Metro Jacksonville DEV

Community => News => Topic started by: Ocklawaha on July 13, 2013, 10:21:17 PM

Title: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Ocklawaha on July 13, 2013, 10:21:17 PM
The justice system at work "Zimmerman Verdict Reached: NOT GUILTY"
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 13, 2013, 10:37:15 PM
Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvaldude08 on July 13, 2013, 10:40:54 PM
Disappointed is an understatement. Not shocked at all. Didn't even bother watching any of it. I don't even have a reaction to it at this point. Same shit, different toilet. Im sure MLK is rolling over in his grave right now.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 13, 2013, 10:47:49 PM
^Kind of how I viewed the entire event. Disappointing but not surprising. I pretty much tuned it out over the last few weeks. My belief in the term, there's nothing new under the sun applies to a lot more than just urban planning.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: copperfiend on July 13, 2013, 11:11:46 PM
Not surprised. But very disturbed by the message this sends.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: FSBA on July 13, 2013, 11:13:44 PM
It is possible to be sad that Trayvon Martin is dead and happy that George Zimmerman is not guilty. Not all tragedies are crimes.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Ocklawaha on July 13, 2013, 11:14:59 PM
Guys, it all comes down to something police officers, public defenders, prosecutors, judges, and every other facet
 of our criminal, civil and legal professions. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK HAPPENED, THE RULE OF LAW HAS BEEN MADE. According to the evidence presented the man was not guilty. Does that mean Zimmerman did or did not profile Martin? Zimmerman wasn't a law enforcement officer and in spite of the media hype, WAS NOT WHITE. The man is Hispanic, who profiled who? This and lots of other details will probably never be known but when the court is in session - only the evidence presented matters. All of our opinions, fears and wishes are either proved or disproved in a court of law. I'm not downplaying what you might feel, just saying. For example, OJ and the infamous murders and trial - did I think he was guilty? Guilty as sin, but the court says he wasn't - thus he wasn't. The same system that worked for OJ worked for Zimmerman, END OF STORY.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 13, 2013, 11:21:17 PM
I will try to be rational.
I believe both parties shared some guilt. It is likely Trayvon  was not as sweet and innocent as he appears in the photos but I don't think G Zimmerman is either.
But ultimately George Zimmerman believed he was a big guy with a gun. He believed, in my opinion, that he could take the law into his own hands and instead of being rational and letting the police do their job he followed a young guy who got angry and intended to  defend himself. At that point GZ felt forced to use his gun.
Ultimately GZ caused this death. I would, even with the evidence, have found him guilty of manslaughter.
As much as people hate this, a gun was at fault. I don't think GZ would have followed this kid if he had not been carrying a gun.
And the ridiculous Stand Your Ground law will produce many more cases as tragic and needless as this. (I know that Stand Your Ground has nothing to do with this but I had to add my two cents.)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 13, 2013, 11:27:39 PM
Ock, i don't think those who are disappointed need lectures about what they think and what the laws are. My issue revolves around precedence, the message sent and potential of future conflicts generating similar confrontations like this. Because I've been in situations like this growing up, my personal perspective may be a little different. Nevertheless, I hope this case at least leads to a movement that results in the modification of certain laws and legal interpretations. No one should die from a confrontation generated from being followed in the dark by an armed stranger.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 13, 2013, 11:31:19 PM
And GZ should have stayed in his car. He was directed to do so. Had he stayed in his car Trayvon Martin would be alive.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 13, 2013, 11:38:28 PM
Also, what's with the mention of Zimmerman being called white and OJ getting off? Who cares about GZ's race and trial 20 years ago? No one white, black, yellow or green should be shot down 70 feet from their front door by an armed neighborhood vigilante, who then walks based on the interpretation of our state laws. Such a situation suggests some laws may need to change to keep this type of situation from happening on a routine basis.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: FSBA on July 14, 2013, 12:13:41 AM
Zimmerman wasn't "directed" to stay in his car.  If you find a child drowning in the St.Johns river and call 911 the dispatcher would tell you to stand back because they would be legally liable.

Martin could've said "Fuck off, I live with my father down the street" and it would've diffused the situation.

Instead Zimmerman followed Martin on a public street, Martin verbally accosted Zimmerman, followed by Martin punching Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, and telling him he would "die tonight motherfucker."

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: FSBA on July 14, 2013, 12:15:43 AM
Also, no matter the truth in the Zimmerman case, a lady in Jax got sentenced today to 20 years for firing warning shots off at her abusive husband. I don't care which way you go on the Zimmerman case, if you don't agree that this incident (warning shots) was a proper Stand your Ground case and that she should be freed then you probably shouldn't be allowed to have opinions on firearm defense laws.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: spuwho on July 14, 2013, 12:24:18 AM
Huge distaste for the way the media, politicians and self described "spokespeople" have been twisting this since the beginning. Instead of just being patient and let the evidence be presented in court.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: FSBA on July 14, 2013, 12:31:36 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 14, 2013, 12:36:42 AM
Disgusting end to a heartbreaking case.

- Moron profiles black youths for weeks.
- Moron calls to report Trayvon Martin walking through the neighborhood.
- Moron is told to stay in his car and to not pursue Martin.
- Moron decides to disregard instructions and take the law into his own hands.
- Confrontation ensues.
- Moron shoots Martin dead.

Because of George Zimmerman, a 17-year-old kid is dead. If GZ had listened to what he was told or waited for the police to arrive, none of this would have ever happened.

I don't care who started the physical confrontation, but you can be damn sure that if someone twice my size was following me in the dark, I'd be ready to defend myself, even if it meant throwing the first punch.

Even under the most liberal interpretation of the law, I don't see how in the universe this guy walked away with anything less than manslaughter.

All that said, I don't envy that jury one bit. It all comes down to the trial, and from what others who have had the time to watch the whole thing have told me, the defense ate the prosecution for breakfast. Sucks to see a scumbag with blood on his hands go free, but I guess that's the sacrifice we make for "beyond reasonable doubt."

Fortunately, I don't see this ending as badly as most. There may be some scattered violence in the next day or two, but the news cycle moves so much faster than it did even 20 years ago post-Rodney King trial that it will sadly just end up a blip on the radar.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvaldude08 on July 14, 2013, 12:47:42 AM
Disgusting end to a heartbreaking case.

- Moron profiles black youths for weeks.
- Moron calls to report Trayvon Martin walking through the neighborhood.
- Moron is told to stay in his car and to not pursue Martin.
- Moron decides to disregard instructions and take the law into his own hands.
- Confrontation ensues.
- Moron shoots Martin dead.

Because of George Zimmerman, a 17-year-old kid is dead. If GZ had listened to what he was told or waited for the police to arrive, none of this would have ever happened.

I don't care who started the physical confrontation, but you can be damn sure that if someone twice my size was following me in the dark, I'd be ready to defend myself, even if it meant throwing the first punch.

Even under the most liberal interpretation of the law, I don't see how in the universe this guy walked away with anything less than manslaughter.

All that said, I don't envy that jury one bit. It all comes down to the trial, and from what others who have had the time to watch the whole thing have told me, the defense ate the prosecution for breakfast. Sucks to see a scumbag with blood on his hands go free, but I guess that's the sacrifice we make for "beyond reasonable doubt."

Fortunately, I don't see this ending as badly as most. There may be some scattered violence in the next day or two, but the news cycle moves so much faster than it did even 20 years ago post-Rodney King trial that it will sadly just end up a blip on the radar.

I completely agree with 100%. I was not going to talk about this at all, but I feel comfortable with metrojax. I was just telling someone as an adult, if I was been followed by a car while walking my neighborhood, and this person jumped out the car at me, I would have defended myself and kicked his ass, and I'm an adult. He should not have gotten out of the car period. And I also agree I dont think there will be a huge rash of violence, but Im more concerned of the long term effects. Speaking as a professional African American male, I know how it is to be profiled just because of my color. I know what its like to stopped by police for no reason and be labeled as thug. I know how it is to get followed in the Gucci store just because I'm black and my friend has dreads. I have a 15 year old nephew that walks to the store on a regular basis. To imagine that we allow things of this nature makes me worry like hell about him. I wont even lie, I feel oppressed right now. Makes me feel like we are back in 50's all over again.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvaldude08 on July 14, 2013, 12:48:10 AM
wonder what the outcome would have been if Trayvon had shot Zimmerman dead and then tried to defend himself with "stand your ground'?

+1000
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 14, 2013, 01:45:57 AM
Verdict has already been bumped from the Breaking News section of many sites to report that the kid from Glee was found dead in his hotel room. Such is the world we live in...
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Keith-N-Jax on July 14, 2013, 03:44:23 AM
Not surprised, didn't bother following.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 14, 2013, 07:40:29 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bF-Ax5E8EJc)

Thanks for that info. I'm just really glad that this mess is over, but unfortunately the real tragedies are gonna be the upcoming sparks of violence throughout the US, all for nothing IMO. First I fell for the medias biased lies concerning this case with the twelve year old pics of TM etc; Then I did my homework a long time ago without seeing any 'colors'. Bottomline, the Georgia Satellites sung this song called "Keep Your Hands to Yourself" and if Trayvon would have followed that advice, he would still be alive today. I'm not a conspiracy theorist type, but I really believe that people in higher places in the media have interest (financially) to break this country apart; Sadly people are falling for it hook, line, and sinker.  Wanna know when I'll be outraged? Wake me up if Micheal Dunn is acquitted (don't think that he'll be).
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 08:01:38 AM
Ock, i don't think those who are disappointed need lectures about what they think and what the laws are. My issue revolves around precedence, the message sent and potential of future conflicts generating similar confrontations like this. Because I've been in situations like this growing up, my personal perspective may be a little different. Nevertheless, I hope this case at least leads to a movement that results in the modification of certain laws and legal interpretations. No one should die from a confrontation generated from being followed in the dark by an armed stranger.

+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 08:07:18 AM
I-10, I'd say the focus on media is a red herring. For me, everything really boils down to this... if no one is followed, there's no confrontation, Martin is alive and GZ could have still had his dream of becoming a police officer alive. Now a kid is dead and his killer (the guy who started the entire thing) gets to go on with his life.

The act of a random armed man following someone in the dark would seem like an initial act of aggression. The fact that our laws don't see that this way could be considered as a reason that it may be time to challenge and work to modify some of our laws.

I don't think this is over by a long shot.  However, I also think it's silly to think people are going to result in violence across the country because of the verdict.  It's the 21st century.  There's a much easier way to push and get change that saves lives in the future.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 08:19:23 AM
Regardless of what I personally think about the trial, I followed it closely and the fact is the State did not present a solid case. Unfortunately most of what the media presents is assumptions and opinion and not fact, they convicted him before he was even charged. If you'll remember the original States Attorney said there wasn't enough evidence to charge him, then responding to public outcry we got a dog as pony show that turned up the exact same result. Tax dollars at work I guess.

I find it interesting all the posts about this of those whom are upset or feel the "system" let them down, yet not one thread mentioned a young girl being abducted and murdered on the northside weeks ago.  They aren't connected, it just seems to prove that we react to media and personality before fact.

I think what this should do is initiate the wave to call for a reform of Florida's gun laws. The right to carry is not the right to kill and Stand Your Ground, though logical on paper, will only cause more such incidents. At the end of the day it comes down to the letter of the law, a loophole has been found so now it needs to be closed.

Blaming it all on "he shouldn't have followed" is just blowing smoke. In the heat of the moment anyone might act same way. If you want to change laws to include that, include charging bartenders with every DUI and every doctor that prescribes pills to someone who then sells them. No law was broken by him following. Did he escalate the situation? Yes. Don't we all learn in kindergarten to turn the other cheek? Yes. Does the law require me to stop following someone whom I just had words with? No.  If you believe otherwise, then I hope you're ready with a plan to house all those arrested because they called the cops to report a suspicious person in the neighborhood and kept tabs on them til police arrived or those who follow drunk drivers until police arrive.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 08:27:12 AM
wonder what the outcome would have been if Trayvon had shot Zimmerman dead and then tried to defend himself with "stand your ground'?

+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 08:29:01 AM
http://www.youtube.com/v/Web007rzSOI

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 08:41:20 AM
Regardless of what I personally think about the trial, I followed it closely and the fact is the State did not present a solid case.

True.  I think it's important that a verdict of not guilty is not the same as being innocent. The defense presented a better case than the State did on what was being charged.

Quote
I find it interesting all the posts about this of those whom are upset or feel the "system" let them down, yet not one thread mentioned a young girl being abducted and murdered on the northside weeks ago.  They aren't connected, it just seems to prove that we react to media and personality before fact.

I think everyone is on the same page that the freak who killed that little girl needs to fry.  Many will also fault her mother and perhaps that's why she no longer has custody of the other kids. Not sure that has anything to do with this issue.

Quote
I think what this should do is initiate the wave to call for a reform of Florida's gun laws. The right to carry is not the right to kill and Stand Your Ground, though logical on paper, will only cause more such incidents. At the end of the day it comes down to the letter of the law, a loophole has been found so now it needs to be closed.

Yes, this is where I've been going.  I don't fault the jury.  I find fault in a law that has already and will easily lead to more unnecessary deaths of innocent people who are simply minding their own business.

Quote
Blaming it all on "he shouldn't have followed" is just blowing smoke. In the heat of the moment anyone might act same way.

Cause and effect.  There's no confrontation if there's no following.  Most likely, there's no following if he's not packing.

Quote
If you want to change laws to include that, include charging bartenders with every DUI and every doctor that prescribes pills to someone who then sells them.

I don't think GZ intended to go out and murder this kid.  I also don't think someone getting toasted up at the bar intends to go out and kill someone behind the wheel. Nevertheless, such an unintentional act will typically get you hit with something like manslaughter.  If you want things to change, you work to take out the loopholes in the law.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 08:58:15 AM
Regardless of what I personally think about the trial, I followed it closely and the fact is the State did not present a solid case.

True.  I think it's important that a verdict of not guilty is not the same as being innocent. The defense presented a better case than the State did on what was being charged.

 I fully agree.

Quote
I find it interesting all the posts about this of those whom are upset or feel the "system" let them down, yet not one thread mentioned a young girl being abducted and murdered on the northside weeks ago.  They aren't connected, it just seems to prove that we react to media and personality before fact.

I think everyone is on the same page that the freak who killed that little girl needs to fry.  Many will also fault her mother and perhaps that's why she no longer has custody of the other kids. Not sure that has anything to do with this issue.

I am among the camp whom assigns blame to the mother, and feel there is more to the story the police have yet to release until trial, as it should be.  I was just pointing out how most of our reactions are based upon what the media presents in a two minute blurb, not what was presented over a lengthy trial. Which is why I made it a point to say "they aren't connected"

Quote
I think what this should do is initiate the wave to call for a reform of Florida's gun laws. The right to carry is not the right to kill and Stand Your Ground, though logical on paper, will only cause more such incidents. At the end of the day it comes down to the letter of the law, a loophole has been found so now it needs to be closed.

Yes, this is where I've been going.  I don't fault the jury.  I find fault in a law that has already and will easily lead to more unnecessary deaths of innocent people who are simply minding their own business.

Though I am a proponent of Right to Carry, I do not believe in Stand Your Ground. A study done by a Tampa newspaper proves its faults outweighs its benefits IMO. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 (http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133)

Quote
Blaming it all on "he shouldn't have followed" is just blowing smoke. In the heat of the moment anyone might act same way.

Cause and effect.  There's no confrontation if there's no following.  Most likely, there's no following if he's not packing.

 I don't fully believe he followed because he was armed, based upon character witnesses and his past I imagine he would follow anyway. He had a Super Hero complex and was not going to let some kid make him feel inferior. I honesty believe he intended to initiate an altercation, and then be the hero holding him down for the cops and the situation got out of his control.

Quote
If you want to change laws to include that, include charging bartenders with every DUI and every doctor that prescribes pills to someone who then sells them.

I don't think GZ intended to go out and murder this kid.  I also don't think someone getting toasted up at the bar intends to go out and kill someone behind the wheel. Nevertheless, such an unintentional act typically get hit with something like manslaughter.  If you want things to change, you work to take out the loopholes in the law.

 Very true, but this goes back to the beginning where the burden rested on the State and they just didn't come through.  I mean the jury even came back out asked the judge to explain the parameters of a manslaughter conviction so I feel it came down to the wording of the law and the presentation of evidence.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MuffinTop on July 14, 2013, 09:03:14 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:06:42 AM
Before reading any of the other posts I have more to add from my comments earlier. Although I think GZ is responsible for TM's death you cannot convict someone for disobeying a 911 operator. There is not a law for that. It's apparent that GZ did not follow TM with the intention of shooting him. But had he remained in his car TM would likely be alive today. The evidence obviously proved killing TM was not his intent. And one of the important things to remember is GZ is Hispanic, not white, but unfortunately racism knows no boundaries. So I guess it's possible that GZ profiled TM. But I'm not saying this was racially motivated either. If TM had been white and dressed the same way, as many young white guys do, I think GZ would have done the same thing.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 09:07:24 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.
^oooo those pesky messy cans of worms again. 

Good points muffintop, though I don't fully agree with them, welcome to MJ.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
If TM had been white and dressed the same way, as many young white guys do, I think GZ would have done the same thing.

+100

Watching the trial I was very surprised the State did not spend much time on the mental state and psychosis of GZ that night.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:15:22 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.

I work in a large retail establishment and we profile, deliberate or not, young guys who look, dress and act a certain way because they are very often the ones who steal. Most of our theft fits into this category of people.  But guess what, we do the same to whites and Hispanics not just black guys who fit into this category. I'm not saying it's right or that normal looking people don't steal but very often young men are our biggest problems. Wearing hoodies doesn't make you bad, but it also makes you look suspicious at times. Some of our thieves, both black and white, try to hide their identity from our security cameras by wearing them. But I can promise you we are equal opportunity profiles. Race and sex mean nothing.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 14, 2013, 09:17:48 AM
The crime of murder requires certain specifically described elements in order to make a  case.  It didn't seem like the prosecution did that.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:28:40 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.

I just saw a pretty detailed exhibition on Race: Are We So Different at a museum in Birmingham three days ago. There's a lot more to this than the perspective you've just presented.  I'll have to provide a detailed post later because it's going to require me to dig up some statistical data and links and I won't have that type of time to invest in a post until I get back to Jax.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:32:55 AM
If TM had been white and dressed the same way, as many young white guys do, I think GZ would have done the same thing.

I don't. Evidently, there were 45 previous 911 calls GZ had made concerning black youths he thought were suspicious over a short time period. His intentions may not have been racial but there could have been some cultural ignorance involved that was a part of his profiling. I'm sure some of this stuff will come to light when the civil case pops up.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:36:52 AM
Zimmerman wasn't "directed" to stay in his car.  If you find a child drowning in the St.Johns river and call 911 the dispatcher would tell you to stand back because they would be legally liable.

Martin could've said "Fuck off, I live with my father down the street" and it would've diffused the situation.

Instead Zimmerman followed Martin on a public street, Martin verbally accosted Zimmerman, followed by Martin punching Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, and telling him he would "die tonight motherfucker."


According to my understanding he was told to wait in his car for the police to arrive.  He thought he was a  "big man"  because he had a gun. How did he know TM didn't  have a gun? That is my point. Don't think you have the power unless you have no other choice. If being followed by a stranger i think MOST people who have responded similarly to TM. 
Stay in your car and the kid lives. Be a big shot and a kid dies. TM may have been the biggest THUG in Sanford but GZ instigated the event. I bet without that gun he would have stayed in his car and waited for the police. I believe at the time of the shooting that GZ was protecting himself, but it didn't have to get to the point.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:37:08 AM
Wearing hoodies doesn't make you bad, but it also makes you look suspicious at times.

To be fair to the dead, the kid was killed on a rainy night in winter.  If there is ever an appropriate time to wear a hoodie, it was the night GZ shot TM.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:39:21 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.

Um.  yeah.  Utter bullshit.

There is no difference, really, between the races when it comes to crime or character.  Just who is more likely to get charged, arrested and convicted.

Maybe the one who should be working on character is the type of person who still believes otherwise---despite all the available current information and statistics.

The exhibit I attended pretty much presented this case with a ton of statistical data and historical relationships to our political structure.  The key relationship focuses on economic level, not race.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:40:45 AM
If TM had been white and dressed the same way, as many young white guys do, I think GZ would have done the same thing.

I don't. Evidently, there were 45 previous 911 calls GZ had made concerning black youths he thought were suspicious over a short time period. His intentions may not have been racial but there could have been some cultural ignorance involved that was a part of his profiling. I'm sure some of this stuff will come to light when the civil case pops up.

I think what I meant is GZ would assume he was black if he was wearing a hoodie and he couldn't determine if he was black or not. Believe me a lot of young white guys wear hoodies too and it's hard to tell the difference. He is probably a racist.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:44:14 AM
Gotcha. I misunderstood.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:46:09 AM
Wearing hoodies doesn't make you bad, but it also makes you look suspicious at times.

To be fair to the dead, the kid was killed on a rainy night in winter.  If there is ever an appropriate time to wear a hoodie, it was the night GZ shot TM.

Your are correct but I swear some young guys of both races come into where I work even in summer wearing them. I guess what I'm saying it draws undue attention to them.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 09:48:21 AM
Gotcha. I misunderstood.

Thanks
I just don't want ANYONE to think that I think the death of TM was justified. Even if he was a terrible young man GZ caused his death for NO reason. It's sad he goes unpunished.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 10:17:07 AM
And why are young black males profiled? Because we live in a racist society or because young black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime? 

Old ladies, Asians and hasidic jews are rarely profiled. Why is that? A racist system that favors them? Or because they don't commit a lot of crime?

I would wager that if young black males stopped committing crime at a rate somewhere around 8 to 1 compared to other racial groups within a year there would be no more profiling.

Maybe it's time to stop blaming racism, the system, the man for targeting a specific group and start trying to change a culture that seems to embrace violence and thuggery?

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

Maybe it's it's time to start working on character?


Coming from a young black male perspective, kind of crazy and disappointing. I fear for my sons and nephews as they get older and are profiled. System may have worked as structured but I don't believe justice was served. Like Rosa Parks, perhaps this case leads to change. Time will tell.

Um.  yeah.  Utter bullshit.

There is no difference, really, between the races when it comes to crime or character.  Just who is more likely to get charged, arrested and convicted.

Maybe the one who should be working on character is the type of person who still believes otherwise---despite all the available current information and statistics.

The exhibit I attended pretty much presented this case with a ton of statistical data and historical relationships to our political structure.  The key relationship focuses on economic level, not race.

poverty has always been the real difference, lake.

anybody with white trash cousins in the south (and we all have them) can tell you the crime stories.

Its the same as old Bill's crazy opinions on black people and food stamps.  68% of food stamp recipients are single white women living in poverty.

The statistical reality just doesnt penetrate the stereotypes.

Amen Stephen
It angers me when Southern white rednecks infer that all food stamp and welfare abuse is black. I know as many whites on both, probably more.
Of course there are lazy bums of both races taking advantage of government assistance, but so may white people want to blame the abuse on blacks.
Those programs are sad necessities and most of the people who use them are in real need. But we have become such a greedy selfish society we resent our tax dollars going to help them.
The wealthy abuse the system just as much as the poor, yet they never get called out.
What are we if we can't help our neighbors in need? We don't mind our tax dollars being used to kill men, women in children in foreign lands, but we don't care if people in our own country are starving.
The GZ/TM horror show is a prime example of the abuse of guns, power and the disrespect of human life.
My rant on Social programs and how much so many people hate them, for me, is another example of our disrespect of human life.
I was brought up in a household that taught respect for EVERYONE. Young, old, rich, poor, mentally or physically disabled, black, white, Hispanic, Mexican and so on. I was taught to obey the law and especially in a volatile situation, let the police do their job. I was taught to work and work hard and give your employer your best. Not to resent people better off than you.
I was also taught that it was not evil if due to circumstances beyond your control you had to take advantage of programs designed for this purpose. And by no means resent others who also had no choice.

For me this horrible tragedy is just another example of where we are at this point in time and our misguided view of fellow humans of every race.
 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Dog Walker on July 14, 2013, 10:30:38 AM
The 2nd degree murder charge was overreach.  If they had gone with manslaughter or negligent homicide (I'm not sure of the difference) the chances of a guilty verdict would have been much stronger.  Trying to prove "malice" just undermined the credibility of their whole case even if manslaughter was added at the last minute.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: avonjax on July 14, 2013, 10:31:11 AM
I don't fully believe he followed because he was armed, based upon character witnesses and his past I imagine he would follow anyway. He had a Super Hero complex and was not going to let some kid make him feel inferior. I honesty believe he intended to initiate an altercation, and then be the hero holding him down for the cops and the situation got out of his control.


Then he needed help with his "Super Hero Complex," not a gun.
His fantasy finally caught up with him and ended in a death.

(This is not an attack on your view.)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 14, 2013, 10:34:38 AM
One guy was minding his own business, one guy had his gun and injected himself into someone else's life. This is a loophole that Zimmerman exploited if you can't see that it calls your morals and intelligence into question.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 10:36:49 AM
I don't fully believe he followed because he was armed, based upon character witnesses and his past I imagine he would follow anyway. He had a Super Hero complex and was not going to let some kid make him feel inferior. I honesty believe he intended to initiate an altercation, and then be the hero holding him down for the cops and the situation got out of his control.


Then he needed help with his "Super Hero Complex," not a gun.
His fantasy finally caught up with him and ended in a death.

(This is not an attack on your view.)

Fully agree, and if they had focused on that the out one may have been different.  Maybe not prison, however some sort of mental health help.  From the beginning of the trial my co-workers and I were amazed of the personality similarities between his actions and thought process and that of someone whom sparks a fire only to save the people trapped inside.  That is a problem.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 10:38:38 AM
I didn't follow the case on a daily basis.  In dealing with the confrontation, how was it determined that TM attacked GZ first?  How did they come up with a timeline of punches thrown? Did someone other than GZ actually see the fight or was the chain of events that led to the shooting GZ's version of the story? I know he got his ass kicked but all that means is the kid was a better fighter.

So with these questions in mind, can you get physically dominated in a fist fight you start, shoot the victim and get off on self defense?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 10:39:39 AM
One guy was minding his own business, one guy had his gun and injected himself into someone else's life. This is a loophole that Zimmerman exploited if you can't see that it calls your morals and intelligence into question.

Not 100% accurate.  It wasn't as though TM was just walking down the street minding his own business.  However, GZ should've stopped pursuing him and agitating the matter. The blame lies on the both of them, unfortunately only one survived.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 14, 2013, 10:51:44 AM
This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 14, 2013, 10:55:01 AM
It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 11:02:03 AM
So with these questions in mind, can you get physically dominated in a fist fight you start, shoot the victim and get off on self defense?

