence, as he never showed up in court. “This renders the evidence of the police officer inconclusive as it denied the defendants their right to fair hearing, and no reasonable court can safely make a conviction on such inconclusive testimony.

“PW 2 (Sgt. Rogers) and PW 3( Mohammedd Abdul) in their confessional statements to the police, said they were enjoined by the first appellant, to murder Kudirat, but these statements were later retracted by them in court.

“PW 2 and 3 retracting their earlier statement to the police told the court that they were cajoled by the prosecution to indict the appellants, with a promise to give them monetary compensation.

“This is a contradiction in the testimonies of the witness, it raises doubt in the case of the prosecution, and it is unimaginable that the lower court did not expunge this evidence. “For an offence like murder, I wonder why the Nigeria Police did not do a proper investigation.

“Jabila who was initially arrested as a co-defendant, was later called prosecution witness, witnesses who ought to be called were never called, the bullet extracted was never tendered before the court.

“Once there is doubt in the case of the prosecution, as in the instant case, it must be resolved in favour of the accused, and this doubt is accordingly resolved in favour of the appellants.

“One thing is clear, Kudirat was shot, but the big question is who pulled the trigger? “I find nothing in this case which sufficiently links the appellants with the commission of the offence.

“It is preposterous that in a 326 page judgment, the lower court was only concerned with securing a conviction at all cost. “Just as God is, He is no respecter of person, so also is this court.

I hereby order that the appellants be discharged and acquitted while the conviction and sentence of the lower court, is hereby discharged.

“For someone who has been incarcerated since 1999 on a baseless indictment, it is so unfortunate” Pemu held. The ruling has since drawn both attacks and commendations from Nigerians nay the international community.

While many praised the ruling to high heavens, others have concluded that it smacks of deceit, hence, a demonstration of perversion of justice in its basest form.

Kudirat Abiola, the heroine of democratic struggle, was killed in Lagos on June 4, 1996. The trial of Al-Mustapha and Shofolahan began in October, 1999 before a Lagos State Chief Magistrate Court sitting in Ikeja, presided over by Magistrate Gbogodo.

They were later re-arraigned before former Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Christopher Segun in 2000 while the judge later withdrew from the case due to allegation of bias raised against him by the counsel of Al-Mustapha, Joseph Dawodu then.

Again, the matter was reassigned to Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun now of Supreme Court, after the elevation of Justice Kekere-Ekun to the Court of Appeal, it was re-assigned to another judge before it got to the court of Justice Mojisola Dada who finally found them guilty of the offence, and accordingly convicted and sentenced them to death by hanging on January 30, 2012.

NationalMirror