The way the law is written, if you are in legal possession of a firearm, yes.  Case law exists that shows people being ago in the back, another with two people shot and killed, and both times the defendant claimed Stand Your Ground, they feared for their life and walked.

I am also surprised at how many Florida politicians are chiming in on Twitter about this, guess it is easier to provoke more hate than to rewrite laws.  Shame.


Maybe the Feds will step in and put an end to this nonsense.

I wouldnt be surprised if "Stand Your Ground" laws, (which were promoted and passed by ALEC around the country---not just florida incidentally) arent the actual reason that the Feds finally ban handguns.

If all the consequences are going to be stripped away from gun murders in multiple states, the only public safety response is to ban the weapons themselves.

That circumvents this kind of free pass for murder.

I believe a federal action is what it will take.  Unfortunately many more may perish before any action is taken.

Quote
In the United States, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. The concept sometimes exists in statutory law and sometimes through common law precedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense or immunity to criminal charges and civil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as an affirmative defense, permits a plaintiff or the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justify the accused's conduct.

"Stand your ground" governs U.S. federal case law in which right of self-defense is asserted against a charge of criminal homicide. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Beard v. U.S. (158 U.S. 550 (1895)) that a man who was "on his premises" when he came under attack and "...did not provoke the assault, and had at the time reasonable grounds to believe, and in good faith believed, that the deceased intended to take his life, or do him great bodily harm...was not obliged to retreat, nor to consider whether he could safely retreat, but was entitled to stand his ground."

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".

Many states have some form of Stand Your Ground law. Alabama, Alaska,Arizona,California,Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa,Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,Maine, Massachusetts,Michigan,Mississippi, Missouri, Montana,New Hampshire,North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,Pennsylvania , Rhode Island,South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee,Texas,Utah,West Virginia, and Wyoming have adopted Castle Doctrine statutes, and other states (Iowa,Virginia,and Washington) have considered "Stand Your Ground" laws of their own.

In Florida, the law has resulted in self-defense claims tripling. The law's critics argue that Florida's law makes it very difficult to prosecute cases against people who shoot others and then claim self-defense. The shooter can argue that he felt threatened, and in most cases, the only witness who could have argued otherwise is the victim who was shot and killed. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 14, 2013, 11:05:13 AM
This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?   
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 11:07:40 AM
Quote
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/02/5539380/zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey.html (http://www.sacbee.com/2013/07/02/5539380/zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey.html)
OCALA, Fla. /PRNewswire/ -- Florida State's Attorney Angela Corey has been indicted by a citizens' grand jury, convening in Ocala, Florida, over the alleged falsification of the arrest warrant and complaint that lead to George Zimmerman being charged with the second degree murder of African-American teenager Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida.

The indictment of Corey, which was handed down last week (see www.citizensgrandjury.com), charges Corey with intentionally withholding photographic evidence of the injuries to George Zimmerman's head in the warrant she allegedly rushed to issue under oath, in an effort to boost her reelection prospects. At the outset of this case, black activists such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who whipped up wrath against Zimmerman, demanded that he be charged with murder, after local police had thus far declined to arrest him pending investigation.

Following Corey's criminal complaint charging Zimmerman, legal experts such as Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz condemned her for falsely signing an arrest affidavit under oath, which intentionally omitted exculpatory evidence consisting of the photographs showing the injuries Zimmerman sustained, and rushing to charge him with second degree murder under political pressure. Dershowitz called her actions unethical and themselves crimes http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161 (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161)

This only makes me think of the quote "who watches the watchers?"
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:12:50 AM
Not utter bullshit. Indisputable fact.

FBI Murder stats by race: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3

White murderers: 4,729
Black murderers: 5,486

Whites represent 72% of the population
Blacks represent 12% of the population

If you do the math on a per-capita basis black people murder 7 to 1 vs white people.

This isn't racist. It's math. Police officers know this stat because they live it.

Thats why they profile young african males and the don't profile equally brown young men from India.

You can bury your head in the sand and surround yourself with people that will further support the version of reality you want to believe.  Or you can look at things in an unemotional objective way and understand things for the way they really are.

Only be choosing the latter can you address and fix a real problem that exists.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:15:37 AM
I'm very relieved that the law supported self defense with deadly force.  I feel that it's a basic human right to be able to defend yourself.

This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 14, 2013, 11:22:20 AM
^was it really necessary to start new account just for that?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:39:28 AM
I screwed up my account or password or something.  It was easier to create a new account that un-cluster whatever I screwed up.

^was it really necessary to start new account just for that?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 12:25:43 PM
Yes.  If a more youthful - but also larger and stronger person is attacking me it makes me happy that the law recognizes my basic human right of self defense.

I'm very relieved that the law supported self defense with deadly force.  I feel that it's a basic human right to be able to defend yourself.

This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?

Yeah, nothing like preemptively defending yourself by murdering a child armed with skittles.

Its a proud day for all of us.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 12:53:24 PM
No I was responding to a previous poster who referenced racial profiling with the underling narrative that it is racist.

I am simply supporting the face that racial profiling has more to do with the behavior of the people being profiled than it does the color of their skin.  I used indisputable FBI murder statistics by race and population percentage.

Now we have indisputable fact that a specific group of people murder at an astonishingly higher rate than other groups of people.  Which is why they are being profiled.  Stop the crime and the profiling will also stop.

Let me give you a real world example of this in action.

In 1941 the Japanese bombed Hawaii. The Japanese at the time built a very aggressive culture of conquest and preemptive war.  They were assholes.  The majority of most American's toward Japan and the Japanese was negative. Why was it negative toward the Japanese and not the Swiss? Because the Swiss didn't do anything to American and the Japanese were running around the globe killing and the swiss were not.  We judged them based on their behavior. 

Fast forward a bit and the Japanese change their culture to one of industry, technology and peaceful co-existence with other countries and what is the general attitude toward the Japanese? I'd say good to great. Why did it change? Their behavior - they stopped killing everyone in their path and attacking their neighbors. 

Young black males commit more crime per capita than any other racial group. Fact. Thats why they are profiled. It's not racist.  It's math.  If middle age Amish men perpetrated most of the crime they would receive the most profiling.  But they don't so they aren't. 

You can't make this very straightforward connection between cause and effect?


Not utter bullshit. Indisputable fact.

FBI Murder stats by race: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3

White murderers: 4,729
Black murderers: 5,486

Whites represent 72% of the population
Blacks represent 12% of the population

If you do the math on a per-capita basis black people murder 7 to 1 vs white people.

This isn't racist. It's math. Police officers know this stat because they live it.

Thats why they profile young african males and the don't profile equally brown young men from India.

You can bury your head in the sand and surround yourself with people that will further support the version of reality you want to believe.  Or you can look at things in an unemotional objective way and understand things for the way they really are.

Only be choosing the latter can you address and fix a real problem that exists.


So we just watched a non black person get away with murder, and part of his defense was that he was scared of the black kid, and you are trying to contradict the idea that black people are more likely to get charged, arrested and convicted than other races?

Well ok.

If you don't see the basic problem with your argument, then talking it through is probably not going to help you.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:07:59 PM
It's not racism it's math.  And it's math that you can't dispute which is why you yell racism.  It's easier to yell and label than it is to discuss esp when the facts support the other guy's argument.

Black youths are killing each other at an astonishing rate every day in America. This is a fact. It's not debatable. Why is this happening? What is the cause? What can we do to reduce it?

I want to stop the senseless killing of young men - and that makes me a racist?


By the way muffin top, thanks for injecting the racism into a thread about gun laws.

Its interesting that for you, the murder of this child is about how all these blacks keep killing people because of the blacks and their lack of character.

and by 'interesting', i pretty much mean 'stomach churning'.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ChriswUfGator on July 14, 2013, 01:26:00 PM
Well you can thank Angela Corey for the decision to overcharge (her normal M.O.) murder, which is what actually got this fellow acquitted. The system didn't fail, the prosecution simply failed to prove their case.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 14, 2013, 01:30:32 PM
I'm very relieved that the law supported self defense with deadly force.  I feel that it's a basic human right to be able to defend yourself.

This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?

Yeah, nothing like preemptively defending yourself by murdering a child armed with skittles.

Its a proud day for all of us.

Again.... did Zimmerman murder TM?  If you say so, how do you know of this?  Do you have clear evidence as to what happened ... so that you can feel confident that it was murder?  Were you there?  Did you see something nobody else saw? 

How can a man be sent to jail on assumptions that something happened, something about which there is no clear evidence? 

This is the kind of thinking which allows some to believe in heaven.  They believe without evidence to support the belief.  Do you believe that Zimmerman murdered TM, even though you have no evidence of it... no proof of it? 

TM was killed.  Without evidence as to exactly what happened, that's all anyone can say about it.  Anything else is from someone's imagination.  You don't put people in jail as a result of imagining events. 

All the discussion here on this forum, and in the media, should have nothing to do with whether or not Zimmerman is guilty or not-guilty.  It's over.  At this point, until clear evidence arrives to support a murder, he cannot be proven guilty.  He is free to go.

The discussion now might focus on the fundamental causes of the tragedy ... which has absolutely nothing to do with Zimmerman's guilt.   

The two fellows were in a situation which had the potential to become confrontational.  Some people tend to escalate potential situations, forcing to hostile confrontations -- other people tend to avoid escalating, giving... backing down to avoid hostility.  The former don't live as long as the latter.

Both Zimmerman and TM made the decision to escalate, to confront, to become physical, with the result that one killed the other.  If only "one" of them had run or avoided escalating the situation, they would both be alive.  Unfortunately, both made the mistake of escalating the situation into a violent physical confrontation.  They were both stupid.  One died because of their stupidity.  End of story.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:42:07 PM
One more thought on profiling and racism.  I believe profiling is race neutral and based on crime stats.

-- Most serial murderers are middle age white men generally loners.  The weirder and more sexual the more likely it seems to be a white guy in his 40s.  And the cops will usually start the search with middle age white guys.  This must be racist. The cops clearly hate middle age white guys.

-- Most infant abductions are perpetrated by childless females. Thats why the cops never look for older black men for these types of crimes.

-- An Amish man has never hijacked or attempted to hijack a commercial airliner.  Which is why they never profile the Amish? But they do profile middle eastern men.  Because the FBI is racist? Or the FBI knows that middle eastern men do most of the hijacking?

This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with statistical probabilities and past behavior of specific groups of people.
.
[/quote]

Hmm. Most criminal money launderers and banking fraud perpetrators are white men.

So perhaps white people shouldnt be allowed to handle money.

And if they threaten to handle it, maybe we should shoot them.

I see your line of reasoning muffintop. 

I wonder if you do.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:43:20 PM
I will never attack someone so this shouldn't be a problem.

Yes.  If a more youthful - but also larger and stronger person is attacking me it makes me happy that the law recognizes my basic human right of self defense.

Wonderful.

Perhaps a public spirited octagenarian will shoot you to death at some point.

Give Chamblin a year or so.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:45:32 PM
You haven't made one substantial argument for your point of view. Thats because you brought skittles to a gunfight.

I'm very relieved that the law supported self defense with deadly force.  I feel that it's a basic human right to be able to defend yourself.

This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?

Yeah, nothing like preemptively defending yourself by murdering a child armed with skittles.

Its a proud day for all of us.

Again.... did Zimmerman murder TM?  If you say so, how do you know of this?  Do you have clear evidence as to what happened ... so that you can feel confident that it was murder?  Were you there?  Did you see something nobody else saw? 

How can a man be sent to jail on assumptions that something happened, something about which there is no clear evidence? 

This is the kind of thinking which allows some to believe in heaven.  They believe without evidence to support the belief.  Do you believe that Zimmerman murdered TM, even though you have no evidence of it... no proof of it? 

TM was killed.  Without evidence as to exactly what happened, that's all anyone can say about it.  Anything else is from someone's imagination.  You don't put people in jail as a result of imagining events. 

All the discussion here on this forum, and in the media, should have nothing to do with whether or not Zimmerman is guilty or not-guilty.  It's over.  At this point, until clear evidence arrives to support a murder, he cannot be proven guilty.  He is free to go.

The discussion now might focus on the fundamental causes of the tragedy ... which has absolutely nothing to do with Zimmerman's guilt.   

The two fellows were in a situation which had the potential to become confrontational.  Some people tend to escalate potential situations, forcing to hostile confrontations -- other people tend to avoid escalating, giving... backing down to avoid hostility.  The former don't live as long as the latter.

Both Zimmerman and TM made the decision to escalate, to confront, to become physical, with the result that one killed the other.  If only "one" of them had run or avoided escalating the situation, they would both be alive.  Unfortunately, both made the mistake of escalating the situation into a violent physical confrontation.  They were both stupid.  One died because of their stupidity.  End of story.

yawn.  do you promise its the end of your story?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:49:57 PM
My opinion is based in indisputable fact - fact which you disagree with - but can't dispute. 

That fact is young black males murder at a rate of 7 to 1 vs whites.  That indisputable fact is why they are profiled.  If old Asian women were doing most of the killing then the police would profile old Asian women.

It is literally that simple.


I want to stop the senseless killing of young men - and that makes me a racist?

Im sure I cant tell you what makes you a racist.

But you sure are using this child's murder to air your half baked opinions about black people.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:53:40 PM
I have and either you're wrong or you lack the mental horsepower to refute me. Or both.

You've resorted to name calling. I've used real world examples and crime stats.

There really isn't much left to say. Unless you'd like to offer up an opposing point of view that isn't a personal insult.

I need to get some stuff done in the real world.  This is entertaining but not productive.  If you can come up with a well reasoned point of view we'll continue this later.


You haven't made one substantial argument for your point of view. Thats because you brought skittles to a gunfight.

I havent had anything substantial to argue against, is the clear reason.

And besides, what else would you bring juveniles in the middle of trying to think of cool ways to get away with murder besides candy?

So, why not put the plastic squirt guns away, kids?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 01:54:53 PM
The loser of Internet arguments will choose one (or both of these courses);

-- Personal insults
-- Critique of spelling and grammar



It is literally that simple.

Well we can definitely agree that you are that simple.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 02:09:51 PM
^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 14, 2013, 02:51:24 PM
^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?


The statistics might be true Lake, but there is a whole discussion waiting, as to why they are as they are.  There are definitely some structured... institutionally based social forces and habits which perpetuate the fundamental causes of those statistics.  But that's a whole discussion in itself.

It amazes me that some people seem to be blind to these fundamental forces or structures in society which maintains the statistics.  They seem to be comfortable in their ignorance.  Why gain knowledge and improve one's perception if one is comfortable in ignorance and apathy?

     
(from Stephene Dare .. to Ron)   yawn.  do you promise its the end of your story?

Stephen, your tendency to avoid constructive contributions to a challenging discussion is showing again.  As I've often said.... you descend to denigrating comments when things get over your head.  Well... let's see, what will be your next effort to lower the quality of this forum?  I'm will wait patiently for some additional nonsense from you. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 03:23:14 PM
This is a somewhat complex case.  It seems that the lack of clear evidence as to exactly what happened is the reason that Zimmerman was set free.  It is a tragedy, as a life was lost, and suffering must be endured by relatives and friends.

To punish an individual by imprisonment, without clear evidence giving cause for, and validation for, that punishment, would also be a tragedy.  Perhaps I've missed some key points of evidence.  Does anyone believe that the evidence is clear as to exactly what happened?  Otherwise, all this controversy, including the civil rights aspect, is really about something other than the specifics of this case.

unarmed dead boy.


armed man who says he shot him.

its pretty clear ron.


It is not complex a guy got away with murder via a loophole.

TM was minding his own business.

Yes, TM was not armed with a gun.  But he was armed with his fists, knees, and hands .. which can be quite frightening, and even deadly -- and in any case, giving a victim reason to fear for his or her life.

So.... where is the clarity?  I'm referring to the clarity as to exactly what happened.  It seems that there is no clear evidence as to exactly what happened.  Therefore, to imprison Zimmerman, based on assumptions?

There's no conflict if an armed GZ doesn't stalk/provoke TM.  The fact that a random guy can carry a firearm, provoke an altercation, shoot the victim when the victim starts to kick his ass, and walk away free from doing any prison time is a problem, IMO.  This doesn't mean the system is broken or the jury didn't make the right decision based on what they were tasked to do.  However, it does indicate that we may need to change some of the laws on our books that allow morons to get away with acts like this on innocent people minding their own business.

Quote
Was it really murder?  How does anyone know at this point?  Perhaps TM was initially minding his own business.  But what happened ..... really?

If TM is initially minding his own business (which the facts prove), who starts the acts that lead to a conflict, which ultimately leads to the death of a kid that was out to get skittles and an iced tea?  It shouldn't matter what happened in the actual fight.  The guy starting the entire thing shouldn't be painted as a victim who gets to walk away free for killing someone when he provoked the entire altercation.  If that isn't manslaughter, I don't know what is.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AKIRA on July 14, 2013, 03:30:42 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 03:37:19 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed.

It was proven that GZ stalked/followed the kid.  Maybe it's just me and the experience of growing up as a black male in a different environment that many of our readers may not be familiar with...but if someone you don't know (who clearly isn't a police officer), follows you in the dark, you're being provoked and being put in a situation where you're on the defensive.  If not, in typical circumstances, your ass is as good as mugged, jumped or whatever.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 03:40:26 PM
^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?


The statistics might be true Lake, but there is a whole discussion waiting, as to why they are as they are.  There are definitely some structured... institutionally based social forces and habits which perpetuate the fundamental causes of those statistics.  But that's a whole discussion in itself.

It amazes me that some people seem to be blind to these fundamental forces or structures in society which maintains the statistics.  They seem to be comfortable in their ignorance.  Why gain knowledge and improve one's perception if one is comfortable in ignorance and apathy?

This is pretty much where I was going with Muffin's skewed statistical data.  There's a much bigger story out there and random numbers don't mean crap if you don't understand or care how they are being generated.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 03:51:29 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed.

It was proven that GZ stalked/followed the kid.  Maybe it's just me and the experience of growing up as a black male in a different environment that many of our readers may not be familiar with...but if someone you don't know (who clearly isn't a police officer), follows you in the dark, you're being provoked and being put in a situation where you're on the defensive.  If not, in typical circumstances, your ass is as good as mugged, jumped or whatever.
Why didn't TM call the Police himself? There seems to have been time for him to do just that. Why didn't TM run to the home he was staying at? Look overall this case is over the Jury has spoken Not Guilty!

Call the police and get mugged while on the phone? Try to run home, get shot in the ass and then mugged? Wow, there's a huge gulf of cultural and environmental ignorance in this thread.

Anyway, I agree the jury has spoken.  However, the ultimate impact of this night may just be beginning. The jury also spoke when Emmett Till was lynched in 1955.  The momentum generated from that injustice ultimately resulted in Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. This case may have just turned TM into a martyr.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 04:05:42 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed.

It was proven that GZ stalked/followed the kid.  Maybe it's just me and the experience of growing up as a black male in a different environment that many of our readers may not be familiar with...but if someone you don't know (who clearly isn't a police officer), follows you in the dark, you're being provoked and being put in a situation where you're on the defensive.  If not, in typical circumstances, your ass is as good as mugged, jumped or whatever.
Why didn't TM call the Police himself? There seems to have been time for him to do just that. Why didn't TM run to the home he was staying at? Look overall this case is over the Jury has spoken Not Guilty!

Call the police and get mugged while on the phone? Try to run home, get shot in the ass and then mugged? Wow, there's a huge gulf of cultural and environmental ignorance in this thread.

Anyway, I agree the jury has spoken.  However, the ultimate impact of this night may just be beginning. The jury also spoke when Emmett Till was lynched in 1955.  The momentum generated from that injustice ultimately resulted in Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. This case may have just turned TM into a martyr.

Indeed.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Apache on July 14, 2013, 04:11:21 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed.

If I'm walking anywhere and a car slows and starts watching me and following me, I would feel provoked. Not ashamed to say I probably would be slightly scared. You never know who's out there these days.

Matter of fact a few nights ago in Riverside. A local guy was walking down Myra, a car slowed. A guy jumped out with a gun (turned out to be a bb gun) the walker pulled out a knife an stabbed the gun attacker.

If I was TM, this is what I would be thinking and would act accordingly



Bottom line, GZ thought TM was up to no good. He was wrong about that. The law may be on his side. He will go to sleep every night knowing he took a someone's life away, and even he has to realize in hindsight, he took that life because he made an inaccurate assumption. That's no easy thing to live with.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 04:14:13 PM
Quote
(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/Trayvon-Martin-Protest-2013.jpg) (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/sheclown2/media/Trayvon-Martin-Protest-2013.jpg.html)

#ProtestTheVerdict: List of Protests in NYC, D.C., Boston, Austin, Chicago + More

As we transition from the shock of George Zimmerman being found not guilty on Saturday, diverse crowds of peaceful protesters are hitting the streets all over the country in Trayvon Martin‘s honor.

As we enter into Sunday, even more demonstrations are being planned for the afternoon and we’ll do our best to list as many as we can. There’s also this cool map of events that has been created. Bring your signs, hoodies, and your voice!

Send additional locations/info to lanae[at]sinuousmag.com or hit us up on Twitter @SinuousMag.

If you can’t make it, you can still lend your signature to this petition.

http://www.sinuousmag.com/2013/07/protest-the-verdict/
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 04:25:57 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed.

It was proven that GZ stalked/followed the kid.  Maybe it's just me and the experience of growing up as a black male in a different environment that many of our readers may not be familiar with...but if someone you don't know (who clearly isn't a police officer), follows you in the dark, you're being provoked and being put in a situation where you're on the defensive.  If not, in typical circumstances, your ass is as good as mugged, jumped or whatever.

...and sometimes (in jacksonville) if it is a police officer -- just sayin'
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 14, 2013, 05:32:57 PM
Just sayin' what?  You are inferring something sinister.  Just say it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 14, 2013, 05:55:10 PM
This has never been a "stand your ground" case.  Martin was the only participant that could have conceivably claimed "stand your ground".  Zimmerman's case rested on self defense.  He had to prove that he was in a place that he was legally able to be, and feared for his life or serious injury.

Without dragging though pages of BS arguments, I'll just state my thoughts.  The gun didn't cause this.  The right to self defense (a concept of citizenry that goes back literally hundreds of years)  is not at fault.  The feds will never (I hope) be allowed to disregard the United States Constitution.  While Muffin's stat's are true and he makes a point in the larger sense, I don't think it allows for the actions followed by Mr. Zimmerman. I agree that this case is a tragic story that has been used by several different camps to set their own agenda.  I will continue to pay no attention to unattributed character assassination of either Mr. Zimmerman or Mr. Martin.  Such behavior is worse than the assigned "racism" charges from all sides. 

Like Lake, I have not followed the day to day testimony, so I am not as familiar with the specifics as some of you may be.  It seems that the likely crime was always "manslaughter" based on what evidence was available.  Mr. Zimmerman's pursuit of Mr. Martin was negligent in its initiation and its length.  I am not aware of how this was presented in trial.  The jury has answered and we now all have to live with the verdict.  I can name literally hundreds of verdicts that I did not agree with in addition to this one.  The Martin family will have their civil trial. 

I see that the personal insults continue to fly in this forum.  No civil discussion can be had when posters ideas are not discussed, but instead personal insults and demeaning attacks are thrown at them.  We should be able to analyze this case in an intelligent manner and exchange our opinions without malice.  But, as usual, that appears to be impossible here.  I am sorry for the Martin family.  I am sorry that Mr. Zimmerman will live the rest of his life with this stigma.  I wish that I could say something positive had come out of this, but I don't see it as of yet.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 14, 2013, 05:56:52 PM
Just sayin' what?  You are inferring something sinister.  Just say it.

Kiko Battles.  Lets start there.


If you would do your usual and start another thread on the Battles incident, I would be happy to discuss it.  But I think it would be insulting to the Martin family to link Battles to their son, don't you?  Let's not do this in this thread.  Start a new one.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 14, 2013, 06:26:14 PM
Provoked....?  There lays a pivotal thing that needs to be proven, not assumed. 

Well Zimmerman said in the 911 call "He's running" . So Zimmerman knows definitively that TM's fight or flight instinct has taken effect and the TM has chosen to avoid conflict. However unsatisfied with just terrifying the young man  Zimmerman chooses to stay in pursuit. I think we can assume provocation proven.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 14, 2013, 06:32:23 PM
Don't get your hopes up Stephen. That is just some CYA on the Justice departments part.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: comncense on July 14, 2013, 06:41:07 PM
From 2007... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/nyregion/23trial.html?_r=3&

Man Convicted for Shooting Teenager

A Suffolk County jury on Saturday night found a black man guilty of manslaughter for shooting of an unarmed white (white and puerto rican) teenager outside the man’s house last year, ending a racially charged trial.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 06:42:31 PM
Just sayin' what?  You are inferring something sinister.  Just say it.

Kiko Battles.  Lets start there.


If you would do your usual and start another thread on the Battles incident, I would be happy to discuss it.  But I think it would be insulting to the Martin family to link Battles to their son, don't you?  Let's not do this in this thread.  Start a new one.

Not Now, I've missed you.  I was hoping I'd see you in the stalking thread.

That being said, I'll do as I please, of course.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 06:46:40 PM
Quote
Appeals for calm in the wake of such a verdict raise the question of what calm there can possibly be in a place where such a verdict is possible. Parents of black boys are not likely to feel calm. Partners of black men are not likely to feel calm. Children with black fathers are not likely to feel calm. Those who now fear violent social disorder must ask themselves whose interests are served by a violent social order in which young black men can be thus slain and discarded.

There's no calm to be had in this. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 06:50:14 PM
(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/martinprotest.jpg) (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/sheclown2/media/martinprotest.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 14, 2013, 06:58:39 PM
To Ron Chamblin.

Im sorry, I just find your posts boring and nonsensical most of the time.

Im sure thats reciprocal, but I doubt I will ever have anything to add to your stunning grasp of the world as it was understood in 1950.

Sorry to bore you so much Stephen.  I'll try to simplify my posts so that you can grasp the essence of them.

If you do indeed find my posts boring, it is probably related to the same phenomenon wherein an individual unfamiliar with.. say... the calculus, becomes bored while looking at a group of formulas simply because it means nothing.  In other words, if an individual has no understanding of the Russian language, wouldn’t he or she become bored after gazing upon it for a while?   

Just as an individual will become bored with any subject about which he or she is too ignorant, the same condition of being bored will occur if he or she lacks the mental capacity to understand enough of the subject at hand.

An idiot sees absolutely nothing when he or she views a complex physics problem.  And just as they become bored, so do you when you fail to comprehend what I’ve posted.

And of course, as one confesses ignorance, and is not able to comprehend because of certain mental limitations, then one might accuse others of being nonsensical.  If you consider my posts as being nonsensical, perhaps you are admitting your inability to understand, and not my inability to make good sense.

And as I’ve said before, your habit, upon discovering that you are found to be either ignorant or stupid, is to simply insult the individual who exposes your limitations.  A review of your many posts will find many references to things like.... “your passing gas”...  etc etc etc etc. 

But no... I don’t find your posting nonsensical.  Some of your posts make good sense, but they too often descend to insulting someone.  So, yes, I do lose interest in reading them, as I do while reading any childish posts. 

What’s so bad about the 1950’s thinking?  Certainly you don’t believe that any decade has a claim to being the most enlightened, or the most deficient in mentality.  If any decade is lacking in general good sense, I would point to the current population as being in need of increasing it. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 07:25:59 PM
^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 14, 2013, 07:33:52 PM
^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.

+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 07:44:09 PM
Can everyone stop tweaking each other over this issue and speak with reason as opposed to instigating conversational flare ups or diluting Trayvon's death and Zimmermans prosecution with incidents from the past at this time?  You called me this and I called you that etc. etc. etc. is taking this dialog nowhere. 

Clearly there is a very important conversation to be had in our society regarding race relations, the legal system and gun control to name a few issues but that conversation has to be reasonable.  I have found that reasonable people can have reasonably different perceptions about anything in life and that has been proved out more recently as a result of the death of Trayvon Martin, the reactions to his death and Zimmerman's trial.  I think all of the varying discussion can only be had in a mature and respectful way and if it can't then the conversation should end here as there is noting productive to be had of further confrontation in words. 

I think the way to walk through this discussion is to begin with the trial itself and why Zimmerman was not convicted of the murder 2 charge Angela Corey went with in this trial.  What unfolded in the trial and was shown by the the not guilty verdict is not a continuation of racism but rather evidences problematic laws in our state, how they are administered and the types of verdicts they end up with after trial by jury.  Clearly many persons think the system failed Trayvon.  If that is the case, the appropriate course of action is to change the laws and how they are administered.  We can legislate race crimes but we can't legislate what is in a bigots heart and bigots come in all shapes, sizes and colors.  That is a separate conversation waiting to be had

A "not guilty" verdict for Zimmerman does not mean he is without "guilt".  It means that the prosecution led by Angela Corey failed to make their case.  I watched most of the trial and heard a good deal of the testimony and legal instructions.  The State failed Trayvon and that was because they failed to make a fact based case that was "free of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt", they just did.  They also failed to properly prepare their witnesses both civilian and expert as well.

We all know that Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman had kept his rear end planted in his car.  The reality is that he did not and the situation went downhill from the moment he left his car.  However leaving his car and following Trayvon in spite of an officer telling him "We don't need you to do that" was not legally a criminal act.  His actions were incredibly foolish and self serving in more ways than one but they were not illegal.  The trial was also not about the "stand your ground" law but rather focused on the idea of self defense.  So in order to deal with the aftermath of the Zimmerman not guilty verdict we have to understand why it was rendered.
 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 14, 2013, 07:50:17 PM
Agree with Cheshire, the state failed to prove its case.  Be made at the state or the law, but not the jury or anything else.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 07:52:21 PM
This should not be an argument about gun laws at this time.  A gun was what physically killed Trayvon, but not the reason he was pursued and ended up dead.  The state and federal law discussion about guns was and is bigger than this case.  If Sandyhook didn't change perceptions, Trayvon's death by single gunshot won't either.  This issues surrounding this case are multiple.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 07:54:46 PM
Agree with Cheshire, the state failed to prove its case.  Be made at the state or the law, but not the jury or anything else.
  Thank you fsquid.  I think this is the conversation that needs to be had first, one specifically about the trial and the verdict.  Only then can people reasonably wade into all the "other" very deep issues attached to this young man's death.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 07:59:23 PM
Can everyone stop tweaking each other over this issue and speak with reason as opposed to instigating conversational flare ups or diluting Trayvon's death and Zimmermans prosecution with incidents from the past at this time?  You called me this and I called you that etc. etc. etc. is taking this dialog nowhere. 

Clearly there is a very important conversation to be had in our society regarding race relations, the legal system and gun control to name a few issues but that conversation has to be reasonable.  I have found that reasonable people can have reasonably different perceptions about anything in life and that has been proved out more recently as a result of the death of Trayvon Martin, the reactions to his death and Zimmerman's trial.  I think all of the varying discussion can only be had in a mature and respectful way and if it can't then the conversation should end here as there is noting productive to be had of further confrontation in words. 

I think the way to walk through this discussion is to begin with the trial itself and why Zimmerman was not convicted of the murder 2 charge Angela Corey went with in this trial.  What unfolded in the trial and was shown by the the not guilty verdict is not a continuation of racism but rather evidences problematic laws in our state, how they are administered and the types of verdicts they end up with after trial by jury.  Clearly many persons think the system failed Trayvon.  If that is the case, the appropriate course of action is to change the laws and how they are administered.  We can legislate race crimes but we can't legislate what is in a bigots heart and bigots come in all shapes, sizes and colors.  That is a separate conversation waiting to be had

A "not guilty" verdict for Zimmerman does not mean he is without "guilt".  It means that the prosecution led by Angela Corey failed to make their case.  I watched most of the trial and heard a good deal of the testimony and legal instructions.  The State failed Trayvon and that was because they failed to make a fact based case that was free of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt", they just did.  They also failed to properly prepare their witnesses both civilian and expert as well.

We all know that Trayvon would still be alive if Zimmerman had kept his rear end planted in his car.  The reality is that he did not and the situation went downhill from the moment he left his car.  However leaving his car and following Trayvon in spite of an officer telling him "We don't need you to do that was not legally a criminal act.  His actions were incredibly foolish and self serving in more ways than one but they were not illegal.  The trial was also not about the "stand your ground" law but rather focused on the idea of self defense.  So in order to deal with the aftermath of the Zimmerman not guilty verdict we have to understand why it was rendered.
 
(So in order to deal with the aftermath of the Zimmerman not guilty verdict we have to understand why it was rendered.) Because Mark O'mara was a much better Attorney!
Mark O'mara is a skilled attorney but he did not come up with the failed murder 2 charge, Angela Corey did and by doing so knew she was putting her prosecutors in the difficult position of proving that charge beyond a reasonable doubt.  Not only did she fail doing so, but she also instructed "evidence" held by the prosecution be illegally withheld from the defense.  Her own staff member pointed this out to her and of course was fired for daring to call this inappropriate action to her attention.  She and her team are now facing serious sanctions as complaints have already been filed. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 08:06:39 PM
Agree with Cheshire, the state failed to prove its case.  Be made at the state or the law, but not the jury or anything else.
  Thank you fsquid.  I think this is the conversation that needs to be had first, one specifically about the trial and the verdict.  Only then can people reasonably wade into all the "other" very deep issues attached to this young man's death.
So Cheshire Cat if the State of Florida did a better job in the courtroom everybody the State felt was Guilty would be found Guilty ???
No, that is inaccurate.  The truth of the matter is that the State should only go for charges that they know they can prove.  In this case Corey overcharged using a murder 2.  Had the state gone with a manslaughter charge, had prepared their witnesses and had more competent expert testimony, they may have gotten a conviction.  But they did not and in fact they failed to prove malice of any sort when Corey proclaimed this incident was "never about race".  In doing so she sidestepped the truth in the minds and hearts of many and as a result her team failed to prove that Zimmerman had hatred, ill will or malice in his heart when he shot Trayvon.  Angela overcharged in this case as she has often done in the past.  This time that tendency to overreach turned around and bit her on the backside. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 08:09:43 PM
What happened to the staff member who spoke out against Corey holding back info from the defense.

Quote
   

State Attorney Angela Corey fired her office’s information technology director Friday after he testified last month about being concerned prosecutors did not turn over information to George Zimmerman’s defense team in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

On the same day attorneys finished their closing arguments in that nationally watched trial, a state attorney investigator went to Ben Kruidbos’ home about 7:30 a.m. to hand-deliver a letter stating Kruidbos “can never again be trusted to step foot in this office.”

The letter contended Kruibos did a poor job overseeing the information technology department, violated public records law for retaining documents, and noted he was questioned in March when the office was trying to determine who had leaked personnel information obtained through a computer breach.

In an interview Friday, Kruidbos denied the allegations in the letter, which was written by Cheryl Peek, the managing director of the State Attorney’s Office.

He said he had acted in good faith about “genuine concerns.” He said he had been proud to work at the State Attorney’s Office and feared the letter would cripple his chances at finding another job to support his family, including a 4-month-old son

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-07-13/story/state-attorney-angela-corey-fires-information-technology-director-who#ixzz2Z4IW2kT2
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 08:11:22 PM
^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.
Look George Zimmerman was stupid in a lot of ways. Sure George should have waited for the police or at best just gone about his way. But should Have, would have or could have will not change what did happen in this case.
Have you been reading any of my previous posts? While disappointed, I'm not surprised and I have no problems with the jury or the system. I have a problem with the law. I'm hoping this case leads to a change so future lives won't be lost because of this type of nonsense.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 08:18:23 PM
Understood. In any event, I have no problem with the jury or system. It was clear that the state did not prove murder 2 without reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 08:50:52 PM
Understood. In any event, I have no problem with the jury or system. It was clear that the state did not prove murder 2 without reasonable doubt.
Well then as Cheshire Cat said "Angela overcharged in this case as she has often done in the past." But it wasn't even Murder in the second degree that was the problem the jury didn't even go with manslaughter? And the Judge had to throw out "third-degree murder based on child abuse?" So if Angela would have started with Manslaughter then aggravated assault or something lower I guess George could have been convicted?
Re read post 140 above.  Had the case be charged differently and handed more competently, a manslaughter charge would have been possible depending upon the level of the charge and lawful requirements of proof.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 08:54:05 PM
I'm no attorney but manslaughter appears pretty evident to me. At the end of the day, a kid was killed and the instigator/shooter gets off. Nevertheless, I don't think this situation is over. Things are just beginning and hopefully, the result is a positive one for all that saves lives.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 14, 2013, 09:14:26 PM
Maybe Al Sharpton should focus a little bit of his time addressing the black and black violence with demonstrations in places like Chicago instead of the 100% effort in bringing down the big bad Purple People Eater George Zimmerman; Although that Trayvon case brought alot of loot to MSNBC, so who can blame him....
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 09:16:04 PM
Zimmerman may be legally free but he will never experience freedom the way he once knew it.  He will now always feel the way Trayvon did, threatened, scared and pursued.  He will live a life in the shadow of his actions and be looking over his shoulder everywhere he goes likely for the rest of his life.  In some way he will now be made to walk in Trayvon's shoes and see first hand what it is like to be viewed with distrust and suspicion.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 09:18:53 PM
Maybe Al Sharpton should focus a little bit of his time addressing the black and black violence with demonstrations in places like Chicago instead of the 100% effort in bringing down the big bad Purple People Eater George Zimmerman; Although that Trayvon case brought alot of loot to MSNBC, so who can blame him....
Al Sharpton is a side issue to this trial as is Black on Black crime.  This trial was about Trayvon's death and the fact that Zimmerman was charged with his murder.  As a side note it is important to realize that there are many ongoing efforts via churches and organizations that are aimed at understanding and stopping Black on Black crime.  MADDADS here in Jacksonville has been at the forefront of that issue for many years now.   
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 09:29:29 PM
I'm no attorney but manslaughter appears pretty evident to me. At the end of the day, a kid was killed and the instigator/shooter gets off. Nevertheless, I don't think this situation is over. Things are just beginning and hopefully, the result is a positive one for all that saves lives.
Lets say TM would have found GZ's gun and shot GZ could TM have used this same defense that GZ was found Not Guilty with?
Why go there? Let's say GZ never followed TM. No conflict or death happens and everyone goes on with their lives.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 14, 2013, 09:38:35 PM
^^^You don't have to agree with what GZ did, but technically he wasn't breaking the law. All of the 911 dispatcher non-order, should've stayed in the car, and did he indirectly follow him arguments is irrelevant IMO. No one wants to address the actual felony assault by Martin which is ludicrous. A six year old kid could follow you from behind; Whatcha gonna do, blast him in the face? I bet that he wasn't all that close to Martin either. Not to mention the 4 minute time frame that Martin should've been home already.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 09:47:34 PM
Zimmerman may be legally free but he will never experience freedom the way he once knew it.  He will now always feel the way Trayvon did, threatened, scared and pursued.  He will live a life in the shadow of his actions and be looking over his shoulder everywhere he goes likely for the rest of his life.  In some way he will now be made to walk in Trayvon's shoes and see first hand what it is like to be viewed with distrust and suspicion.
Cheshire Cat you are so sure of George Zimmerman's Guilt? I heard the 911 tape when the mothers of both GZ and TM said it was their Son? And we really don't know what TM felt do we? Because if the State of Florida would have put on a better case then GZ would be in jail today? I'm sorry what happen to both TM & GZ but you nor I was there Jesus! God forbid if GZ is killed by someone over the next year will you cry for GZ? Or will you think Justice for TM has been served?  :o
How do you get I am sure of GZ's guilt from what I said?  There has never been a debate about the fact that Zimmerman shot Trayvon and that shot is what took Trayvon's life.  Regardless of what Zimmerman was feeling when he shot Trayvon, anger or fear, he will carry the burden of having pulled that trigger for the rest of his life.  Zimmermans brother has already publicly spoken to the fact that his older brother has been deeply changed by this experience.  He is now somber, afraid and worried for his own life and that of his family. What I am sure about is the fact that if Zimmerman had stayed in his car and let the police do their job, Trayvon would still be alive.  So in that way, his lousy choice is what put him in a place where a confrontation occurred.  There is no getting away from that fact.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Seraphs on July 14, 2013, 09:49:04 PM
My Mother a wise old gal often said, 'None is so blind as one who WILL NOT SEE.'  These people know what is going on they just refuse to see truth.  The fight between Trayvon and Zimmerman didn't start on the ground it started when Zimmerman decided to follow him, because he was a black young man.  That trash Ock was talking is just that trash.  Every attorney who spoke last night made a point to say they respected the Jury's verdict well I don't.  I may not be able to change it but I know because of Zimmerman's decision a young man is dead.

When I was a younger black man I was profiled all the time.  Driving my own car, with no warrants, police would stop me with guns drawn.  I had a friend, white, who lived on Seminole Road in Atlantic Beach.  Almost every time I took him home I was stopped by police even parked in his driveway.  My friend couldn't believe this he even told one police officer to get out of his yard.  I use to be Trayvon.  The bottom line is this, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN HAD NO RIGHT TO FOLLOW THIS KID.  END OF F ING SUBJECT.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 09:50:57 PM
^^^You don't have to agree with what GZ did, but technically he wasn't breaking the law. All of the 911 dispatcher non-order, should've stayed in the car, and did he indirectly follow him arguments is irrelevant IMO. No one wants to address the actual felony assault by Martin which is ludicrous. A six year old kid could follow you from behind; Whatcha gonna do, blast him in the face? I bet that he wasn't all that close to Martin either. Not to mention the 4 minute time frame that Martin should've been home already.
Did you watch the trial?  A very large part of the testimony both civilian and professional revolved around the physical altercation between Trayvon and Zimmerman.  So to say no one want's to talk about it is patently false.  In fact it was the altercation that led to discussion of Zimmerman's state of mind when he shot Trayvon.  The jury concluded that there was reasonable doubt that Zimmerman shot because of malice but rather because at that moment he was afraid.  That is what led to the "not guilty verdict".
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 09:58:04 PM
My opinion - no factual crime stats. The majority of the problem is with the disproportionate number of absent fathers. The lack of a strong upstanding male role model to keep young men on track when they stray.  I think there is also an undercurrent of respect for thug life where life doesn't appear to have much value and education has even less value.

Contrast that with Asian and Indian immigrants who value raising their kids and put a huge emphasis on education.  They also stick together and help each other as a tight community.  They put an emphasis on using the English language correctly - that is huge.  It's the language of business and if you can't speak it, read it and write it you're going to be left out.

Basically I believe the same stuff that Bill Cosby got into trouble for saying.

What do you think is causing it? Maybe you have a different point of view?


^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 10:01:07 PM
My Mother a wise old gal often said, 'None is so blind as one who WILL NOT SEE.'  These people know what is going on they just refuse to see truth.  The fight between Travon and Zimmerman didn't start on the ground it started when Zimmerman decided to follow him, because he was a black young man.  That trash Ock was talking is just that trash.  Every attorney who spoke last night made a point to say they respected the Jury's verdict well I don't.  I may not be able to change it but I know because of Zimmerman's decision a young man is dead.

When I was a younger black man I was profiled all the time.  Driving my own car, with no warrants, police would stop me with guns drawn.  I had a friend, white, who lived on Seminole Road in Atlantic Beach.  Almost every time I took him home I was stopped by police even parked in his driveway.  My friend couldn't believe this he even told one police officer to get out of his yard.  I use to be Travon.  The bottom line is this, GEORGE ZIMMERMAN HAD NO RIGHT TO FOLLOW THIS KID.  END OF F ING SUBJECT.
I hear you loud and clear.  Again, everyone understands that Zimmerman chose to follow Trayvon and that led to his death. No one is arguing that.  But your response has emotion overriding what the law actually is.  As stupid as it was for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon, he was not breaking the law.  That's simply the facts and there are many individuals who have been stalked over extensive periods of time, even years and the laws as written make stopping stalking difficult.  It has to do with the right to move freely, which was sadly denied Trayvon by Zimmerman, but freedom of movement is a closely held American value.  So when we say no one has a right to follow we are talking about basic freedoms.  Of course people can demand that the laws be changed to prevent people from following each other, but are we ready for a world in which someone who is paranoid can accuse another of following them and that person be thrown into a legal battle for their own freedom because we created yet another law that would be impossible to enforce fairly?  This type of legislation cuts both ways.  On another note, no need to use hyphenated vulgarities to make your point Seraph.  I think most understand your position and agree with it.  But what to do to change things is not a story that has ended but one that is just beginning.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 10:02:25 PM
^^^You don't have to agree with what GZ did, but technically he wasn't breaking the law. All of the 911 dispatcher non-order, should've stayed in the car, and did he indirectly follow him arguments is irrelevant IMO. No one wants to address the actual felony assault by Martin which is ludicrous. A six year old kid could follow you from behind; Whatcha gonna do, blast him in the face? I bet that he wasn't all that close to Martin either. Not to mention the 4 minute time frame that Martin should've been home already.
For no one to have witnessed the start of the physical altercation, you're making a huge assumption. All we have is GZ's side of the story because his victim isn't alive to share his. So I'm not sure one can say TM was breaking the law in defending himself. All I do know is that if the kid isn't followed, no altercation happens.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 10:07:26 PM
AM, how do your stats break down along economic levels?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:10:25 PM
I didn't skew anything.  I took the data from the 2011 FBI crime stats and the 2010 USA census. 

If you look at the FBI numbers there is a huge murder bubble for black males between 18 and 30 that blows everything else out of the water.  As black males get past the age of 30 they seem to calm down.

If you look at the NYC numbers they are even worse for black people than the national numbers.  In rough numbers black people murder at a rate in the range of 15 to 1 vs white people.  And mostly it's black people killing other black people. Why isn't Sharpton and Jesse Jackson marching for this? This is the biggest threat to black people right now.

Anyone looking at this would have to come to the conclusion that there is a problem here that needs to be addressed.

^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?


The statistics might be true Lake, but there is a whole discussion waiting, as to why they are as they are.  There are definitely some structured... institutionally based social forces and habits which perpetuate the fundamental causes of those statistics.  But that's a whole discussion in itself.

It amazes me that some people seem to be blind to these fundamental forces or structures in society which maintains the statistics.  They seem to be comfortable in their ignorance.  Why gain knowledge and improve one's perception if one is comfortable in ignorance and apathy?

This is pretty much where I was going with Muffin's skewed statistical data.  There's a much bigger story out there and random numbers don't mean crap if you don't understand or care how they are being generated.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 10:12:33 PM
My opinion - no factual crime stats. The majority of the problem is with the disproportionate number of absent fathers. The lack of a strong upstanding male role model to keep young men on track when they stray.  I think there is also an undercurrent of respect for thug life where life doesn't appear to have much value and education has even less value.

Contrast that with Asian and Indian immigrants who value raising their kids and put a huge emphasis on education.  They also stick together and help each other as a tight community.  They put an emphasis on using the English language correctly - that is huge.  It's the language of business and if you can't speak it, read it and write it you're going to be left out.

Basically I believe the same stuff that Bill Cosby got into trouble for saying.

What do you think is causing it? Maybe you have a different point of view?


^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?
I don't know if we can say "the majority" of the problem is absent fathers although it is pretty much understood that a positive father figure in the life of any young man is a good thing.  Broken families unfortunately is an issue for families of all racial backgrounds with a divorce rate of over 50% of American households.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:18:30 PM
This is the first rational thing I've seen you post.

Here is the thing white poor people don't kill each other at the rate that black poor people kill each other. Look it up.  Thats the great thing about the Internet all of this information is out there ready to enlighten you if you just take the time to access it.

My stats came directly from the FBI website and the 2010 US census.  They aren't psudo-anything.  They are facts.

Say my numbers are skewed how do you explain the NYC black vs white murder rate?  National is 7 to 1.  NYC is 15 to 1. Just go to Google and type in "NYC black murder rate" and you will be enlightened.

This is what makes no sense to me about people like you.  You get outraged by this one case while you completely ignore the dozen black kids that killed each other on the South side of Chicago this past week. That is the travesty here.  Thats what we all need to be outraged about.  Not this one case.  Hundreds of black people are going to kill hundreds of other black people this year in just one city.  But you focus on this case missing the bigger picture.



not to mention how drastically the numbers change when you view them through different lenses.

For example.  The statistics also show that more poor people are convicted murderers than wealthy people.  By serious margins so large that they make the racial differences seem insignificant.

And if you add in the true number of killers, vs 'murderers' at least by gun violence the racial numbers get very lopsided.  Of course such a count includes shootings by policemen, and no one ever seems to want to mention that.

But of course, in this case, a murderer is found not guilty, and so he will only be a 'killer' and not included in muffin tops absurd psuedo statistics.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 10:23:45 PM
This is the first rational thing I've seen you post.

Here is the thing white poor people don't kill each other at the rate that black poor people kill each other. Look it up.  Thats the great thing about the Internet all of this information is out there ready to enlighten you if you just take the time to access it.

My stats came directly from the FBI website and the 2010 US census.  They aren't psudo-anything.  They are facts.

Say my numbers are skewed how do you explain the NYC black vs white murder rate?  National is 7 to 1.  NYC is 15 to 1. Just go to Google and type in "NYC black murder rate" and you will be enlightened.

This is what makes no sense to me about people like you.  You get outraged by this one case while you completely ignore the dozen black kids that killed each other on the South side of Chicago this past week. That is the travesty here.  Thats what we all need to be outraged about.  Not this one case.  Hundreds of black people are going to kill hundreds of other black people this year in just one city.  But you focus on this case missing the bigger picture.



not to mention how drastically the numbers change when you view them through different lenses.

For example.  The statistics also show that more poor people are convicted murderers than wealthy people.  By serious margins so large that they make the racial differences seem insignificant.

And if you add in the true number of killers, vs 'murderers' at least by gun violence the racial numbers get very lopsided.  Of course such a count includes shootings by policemen, and no one ever seems to want to mention that.

But of course, in this case, a murderer is found not guilty, and so he will only be a 'killer' and not included in muffin tops absurd psuedo statistics.
Perhaps you can make your points without the "people like you" statement?  There are very few people who are like yourself in individual thought and action and that's okay.  We are all different as are our life experiences.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:31:55 PM
No there is no money in that or camera time.  Of course it's a bigger problem 400 vs 1.  But Al isn't into solving problems. He is about media whoring and making money.


Maybe Al Sharpton should focus a little bit of his time addressing the black and black violence with demonstrations in places like Chicago instead of the 100% effort in bringing down the big bad Purple People Eater George Zimmerman; Although that Trayvon case brought alot of loot to MSNBC, so who can blame him....
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 14, 2013, 10:36:10 PM
I'm still waiting on old Al to apologize to the Duke lacrosse players.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 14, 2013, 10:42:29 PM
^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.
Look George Zimmerman was stupid in a lot of ways. Sure George should have waited for the police or at best just gone about his way. But should Have, would have or could have will not change what did happen in this case.

Then why are you arguing about it?  And While it wont change what happened in the limited arena of Florida's prosecution against Zimmerman, there will probably be a Federal case.

And talking about this case is really more about talking about what kind of a country we want in the future.

A nation of child murderers toting guns?  Or a place where we look at ways to kill fewer people, not more?
Stephen you know that you will not be able to remove guns in America so why argue that point till your blue in the face?

Well I suppose we shall see what happens.

Im not going to argue with moral cripples about their racist viewpoints on murder (not addressing you here IILY)

My involvement was because an idiot poster, using no references and citing no sources is explaining why its a good thing that a child murderer just got off because he thinks my nephews are criminals.


I missed this part of the conversation.  There was a mention of your nephews?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:44:29 PM
I don't have that info.  Just personal observation.  I'm sure poorer people commit more crime and I know that black people tend to be poorer than white people on average.



AM, how do your stats break down along economic levels?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:47:23 PM
Something is going horribly wrong to cause this level of violence.  I wish for a few minutes that we would all drop the racial bullshit and sensitivity and admit there is a huge problem, identify the cause and start working toward mitigating it.

My opinion - no factual crime stats. The majority of the problem is with the disproportionate number of absent fathers. The lack of a strong upstanding male role model to keep young men on track when they stray.  I think there is also an undercurrent of respect for thug life where life doesn't appear to have much value and education has even less value.

Contrast that with Asian and Indian immigrants who value raising their kids and put a huge emphasis on education.  They also stick together and help each other as a tight community.  They put an emphasis on using the English language correctly - that is huge.  It's the language of business and if you can't speak it, read it and write it you're going to be left out.

Basically I believe the same stuff that Bill Cosby got into trouble for saying.

What do you think is causing it? Maybe you have a different point of view?


^AM, why do you think those crime statistics are what you claim they are? Do you care?
I don't know if we can say "the majority" of the problem is absent fathers although it is pretty much understood that a positive father figure in the life of any young man is a good thing.  Broken families unfortunately is an issue for families of all racial backgrounds with a divorce rate of over 50% of American households.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 10:58:13 PM
You won't address it because you can't win the argument. You can't win the argument because you are wrong and a few hours ago - completely uninformed. Now you are more informed but still not processing the information.

You're bright enough to know not to engage but you're not bright enough to successfully argue your point.

I'd try to avoid a fight with a stronger opponent too.


^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.
Look George Zimmerman was stupid in a lot of ways. Sure George should have waited for the police or at best just gone about his way. But should Have, would have or could have will not change what did happen in this case.

Then why are you arguing about it?  And While it wont change what happened in the limited arena of Florida's prosecution against Zimmerman, there will probably be a Federal case.

And talking about this case is really more about talking about what kind of a country we want in the future.

A nation of child murderers toting guns?  Or a place where we look at ways to kill fewer people, not more?
Stephen you know that you will not be able to remove guns in America so why argue that point till your blue in the face?

Well I suppose we shall see what happens.

Im not going to argue with moral cripples about their racist viewpoints on murder (not addressing you here IILY)

My involvement was because an idiot poster, using no references and citing no sources is explaining why its a good thing that a child murderer just got off because he thinks my nephews are criminals.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 11:01:52 PM
This is a totally different subject that has nothing to do with the Sanford case, outside of GZ profiling TM. Nevertheless, I have a few questions and comments since you keep bringing it up.

My opinion - no factual crime stats. The majority of the problem is with the disproportionate number of absent fathers. The lack of a strong upstanding male role model to keep young men on track when they stray.

Why is this?  Could it be the long term result of an environment and political system that has slowly ripped apart the black family structure, resulted in huge discrepancies in family wealth, and limited overall educational opportunity for more than a century after the ending of the Civil War?  Could a problem be access to birth control for those with lower household incomes? Could closing neighborhood schools and libraries in poverty stricken areas result in decreased access to educational amenities for that general population?  Does that decreased access at an early childhood level lead to higher crime at some point?

Or is it simply only black fathers out of all races who have chosen to abandon their families?  Is there an environmental cause and effect situation at play that multiples the numbers quoted?

Quote
I think there is also an undercurrent of respect for thug life where life doesn't appear to have much value and education has even less value.

Last time I checked, I'm black and still have my male parts and there's no undercurrent or respect for thug life in my household.  Is this undercurrent you speak of based along economic lines?  If so, is there a similar undercurrent spread among different races where the population lives in the same economic conditions?

Quote
Contrast that with Asian and Indian immigrants who value raising their kids and put a huge emphasis on education.  They also stick together and help each other as a tight community.  They put an emphasis on using the English language correctly - that is huge.  It's the language of business and if you can't speak it, read it and write it you're going to be left out.

Again, I'd challenge you to look at economic levels before putting people into groups by color.  We're all the same.  Our colors are various shades because we have ancestors who's skin adapted to exposure to sunlight in various parts of the globe.  There's no black vs white, green or yellow person blood type, finger prints, bone structure, etc. Give America another hundred years or so and you'll see more shades of color develop.

What we have on our hands is a centuries old economic system where hierocracy has been based largely upon skin color. Place a group of people in a bad environment and bad things will happen.  Change the environment and you'll change the result. 

Quote
Basically I believe the same stuff that Bill Cosby got into trouble for saying.

I think Bill Cosby caught a lot of flack for the same reason Ock did at the beginning of this thread.  Focusing on a specific point in time and lecturing people when you may not be wearing the shoes they are walking in isn't going to help the situation.  Figuring out and altering the cause is how you impact the result.

Quote
What do you think is causing it? Maybe you have a different point of view?

I believe things revolve around economics and environment. Since WWII, I can offer up countless examples of taxpayer backed programs that have created an economic gulf between races in America, such as the GI Bill or many of the urban renewal programs of the late 20th century.  For example, the taxpayer subsidized G.I. Bill directly led to sprawling suburban areas like Levittown.  However, many minorities were prohibited from this federal handout.  On the flip end, we grouped those in living in poverty to the central cities with the development off projects.  We also ripped apart several of those neighborhoods with expressways to provide access for those being subsidized to flee the city. Then we wonder why areas like the Northside became havens of crime? Simple cause and effect.

If you want to dig into prison statistics, you can look at laws that result in certain populations getting more prison time than others. Heck, you can even start getting into profiling tendencies. Even the idea of GZ shooting TM and walking away free, but a 21 year old weed smoker going to prison should be a cause for concern.

For me, lecturing others on issues, one has no earthly idea of what they are talking about, by offering up skewed statistics doesn't resolve anything.  It only leads to more division.  The real issues revolve around economics and environment. Change those and you'll end up will different results, no matter what the person's skin pigmentation is.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 11:09:06 PM
(The real issues revolve around economics and environment. Change those and you'll end up will different results, no matter what the person's skin pigmentation is.) True but the Very rich will never let this happen this is the way they control us all. Why is it even in 2013 a Woman makes less money then a Man in a lot of jobs?
^Just goes to show that everything is not peaches and cream.  We still have some work to do.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:09:21 PM
Incorrect. Link to the FBI murder stats I posted earlier:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3

2011 - murder stats by race

You make this so easy.


^You have to understand a little American history from the black perspective and be willing to attempt to understand the environment TM was placed in to truly get that post. Nevertheless, why place the burden on the innocent kid, who ended up losing his right to life for absolutely nothing? Do you place any responsibility on the armed grown man who initiated the entire conflict? Your comments are reflected in the Gawker article copied a few posts back.
Look George Zimmerman was stupid in a lot of ways. Sure George should have waited for the police or at best just gone about his way. But should Have, would have or could have will not change what did happen in this case.

Then why are you arguing about it?  And While it wont change what happened in the limited arena of Florida's prosecution against Zimmerman, there will probably be a Federal case.

And talking about this case is really more about talking about what kind of a country we want in the future.

A nation of child murderers toting guns?  Or a place where we look at ways to kill fewer people, not more?
Stephen you know that you will not be able to remove guns in America so why argue that point till your blue in the face?

Well I suppose we shall see what happens.

Im not going to argue with moral cripples about their racist viewpoints on murder (not addressing you here IILY)

My involvement was because an idiot poster, using no references and citing no sources is explaining why its a good thing that a child murderer just got off because he thinks my nephews are criminals.


I missed this part of the conversation.  There was a mention of your nephews?

Certainly.  They are young black males, after all.  And Muffintop seems to think that we need to have discussions with them about 'character' so that some fat racist pretending to be a cop doesnt shoot them to death.  Because, you know: crime.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 14, 2013, 11:12:02 PM
^What's the murder rate by economic status? We all know that in America, we struggle with a system that has been built on economic hierarchy based on skin color. Cause and effect. Change the environment, change the results.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:18:05 PM
No I'm not a troll. This is my point of view. It's my point of view in reference to an original post that profiling is unfair and racist.  My claim is that profiling exists because of the actions of the people being profiled.

You've not been able to refute a single one of my points - not one. You've only been able to call me names and insult me. I use statistics - you deflect.  I try to discuss  problem like an adult you finger point and act childish.

You're not very good at this game.  One more post and I'm done. Saving the best for last.


You won't address it because you can't win the argument. You can't win the argument because you are wrong and a few hours ago - completely uninformed. Now you are more informed but still not processing the information.

You're bright enough to know not to engage but you're not bright enough to successfully argue your point.

I'd try to avoid a fight with a stronger opponent too.


Actually.  I don't address the arguments of trolls.

You are a racist troll, and you are using the murder of a black child to launch your pretty pathetic discussion about black criminality. 

Never mind the disrespect and lack of common decency to accuse the victim of a murder for his murderers crime.

You havent really advanced an 'argument'.  youve simply made an unverified claim about a racial group.  Not very impressive.

So I don't know what you think can be 'won', except that you win by further engaging people in your racist chatter.

But Im sure you must be right about me fearing your towering (and unsourced) intellect.  Im a shrinking violet when it comes to things like that.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: If_I_Loved_you on July 14, 2013, 11:24:48 PM
No I'm not a troll. This is my point of view. It's my point of view in reference to an original post that profiling is unfair and racist.  My claim is that profiling exists because of the actions of the people being profiled.

You've not been able to refute a single one of my points - not one. You've only been able to call me names and insult me. I use statistics - you deflect.  I try to discuss  problem like an adult you finger point and act childish.

You're not very good at this game.  One more post and I'm done. Saving the best for last.


You won't address it because you can't win the argument. You can't win the argument because you are wrong and a few hours ago - completely uninformed. Now you are more informed but still not processing the information.

You're bright enough to know not to engage but you're not bright enough to successfully argue your point.

I'd try to avoid a fight with a stronger opponent too.


Actually.  I don't address the arguments of trolls.

You are a racist troll, and you are using the murder of a black child to launch your pretty pathetic discussion about black criminality. 

Never mind the disrespect and lack of common decency to accuse the victim of a murder for his murderers crime.

You havent really advanced an 'argument'.  youve simply made an unverified claim about a racial group.  Not very impressive.

So I don't know what you think can be 'won', except that you win by further engaging people in your racist chatter.

But Im sure you must be right about me fearing your towering (and unsourced) intellect.  Im a shrinking violet when it comes to things like that.
AngryMuffin when they call you Troll it's because you have gotten under their skin?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: If_I_Loved_you on July 14, 2013, 11:31:12 PM
AngryMuffin when they call you Troll it's because you have gotten under their skin?

1.  no.  it has an actual meaning.

2.  while its true there isnt a great appetite for 'stupid' around here, it doesnt mean you are trolling.
Stephen why don't you spell check what you post?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 14, 2013, 11:38:18 PM
I am going to lobby for a bill that expressly gives people the right to flee danger. As a provision following people who are fearfully fleeing you will constitute harassment and of course any gun use in the commitment of that crime (harassment ) will in no way be justifiable.

You ought to be able to try and avoid trouble without it taking its gun and pursuing you.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:44:53 PM
Oh boy.  Not so good at math are you?  Who cares what unknown is.  Say it's 50 / 50.

At 50 / 50.

White : 6767
Black : 7524

Population white / black 72% vs 12%

That would change the result to 6.74 black murders per 1 white murder.



Well Lake, it turns out that the first line of his own link shows his interpretation to be complete bullshit.

Total    for 2011 14,548   
Sex of offender:
Male  9,485   
Female:  1,138   
Unknown Gender:  3,925   

Race of offender:
White:  4,729   
Black:  5,486   
Other:  256   
Unknown:  4,077

32% vs 37% black v. white respectively, except there is the huge problem presented by the 'unknown' category.  28%.  Considering that there is no information on his link which shows the racial breakdown of the 'unknown', any conclusions would be kind of stupid to make.  It is possible that all 4,077 of the unknown murderers are white, They could all be "Other".  Who knows?

And so on the basis of this very thin and non conclusive data, you would like us to stop noticing that a child murder was committed by a guy (whose family describes him as a racist) and talk about your racist theories instead?

Well awesome.  But it still doesnt cover your underlying problem with dancing around the difference between 'killers' and 'murderers'.  Your point was about social violence and killing, but youve narrowed it to the category of people who have been found guilty of murder instead.

And even then, your own citations don't back up your little fantasy.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:46:32 PM
They call me a troll because I'm much brighter and more informed than they are and I'm showing them to be mental weaklings.


No I'm not a troll. This is my point of view. It's my point of view in reference to an original post that profiling is unfair and racist.  My claim is that profiling exists because of the actions of the people being profiled.

You've not been able to refute a single one of my points - not one. You've only been able to call me names and insult me. I use statistics - you deflect.  I try to discuss  problem like an adult you finger point and act childish.

You're not very good at this game.  One more post and I'm done. Saving the best for last.


You won't address it because you can't win the argument. You can't win the argument because you are wrong and a few hours ago - completely uninformed. Now you are more informed but still not processing the information.

You're bright enough to know not to engage but you're not bright enough to successfully argue your point.

I'd try to avoid a fight with a stronger opponent too.


Actually.  I don't address the arguments of trolls.

You are a racist troll, and you are using the murder of a black child to launch your pretty pathetic discussion about black criminality. 

Never mind the disrespect and lack of common decency to accuse the victim of a murder for his murderers crime.

You havent really advanced an 'argument'.  youve simply made an unverified claim about a racial group.  Not very impressive.

So I don't know what you think can be 'won', except that you win by further engaging people in your racist chatter.

But Im sure you must be right about me fearing your towering (and unsourced) intellect.  Im a shrinking violet when it comes to things like that.
AngryMuffin when they call you Troll it's because you have gotten under their skin?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:52:10 PM
And Steve for my checkmate.  I remember a nice interview and glowing writeup that you did a while back. Lucky guy to get the opportunity to talk to Bill Cosby.  You clearly showed him the reverence and respect that he deserved.

Here is the part that sucks for you. He agrees with everything I've been saying on this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itWCvkK44lE

Your interview of Bill:

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-apr-stephen-dare-interviews-bill-cosby

My work here is done.  Hope you're better prepared for the next time.

Good night.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 14, 2013, 11:56:18 PM
Well it would be nice if you were good at math.  You don't have a talent for debate.

How about some unambiguous numbers from the NYC 2012 crime stats with 99% of the perp race known?

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/analysis_and_planning/2012_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

15 to 1 in the NYC report.

But I'm sure thats just because of all of the racist cops in NYC. 

If you don't admit there is the problem - you can't address the problem.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 12:03:39 AM
I haven't referred to anyone as a troll.  There's also been no response to my post on what I believe to be heavily skewed statistics.  Any comments? With that said, none of this stuff deals with the topic at hand, which is a kid losing losing his life for absolutely nothing and the instigator/shooter doing no time for it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 15, 2013, 02:28:48 AM
Lake .... I agree totally with your post No. 178 wherein you discuss the fundamental causes of the problems endured by the black community ... oppressive and discriminatory conditions which have been around since the civil war.  The U. S. has come a certain way toward resolving these economic, social, and political pressures which have perpetuated the lack of real opportunities for the black population, but anyone observing the continued problems will know that there is much to be done.   

Societal momentums and habits, along with the continued existence of enough individuals prone to racist behavior and decisions, ensure that times will continue to be bleak, even desperate, for the majority of black men and boys.  Hopefully, as more individuals become schooled in the subtle causes of discrimination, the American population will have a greater percentage of movers and shakers who will have a genuine desire to make solid changes favoring the minorities who've suffered for many decades.  The black man has endured over many decades what we might call institutional racism, which originates in the operation of established and respected forces in our society, and thus receives little public condemnation.  Shame on American whites, the comfortable and complacent, for allowing continued discrimination and oppression, however subtle it may be. 

As for Zimmerman and Martin ... without clear evidence as to what happened, I don't see how Zimmerman can be found guilty of anything close to manslaughter or murder.  He certainly should not have initiated a scenario with the potential to escalate to violence, which he did by following Martin too close, and for too long.  If it was murder .... and if there is enough evidence to it, then by all means we should convict and punish.  But given the lack of clear evidence, how does one convict on a murder or manslaughter charge? 

What jury is going to put a man in jail based on assumptions of what actually happened?  Martin's death is a tragedy, but that doesn't change the fact that there is too little evidence for conviction. 

It reminds me of the O.J. Simpson case.  Surely O. J. was guilty of the killings.  But the jury process did not convict.  Ridiculous.  Thank goodness he was made to suffer via other means.  Although Zimmerman's actions are not so clear as that of Simpson's, perhaps further evidence will allow for proper punishment for Zimmerman via the federal or civil actions.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 15, 2013, 06:59:06 AM
I haven't referred to anyone as a troll.  There's also been no response to my post on what I believe to be heavily skewed statistics.  Any comments? With that said, none of this stuff deals with the topic at hand, which is a kid losing losing his life for absolutely nothing and the instigator/shooter doing no time for it.

And this is the long and short of it.  Nothing else matters. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 07:32:08 AM

As for Zimmerman and Martin ... without clear evidence as to what happened, I don't see how Zimmerman can be found guilty of anything close to manslaughter or murder.  He certainly should not have initiated a scenario with the potential to escalate to violence, which he did by following Martin too close, and for too long.  If it was murder .... and if there is enough evidence to it, then by all means we should convict and punish.  But given the lack of clear evidence, how does one convict on a murder or manslaughter charge? 

What jury is going to put a man in jail based on assumptions of what actually happened?  Martin's death is a tragedy, but that doesn't change the fact that there is too little evidence for conviction. 

It reminds me of the O.J. Simpson case.  Surely O. J. was guilty of the killings.  But the jury process did not convict.  Ridiculous.  Thank goodness he was made to suffer via other means.  Although Zimmerman's actions are not so clear as that of Simpson's, perhaps further evidence will allow for proper punishment for Zimmerman via the federal or civil actions.

It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 15, 2013, 07:36:57 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming.


Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 15, 2013, 08:18:08 AM
go here to sign a petition.

Quote
Open a civil rights case against George Zimmmerman

A jury has acquitted George Zimmerman, but we are not done demanding justice for Trayvon. Sign our petition to the Department of Justice today.

Attorney General Eric Holder,

The Department of Justice has closely monitored the State of Florida's prosecution of the case against George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin murder since it began. Today, with the acquittal of George Zimmerman, it is time for the Department of Justice to act.

The most fundamental of civil rights — the right to life — was violated the night George Zimmerman stalked and then took the life of Trayvon Martin. We ask that the Department of Justice file civil rights charges against Mr. Zimmerman for this egregious violation.

Please address the travesties of the tragic death of Trayvon Martin by acting today.

Thank you.

http://www.naacp.org/page/s/doj-civil-rights-petition

If her son is not safe...

(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/martin.jpg) (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/sheclown2/media/martin.jpg.html)

no mother's son is safe. 

bottom line.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: FSBA on July 15, 2013, 08:28:10 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 09:20:01 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming.



What was the message? 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 09:29:27 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?

I think your right there isn't an implicit right.  That is why I think we need to enact a law that expresses the right to flee danger without continuing harassment.  Certainly if we are allowed to use deadly force for just believing we are in danger we ought to be able to flee if we believe we are in danger.

IMO Zimmerman's continued pursuit, after he noted in the 911 call that TM was running, should constituent harassment (not stating that as law). If we make it law then his weapon would have been used in the act of a crime and not justifiable by self defense.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 09:35:54 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?
I'm no attorney but many are saying his right to live is one. I guess we'll see in upcoming months.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 09:52:48 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?

I think your right there isn't an implicit right.  That is why I think we need to enact a law that expresses the right to flee danger without continuing harassment.  Certainly if we are allowed to use deadly force for just believing we are in danger we ought to be able to flee if we believe we are in danger.

IMO Zimmerman's continued pursuit, after he noted in the 911 call that TM was running, should constituent harassment (not stating that as law). If we make it law then his weapon would have been used in the act of a crime and not justifiable by self defense.
Lots of folks trying to oversimplify this case by stating: "A 17 year old is dead, and that's all that needs to be said."  Unfortunately, its not that simple.  Zimmerman had to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury could not get to that level of certainty. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 09:56:42 AM
Yeah, it's not that simple. That's why I don't believe everything ends with this decision. Things are just beginning.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 10:07:00 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?

I think your right there isn't an implicit right.  That is why I think we need to enact a law that expresses the right to flee danger without continuing harassment.  Certainly if we are allowed to use deadly force for just believing we are in danger we ought to be able to flee if we believe we are in danger.

IMO Zimmerman's continued pursuit, after he noted in the 911 call that TM was running, should constituent harassment (not stating that as law). If we make it law then his weapon would have been used in the act of a crime and not justifiable by self defense.
Lots of folks trying to oversimplify this case by stating: "A 17 year old is dead, and that's all that needs to be said."  Unfortunately, its not that simple.  Zimmerman had to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the jury could not get to that level of certainty. 

Agree, I think the jury made the right call according to the law. I think the law should be changed so the when the skittles toting teenager runs from the gun toting block captain it frees the teen from having to further deal with whoever it is he feels he needs to flee.

Seems to me running issues a pretty strong statement that I would feel safer with some distance from who I am running from. That statement seems like a reasonable request.  Do you not think bird dogging someone who flees from you is a kind of harassment?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Gators312 on July 15, 2013, 10:16:53 AM
go here to sign a petition.

Quote
Open a civil rights case against George Zimmmerman

A jury has acquitted George Zimmerman, but we are not done demanding justice for Trayvon. Sign our petition to the Department of Justice today.

Attorney General Eric Holder,

The Department of Justice has closely monitored the State of Florida's prosecution of the case against George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin murder since it began. Today, with the acquittal of George Zimmerman, it is time for the Department of Justice to act.

The most fundamental of civil rights — the right to life — was violated the night George Zimmerman stalked and then took the life of Trayvon Martin. We ask that the Department of Justice file civil rights charges against Mr. Zimmerman for this egregious violation.

Please address the travesties of the tragic death of Trayvon Martin by acting today.

Thank you.

http://www.naacp.org/page/s/doj-civil-rights-petition

If her son is not safe...

(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/martin.jpg) (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/sheclown2/media/martin.jpg.html)

no mother's son is safe. 

bottom line.

When was her son safe?  No one's children are safe today, they weren't safe in the days, weeks, years before Trayvon died.  Murderers, kidnappers and rapists have been stealing our children yet few people have shown the outrage they are showing over this case.

This was a terrible tragedy, and there are terrible tragedies every day just ask Robert Sutton. 

Until we take on the issues that Lake has mentioned in this thread, there are many more dangers for our children than a fluke like the GZ incident.




Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 10:34:36 AM
Murder and manslaughter are State charges.  I am not aware of any ability by the federal government to charge citizens with violation of any "civil right to live".   The Police Officers in the Rodney King case were charged with civil rights violations because they were acting under color of law, or under their authority as Police.  I will defer to an attorney who is familiar with this area of law, but I don't see it.

In any event, this would appear to be a violation of double jeapordy.   There may yet be some legal action at the state level, and the parents of Martin will file a civil lawsuit.

I agree that manslaughter was the appropriate charge, but it was an included charge in the trial and apparently, at least in the eyes of the jury, it was not proved in trial.  Zimmerman has been tried and aquitted.  It is certainly not a perfect system, but it is the best we have. 

It is my understanding, correct me if I am wrong, that Zimmerman testified that he lost sight of Martin, and then upon exitin his truck he was pysically attacked by Martin without warning.  I don't know if there were witnesses to that beyond Mr. Zimmerman.  I did hear a witness testifying that he saw what appeared to be Mr. Martin on top of Mr. Zimmerman striking him.  This was apparently enough for the jury not to assign guilt to Mr. Zimmerman.  So it appears to me that it was not the Zimmermans testimony of  "fleeing" that caused the jury to come back with their verdict, but his testimony of a sudden physical attack without warning. 

This is a judgement call in my opinion.  A tough one for the jury.  Mr. Martin is dead and could not present his own testament as to what happened.  All the jury had was the evidence that was presented. 

I don't see what laws should be changed.  We live in an imperfect world.  Of course no one's son is safe.  No one is completely safe.  Giving up liberties to chase "security" is a false hope.  Your actions have consequences.  Both Zimmerman and Martin's actions that night had consequences.  A different choice at any stage leads to different results.  This tragic case has been hijacked by others to be used for their own purposes.  I see the language being repeated here... "wanna be cop", "wanna be thug", "twice his size", etc.  and even worse.  I don't believe there is a lot more to this other than a civil trial, which will award any monetary profit from this circus to the Martin family.   



Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 10:41:18 AM
Govt going after Zimmerman sets a dangerous precedent that will assuredly do more harm than good.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: acme54321 on July 15, 2013, 10:45:44 AM
Govt going after Zimmerman sets a dangerous precedent that will assuredly do more harm than good.

Agreed
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 10:47:04 AM
As I have previously stated, I would have thought that a manslaughter conviction was appropriate in this case.   The jury did not agree. 

What other "security guy shooting a teenager to death" cases are you speaking of?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 10:53:39 AM
I do not see adding a law that explicitly states one right to flee without harassment as giving up liberty.  I do not think it was relevant in this case under current law but Zimmerman said he's running in the 911 call.  He should have been allowed to avoid Zimmerman by Fleeing IMO.

I think an educational effort after a "You are protected if you run law" would teach people to watch their homes and neighborhoods without harassing people who do something like ("he look's like he's on drugs just walking while it's raining"GZ).

Fight or Flight instinct is real and when you take away the flight option you shouldn't get cover when the fight instinct takes over.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 10:54:48 AM
Govt going after Zimmerman sets a dangerous precedent that will assuredly do more harm than good.

BS if this wasn't a politically charged case just a simple child murder we would all want the government to pursue every legal means to take the child killer off the street.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 10:56:13 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?
I'm no attorney but many are saying his right to live is one. I guess we'll see in upcoming months.

so anyone found not guilty of murder can then be charged on a civil rights law?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 15, 2013, 11:00:33 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 11:03:29 AM
I do not see adding a law that explicitly states one right to flee without harassment as giving up liberty.  I do not think it was relevant in this case under current law but Zimmerman said he's running in the 911 call.  He should have been allowed to avoid Zimmerman by Fleeing IMO.

I think an educational effort after a "You are protected if you run law" would teach people to watch their homes and neighborhoods without harassing people who do something like ("he look's like he's on drugs just walking while it's raining"GZ).

Fight or Flight instinct is real and when you take away the flight option you shouldn't get cover when the fight instinct takes over.

It is my understanding that the testimony claimed that Martin attacked Zimmerman without warning after Zimmerman got out of his truck.  With no evidence to contradict that testimony, then any "fleeing" law would not apply.  Current law would protect any citizen who is attempting to flee danger.  Had there been any evidence that Zimmerman "caught up to" Martin and attacked him then I am sure there would have been a conviction.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: If_I_Loved_you on July 15, 2013, 11:05:35 AM
AngryMuffin when they call you Troll it's because you have gotten under their skin?

1.  no.  it has an actual meaning.

2.  while its true there isnt a great appetite for 'stupid' around here, it doesnt mean you are trolling.
Stephen why don't you spell check what you post?

I often forget, especially when I am actually watching television.  In reality I don't ever use spell check.  Its usually lazy typing or autocorrect.  Predictably I was a spelling bee champion throughout my youth, and Im pretty accurate in a few languages.  But sometimes I type faster than I read.

sorry.

I just ran spell check and it says that I didn't add a contraction mark in the word "isn't".

I hope that it didn't completely distort my meaning.
It didn't it just looks better. Thank You
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 11:11:14 AM
Govt going after Zimmerman sets a dangerous precedent that will assuredly do more harm than good.

BS if this wasn't a politically charged case just a simple child murder we would all want the government to pursue every legal means to take the child killer off the street.

he was tried and found not guilty, that is the system.  Do you want the Feds getting involved in every case where people don't agree with the verdict?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 11:13:26 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

I must assume you didn't watch a single second of the trial.  Otherwise, you wouldn't post such a silly response. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 11:14:01 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 11:20:53 AM
NN I think Zimmerman reporting on the 911 call that TM was running is evidence that supports fleeing.

Fsquid I don't want the Feds into every disappointing verdict or even this one I just do not see it opening up a bunch of problems.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 11:21:38 AM
Govt going after Zimmerman sets a dangerous precedent that will assuredly do more harm than good.

Agreed
Many thought the same with the Emmet Till case in 1955. You strive to get better, not maintain status quo. This is larger than GZ.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 11:32:09 AM
Jeffrey,

I agree that Zimmerman's decision to continue his pursuit and/or search after he said that martin was "running" is an issue.  My point is that any "fleeing" law would not apply when a person stops "fleeing".  I wasn't in the courtroom, and I am not familiar with the testimony but it is my understanding that Zimmerman claimed he was suddenly attacked by Martin after Zimmerman had lost sight of him and had exited his truck.  It is also my understanding that there was no evidence to argue this testimony. 

Lake,

I wouldn't equate the Emmet Till case with this one.  I understand the racial sensitivity, and I understand the outrage at the loss of a seventeen year old boy in such circumstances.  But I would not equate Zimmerman's overzealous pursuit and the subsequent conflict between him and Martin with what happened to Till. 

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 15, 2013, 11:44:01 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole

Gesundheit


& btw.

I have walked this earth for quite a while now.  I grew up near DC during the civil rights marches.  I have witnessed overt and covert racism in many forums and I gotta tell ya...   

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 11:50:33 AM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole

Gesundheit


& btw.

I have walked this earth for quite a while now.  I grew up near DC during the civil rights marches.  I have witnessed overt and covert racism in many forums and I gotta tell ya...   

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive.



It's a little early to be drinking.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 11:54:41 AM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?
I'm no attorney but many are saying his right to live is one. I guess we'll see in upcoming months.

so anyone found not guilty of murder can then be charged on a civil rights law?

Best to let the courts play it out than to pointelessly argue the finer points of law here. 

Have you ever read the Civil Rights Act?  Or read up on Civil Rights Law?

Or were you asking genuinely?

I have, although on a very basic level.  I was simply responding to the statement that Trayvon's civil right to live was violated.   When put in those simple terms, you could bring up civil rights charges on any acquitted murderer if you wanted to.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 12:26:44 PM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole

Gesundheit


& btw.

I have walked this earth for quite a while now.  I grew up near DC during the civil rights marches.  I have witnessed overt and covert racism in many forums and I gotta tell ya...   

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive.

that's great that you have experienced that.  Still doesn't change my opinion that this isn't going to mean that black kids are going to get gunned down at will in the streets starting next month anymore than they already are in some inner cities.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 15, 2013, 12:27:23 PM
It seems the evidence is there for manslaughter and certainly the kid's civil rights were violated.  As I've continued to state, I don't think this is over by a long shot.  Nevertheless, we can't raise TM from the dead but we can work to save other innocent people from similar fates.

What civil right was violated?
I'm no attorney but many are saying his right to live is one. I guess we'll see in upcoming months.

so anyone found not guilty of murder can then be charged on a civil rights law?

Best to let the courts play it out than to pointelessly argue the finer points of law here. 

Have you ever read the Civil Rights Act?  Or read up on Civil Rights Law?

Or were you asking genuinely?

I have, although on a very basic level.  I was simply responding to the statement that Trayvon's civil right to live was violated.   When put in those simple terms, you could bring up civil rights charges on any acquitted murderer if you wanted to.

or unacquitted murder.  Lets not over burden the simplification with so much hot air. ;)

well if you are found guilty of murder, I believe the feds just let the state sentence be.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: BridgeTroll on July 15, 2013, 12:48:59 PM
Quote
...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

Wow... Pretty broad statement there... ::)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 12:49:14 PM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole

Gesundheit


& btw.

I have walked this earth for quite a while now.  I grew up near DC during the civil rights marches.  I have witnessed overt and covert racism in many forums and I gotta tell ya...   

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

There are not enough facepalms in the world if that's what you believe.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Gators312 on July 15, 2013, 01:03:19 PM
Quote
...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

Wow... Pretty broad statement there... ::)

I often wonder if Stephen merely posts these type of flamebait statements to drive clicks for the site. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 01:05:41 PM
The thread began with the statement "Zimmerman Found Not Guilty".  I think it is safe to say that him being found not guilty refers to his "trial".  However on this thread posters have moved to a number of topics that in my view go to the underlying emotions the trial brought out and not the trial itself.  I want to say again that if we are going to address those issues, it should be one at a time without making this a personal contest of who is right and who is wrong but rather what are the issues in "everyone's" view that made this trial so "powerful" and what are the emotions behind all of the public outpouring?  Look, if we are not going to allow others their views, even if we don't agree with those views then we are turning our eyes and ears away from causes, real or imagined.  I use the word imagined, because the reality each of us feel regarding this case are based on what we imagine happened and what we imagine the causes were.

Was this a state sanctioned lynching?  No, it wasn't and I have heard that sentiment more than once.  While it's a feeling one can definitely associate with the killing a a black youth, the reality in this case is that Zimmerman's actions were called out, he was charged "by the state" and prosecuted "by the state".  Was this a travesty of justice under the law "no".  Cause here is the fact of the matter.  It was the law "as written" that the attorneys, judge and the jurors had to abide by.

There was a grand jury seated whose purpose was to review the killing of Trayvon and decide if there was enough evidence to charge Zimmerman and with what crime.  When it was apparent that the case was one that had caught the eye and passions of the public, Angela Corey stepped in and put herself at the front of this case.  The grand jury was dismissed and a special prosecutor took this into their own hands, to trial with a murder 2 charge which under the law must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.  Corey and her prosecutors who are in fact "the state" in this situation were responsible for prosecuting Zimmerman and getting justice for Trayvon.  Since the state prosecuted for Trayvon there is not way I can see that the state sanctioned Trayvon's death.  It didn't, but the man who caused his death was found "not guilty" because of the way our laws in Florida are written and that's the God's honest truth.

My view on what happened with the case itself (I am only talking trial here), is perhaps a bit different than what others have focused on so far. First questions, why did Corey jump into this case?   Remember Corey, who is known for overcharging in cases, particularly those with minorities in the hot seat, now want's to step up as she said over and over again, while standing before cameras next to the Martin's was only "to get justice for Trayvon".  Sure painted herself as a scion for justice at that moment.  But what is her record really?  Remember Christian Hernandez?  He was the 10 year old child, (child not teenager) that Corey in her quest for justice charged as an adult.  The 10 year old who violently pushed his brother into a bookcase and the little brother died because the injured child's own mother did not get medical help for him until hours later.  As it turns out several high powered attorneys challenged Corey's actions and the child was tried as a juvenile and is now safe and receiving treatment.

Corey has taken some serious hits overtime when it comes to Black prosecution and minority prosecution.   I think she saw the Trayvon case as a way to thrust herself into the spotlight as the avenging angel for the Martin family and in so doing to rehabilitate herself in the eyes of public opinion.  I thought this to begin with but felt it even more strongly when she instructed her office to withhold evidence from the defense in this case.  Sanctions against her are now pending for this reason.  When the Zimmerman verdict was announced as "not guilty", Corey rushed before television camera's, not to the Martin's in support and then played the role of the "good loser" thanking local authorities for their treatment of her and her team while wearing this odd and phoney smile.  She said while she didn't like the outcome, she respects the law and the jury's verdict.  She also stated the case was "Never about race".  Really?  Is this what she thought?  I seriously doubt it.

Zimmerman was not convicted because Corey charged him with a crime she and her team could not prove.  The prosecution put on a lousy case to support a murder two charge.  They didn't prep witnesses, civil or otherwise all they did was call Zimmerman a liar or cop wanna be and during closing arguments actually claimed he made a statement about killing Trayvon that was  proved to be a lie as the incident was recorded.  The prosecution blew it and the way our laws are written set up the state for a "not guilty".  Is that racist?  No it's not, the jury acted according to the law they were instructed to use and anyone who watched the trial knows that there were many, many circumstances raised in the case that screamed "reasonable doubt".  Which means if the jury had any doubt that was reasonable, they could not convict on the murder 2 charge.  The addition of the manslaughter charge as a "fall back" charge that was not defended in the court failed.  Had the case been argued under that charge we may have seen a different outcome.

The questions the case raised touch upon deeply felt hurts in the Black community that are justified and backed by more than a few historical events.  We cannot undo those events, but we should avoid infusing this case with facts from the past.  In order to discuss the injustice in the deaths of everyone who has died because of racism, we need to listen, stay calm, not make it about ourselves but rather about everyone.  Zimmerman was one guy who for many became everyone that had ever made a racist statement in the past, but he does not speak for an entire race and an entire race is not prejudiced.  My goodness, this insistence on calling him "white" as a basis to prove his thoughts and actions were racist is in and of itself the backside of racism, it is a racist view.  The underlying question is why human beings, not just here but globally judge one another by the color of their skin as opposed to the content of their character?  If we are going to discuss such an important issue can we please do it without the need to attack those with different opinions or life experiences?  We need to first listen with compassion to all that is said, not lash out, because when we do that we only fall into the habits of the past which have allowed the deep problems of racism to fester and grow.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: carpnter on July 15, 2013, 01:15:46 PM
Whatever is wrong, needs to be fixed.  And needs to be fixed quickly.  We cannot live in a world where this is allowed to happen. 

The message sent is more than alarming



What was the message? 

Well.  Open season on young black men for one   Easy targets. No protection 

hyperbole

Gesundheit


& btw.

I have walked this earth for quite a while now.  I grew up near DC during the civil rights marches.  I have witnessed overt and covert racism in many forums and I gotta tell ya...   

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive.

That is a complete load of crap. 

The evidence did not support convicting Zimmerman.  Is it a tragedy? Yes.  There are two people who know what happened that night, and one of them is dead.  The prosecution presented their case and it was not enough to convince a jury that he was guilty.  Could he have been guilty of what they claimed?  Yes, but the burden of proof is on the prosecution and they must convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt and the bar is purposely set that high by our laws to help prevent innocent people of being convicted of crimes they did not commit.
William Blackstone, a British jurist and judge who influenced a number of our founding fathers, said that it is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be punished. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: carpnter on July 15, 2013, 01:30:49 PM

That is a complete load of crap. 

The evidence did not support convicting Zimmerman.

Is that your legal opinion Carpenter?  What part of the testimony that you listened to and saw, you know during the court proceedings that makes you say that?

Looking for specifics here.

The jury made that decision, the state did not convince them beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of 2nd degree murder or manslaughter.  Their opinion is the only one that matters.  What you or I think really isn't relevant, but since you asked.

I didn't watch the trial, but I did read the daily news articles and read CNN's Headline News daily blog of the trial, and from what I read, there wasn't enough to get beyond reasonable doubt. 
I like many other people thought he was guilty and should have already been arrested when the story first came out, but as more information came out my opinion changed.  I can't say Zimmerman is innocent, but I can say that the evidence isn't there to convict him beyond that reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 01:31:00 PM
Stephen, the jurors listened to five long weeks of testimony from both sides.  They received directions from the court as to what guilty beyond a reasonable doubt meant.  The testimony of many individuals as well as expert witnesses confirmed doubt at many levels.  Let's just take one statement by Angela Corey herself on behalf of her prosecution made after the verdict.  She was asked why she went for a murder 2 conviction.  Her answer I found to be stunning.  Her reasoning was that they had listened to the 911 tape of the screams during the altercation between Zimmerman and Trayvon.  They were "sure" the once screaming was Trayvon and backed that up with the statement that the screaming stopped after the shot was fired.  As it turns out the preponderance of witnesses said it was Zimmerman screaming but the hard facts are that police forensics and the forensics of the FBI said there was no way to know for sure if it was Zimmerman or Trayvon screaming.  Nada, they testified to this in court.  Right there you have reasonable doubt through the testimony of experts from the FBI.  There were other things as well testified to by experts where serious doubt was raised regarding the actual shooting of Trayvon, which spoke to him being on top during the altercation and the direction in which he was shot and all that it indicated.  The entire trial was filled with areas of testimony and conflicting evidence that raised doubt.  The jury decided not guilty which means after all those weeks of testimony and backroom discussions they had doubts.  I watched most of the trial and I would have to agree with the jury's response based on how the law was written and the criterion for reasonable doubt.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AKIRA on July 15, 2013, 01:38:09 PM
Alan Dershowitz called it from the beginning, based on the weakness of the case.

 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 01:45:45 PM
It was a weak case and did not do Trayvon justice.  I mean if Corey and her prosecutors were making their case based upon the screams hear over a cell phone as a murder 2 it really was a stretch and speakers to her penchant to overcharge defendants.  My question is "Why did she not change gears and go for a manslaughter conviction when police and FBI experts said there was no way to prove who screamed?"  Right there her case was undone, but did she back down from murder 2?  No she went blindly ahead thinking she could withhold evidence from the defense and use other tactics to get a conviction.  In my view, her inability to change gears and go for another lesser charge that they could possibly prove made this more about Corey having her way than it was about justice for Trayvon.  She has a big chip on her shoulder and doesn't like it knocked off.  In this case even FBI evidence telling her the basis of her case was not provable she did what she wanted anyway.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 01:50:45 PM
I hear what you are saying Stephen, but Corey herself said the trial was never about race.  If that is her position then she has made it impossible to look at racial profiling as to the motive for Zimmermans actions.  While trial law isn't a science, forensic science is important to a jury and the outcome of a trial.  Corey failed Trayvon on all counts in this trial. 

The issue of profiling and rights is deeply important and perhaps a thread can be started to focus on that issue.  I think a lot of good discussion can be had about profiling, personal rights, rights of free movement and the like. :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 01:51:35 PM
Quote
...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

Wow... Pretty broad statement there... ::)

I often wonder if Stephen merely posts these type of flamebait statements to drive clicks for the site.

Well there's no reason to wonder.  It expresses my personal view.

I have yet to have someone explain their viewpoint on this without resorting to their opinions on the scariness of young black people.

Not even much more than a peep ---with the sole exception of not now, our curious LEO who thinks that facing death by handgun is something that average citizens should have to do whenever they step out to walmart.--- from people who are defending the right to become walking death machines (in self defense, of course) because, you know:  Liberty!  or something connected by vampire snot to the Second Amendment.

If this is the case, are we really saying that anyone who stalks, abducts, and murders a child can do so without penalty as long as they claim that they percieved the child as a threat?  Thats what happened in this case, and no matter how racist or how gun nutty you might personally be, this kind of precedent is an existential threat to you and your family.

Just like the media, you're making this out to be something it's not.  I have no idea how you could have listened to the testimony provided, the evidence produced or the state's shaky arguments and thought the outcome should have been any different.  This wasn't a matter of race, this was the worst possible scenario playing out.  Defenses based upon self-defense are decided on an ad hoc basis, and it's not as if this ruling gives any person the framework to beat a murder charge.

And what a crock for you to portray other's views as racist because they don't align with your tin-foil hat theory. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 01:56:54 PM
It was a weak case and did not do Trayvon justice.  I mean if Corey and her prosecutors were making their case based upon the screams hear over a cell phone as a murder 2 it really was a stretch and speakers to her penchant to overcharge defendants.  My question is "Why did she not change gears and go for a manslaughter conviction when police and FBI experts said there was no way to prove who screamed?"  Right there her case was undone, but did she back down from murder 2?  No she went blindly ahead thinking she could withhold evidence from the defense and use other tactics to get a conviction.  In my view, her inability to change gears and go for another lesser charge that they could possibly prove made this more about Corey having her way than it was about justice for Trayvon.  She has a big chip on her shoulder and doesn't like it knocked off.  In this case even FBI evidence telling her the basis of her case was not provable she did what she wanted anyway.

I think she made the mistake of thinking that all women on a jury were easier to convince when it came to a child, to be frank.

That has never been my own experience.  Especially when there is some doubt as to who was at fault situationally.

It was brilliant on the part of the defense to bring Zimmerman's mother to the case, and to present him as an ineffectual loser.  Since Trayvon is dead, Zimmerman became the only victim in the room.  Its hard to overcome that.
I agree.  Not sure what Corey was thinking about the jurors being all women, but as both a woman and mother I can say that if I were deciding what was to become of the life of any human being I would want to make my choice without any doubt as to their guilt.    Some others have said that six women, five white were not representative of Trayvon's and Zimmerman's peers.  But if they wish to point to the jury and say they didn't get the facts or emotion of the case because of their gender or color is in it's own right a racist view.  If the argument is that more Blacks on the jury would have led to a different outcome, it again comes back to the prosecution.  They agreed to the jurors and could have made motions to change the jury selection or fought to have 12 jurors instead of 6.  They didn't so once again the failed case goes back to the prosecution.  No one else.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 01:58:12 PM
Stephen, you write: "Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder and had a pretty huge task in front of her."

Leaking negatives about Trayvon's past? You mean like the racially charged and derogatory statements about women all over his Twitter feed? Or the pictures of him holding a gun? Or smoking weed? Or from the message boards about him looking for hydrocodone for sizzurp and claiming he's drank it before? Or his multiple suspensions from school? All of that is irrelevant, correct?

Yet at the same time, you think Zimmerman's past IS relevant. You talk about his past run-in with the law and post a link to a HuffPo article where one woman claims that Zimmerman and his family are racists?

Zimmerman's past and the opinions of others are fair game by your standards, but Trayvon's past and his destructive behavior leading up to him referring to Zimmerman by racial epithets and then attacking him for GZ asking "What are you doing?" is not?

Despite the fact that the FBI has already investigated him and cleared him of being a racist? Despite the fact that Det. Serino testified under oath that the profiling was not based on race?

It is apparent that you have an agenda and you are going to skew things to fit your agenda.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:08:00 PM
Stephen, you write: "Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder and had a pretty huge task in front of her."

Leaking negatives about Trayvon's past? You mean like the racially charged and derogatory statements about women all over his Twitter feed? Or the pictures of him holding a gun? Or smoking weed? Or from the message boards about him looking for hydrocodone for sizzurp and claiming he's drank it before? Or his multiple suspensions from school? All of that is irrelevant, correct?

Yet at the same time, you think Zimmerman's past IS relevant. You talk about his past run-in with the law and post a link to a HuffPo article where one woman claims that Zimmerman and his family are racists?

Zimmerman's past and the opinions of others are fair game by your standards, but Trayvon's past and his destructive behavior leading up to him referring to Zimmerman by racial epithets and then attacking him for GZ asking "What are you doing?" is not?

Despite the fact that the FBI has already investigated him and cleared him of being a racist? Despite the fact that Det. Serino testified under oath that the profiling was not based on race?

It is apparent that you have an agenda and you are going to skew things to fit your agenda.
Not a challenge or argument.  Can you tell me the post to which you are referring where such statements were made?  Thanks. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 02:09:56 PM
Both Zimmerman and Trayvon had opportunities to prevent this tragedy. The whole situation just sucks.

We can go back to the fact that Trayvon would have never even had been in Orlando had he not been suspended from school for 10 days. But even so, Zimmerman should have stopped pursuing him when told to by the dispatcher. Period. But even after that, when he asked Trayvon "What are you doing?", it could have ended there had Trayvon simply said "I'm walking back from the store, see?" But instead, it appears that he got defensive and a fight ensued ending in his tragic death. And if Trayvon was feeling threatened when he was being followed, why didn't he hang up with Rachel and dial 911?

And now here we are. A teenager is dead and Zimmerman has to live with that and he will never have a normal day in his life. It is a tragedy from every angle.

Shame on the media for jumping to conclusions, flat-out lying and distorting the facts to fit their agenda, the President for remarking on a state case that he has no business ever being involved in, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and the New Black Panthers for stirring up the racial narrative to fit their agenda, Angela Corey's office for manipulating evidence and keeping it from the defense and the press, MSNBC for doctoring recordings to make Zimmerman sound like he was racial profiling, CNN for broadcasting Zimmerman's SSN and personal info, and so on and so on.

We can all learn from this. Most importantly that when "race" is made a focal point in any situation, it can only set us back as a society.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 02:21:36 PM

Juries are fickle creatures, Diane.  In the end most attorneys really don't know what motivates the decisions or why the jurors make up their minds.

Law isnt a science, and our system of trial by jury Justice is an inexact process.  It beats Trial by aristocracy, to be sure, but theres no point in mistaking it for a foregone process.

Obviously there was enough evidence to convict OJ Simpson, for the crime that he was later legally found responsible for committing in a separate civil trial.  But the jurors didnt convict him for whatever reason, even though he did in fact murder nichole simpson and is presently in jail for another violent crime.

Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder and had a pretty huge task in front of her.

But I don't think anyone is arguiing that Zimmerman's outcome should be reversed by the Jury or Judge.

Thats fait accompli, but as in the case of the OJ Simpson case, it is not (nor should it be) the end of the legal matters.

Profiling is a violation of Trayvon's Civil Rights.

He has the right to walk through the streets of a city without being profiled and accosted based on his race. 

However, Zimmerman admitted to profiling the kid.  No one has denied that he profiled him.

This was probably under the assumption that since Zimmerman wasnt actually a cop that it didnt matter.  We usually proceed on the basis that profiling is something that cops do, and if they get caught, then its unfair.  In fact the Supremes have found it unconstitutional.

But what happens when a private citizen profiles?

Well thats a different question isnt it?




Stephen, above is the post where you state the line I was referring to in my previous post.

I read the statement as though you found it to be "wrong" that there were leaks in the media about Trayvon's past.

Yet at the same time on page 2 of this very same thread, you dedicate 2 very long posts questioning Zimmerman's past run in with the law, his character, and that of his family.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:21:59 PM
Both Zimmerman and Trayvon had opportunities to prevent this tragedy. The whole situation just sucks.

We can go back to the fact that Trayvon would have never even had been in Orlando had he not been suspended from school for 10 days. But even so, Zimmerman should have stopped pursuing him when told to by the dispatcher. Period. But even after that, when he asked Trayvon "What are you doing?", it could have ended there had Trayvon simply said "I'm walking back from the store, see?" But instead, it appears that he got defensive and a fight ensued ending in his tragic death. And if Trayvon was feeling threatened when he was being followed, why didn't he hang up with Rachel and dial 911?

And now here we are. A teenager is dead and Zimmerman has to live with that and he will never have a normal day in his life. It is a tragedy from every angle.

Shame on the media for jumping to conclusions, flat-out lying and distorting the facts to fit their agenda, the President for remarking on a state case that he has no business ever being involved in, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and the New Black Panthers for stirring up the racial narrative to fit their agenda, Angela Corey's office for manipulating evidence and keeping it from the defense and the press, MSNBC for doctoring recordings to make Zimmerman sound like he was racial profiling, CNN for broadcasting Zimmerman's SSN and personal info, and so on and so on.

We can all learn from this. Most importantly that when "race" is made a focal point in any situation, it can only set us back as a society.
I agree with your overall sentiment, but there was no testimony to Zimmerman asking Trayvon what he was doing.  The only commentary that was testified to by either side was Zimmerman saying that just before the altercation, Trayvon approached him saying "You have a problem with me?" and Zimmerman says he responded "No I don't have problem with you" and then said Trayvon struck him.  I agree with your statement that media helped to inflame people and did participate in the broadcast of partial truth's which is why NBC is being sued.

The Martin case has become the proverbial "Straw that broke the Camels Back".  Trayvon became every black man who has ever been profiled or suspected because of race and Zimmerman became every non black that has acted with prejudice toward Black men.  That is the outcropping of the case.  The reality is that Zimmerman is just "some guy" not an authority figure and Trayvon is a young man who was killed as a result of the zeal with which he was pursued by another.  Neither one perfect.  Just two people.  Zimmerman was the adult in this situation and in my view he is responsible for his actions that led up to Trayvon's death, but he is not the guy to point to when it comes to issues of racial profiling because the prosecution said this was not about race.  Zimmerman represents no one in this situation but himself, not all whites or Hispanics for that matter. Just himself.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:24:05 PM
Both Zimmerman and Trayvon had opportunities to prevent this tragedy. The whole situation just sucks.

We can go back to the fact that Trayvon would have never even had been in Orlando had he not been suspended from school for 10 days. But even so, Zimmerman should have stopped pursuing him when told to by the dispatcher. Period. But even after that, when he asked Trayvon "What are you doing?", it could have ended there had Trayvon simply said "I'm walking back from the store, see?" But instead, it appears that he got defensive and a fight ensued ending in his tragic death. And if Trayvon was feeling threatened when he was being followed, why didn't he hang up with Rachel and dial 911?

And now here we are. A teenager is dead and Zimmerman has to live with that and he will never have a normal day in his life. It is a tragedy from every angle.

Shame on the media for jumping to conclusions, flat-out lying and distorting the facts to fit their agenda, the President for remarking on a state case that he has no business ever being involved in, the NAACP, Al Sharpton, and the New Black Panthers for stirring up the racial narrative to fit their agenda, Angela Corey's office for manipulating evidence and keeping it from the defense and the press, MSNBC for doctoring recordings to make Zimmerman sound like he was racial profiling, CNN for broadcasting Zimmerman's SSN and personal info, and so on and so on.

We can all learn from this. Most importantly that when "race" is made a focal point in any situation, it can only set us back as a society.

Shame on you, Jameson.  Shame on you.  It sounds like the minute someone mentioned race, you forgot that it was about a child killing.

And btw, your last point is nonsense.  Do you think the Civil Rights Movement set us back as a nation?  Poppycock.
Stephen, why the shame on you?  Jameson is stating their view as they are entitled to.  You don't have to agree but please don't go after those who disagree with you all of the time.  Perhaps it would be better to try and understand what others think without making their views inferior.  It makes for better discussion that can possibly lead to understanding.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:25:42 PM

Juries are fickle creatures, Diane.  In the end most attorneys really don't know what motivates the decisions or why the jurors make up their minds.

Law isnt a science, and our system of trial by jury Justice is an inexact process.  It beats Trial by aristocracy, to be sure, but theres no point in mistaking it for a foregone process.

Obviously there was enough evidence to convict OJ Simpson, for the crime that he was later legally found responsible for committing in a separate civil trial.  But the jurors didnt convict him for whatever reason, even though he did in fact murder nichole simpson and is presently in jail for another violent crime.

Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder and had a pretty huge task in front of her.

But I don't think anyone is arguiing that Zimmerman's outcome should be reversed by the Jury or Judge.

Thats fait accompli, but as in the case of the OJ Simpson case, it is not (nor should it be) the end of the legal matters.

Profiling is a violation of Trayvon's Civil Rights.

He has the right to walk through the streets of a city without being profiled and accosted based on his race. 

However, Zimmerman admitted to profiling the kid.  No one has denied that he profiled him.

This was probably under the assumption that since Zimmerman wasnt actually a cop that it didnt matter.  We usually proceed on the basis that profiling is something that cops do, and if they get caught, then its unfair.  In fact the Supremes have found it unconstitutional.

But what happens when a private citizen profiles?

Well thats a different question isnt it?




Stephen, above is the post where you state the line I was referring to in my previous post.

I read the statement as though you found it to be "wrong" that there were leaks in the media about Trayvon's past.

Yet at the same time on page 2 of this very same thread, you dedicate 2 very long posts questioning Zimmerman's past run in with the law, his character, and that of his family.


Semantics perhaps?  The statement does speak to the leaking of information about Trayvon.  When did that happen and who did the leaking.  It really is another sad statement about the SAO.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 02:25:48 PM
Quote
...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

Wow... Pretty broad statement there... ::)

I often wonder if Stephen merely posts these type of flamebait statements to drive clicks for the site.

Well there's no reason to wonder.  It expresses my personal view.

I have yet to have someone explain their viewpoint on this without resorting to their opinions on the scariness of young black people.

Not even much more than a peep ---with the sole exception of not now, our curious LEO who thinks that facing death by handgun is something that average citizens should have to do whenever they step out to walmart.--- from people who are defending the right to become walking death machines (in self defense, of course) because, you know:  Liberty!  or something connected by vampire snot to the Second Amendment.

If this is the case, are we really saying that anyone who stalks, abducts, and murders a child can do so without penalty as long as they claim that they percieved the child as a threat?  Thats what happened in this case, and no matter how racist or how gun nutty you might personally be, this kind of precedent is an existential threat to you and your family.

Just like the media, you're making this out to be something it's not.  I have no idea how you could have listened to the testimony provided, the evidence produced or the state's shaky arguments and thought the outcome should have been any different.  This wasn't a matter of race, this was the worst possible scenario playing out.  Defenses based upon self-defense are decided on an ad hoc basis, and it's not as if this ruling gives any person the framework to beat a murder charge.

And what a crock for you to portray other's views as racist because they don't align with your tin-foil hat theory.

Im sorry, bill.  I really cant make out what you are trying to say.  What are you saying is not a matter of race?  The child killing by Zimmerman or the verdict that the jury came back with?

I assumed we were discussing this case, and the media sensationalism surrounding it.  The facts of this matter led to a jury acquitting Zimmerman of the charges filed by the State.  Seemingly, you believe that anyone that agrees with the Jury's acquittal is a "covert racist," when the facts of this case seemingly show that Zimmerman possessed a reasonable fear for his life.  No one's happy that a child died, but believing that this case will lead to an "open season," on African-Americans is nonsensical. 

For the record, I'm not scared of any race of people, and think the jury came to the proper decision.  It's a tragic situation, no doubt, but the race card is unnecessary as it relates to this case.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:36:25 PM
The case if the prosecution is to be believed was not about race.  However for many it was and is.  For me it is easy to see how this can be about race if you are a Black, a minority member or a non bigoted individual.  The problem I have is that somehow in the minds of some Zimmerman became an authority figure who profiled.  He was not an authority figure, just a guy on a neighborhood watch team.  What happened is his actions then morphed into "profiling by authorities".  It wasn't.  Perhaps Zimmerman is a bigot and his motivation was based in a racist view, that just makes him a "bigot".  I frankly don't know how we can pretend that we can get into everyone's head and stop them for viewing others through the lens of race.  The only thing we can do is to address the laws and how and if they permit racial profiling as used and applied by authorities.  To deal with all the racists and bigots in the world is a much bigger more complicated issues and not one that I think we can legislate into being but rather one we can educate about.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 02:36:53 PM


If this is the case, are we really saying that anyone who stalks, abducts, and murders a child can do so without penalty as long as they claim that they percieved the child as a threat?
You are taking a lot of liberties with the facts, Stephen.  The facts that most agree upon are:


The testimonial discrepancies differ between 5 and 6 above.  Now, if the evidence had shown that Zimmerman had sprinted after Martin, tackled him, fought him and then shot him, I think the verdict would have been very different.  However, that's not what the evidenced showed.  Instead, there was evidence that Zimmerman continued his pursuit of Martin (walking, not running) and that Martin jumped out from behind some bushes and attacked Zimmerman.  Very different scenarios.  So different that it cast reasonable doubt on the prosecution's case.


Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Coolyfett on July 15, 2013, 02:38:40 PM
LOL at this thread and the comments.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:41:24 PM
LOL at this thread and the comments.
I don't find much funny about the death of Trayvon or the hurts of racism.  I think there has been some very good commentary so far.  What is funny about this thread in your view?  I would be interested to know. This is a sincere question by the way.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 02:45:14 PM
Shame on you, Jameson.  Shame on you.  It sounds like the minute someone mentioned race, you forgot that it was about a child killing.

And btw, your last point is nonsense.  Do you think the Civil Rights Movement set us back as a nation?  Poppycock.
Stephen, why the shame on you?  Jameson is stating their view as they are entitled to.  You don't have to agree but please don't go after those who disagree with you all of the time.  Perhaps it would be better to try and understand what others think without making their views inferior.  It makes for better discussion that can possibly lead to understanding.

Stephen, if you truly listen to the words of MLK, his dream was to live in a nation where one's race was irrelevant. Where one's race would one day not be a factor in regards to anything and everything. Where we wouldn't see a black person or a white person. We would simply see a person. That is the world I want to live in and only when we reach that point as a society will racism be extinct.

It wasn't "someone" mentioning race. It was the media creating a racial narrative to fit their agenda (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/13/Media-Zimmerman-Coverage-Rap-Sheet), networks such as MSNBC doctoring 911 calls to make it sound like Zimmerman was profiling based on race, etc., THAT then makes this case more about race in the public's eyes instead of the fact that it is a tragedy that a teenager was killed.

If you want to shame anyone, you should shame the media.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 02:53:14 PM
Shame on you, Jameson.  Shame on you.  It sounds like the minute someone mentioned race, you forgot that it was about a child killing.

And btw, your last point is nonsense.  Do you think the Civil Rights Movement set us back as a nation?  Poppycock.
Stephen, why the shame on you?  Jameson is stating their view as they are entitled to.  You don't have to agree but please don't go after those who disagree with you all of the time.  Perhaps it would be better to try and understand what others think without making their views inferior.  It makes for better discussion that can possibly lead to understanding.

Stephen, if you truly listen to the words of MLK, his dream was to live in a nation where one's race was irrelevant. Where one's race would one day not be a factor in regards to anything and everything. Where we wouldn't see a black person or a white person. We would simply see a person. That is the world I want to live in and only when we reach that point as a society will racism be extinct.

It wasn't "someone" mentioning race. It was the media creating a racial narrative to fit their agenda (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/13/Media-Zimmerman-Coverage-Rap-Sheet), networks such as MSNBC doctoring 911 calls to make it sound like Zimmerman was profiling based on race, etc., THAT then makes this case more about race in the public's eyes instead of the fact that it is a tragedy that a teenager was killed.

If you want to shame anyone, you should shame the media.

Well youve already mistakenly criticized my own posts here based on what you thought was being said, rather than what I actually said, and at the end of the day, you can thank Zimmerman and his family for driving the racial profiling narrative. 

NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets.
Stephen, The Zimmermans may or may not be racist I don't know.  But if they are, there is no evidence of them using the media to drive home their racist views and they are not the ones on trial, only George is.  If there is a public evidence of them driving a racist agenda behind this case via the media can you share that with all of us?  I think this was media at the forefront of the issue in that they know that a case that can be shared as racist is a case that will get viewers and readership.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: tmania on July 15, 2013, 03:03:32 PM
It seems everyone is arguing over the unknown.  If you speculate that Zimmerman attacked Trayvon, then Zimmerman is a racist child killer.  If Trayvon attacked Zimmerman than Trayvon is a deserving dead thug.  Pick your brand of racism and throw the dice.  What a waste of time, looks like there's  no good to come from this tragedy.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:11:31 PM


What brought this case to national attention was the delay in arresting Zimmerman in the first place.  You probably don't remember the early days of this, but the zimmerman camp had some pretty steamy things that got put out there in the press in hopes of keeping him from being charged with any crime at all.
Zimmerman was not charged with a crime because the local prosecutor did not believe it had the evidence to convict him.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:16:21 PM
see above.



What brought this case to national attention was the delay in arresting Zimmerman in the first place.  You probably don't remember the early days of this, but the zimmerman camp had some pretty steamy things that got put out there in the press in hopes of keeping him from being charged with any crime at all.
Zimmerman was not charged with a crime because the local prosecutor did not believe it had the evidence to convict him.

That addresses Zimmerman's defense.  It does not address the delay in prosecuting Zimmerman.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:19:12 PM
Shame on you, Jameson.  Shame on you.  It sounds like the minute someone mentioned race, you forgot that it was about a child killing.

And btw, your last point is nonsense.  Do you think the Civil Rights Movement set us back as a nation?  Poppycock.
Stephen, why the shame on you?  Jameson is stating their view as they are entitled to.  You don't have to agree but please don't go after those who disagree with you all of the time.  Perhaps it would be better to try and understand what others think without making their views inferior.  It makes for better discussion that can possibly lead to understanding.

Stephen, if you truly listen to the words of MLK, his dream was to live in a nation where one's race was irrelevant. Where one's race would one day not be a factor in regards to anything and everything. Where we wouldn't see a black person or a white person. We would simply see a person. That is the world I want to live in and only when we reach that point as a society will racism be extinct.

It wasn't "someone" mentioning race. It was the media creating a racial narrative to fit their agenda (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/13/Media-Zimmerman-Coverage-Rap-Sheet), networks such as MSNBC doctoring 911 calls to make it sound like Zimmerman was profiling based on race, etc., THAT then makes this case more about race in the public's eyes instead of the fact that it is a tragedy that a teenager was killed.

If you want to shame anyone, you should shame the media.

Well youve already mistakenly criticized my own posts here based on what you thought was being said, rather than what I actually said, and at the end of the day, you can thank Zimmerman and his family for driving the racial profiling narrative. 

NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets.
Stephen, The Zimmermans may or may not be racist I don't know.  But if they are, there is no evidence of them using the media to drive home their racist views and they are not the ones on trial, only George is.  If there is a public evidence of them driving a racist agenda behind this case via the media can you share that with all of us?  I think this was media at the forefront of the issue in that they know that a case that can be shared as racist is a case that will get viewers and readership.

actually, that isnt accurate, Diane.  From the beginning, Zimmerman maintained that he was covered by the stand your ground law, and then his cousins immediately came out and called him out for his racist background.

What brought this case to national attention was the delay in arresting Zimmerman in the first place.  You probably don't remember the early days of this, but the zimmerman camp had some pretty steamy things that got put out there in the press in hopes of keeping him from being charged with any crime at all.
Interesting, I was unaware of the statements by his cousins, but not sure that those qualify has driving the racist perception.  But will concede it does lead some credence to racism in Zimmerman's mind.  My question then becomes if his cousins made such statements, why didn't the prosecution put them on the stand?  Probably because Corey decided it wasn't about race.  In any event it was the media driving much of the sentiment surrounding this case. IMO  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:20:11 PM
By the way, I am not going to participate in a debate about whether or not the case is about racism.  For me it is about irresponsible gun laws, created by the very people who want more proliferation of guns.

However, an idiot first time poster decided to use this issue as a way to discuss his bizarre theories about the criminality of black people, which is how i got involved in the discussion in the first place.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/07/15/2301621/why-stand-your-ground-is-central-to-george-zimmermans-case-after-all/

The Stand Your Ground law that gained notoriety in the wake of Trayvon Martin’s shooting became central to the case again last week, when written instructions advised the jury that found shooter George Zimmerman not guilty to take the law’s central provision into account.

The law that authorizes the use of unfettered deadly force with no “duty to retreat” sparked national outcry last year when police cited the statute as grounds for not arresting George Zimmerman for more than a month. Since then, reports and studies have shown that similar laws on the books in at least 21 states are discriminatory, applied arbitrarily, and associated with a higher rate of homicides. But the law faded from center stage after police pursued arrest of Zimmerman 44 days later, and Zimmerman’s lawyers opted not to specifically raise the law as a defense during trial. Had the lawyers moved to formally raise Stand Your Ground as a defense, the judge would have held a hearing devoted to whether the law immunized Zimmerman from criminal liability, and the case might have ended without ever going to a jury.

Zimmerman’s lawyer chose instead to go to trial, once again declining to specifically raise “Stand Your Ground” as a defense and keeping the law out of the trial. But the principle’s irrelevance ended the moment the jury received their instructions for deciding the case. As Ta-Nehisi Coates reveals, the written instructions that sat with the jurors as they deliberated made very clear that under Florida law, a shooter has a right to stand his ground:

Quote
If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Since Zimmerman’s lawyers opted not to invoke Stand Your Ground as a defense, observers have characterized this case as a regular old “self-defense” case, rather than a “Stand Your Ground” case. But what these jury instructions make clear is that, in Florida, there is no longer an effective distinction. Stand Your Ground is the state’s self-defense law, whether or not a defendant opts to hold a hearing specifically on the question. In fact, this section on the “Justifiable Use of Deadly Force” is the only place in all 27 pages of jury instructions in which the phrase “self-defense” is used.

And self-defense now means shooters may stand their ground not just to prevent death or great bodily harm, but also to prevent the “commission of a forcible felony.” Those who wonder why jurors didn’t expect that a reasonable person in George Zimmerman’s situation should have taken lesser action than firing a deadly shot at a kid whose arsenal consisted of candy and a soft drink – regardless of whether or not he attacked Zimmerman — may find their answer on page 11 of the jury instructions.

Given this instruction, it is worth pointing out that George Zimmerman was studying criminal justice at an online college, including Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. After jurors watched the recording of a Fox News interview in which Zimmerman claimed to have no knowledge of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, his college professor testified that the law was covered extensively in his class, and that Zimmerman was “probably one of the better students in the class” and received an A.

Regardless of whether Zimmerman was well-versed in the statute and exploited it to his advantage, it remains the law in Florida. Its inclusion in the jury instructions as an explanation of self-defense makes all the more compelling the jury’s reasonable doubt about Zimmerman’s legal culpability, even if, as Emily Bazelon suggests, Florida is undoubtedly guilty.

The Stand Your Ground law may once again play a pivotal role in civil lawsuits against Zimmerman. As legal commentators have pointed out, the Stand Your Ground law provides the same opportunity for defendants to seek immunity from civil liability that it does from criminal, if a judge finds the defendant’s use of force was justifiable under the law’s standards. And as in this case, even if a judge doesn’t find Zimmerman immune, a jury would once again be instructed to take the Stand Your Ground rule into account.
Can you start a link about how Gun laws impacted this case?  That is a discussion waiting to be continued.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 03:21:27 PM

Well youve already mistakenly criticized my own posts here based on what you thought was being said, rather than what I actually said, and at the end of the day, you can thank Zimmerman and his family for driving the racial profiling narrative. 

NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets.

Actually Stephen, I criticized your post, you asked me to show you which post I was referring to and demanded an apology. Instead of apologizing (as it most certainly is not warranted), I quoted your post, pointed out the line to you, and you have not made any attempt at a clarification or a rebuttal.

Now you claim that Zimmerman and his family drove the racial narrative and not the media. How one can look at the news stories and make such an ignorant statement is beyond me. But I digress.

Yes, PROFILING happened. Not RACIAL PROFILING. Keep in mind that it was at night, dark, raining, Trayvon was wearing a hoodie and walking away from Zimmerman, and Zimmerman made no mention of the race of Trayvon Martin until asked by the 911 Dispatcher:

Dispatcher: Sanford Police Department.

Zimmerman: Hey we've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy, uh, it's Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy is he white, black, or hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.


So again, as the facts show, Zimmerman wasn't profiling Trayvon based on his race.

Also, the FBI has already investigated whether Zimmerman was motivated by "racial bias or hatred" and found no evidence to support those claims:

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0712/FBI-report-No-evidence-George-Zimmerman-is-racist
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: mikew on July 15, 2013, 03:23:19 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 03:27:32 PM
By the way, I am not going to participate in a debate about whether or not the case is about racism.  For me it is about irresponsible gun laws, created by the very people who want more proliferation of guns.

However, an idiot first time poster decided to use this issue as a way to discuss his bizarre theories about the criminality of black people, which is how i got involved in the discussion in the first place.

Who might the idiot first time poster be?  :D
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 15, 2013, 03:30:02 PM
If there was some legit concern that he acted out as a racist, the charges should have been filed immediately. Filing them now makes it seem a lot like double jeopardy.

"Well shit, we didnt get the conviction. Screw it, we will just keep filing new charges until we find one that sticks!!"

Also, I believe corporations, landlords, and employers should be regulated as far as racial issues go (EO is necessary and justifiable) but individuals being charged with racism is a little too thought policey for me.

If someone murders someone because they are gay or black, its still murder. Motive is already considered when the charges are levied. No?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:31:21 PM


megatron, do you have any clue at all about the criminal process? 
I suspect that you don't know what you are talking about, and would be more than happy to fill you in.  Normally a case like this is initiated by an arrest and a police officer filing a criminal charge with the states attorney.

At that point the states attorney decides whether to prosecute or not.

In this case, the police didnt arrest zimmerman for weeks.

Anyways, this doesnt apply to the conversation that you are commenting on, which is about how the discussion of race and profiling was first injected into the story nationally.
[/quote]I know a lot more about it than you do, Stephen.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:32:38 PM



megatron, do you have any clue at all about the criminal process? 
I suspect that you don't know what you are talking about, and would be more than happy to fill you in.  Normally a case like this is initiated by an arrest and a police officer filing a criminal charge with the states attorney.

At that point the states attorney decides whether to prosecute or not.

In this case, the police didnt arrest zimmerman for weeks.

Anyways, this doesnt apply to the conversation that you are commenting on, which is about how the discussion of race and profiling was first injected into the story nationally.
I know a lot more about it than you do, Stephen.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:34:42 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
The difference is that Trayvon was a teenager and teenagers say stupid stuff.  I think for him the statement was simply a descriptive in his mind and frankly, he was a kid being followed by a "cracker" in his view.  No big deal.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 03:34:56 PM
By the way, I am not going to participate in a debate about whether or not the case is about racism.  For me it is about irresponsible gun laws, created by the very people who want more proliferation of guns.


It's hard to take this post seriously after you say:

"...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist."
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 03:36:22 PM
What I would like to know is why the Judge over ruled the state's request to have the initial aggressor rule read to the jury as part of the juror instructions. I know the defense objected but I have yet to hear why the judge ruled in the defenses favor. I am not saying she was right or wrong I would just like an explanation as to why.

The First Aggressor Rule is a rather simple common law rule that says “a defendant who provokes an encounter as a result of which he finds it necessary to use deadly force to defend himself, is guilty of an unlawful homicide and cannot claim that he acted in self-defense.” Wharton’s Criminal Law, Sec. 136 Provocation by Defendant.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 03:36:47 PM
By the way, I am not going to participate in a debate about whether or not the case is about racism.  For me it is about irresponsible gun laws, created by the very people who want more proliferation of guns.


It's hard to take this post seriously after you say:

"...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist."

 :D
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: mikew on July 15, 2013, 03:37:18 PM
An idiot poster?  I thought you had more class than that.

I believe it was you who stated:

"NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

No, that's only in your mind. No one knows went through Zimmerman's mind that night.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:37:41 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
The difference is that Trayvon was a teenager and teenagers say stupid stuff.  I think for him the statement was simply a descriptive in his mind and frankly, he was a kid being followed by a "cracker" in his view.  No big deal.
That's no different than saying profiling is no big deal.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 03:39:00 PM
sorry, i didnt see this in the mix, Jameson.

My post was clearly in response to Diane's comments about the failures of the prosecution, and I was commenting on that narrow subject. 

People are allowed to talk about whatever they like, thats part of life and a controversial case being argued in public.  This will not be either the first or last time that a victim is smeared through 'opposition research'.

But my comments were restricted to the execution of the prosecution.

You were mistaken, and I accept your apology. ;)


But you never clarified. Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 15, 2013, 03:40:02 PM
By the way, I am not going to participate in a debate about whether or not the case is about racism.  For me it is about irresponsible gun laws, created by the very people who want more proliferation of guns.


It's hard to take this post seriously after you say:

...anyone who thinks this isn't anything but a state-sanctioned lynching is being naive covertly racist.

you are free to take whatever you like, in good health.

and you're free to live out the lyrics to a certain Dead or Alive song.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:42:06 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
The difference is that Trayvon was a teenager and teenagers say stupid stuff.  I think for him the statement was simply a descriptive in his mind and frankly, he was a kid being followed by a "cracker" in his view.  No big deal.
That's no different than saying profiling is no big deal.
No, not really.  I think you have to consider context.  As a mother of two son's they have said many things that on the surface could be misunderstood or taken wrong when they were teens.  It's context that counts and his "cracker" statement was no where close to racial profiling.  ;)  Lord have mercy, if everything I said or did as a teenager were held up as proof of my inner soul, I can't imagine what a person could claim about me.  lol
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 03:47:44 PM
sorry, i didnt see this in the mix, Jameson.

My post was clearly in response to Diane's comments about the failures of the prosecution, and I was commenting on that narrow subject. 

People are allowed to talk about whatever they like, thats part of life and a controversial case being argued in public.  This will not be either the first or last time that a victim is smeared through 'opposition research'.

But my comments were restricted to the execution of the prosecution.

You were mistaken, and I accept your apology. ;)


But you never clarified. Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?

I have clarified my statement.  If you agree with that, then I will answer your second question about my opinion as to the relevance of trayvons facebook page on his murder.

Where did you clarify?

A simple yes or no will suffice: Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 15, 2013, 03:49:45 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
The difference is that Trayvon was a teenager and teenagers say stupid stuff.  I think for him the statement was simply a descriptive in his mind and frankly, he was a kid being followed by a "cracker" in his view.  No big deal.
That's no different than saying profiling is no big deal.
No, not really.  I think you have to consider context.  As a mother of two son's they have said many things that on the surface could be misunderstood or taken wrong when they were teens.  It's context that counts and his "cracker" statement was no where close to racial profiling.  ;)  Lord have mercy, if everything I said or did as a teenager were held up as proof of my inner soul, I can't imagine what a person could claim about me.  lol
What about, in this case, where that same 17 year old was alleged to have hid in bushes and jumped a guy as he came by?  Then do his statements 4 minutes earlier matter?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:57:31 PM
Actually, the FBI did an investigation on Zimmerman and came to the conclusion that he wasn't racist. 

And as far as I'm aware - the only racist that night was Trayvon Martin.  Or maybe you consider "crazy-ass cracker" an endearing term?
The difference is that Trayvon was a teenager and teenagers say stupid stuff.  I think for him the statement was simply a descriptive in his mind and frankly, he was a kid being followed by a "cracker" in his view.  No big deal.
That's no different than saying profiling is no big deal.
No, not really.  I think you have to consider context.  As a mother of two son's they have said many things that on the surface could be misunderstood or taken wrong when they were teens.  It's context that counts and his "cracker" statement was no where close to racial profiling.  ;)  Lord have mercy, if everything I said or did as a teenager were held up as proof of my inner soul, I can't imagine what a person could claim about me.  lol
What about, in this case, where that same 17 year old was alleged to have hid in bushes and jumped a guy as he came by?  Then do his statements 4 minutes earlier matter?
No one that I know of made a claim anywhere in the trial that had Trayvon hiding in the bushes.  Zimmerman himself only stated that he came up to him from his left side. That is what his testimony was.  No one ever said Trayvon was hiding in bushes. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 03:59:47 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

Trayvon Martin and the Myth of "Black on Black Crime"

Crime is driven by proximity and opportunity, writes Jamelle Bouie—which is why 86 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders.

Last week, in Chicago, 16-year-old Darryl Green was found dead in the yard of an abandoned home. He was killed, relatives reported, because he refused to join a gang. Unlike most tragedies, however—which remain local news—this one caught the attention of conservative activist Ben Shapiro, an editor for Breitbart News. Using the hashtag “#justicefordarryl,” Shaprio tweeted and publicized the details of Green’s murder. But this wasn’t a call for help and assistance for Green’s family, rather, it was his response to wide outrage over Saturday’s decision in the case of George Zimmerman, where a Florida jury judged him “not guilty” of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

Shapiro, echoing many other conservatives, is angry over the perceived politicization of the Zimmerman trial, and believes that activists have ”injected” race into the discussion, as if there’s nothing racial already within the criminal-justice system. Indeed, he echoes many conservatives when he complains that media attention had everything to do with Zimmerman’s race. If he were black, the argument goes, no one would care. And so, Shapiro found the sad story of Darryl Green, and promoted it as an example of the “black-on-black” crime that, he believes, goes ignored. Or, as he tweets, “49% of murder victims are black men. 93% of those are killed by other blacks. Media don’t care. Obama doesn’t care. #JusticeForDarryl.”

The idea that “black-on-black” crime is the real story in Martin’s killing isn’t a novel one. In addition to Shapiro, you’ll hear the argument from conservative African-American activists like Crystal White, as well as people outside the media, like Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O’Mara, who said that his client “never would have been charged with a crime” if he were black.

(It’s worth noting, here, that Zimmerman wasn’t charged with a crime. At least, not at first. It took six weeks of protest and pressure for Sanford police to revisit the killing and bring charges against him. Indeed, in the beginning, Martin’s cause had less to do with the identity of the shooter and everything to do with the appalling disinterest of the local police department.)

But there’s a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: There’s no such thing as “black-on-black” crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, you’ll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.

What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that it’s driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.

Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

“Black-on-black crime” has been part of the American lexicon for decades, but as a specific phenomenon, it’s no more real than “white-on-white crime.” Unlike the latter, however, the idea of “black-on-black crime” taps into specific fears around black masculinity and black criminality—the same fears that, in Florida, led George Zimmerman to focus his attention on Trayvon Martin, and in New York, continue to justify Michael Bloomberg’s campaign of police harassment against young black men in New York City.

Indeed, these fears are the reason that—in predominantly African-American neighborhoods across the country—police gathered and waited. There might be riots, observers said, and we have to be prepared. Why? The protests in support of Martin have been peaceful, and no one has called for violence or retribution. But that doesn’t matter.

America is afraid of black people, and that’s especially true—it seems—when it thinks they might be angry.
Compelling article and discussion.  Deserves it's own thread perhaps?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:00:07 PM
sorry, i didnt see this in the mix, Jameson.

My post was clearly in response to Diane's comments about the failures of the prosecution, and I was commenting on that narrow subject. 

People are allowed to talk about whatever they like, thats part of life and a controversial case being argued in public.  This will not be either the first or last time that a victim is smeared through 'opposition research'.

But my comments were restricted to the execution of the prosecution.

You were mistaken, and I accept your apology. ;)


But you never clarified. Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?

I have clarified my statement.  If you agree with that, then I will answer your second question about my opinion as to the relevance of trayvons facebook page on his murder.

Where did you clarify?

A simple yes or no will suffice: Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?


You made the comment: Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder and had a pretty huge task in front of her.

The underlined part is your opinion - leaking negatives about a teenager has nothing to do with his murder.

So negatives about Trayvon and his past have nothing to do with the case?

Yet on the other hand, you see Zimmerman's past as completely relevant and having something to do with the case.

Got it.  ;)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 15, 2013, 04:01:35 PM
You mean stuff like in the past he has purchased and eaten skittles without incident?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:15:08 PM

Jameson do you need coffee?  Ive already asked you if you think this is appropriate to a murder prosecution, and whether or not it should be coming from the officials in charge of prosecuting the murderer.  Is there something unclear to you about the inappropriateness of this?


I think we're talking about two different things.

When you mentioned "leaks" in your statement, which leaks are you referring to? Leaks about Zimmerman? Zimmerman's past? The case in general? Trayvon's past? Something else?

Again, I read it as though you think that leaks about Trayvon's past have nothing to do with the case and therefore should not be in the discussion.

What am I missing?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 04:32:29 PM
This is an interesting article about the jury instructions in today's T.U.

http://jacksonville.com/news/florida/2013-07-15/story/jury-instructions-center-zimmerman-verdict

Quote
The acquittal of the former neighborhood watch leader left many Americans wondering Sunday how the justice system could allow him to walk away from the fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teenager whose death provoked a long national debate over racial profiling and self-defense.

But the essential criteria for deciding the case came from the court itself, which told jurors that Zimmerman was allowed to use deadly force when he shot the teen not only if he actually faced death or bodily harm, but also if he merely thought he did.

And jurors heard plenty of conflicting evidence and testimony that could have created reasonable doubt

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/florida/2013-07-15/story/jury-instructions-center-zimmerman-verdict#ixzz2Z9GTl6Ji
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:37:01 PM

So you read my post that way, despite the fact that it was in response to a criticism of the prosecutor, is bracketed by references to the prosecutor's office in the same sentence, and i have since then clarified for you four times that it was in reference to the job faced by the prosecutor?

Can you explain, given this, why anything I might respond with matters?

Why would Corey's office leak anything negative about Trayvon while at the same time prosecuting his case? That's why your statement doesn't make sense to me.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 04:38:47 PM
Stephen, what is the point of the photo beyond sensationalism?  Everyone knows a young man who was loved by his family is dead and that the death never needed have happened.  The graphic visual is not necessary to make that understood.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:41:43 PM
And I still don't understand why we are discussing his facebook page and twitter account or whether or not he smoked pot.

None of those things caused this:

This is what happened.  A child was shot to death by a man with a gun who followed and accosted him.




Again, because you want to make an issue of Zimmerman's past in an attempt to paint him as a racist, yet at the same time completely ignore Trayvon's destructive behavior that lead to him being in Orlando in the first place. Why can't you leave BOTH of their pasts out of the case?

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: CityLife on July 15, 2013, 04:44:38 PM
I have no friggin clue how this thread got to 22 pages, nor do I have time to catch up, but wanted to jump in and say that there are rumors swirling that the 2 brothers that were killed at Golden Corral last night MAY and I stress may have been killed in retaliation to the Zimmerman acquittal. Saw on Facebook that someone who knows one of the brothers says it was related to Zimmerman.

I hope this is not true and I hope that the media is responsible before putting anything out there.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-07-15/story/brothers-killed-shooting-outside-jacksonville-restaurant-identified
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:50:14 PM

Exactly.  And the guy who did it has been subsequently fired by Corey.

My comment was in response to diane's post which immediately preceded it.

So now that that is settled, I will answer your question.

A criminal trial is about an act and a circumstance.

We punish guilty minds, not guilty deeds.  So a person who accidentally kills someone is not charged in the same way as a person who intentionally kills someone.

In the case of this murder, unless Zimmerman was acquainted with Martin before the trial, then Martins life before the incident has no bearing on the case.

It is not Martin's worthiness of living that is on trial.

It is the actions taken by Zimmerman.

Unless you think that murder charges should be decided by the worth that a jury places on the life of the person who has been killed as a factor.

Do you?


Hold on, are you referring to the IT Director, Kruidbos as the employee who was fired?

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 04:55:44 PM

You cannot possibly be this thick skulled.

Should people who have been hit behind by a mack truck be called to account as to why they were driving in that city?

This has to be literally the dumbest legal theory i have ever heard.  Literally.  In my life.

Let me make myself VERY clear. Trayvon's past does NOT mean that he deserved to die. Not at all. That is NOT what I am implying. Anyone who thinks like that is an ignorant fool.

I do not understand how you think Trayvon's destructive path of behavior from 2010-2012 that culminated with him being in Orlando because he was suspended from school for 10 days should be left out of the discussion, whereas you have made several references to Zimmerman's past in the discussion, accused he and his family of being racists, etc.

In my opinion, neither man should being tried on their past. BOTH of their pasts should be left out of it.

I have been merely trying to make the point that BOTH OF THEIR PASTS SHOULD BE LEFT OUT OF THE DISCUSSION AS IT DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THE CASE.

Do you not agree? 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 04:58:08 PM
Stephen, what is the point of the photo beyond sensationalism?  Everyone knows a young man who was loved by his family is dead and that the death never needed have happened.  The graphic visual is not necessary to make that understood.

well I don't think everyone does, Diane.  Most of the commentary on the issue has been about everything except for the dead child. 
I only know this.  As a mother I would never, every want my child's photo showing his face in death to be running through media and social media and being used to push one side or other in a discussion.  It's insensitive and disrespectful to Trayvon and his family to use the moment when he was most vulnerable in death this way.  I hope you will take it down.  Any mother I think would agree.  Their child is the most sacred thing in their life and to see them exploited in photo's in death is dreadful.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 05:01:51 PM
Thanks Stephen!
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 05:29:08 PM

Obviously I don't, and neither does a few thousand years of legal precedent.

George's motivations for killing this child are literally the essence of a murder trial.

Surprising that you don't seem to understand that.

This isnt a public relations campaign Jameson.  Someone died.

Of course you don't.

"George's motivations for killing this child are literally the essence of a murder trial."

A "murder trial."

None of the evidence supported murder. It was a reach to begin with. Anyone thinking logically and not racially sees that. Should have tried him for involuntary manslaughter or manslaughter if they really wanted a conviction.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 15, 2013, 05:43:19 PM

um hello.  welcome to earth, Jameson.

Don't know if you heard out there in outer space, but Florida just concluded a murder trial in the case of George Zimmerman.  He was acquitted.

Cute childish sayings, Stephen.

Title: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 05:45:50 PM
This is most assuredly a difficult conversation to have, yet another outcropping to the death of Trayvon, has been conversation about Black on Black crime.  It has been brought up recently on this forum and the conversation was not one initially welcome.  In my view it had much to do with the timing for the opening of the conversation which was not very long after Zimmerman was found not guilty.  People were reeling in response to the outcome of the trial and quite frankly were not ready to talk about anything that pointed a finger back to the Black Community after the death of a young Black man at the hands of a White/Hispanic.  When emotions calm a bit, people can speak and listen a bit more clearly. 

I hold many people close to my heart who are of a variety of races. Many of those persons are black and I love them dearly. I do not even begin to speak for them with regard to this topic but have worked with Black organizations and individuals have spoken to me in depth about their deep concerns regarding Black on Black crime.

Should a discussion about Black on Black crime be used to deflect feelings about the death of Trayvon?  Absolutely
not.  But this is perhaps a conversation needing to be had.  Some non Blacks wonder why outrage only seems to come when a crime includes people of different races.  Real or imagined this perception needs to be understood and discussed if we are ever to get to the bottom of how racism and crime impacts us today.

Let me offer a post from a FB acquaintance who is a Black woman.  I think it is clear that the concern of Black on Black crime is not just an observation about crime but a real concern in the eyes of many.

Quote
What is more sickening then Trayvon Martin's murder? Black on Black murders. We have become so immune to them that we don't even raise an eyebrow when the news speak of a shooting on Moncrief, Soutel, Lem Turner, Edgewood, Phoenix, Eastside of town or the Northside of town. We just go on about our life as though it's business as usual. It's really disheartening that we pick and choose what murders we want to polarize or demonstrate about. People wake up. Murder is Murder; regardless of who pulled the trigger. Regardless of what life style the individual lived. It's not the choice of no man on earth decision as to when another person's life should end. That is up to our creator. My nephew RIP Bernard "Hard Nard" Cason was shot and killed 03/11/12 during a senseless Black on Black murder. My family lives for the day we can sit in a courtroom for the trial of a coward. I know there are plenty of others that have experienced tragic family murders and live today to see justice served. We must first start respecting our own color before anyone else does. Missing my nephew!
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Charles Hunter on July 15, 2013, 05:53:46 PM
This was a point more than one speaker brought up at the Trayvon rally in Hemming Park Sunday.  One middle-aged black male said that (paraphrasing), 'a guarantee that before tomorrow, a black man the same age as Zimmerman will kill another black man, Trayvon's age ... and it won't make the news'  He urged black folk to stop killing each other.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: CityLife on July 15, 2013, 06:02:10 PM
Here is the Facebook of one of the brothers that was killed. Pretty much everyone on there was saying he got shot over an argument related to the Zimmerman case.

https://www.facebook.com/matthew.r.bohannon
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 06:09:09 PM
This was a point more than one speaker brought up at the Trayvon rally in Hemming Park Sunday.  One middle-aged black male said that (paraphrasing), 'a guarantee that before tomorrow, a black man the same age as Zimmerman will kill another black man, Trayvon's age ... and it won't make the news'  He urged black folk to stop killing each other.
I have heard this over and over Charles.  I know many in the Black community have deep concerns with regard to this issue.  I don't think it is appropriate to pretend it doesn't exist in the face of one high profile crime.  All life is important and while profiling and race based crimes are indeed a very grave problem, I think it may be unfortunate that Zimmerman has become the face for every non black that has been hurt or killed by a non black and Trayvon became the face for all young men on the wrong end of a deadly exchange with a non black.  History clearly shows very egregious crimes against the Black race have been visited upon them through no fault of their own.  That is totally undeniable.  What I think we cannot afford as a society if we are serious about addressing racially based conflicts is to edit today's reality by the past alone.  We need to be honest with ourselves and think rationally, not just through our emotions.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 06:23:51 PM
CL, JSO has issued a statement saying this shooting had nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial.  https://www.facebook.com/JacksonvilleSheriffsOffice/posts/10151527049572896
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 06:27:01 PM
I don't know how to embed videos.  Perhaps someone else can do this for me.  The following is a link to Angela Corey's statements immediately following the Zimmerman "not guilty" verdict for those who have not seen it. 

http://news.yahoo.com/video/angela-corey-prosecutors-speak-george-033320376.html
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: peestandingup on July 15, 2013, 06:29:52 PM
This. A thousand times. I was gonna post this on the other thread, but its a lost cause & turned into a zoo quite frankly.

I think we're all guilty of letting the media circus take hold of us, try to divide & distract us with race baiting. That same media who loves LOVES a juicy story & spins it every way from Sunday. To the point where we're now all arguing about it, losing friends because of it, painting these broad assumptions of people because of their opinion, etc. Its disgusting really, but its the world we live in. The 6 giant corporations that now owns over 90% of all the media that we have access to tells us to jump & before thinking, we jump. And its getting worse, but still people don't seem to recognize it because the topics they choose to pound into our heads are so tempting to get bent out of shape over.

Stop & think for a moment, please. And look at things from a broader perspective. I read something like 25 black youths/young adults have been killed in Chicago so far in the month of July ALONE. Not to mention a bunch of injuries to women, children, etc. Now, where the hell is the outrage there? Where are the protests?? Where is the media??? Hmm, I'm looking around & all anyone is talking about is this one isolated instance. I guess they don't matter since its not a juicy enough story then. And people apparently certainly wont seek this information out, or even want to know about it, because, again, we like to be told what to be outraged about & can only take it in the prescribed concentrated bursts. That way we can all get up on our soap boxes & push whatever agendas or hangups we ourselves might have, forget about it when the next cycle hits, while never acknowledging the real ugliness.

It's fucking sick & that's all I'm saying about it.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 06:40:43 PM
This. A thousand times. I was gonna post this on the other thread, but its a lost cause & turned into a zoo quite frankly.

I think we're all guilty of letting the media circus take hold of us, try to divide & distract us with race baiting. That same media who loves LOVES a juicy story & spins it every way from Sunday. To the point where we're now all arguing about it, losing friends because of it, painting these broad assumptions of people because of their opinion, etc. Its disgusting really, but its the world we live in. The 6 giant corporations that now owns over 90% of all the media that we have access to tells us to jump & before thinking, we jump. And its getting worse, but still people don't seem to recognize it because the topics they choose to pound into our heads are so tempting to get bent out of shape over.

Stop & think for a moment, please. And look at things from a broader perspective. I read something like 25 black youths/young adults have been killed in Chicago so far in the month of July ALONE. Not to mention a bunch of injuries to women, children, etc. Now, where the hell is the outrage there? Where are the protests?? Where is the media??? Hmm, I'm looking around & all anyone is talking about is this one isolated instance. I guess they don't matter since its not a juicy enough story then. And people apparently certainly wont seek this information out, or even want to know about it, because, again, we like to be told what to be outraged about & can only take it in the prescribed concentrated bursts. That way we can all get up on our soap boxes & push whatever agendas or hangups we ourselves might have, forget about it when the next cycle hits, while never acknowledging the real ugliness.

It's fucking sick & that's all I'm saying about it.
It is indeed sick and this is a point that needs to be made.  Believe me I thought twice before wading into any of the Trayvon discussions but it is my deep feeling that we need to walk into some of these discussions in order to bring some sort of understanding as to why race and discussion of race remains such a volatile subject and much of that I believe is the fanning of passions as opposed to clarity of thinking and honest discussion.  As long as people simply take the lead of the angry or political in cases like this the core importance of an issue is lost in blame, angry words and passion.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 15, 2013, 06:44:55 PM
CL, JSO has issued a statement saying this shooting had nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial.  https://www.facebook.com/JacksonvilleSheriffsOffice/posts/10151527049572896

Oh what a surprise, of course they are gonna say that. Meanwhile, all of the USA still remain 'peaceful' regarding the verdict. I know better.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 06:57:01 PM
sorry, i didnt see this in the mix, Jameson.

My post was clearly in response to Diane's comments about the failures of the prosecution, and I was commenting on that narrow subject. 

People are allowed to talk about whatever they like, thats part of life and a controversial case being argued in public.  This will not be either the first or last time that a victim is smeared through 'opposition research'.

But my comments were restricted to the execution of the prosecution.

You were mistaken, and I accept your apology. ;)


But you never clarified. Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?

I have clarified my statement.  If you agree with that, then I will answer your second question about my opinion as to the relevance of trayvons facebook page on his murder.

Where did you clarify?

A simple yes or no will suffice: Were you or were you not referring to "negatives" about Trayvon's past having nothing to do with the case?


You made the comment: Angela Corey was undermined by her own staff, leaking negatives about a teenager that had nothing to do with his murder[/u] and had a pretty huge task in front of her.

The underlined part is your opinion - leaking negatives about a teenager has nothing to do with his murder.

So negatives about Trayvon and his past have nothing to do with the case?

Yet on the other hand, you see Zimmerman's past as completely relevant and having something to do with the case.

Got it.  ;)

Jameson do you need coffee?  Ive already asked you if you think this is appropriate to a murder prosecution, and whether or not it should be coming from the officials in charge of prosecuting the murderer.  Is there something unclear to you about the inappropriateness of this?

If you can verify that you were wrong and launched a 'shame on you' tirade based on being wrong, then I will gladly address your question.

The prosecution is required by law to share this and any other evidence with the defense.  All recovered information from electronic devices must be shared.  If there is a question as to whether it should be entered in the trial, then a motion should be made for the  bench to decide.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 07:03:06 PM
ALL evidence.  Anything found on the phone has to be shared.  "Pertinent to the case" will be decided by the judge.  Ask your friend Chris.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 07:14:15 PM
You might want to study up on Florida State Statutes Chapter 776.

Specifically 776.012, 776.013, and for any of you who want to read the Florida statute which pertains to the "Aggressor Rule"...776.041.

There is a lot of emotion, speculation, and just plain wrong information being put out here.  I would recommend doing your own research from other than biased sites on either "side" of this issue.  I will look for a factual article on this case but honestly...I haven't seen one yet.

Oh, and you might take a gander at Brady v. Maryland (1963).
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 07:15:02 PM
I believe the point is moot based on the fact that a grand jury has already indicted her on the issue of withholding evidence.  Or at least they believed there was enough of a notion to warrant further investigation
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 15, 2013, 07:20:11 PM
JayBird, that was a "citizens grand jury".  It has no legal standing.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 07:25:37 PM
CL, JSO has issued a statement saying this shooting had nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial.  https://www.facebook.com/JacksonvilleSheriffsOffice/posts/10151527049572896

Oh what a surprise, of course they are gonna say that. Meanwhile, all of the USA still remain 'peaceful' regarding the verdict. I know better.

No I-10 it is true, it is a rumor that has been confirmed false by several sources, also being that they have video of the incident which have to come to light in any trial, they can't really deny a connection if it existed.  And as for 'peaceful' that is based purely on arrests.  Huge protests and demonstrations with over 8,000 in NYC yesterday and last night and no arrests.  Demonstrations in Hemming Plaza, no arrests.  That is how they can say peaceful.  It is just civilians exercising their first amendment. However, some people like to stir the pot and get other riled up, so there will probably more rumors to come. Personally I think Zimmerman might know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 07:28:18 PM
JayBird, that was a "citizens grand jury".  It has no legal standing.

Overlooked that, thanks for keeping me on the facts.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 07:50:16 PM
This. A thousand times. I was gonna post this on the other thread, but its a lost cause & turned into a zoo quite frankly.

I think we're all guilty of letting the media circus take hold of us, try to divide & distract us with race baiting. That same media who loves LOVES a juicy story & spins it every way from Sunday. To the point where we're now all arguing about it, losing friends because of it, painting these broad assumptions of people because of their opinion, etc. Its disgusting really, but its the world we live in. The 6 giant corporations that now owns over 90% of all the media that we have access to tells us to jump & before thinking, we jump. And its getting worse, but still people don't seem to recognize it because the topics they choose to pound into our heads are so tempting to get bent out of shape over.

Stop & think for a moment, please. And look at things from a broader perspective. I read something like 25 black youths/young adults have been killed in Chicago so far in the month of July ALONE. Not to mention a bunch of injuries to women, children, etc. Now, where the hell is the outrage there? Where are the protests?? Where is the media??? Hmm, I'm looking around & all anyone is talking about is this one isolated instance. I guess they don't matter since its not a juicy enough story then. And people apparently certainly wont seek this information out, or even want to know about it, because, again, we like to be told what to be outraged about & can only take it in the prescribed concentrated bursts. That way we can all get up on our soap boxes & push whatever agendas or hangups we ourselves might have, forget about it when the next cycle hits, while never acknowledging the real ugliness.

It's fucking sick & that's all I'm saying about it.

Good, solid points and I am in agreement with you.  The only answer I can determine is that it isn't just July, it has been happening that way in Chicago and I guess if it was happening in Jax the same way for the same time period we would just take it as fact too.  Everytime First Coast news posts on their Facebook that JSO is responding to the Northside or Westside, details to follow, you get the rigmarole of comments of people saying must be another shooting. So in a way, maybe we do have the same mentality or have become numb to it. Or maybe we ignore it because it wasn't on my street.  As for black on black crime, it happens but one observation I do have is that in a predominately African American community, they are much more close-knitted than say a 90% white neighborhood.  I think some of the issue is that they don't like it to happen, but the fear of having outsiders to come in and try to 'fix' the situation is even worse to them.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 07:53:40 PM
  Believe me I thought twice before wading into any of the Trayvon discussions but it is my deep feeling that we need to walk into some of these discussions in order to bring some sort of understanding as to why race and discussion of race remains such a volatile subject and much of that I believe is the fanning of passions as opposed to clarity of thinking and honest discussion.  As long as people simply take the lead of the angry or political in cases like this the core importance of an issue is lost in blame, angry words and passion.

And for that Diane, thank you.  Even though not everyone comments, a lot of us follow the board and both respect and admire your ability to act as voice of calm and reason when emotions get a little too involved.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 07:56:25 PM
This. A thousand times. I was gonna post this on the other thread, but its a lost cause & turned into a zoo quite frankly.

I think we're all guilty of letting the media circus take hold of us, try to divide & distract us with race baiting. That same media who loves LOVES a juicy story & spins it every way from Sunday. To the point where we're now all arguing about it, losing friends because of it, painting these broad assumptions of people because of their opinion, etc. Its disgusting really, but its the world we live in. The 6 giant corporations that now owns over 90% of all the media that we have access to tells us to jump & before thinking, we jump. And its getting worse, but still people don't seem to recognize it because the topics they choose to pound into our heads are so tempting to get bent out of shape over.

Stop & think for a moment, please. And look at things from a broader perspective. I read something like 25 black youths/young adults have been killed in Chicago so far in the month of July ALONE. Not to mention a bunch of injuries to women, children, etc. Now, where the hell is the outrage there? Where are the protests?? Where is the media??? Hmm, I'm looking around & all anyone is talking about is this one isolated instance. I guess they don't matter since its not a juicy enough story then. And people apparently certainly wont seek this information out, or even want to know about it, because, again, we like to be told what to be outraged about & can only take it in the prescribed concentrated bursts. That way we can all get up on our soap boxes & push whatever agendas or hangups we ourselves might have, forget about it when the next cycle hits, while never acknowledging the real ugliness.

It's fucking sick & that's all I'm saying about it.

Good, solid points and I am in agreement with you.  The only answer I can determine is that it isn't just July, it has been happening that way in Chicago and I guess if it was happening in Jax the same way for the same time period we would just take it as fact too.  Everytime First Coast news posts on their Facebook that JSO is responding to the Northside or Westside, details to follow, you get the rigmarole of comments of people saying must be another shooting. So in a way, maybe we do have the same mentality or have become numb to it. Or maybe we ignore it because it wasn't on my street.  As for black on black crime, it happens but one observation I do have is that in a predominately African American community, they are much more close-knitted than say a 90% white neighborhood.  I think some of the issue is that they don't like it to happen, but the fear of having outsiders to come in and try to 'fix' the situation is even worse to them.
I know this is a very important issue to many in the Black community and as I mentioned on another thread MADDADS, as well as other organizations, pastors and religious groups have taken this issue on.  I don't think this is a thing that can be fixed but rather is going to turn from inside the community.  How that may happen I don't know but I do know folks are very tired of the crime.

Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 07:57:44 PM
A proper discussion on black-on-black crime can't take place without putting it within its proper content.  For example, it's not all peaches and cream across the tracks. Crime in general is based on environment, not race. This article Stephendare posted in the Zimmerman thread seems ideal for this discussion.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

Trayvon Martin and the Myth of "Black on Black Crime"

Crime is driven by proximity and opportunity, writes Jamelle Bouie—which is why 86 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders.

Last week, in Chicago, 16-year-old Darryl Green was found dead in the yard of an abandoned home. He was killed, relatives reported, because he refused to join a gang. Unlike most tragedies, however—which remain local news—this one caught the attention of conservative activist Ben Shapiro, an editor for Breitbart News. Using the hashtag “#justicefordarryl,” Shaprio tweeted and publicized the details of Green’s murder. But this wasn’t a call for help and assistance for Green’s family, rather, it was his response to wide outrage over Saturday’s decision in the case of George Zimmerman, where a Florida jury judged him “not guilty” of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

Shapiro, echoing many other conservatives, is angry over the perceived politicization of the Zimmerman trial, and believes that activists have ”injected” race into the discussion, as if there’s nothing racial already within the criminal-justice system. Indeed, he echoes many conservatives when he complains that media attention had everything to do with Zimmerman’s race. If he were black, the argument goes, no one would care. And so, Shapiro found the sad story of Darryl Green, and promoted it as an example of the “black-on-black” crime that, he believes, goes ignored. Or, as he tweets, “49% of murder victims are black men. 93% of those are killed by other blacks. Media don’t care. Obama doesn’t care. #JusticeForDarryl.”

The idea that “black-on-black” crime is the real story in Martin’s killing isn’t a novel one. In addition to Shapiro, you’ll hear the argument from conservative African-American activists like Crystal White, as well as people outside the media, like Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O’Mara, who said that his client “never would have been charged with a crime” if he were black.

(It’s worth noting, here, that Zimmerman wasn’t charged with a crime. At least, not at first. It took six weeks of protest and pressure for Sanford police to revisit the killing and bring charges against him. Indeed, in the beginning, Martin’s cause had less to do with the identity of the shooter and everything to do with the appalling disinterest of the local police department.)

But there’s a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: There’s no such thing as “black-on-black” crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, you’ll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.

What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that it’s driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.

Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

“Black-on-black crime” has been part of the American lexicon for decades, but as a specific phenomenon, it’s no more real than “white-on-white crime.” Unlike the latter, however, the idea of “black-on-black crime” taps into specific fears around black masculinity and black criminality—the same fears that, in Florida, led George Zimmerman to focus his attention on Trayvon Martin, and in New York, continue to justify Michael Bloomberg’s campaign of police harassment against young black men in New York City.

Indeed, these fears are the reason that—in predominantly African-American neighborhoods across the country—police gathered and waited. There might be riots, observers said, and we have to be prepared. Why? The protests in support of Martin have been peaceful, and no one has called for violence or retribution. But that doesn’t matter.

America is afraid of black people, and that’s especially true—it seems—when it thinks they might be angry.

As for the Chicago killings, there is outrage.  However, the major difference between the GZ/TM situation and those is when the killers are identified, they end up being put away behind bars.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 07:59:20 PM
  Believe me I thought twice before wading into any of the Trayvon discussions but it is my deep feeling that we need to walk into some of these discussions in order to bring some sort of understanding as to why race and discussion of race remains such a volatile subject and much of that I believe is the fanning of passions as opposed to clarity of thinking and honest discussion.  As long as people simply take the lead of the angry or political in cases like this the core importance of an issue is lost in blame, angry words and passion.

And for that Diane, thank you.  Even though not everyone comments, a lot of us follow the board and both respect and admire your ability to act as voice of calm and reason when emotions get a little too involved.
Wow Jaybird, thank you.  I just feel in my heart that real conversation can change things and that everyone has the right to their views but they are so much more useful when shared without vitriol.  It really isn't that hard to be respectful.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 08:02:18 PM
A proper discussion on black-on-black crime can't take place without putting it within it's proper content.  For example, it's not all peaches and cream across the tracks. Crime in general is based on environment, not race. This article Stephendare posted in the Zimmerman thread seems ideal for this discussion.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

Trayvon Martin and the Myth of "Black on Black Crime"

Crime is driven by proximity and opportunity, writes Jamelle Bouie—which is why 86 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders.

Last week, in Chicago, 16-year-old Darryl Green was found dead in the yard of an abandoned home. He was killed, relatives reported, because he refused to join a gang. Unlike most tragedies, however—which remain local news—this one caught the attention of conservative activist Ben Shapiro, an editor for Breitbart News. Using the hashtag “#justicefordarryl,” Shaprio tweeted and publicized the details of Green’s murder. But this wasn’t a call for help and assistance for Green’s family, rather, it was his response to wide outrage over Saturday’s decision in the case of George Zimmerman, where a Florida jury judged him “not guilty” of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

Shapiro, echoing many other conservatives, is angry over the perceived politicization of the Zimmerman trial, and believes that activists have ”injected” race into the discussion, as if there’s nothing racial already within the criminal-justice system. Indeed, he echoes many conservatives when he complains that media attention had everything to do with Zimmerman’s race. If he were black, the argument goes, no one would care. And so, Shapiro found the sad story of Darryl Green, and promoted it as an example of the “black-on-black” crime that, he believes, goes ignored. Or, as he tweets, “49% of murder victims are black men. 93% of those are killed by other blacks. Media don’t care. Obama doesn’t care. #JusticeForDarryl.”

The idea that “black-on-black” crime is the real story in Martin’s killing isn’t a novel one. In addition to Shapiro, you’ll hear the argument from conservative African-American activists like Crystal White, as well as people outside the media, like Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O’Mara, who said that his client “never would have been charged with a crime” if he were black.

(It’s worth noting, here, that Zimmerman wasn’t charged with a crime. At least, not at first. It took six weeks of protest and pressure for Sanford police to revisit the killing and bring charges against him. Indeed, in the beginning, Martin’s cause had less to do with the identity of the shooter and everything to do with the appalling disinterest of the local police department.)

But there’s a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: There’s no such thing as “black-on-black” crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, you’ll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.

What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that it’s driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.

Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

“Black-on-black crime” has been part of the American lexicon for decades, but as a specific phenomenon, it’s no more real than “white-on-white crime.” Unlike the latter, however, the idea of “black-on-black crime” taps into specific fears around black masculinity and black criminality—the same fears that, in Florida, led George Zimmerman to focus his attention on Trayvon Martin, and in New York, continue to justify Michael Bloomberg’s campaign of police harassment against young black men in New York City.

Indeed, these fears are the reason that—in predominantly African-American neighborhoods across the country—police gathered and waited. There might be riots, observers said, and we have to be prepared. Why? The protests in support of Martin have been peaceful, and no one has called for violence or retribution. But that doesn’t matter.

America is afraid of black people, and that’s especially true—it seems—when it thinks they might be angry.

As for the Chicago killings, there is outrage.  However, the major difference between the GZ/TM situation and those is when the killers are identified, they end up being put away behind bars.
Thanks for reposting the article Ennis.  It is a good one for this discussion to be sure.  So far no one has touched your query on the Zimmerman thread about how environment impacts this type of crime.  Are you willing to lead us down that path of discussion.  I would be very interested in you take on the issue from all sides. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 08:12:04 PM
Caught this too late.  Anderson Cooper just had an exclusive with one of the jurors on the Zimmerman case. This is on CNN and the broadcast continues right now. 
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 08:17:46 PM
A proper discussion on black-on-black crime can't take place without putting it within its proper content.  For example, it's not all peaches and cream across the tracks. Crime in general is based on environment, not race. This article Stephendare posted in the Zimmerman thread seems ideal for this discussion.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/the-trayvon-martin-killing-and-the-myth-of-black-on-black-crime.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=cheatsheet_afternoon&cid=newsletter%3Bemail%3Bcheatsheet_afternoon&utm_term=Cheat%20Sheet

Trayvon Martin and the Myth of "Black on Black Crime"

Crime is driven by proximity and opportunity, writes Jamelle Bouie—which is why 86 percent of white victims were killed by white offenders.

Last week, in Chicago, 16-year-old Darryl Green was found dead in the yard of an abandoned home. He was killed, relatives reported, because he refused to join a gang. Unlike most tragedies, however—which remain local news—this one caught the attention of conservative activist Ben Shapiro, an editor for Breitbart News. Using the hashtag “#justicefordarryl,” Shaprio tweeted and publicized the details of Green’s murder. But this wasn’t a call for help and assistance for Green’s family, rather, it was his response to wide outrage over Saturday’s decision in the case of George Zimmerman, where a Florida jury judged him “not guilty” of second-degree murder or manslaughter in the killing of Trayvon Martin.

Shapiro, echoing many other conservatives, is angry over the perceived politicization of the Zimmerman trial, and believes that activists have ”injected” race into the discussion, as if there’s nothing racial already within the criminal-justice system. Indeed, he echoes many conservatives when he complains that media attention had everything to do with Zimmerman’s race. If he were black, the argument goes, no one would care. And so, Shapiro found the sad story of Darryl Green, and promoted it as an example of the “black-on-black” crime that, he believes, goes ignored. Or, as he tweets, “49% of murder victims are black men. 93% of those are killed by other blacks. Media don’t care. Obama doesn’t care. #JusticeForDarryl.”

The idea that “black-on-black” crime is the real story in Martin’s killing isn’t a novel one. In addition to Shapiro, you’ll hear the argument from conservative African-American activists like Crystal White, as well as people outside the media, like Zimmerman defense attorney Mark O’Mara, who said that his client “never would have been charged with a crime” if he were black.

(It’s worth noting, here, that Zimmerman wasn’t charged with a crime. At least, not at first. It took six weeks of protest and pressure for Sanford police to revisit the killing and bring charges against him. Indeed, in the beginning, Martin’s cause had less to do with the identity of the shooter and everything to do with the appalling disinterest of the local police department.)

But there’s a huge problem with attempt to shift the conversation: There’s no such thing as “black-on-black” crime. Yes, from 1976 to 2005, 94 percent of black victims were killed by black offenders, but that racial exclusivity was also true for white victims of violent crime—86 percent were killed by white offenders. Indeed, for the large majority of crimes, you’ll find that victims and offenders share a racial identity, or have some prior relationship to each other.

What Shapiro and others miss about crime, in general, is that it’s driven by opportunism and proximity; If African-Americans are more likely to be robbed, or injured, or killed by other African-Americans, it’s because they tend to live in the same neighborhoods as each other. Residential statistics bear this out (PDF); blacks are still more likely to live near each other or other minority groups than they are to whites. And of course, the reverse holds as well—whites are much more likely to live near other whites than they are to minorities and African-Americans in particular.

Nor are African-Americans especially criminal. If they were, you would still see high rates of crime among blacks, even as the nation sees a historic decline in criminal offenses. Instead, crime rates among African-Americans, and black youth in particular, have taken a sharp drop. In Washington, D.C., for example, fewer than 10 percent of black youth are in a gang, have sold drugs, have carried a gun, or have stolen more than $100 in goods.

Overall, figures from a variety of institutions—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Bureau of Justice Statistics—show that among black youth, rates of robbery and serious property offenses are at their lowest rates in 40 years, as are rates of violent crime and victimization. And while it’s true that young black men are a disproportionate share of the nation’s murder victims, it’s hard to disentangle this from the stew of hyper-segregation (often a result of deliberate policies), entrenched poverty, and nonexistent economic opportunities that characterizes a substantial number of black communities. Hence the countless inner-city anti-violence groups that focus on creating opportunity for young, disadvantaged African-Americans, through education, mentoring, and community programs. Blacks care intensely about the violence that happens in their communities. After all, they have to live with it.

“Black-on-black crime” has been part of the American lexicon for decades, but as a specific phenomenon, it’s no more real than “white-on-white crime.” Unlike the latter, however, the idea of “black-on-black crime” taps into specific fears around black masculinity and black criminality—the same fears that, in Florida, led George Zimmerman to focus his attention on Trayvon Martin, and in New York, continue to justify Michael Bloomberg’s campaign of police harassment against young black men in New York City.

Indeed, these fears are the reason that—in predominantly African-American neighborhoods across the country—police gathered and waited. There might be riots, observers said, and we have to be prepared. Why? The protests in support of Martin have been peaceful, and no one has called for violence or retribution. But that doesn’t matter.

America is afraid of black people, and that’s especially true—it seems—when it thinks they might be angry.

As for the Chicago killings, there is outrage.  However, the major difference between the GZ/TM situation and those is when the killers are identified, they end up being put away behind bars.

Thanks, I missed this in the other board but that's growing at a new page every hour it seems.  Let me grab dinner and I hope Ennis that you jump into this.  From a quick scan, I will say I have used statistics like that before in discussions with prisoners in Lake Butler CI and I will never forget what one told me. He said "I grew up in 29th & Chase in Jacksonville and I was more afraid of my neighbor than some (slang word for white guy) with gun in his pocket.  Those numbers don't mean (slang) when it's 100 brothers getting cut down and only 5 (slang for white men)." Now, to keep in context he was imprisoned for the murder of his neighbor, and he held within him a lot of hate.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 08:56:31 PM
^I'm just getting back in to town.  That Zimmerman thread has gotten so large during my commute back, that I'm going to have to search and dig out my post about about economics and environment.  This issue of black-on-black crime isn't about race.  Stats tend to be pretty skewed when they are cherry picked. Anyway, the underlying issue deals with economics and environment.  Change those, you change the results and it doesn't matter what the population's skin pigmentation happens to be.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 09:17:50 PM
The two takeaway statements I got from her was first that they "never" discussed race.  Second that when they first went back there were three for not guilty, one for murder 2 and two for manslaughter.  She said that as they read and re-read the law there was no way to find Zimmerman guilty of either charge.  She went on to say that a couple of jurors wanted to find him guilty of something because Trayvon had died, but the law didn't support either charge. 

She said all the jurors wept after they had come to the verdict and given it to the bailiff and that none of them ever want to serve on another jury.   She also said that they were totally surprised by how big the public interest had become in the trial and that race had been brought into the picture.  She said none of the jurors even thought about race as a factor. She also wanted the public to know that they combed through all the evidence again and listened over and over to the testimony and did their very best to render a verdict according to law. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 09:51:27 PM
The two takeaway statements I got from her was first that they "never" discussed race.  Second that when they first went back there were three for not guilty, one for murder 2 and two for manslaughter.  She said that as they read and re-read the law there was no way to find Zimmerman guilty of either charge.  She went on to say that a couple of jurors wanted to find him guilty of something because Trayvon had died, but the law didn't support either charge. 

She said all the jurors wept after they had come to the verdict and given it to the bailiff and that none of them ever want to serve on another jury.   She also said that they were totally surprised by how big the public interest had become in the trial and that race had been brought into the picture.  She said none of the jurors even thought about race as a factor. She also wanted the public to know that they combed through all the evidence again and listened over and over to the testimony and did their very best to render a verdict according to law. 

Totally understandable.  I think he's guilty of manslaughter but I'm also sure he did fear for his life when TM started getting the best of him.  After all, from his perspective, TM was a thug on the prowl.  If I find anything wrong, it's the idea that one can provoke an incident, shoot the victim when the victim gets the best of him and walk away free on a claim of self defense. 

IMO, there's no telling what can of worms we are opening here.  If what I've described is true (which it appears to be), then I believe we need to work on modifying law to not allow such a chain of events to happen and the instigator get away with it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 15, 2013, 09:52:28 PM
The two takeaway statements I got from her was first that they "never" discussed race.  Second that when they first went back there were three for not guilty, one for murder 2 and two for manslaughter.  She said that as they read and re-read the law there was no way to find Zimmerman guilty of either charge.  She went on to say that a couple of jurors wanted to find him guilty of something because Trayvon had died, but the law didn't support either charge. 

She said all the jurors wept after they had come to the verdict and given it to the bailiff and that none of them ever want to serve on another jury.   She also said that they were totally surprised by how big the public interest had become in the trial and that race had been brought into the picture.  She said none of the jurors even thought about race as a factor. She also wanted the public to know that they combed through all the evidence again and listened over and over to the testimony and did their very best to render a verdict according to law. 

Totally understandable.  I think he's guilty of manslaughter but I don't doubt that he didn't fear for his life with TM started getting the best of him.  If I find anything wrong, it's the idea that one can provoke an incident, shoot the victim when the victim gets the best of him and walk away free on a claim of self defense. 

IMO, there's no telling what can of worms we are opening here.  If what I've described is true (which it appears to be), then I believe we need to work on modifying law to not allow such a chain of events to happen and the instigator get away with it.

Clearly stated, bottom line.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ChriswUfGator on July 15, 2013, 10:24:00 PM
ALL evidence.  Anything found on the phone has to be shared.  "Pertinent to the case" will be decided by the judge.  Ask your friend Chris.

Im sure he will weigh in shortly

Stephen you know I love ya bud, but NotNow's right on this one. It's anything in the possession of the state with few very limited exceptions, and possession's imputed to not only SAO and their investigators, but also law enforcement and any agency of the executive branch. The photos should have been turned over, no question. Whether they were admissible at trial would depend on who wins the ruling on the motion in limine or wins the objection when somebody attempts to introduce them, and in this particular case the state actually succeeded in keeping most of it out. But no question at all that they should have been given to the defense. Failing to do so was just one of several serious ethical lapses that SAO4 appeared to use as a crutch in the absence of a viable strategy, commencing with the filing of the affidavit in support of the warrant and getting worse from there.

Also FWIW: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-07-15/story/state-attorney-corey-scrutinized-nationally-over-handling-trayvon
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 15, 2013, 10:51:35 PM
Blah blah blah.  So much talking about nothing.  Everyone knows black people kill a lot of other black people.  Everyone (who is living in the real world) knows that young black males commit a lot more crime per capita than any other race.  Great. So you've spent two pages talking about stuff everyone already knows.  Known facts.

-- Why does this demographic commit so much violent crime?

-- What can the rest of society do to slow it down?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 10:58:25 PM
He's being paid a lot of money to argue a point a certain way.  I'm sure if he was paid by the other side, he'd argue in the opposite direction.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 11:00:15 PM
Blah blah blah.  So much talking about nothing.  Everyone knows black people kill a lot of other black people.  Everyone (who is living in the real world) knows that young black males commit a lot more crime per capita than any other race.  Great. So you've spent two pages talking about stuff everyone already knows.  Known facts.

-- Why does this demographic commit so much violent crime?

-- What can the rest of society do to slow it down?
I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but this last post tells me you are intent upon making your own point about Blacks and crime that is not born of concern but rather accusative.  I don't think there is a place in this conversation where that attitude toward this discussion has value.  Perhaps you should reconsider your approach if you expect anyone to entertain your views and ideas. 
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 11:01:11 PM
Blah blah blah.  So much talking about nothing.  Everyone knows black people kill a lot of other black people.  Everyone (who is living in the real world) knows that young black males commit a lot more crime per capita than any other race.  Great. So you've spent two pages talking about stuff everyone already knows.  Known facts.

-- Why does this demographic commit so much violent crime?

-- What can the rest of society do to slow it down?

AngryMuffin, I've already answered both of those questions.  You ignored both in that long Zimmerman thread to go back and forth trading pot shots with Stephendare instead. 
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: comncense on July 15, 2013, 11:05:15 PM
I found an interesting article at http://www.theroot.com/views/why-don-t-we-talk-about-white-white-crime?page=0,1. I'll just quote a few bits from it.

Quote
The term "black on black" crime is a destructive, racialized colloquialism that perpetuates an idea that blacks are somehow more prone to violence. This is untrue and fully verifiable by FBI, DOJ and census (pdf) data. Yet the fallacy is so fixed that even African Americans have come to believe it.

In Michelle Alexander's book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, she explains that the term was coined in the 1980s as American cities underwent transformation as a result of riots, white flight and the onslaught of the drug trade. David Wilson, a professor at the University of Illinois, documents the phenomena in Inventing Black-on-Black Violence. Wilson says that instead of attributing increased crime activity to poverty, inequality and disenfranchisement, the media chose to blame "a supposedly defective, aberrant black culture."

In a 2010 piece published by The Root, "The Myth of Black-on-Black Violence," Natalie Hopkinson opines that journalists should follow the direction of the United Kingdom, where the Guardian newspaper banned the use of the phrase. A Guardian stylebook asked authors to ''imagine the police saying they were investigating an incident of white-on-white violence ... " Hopkinson concludes, "The term 'black-on-black violence' is a slander against the majority of law-abiding black Americans, rich and poor, who get painted by this broad and crude brush."

Quote
African-American media and policymakers have been equally complicit in promoting a "black-on-black crime" anecdote, thinking that it could help address some of the community's problems; but what it has actually done is provide support for racial profiling and promote the disproportionate policing of black criminality as "legitimate" and "acceptable." This over-policing has led to disproportionately higher rates of arrests in black communities, reinforcing the idea that blacks commit more crimes.

If we were to talk about "white-on-white crime," then at least we'd be addressing issues like gun violence in a racially neutral way. That doesn't happen because too many Americans remain convinced that black or brown people are the problem.

Quote
Washington Post columnist George Will said that despite the Trayvon tragedy, "150 black men are killed every week in this country," and "about 94 percent of them by other black men."

... the exacting truth that white Americans are just as likely to be killed by other whites. According to Justice Department statistics (pdf), 84 percent of white people killed every year are killed by other whites.

http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0325.pdf

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 15, 2013, 11:14:09 PM
Can we somehow get the First Baptist Church involved in this conversation?   ;D
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 11:16:16 PM
Can we somehow get the First Baptist Church involved in this conversation?   ;D
No Ron, we can't!  lol
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 15, 2013, 11:31:42 PM
Ron here is the thing about the liberal asshole agenda... they use religion as a wedge to peel off people into believing their bullshit. A lot of people - myself included are atheists (I am actually a born again atheist) they paint religious people as evil hell bent on destroying all the great stuff in life; speeding, whoring around, drinking, rock music and the demon weed. 

I bought into this bullshit. But then I started noticing that there are a whole lot of religious people that I really like personally. In fact the religious people that I know and like are among the nicest, most responsible, highest quality people that I know.  Good jobs.  Good families. Well educated great kids. Bedrock people.  But then I had Bill Maher telling me that these people were stupid, evil, had an agenda to destroy my lifestyle etc.

Here is what I realized; religious people wasted time doing stupid stuff on Sunday mornings and believed in stuff I didn't. Other than that these people on the whole - pretty good people.  And while the lefties were trying to paint them as the cause of the world's problems I realized that they weren't and aren't the problem after all.

Before someone calls me an evil conservative; I want drugs to be legalized, government funded abortions and the last time I set foor in a church it was a funeral.

Can we somehow get the First Baptist Church involved in this conversation?   ;D
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 11:32:45 PM
^Interesting pieces to be sure.  What I am trying to come to balance with is what is happening beyond the rhetoric.  In Jacksonville at least some of the crimes being committed that place Blacks as the victims also have Blacks as the perp.  The stats I have seen in the past when working with those working on the issue of crime and prevention have pointed to a great deal of crime between Blacks that statistically is higher than other races when population is factored in.  Like the 09 area code.  I do believe that there is a great influence when it comes to poverty and environment as Ennis mentioned and look forward to more input about that.  But there is something else going on as well.  During ride alongs with the JSO I have have witnessed many incidents where citizens call each other the "n" word with venom and they are all of the Black race.  I have also seen flareups over the shade of Black one happens to be and value associated with one another based on degree of color.  That is something that tells me at least that this may go beyond economics and toward something unspoken and painful in the Black psyche.  Please know and accept me at my word that I am not laying down judgments but rather sharing ideas and experiences that have mostly come through my deep associations with members of the Black community.  I simply want to understand so that there can be healing and clarity of thought where needed in our community and society in general.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 15, 2013, 11:48:38 PM
Sorry man I must have missed it.  You're right I was.  I just like arguing with him.  I don't know why.  I do have to credit the dude.  If I was running a message board and some smart ass was giving me a beat down on it I'd probably ban him or delete his posts.  On the other hand I'm driving up engagement and advertising impressions... so...

What did you say?  Irreverence aside.  I'd love to know your opinion.

Here is the problem with this thread.  I didn't see a single solution, opinion or guess what is causing this problem and what can be done to stop it.

Blah blah blah.  So much talking about nothing.  Everyone knows black people kill a lot of other black people.  Everyone (who is living in the real world) knows that young black males commit a lot more crime per capita than any other race.  Great. So you've spent two pages talking about stuff everyone already knows.  Known facts.

-- Why does this demographic commit so much violent crime?

-- What can the rest of society do to slow it down?

AngryMuffin, I've already answered both of those questions.  You ignored both in that long Zimmerman thread to go back and forth trading pot shots with Stephendare instead.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 15, 2013, 11:52:42 PM
I had some causes and solutions in there.  I'll have to go into that thread and dig it out of there.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 15, 2013, 11:54:30 PM
Well, perhaps it is too soon to talk solutions when discussing an issue that is this important.  We have a ways to go in understanding and coming to conclusions if there are any to be had.  I know this is the age where everyone want's what they want now.  But real life takes real time when deciding on things of importance.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: AngryMuffin on July 16, 2013, 12:01:39 AM
I'll go look for it.  I went to bed before you posted.  Or Steve's orange shirt distracted me.

I had some causes and solutions in there.  I'll have to go into that thread and dig it out of there.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 01:11:26 AM
Huge protests and demonstrations with over 8,000 in NYC yesterday and last night and no arrests.  Demonstrations in Hemming Plaza, no arrests.  That is how they can say peaceful.  It is just civilians exercising their first amendment.

Some of these 'civilians' apparently think that it's okay to exercise their 'right' to assault a particular group of people. The Baltimore Sun already reported that a Hispanic man was attacked by blacks shouting "For Trayvon". Also their was some violence in Mississippi with someone (I believe a white man) being thrown out of a car. Expect a lot more violence. The race baiters won't be happy until George's head is on a stake....
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 07:04:16 AM
Or in reality AM you are completely wrong.  My liberal ass is in church most Sundays. You have certainly read Stephen's support of religion on this site. There are lots of different people making up the groups known as liberal and conservative. Do you think the Hispanics who have been voting for the more liberal party are anti religion? 

Anyway enjoy this glimpse into the real world.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 07:10:25 AM
Someone may have already posted this, but here:

Quote
Another trial involving a Florida man who fatally shot an unarmed black teen
By Eric W. Dolan
Monday, July 15, 2013 19:55 EDT
Murder suspect Michael Dunn (Screenshot)
Topics: Jordan Davis ? Michael David Dunn ? Ron Davis
 
CNN’s Ryan Smith on Monday highlighted an upcoming trial in Florida that is eerily similar to the Trayvon Martin case. In both cases, an unarmed 17-year-old black male was left dead.

“I’m not an eye for an eye type person where I think he should be killed,” Ron Davis, the father of Jordan Davis, told CNN. “I don’t believe in capitol punishment. I believe every life is precious. You took my son’s life. That doesn’t mean anybody else should take his life. I think he should spend the rest of his life in prison because of the fact that you have to think about what you’ve done not only to Jordan but to his family, his friends, people that cry for him every day.”

Michael David Dunn, 45, told police he shot and killed Davis at a gas station last year because he feared for his life. Dunn had told Davis and his friends to turn down their loud music. He claimed the situation escalated and the teens began threatening him. Dunn started shooting because he thought they had a shotgun.

“It was either a barrel or a stick but, sir, they’re like we’re going to kill you and then they said, ‘you’re dead [expletive removed].’ What I should have done was put the car in reverse, but that shotgun come up or whatever it was – fight or flight – and I don’t think there was time for flight at that moment because I was going to get shot,” he told police.

Dunn fled the scene, but was arrested the next day.

Dunn, who faces a first-degree murder charge and three attempted murder charges, plans to invoke Florida’s controversial “Stand your ground” law in his defense. The law allows gun owners to use deadly force without the “duty to retreat” first if they feel their life is endangered.

http://www.youtube.com/v/LT_6LFuVkZw?list=UUupvZG-5ko_eiXAupbDfxWw
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 07:18:43 AM
Huge protests and demonstrations with over 8,000 in NYC yesterday and last night and no arrests. Demonstrations in Hemming Plaza, no arrests.  That is how they can say peaceful.  It is just civilians exercising their first amendment.

Some of these 'civilians' apparently think that it's okay to exercise their 'right' to assault a particular group of people. The Baltimore Sun already reported that a Hispanic man was attacked by blacks shouting "For Trayvon". Also their was some violence in Mississippi with someone (I believe a white man) being thrown out of a car. Expect a lot more violence. The race baiters won't be happy until George's head is on a stake....

There has not been an arrest in Baltimore yet, so keeping it in context with what I had written they can technically still assert peaceful protest.  And according to Baltimore Sun, it wasn't part of any demonstration.

Quote
Tensions have run high, and Baltimore police said Monday they are investigating an alleged beating of a Hispanic man that, according to a witness, came at the hands of a group of black youths who were saying "This is for Trayvon" while they attacked him. Police, who have urged residents to respond peacefully, reported no incidents at the protests.http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-76681129/ (http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-76681129/)

I couldn't find the Mississippi case, which is why it is helpful when you post a link to where you get your info, but I am sure it has been embellished.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 07:22:42 AM
Stevie Wonder pledged not to play in Florida until the "Stand Your Ground" law is repealed.

http://www.youtube.com/v/3i9GSbwgvcQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/3i9GSbwgvcQ?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-


Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 07:26:56 AM
Someone may have already posted this, but here:

Quote
Another trial involving a Florida man who fatally shot an unarmed black teen
By Eric W. Dolan
Monday, July 15, 2013 19:55 EDT
Murder suspect Michael Dunn (Screenshot)
Topics: Jordan Davis ? Michael David Dunn ? Ron Davis
 
CNN’s Ryan Smith on Monday highlighted an upcoming trial in Florida that is eerily similar to the Trayvon Martin case. In both cases, an unarmed 17-year-old black male was left dead.

“I’m not an eye for an eye type person where I think he should be killed,” Ron Davis, the father of Jordan Davis, told CNN. “I don’t believe in capitol punishment. I believe every life is precious. You took my son’s life. That doesn’t mean anybody else should take his life. I think he should spend the rest of his life in prison because of the fact that you have to think about what you’ve done not only to Jordan but to his family, his friends, people that cry for him every day.”

Michael David Dunn, 45, told police he shot and killed Davis at a gas station last year because he feared for his life. Dunn had told Davis and his friends to turn down their loud music. He claimed the situation escalated and the teens began threatening him. Dunn started shooting because he thought they had a shotgun.

“It was either a barrel or a stick but, sir, they’re like we’re going to kill you and then they said, ‘you’re dead [expletive removed].’ What I should have done was put the car in reverse, but that shotgun come up or whatever it was – fight or flight – and I don’t think there was time for flight at that moment because I was going to get shot,” he told police.

Dunn fled the scene, but was arrested the next day.

Dunn, who faces a first-degree murder charge and three attempted murder charges, plans to invoke Florida’s controversial “Stand your ground” law in his defense. The law allows gun owners to use deadly force without the “duty to retreat” first if they feel their life is endangered.

http://www.youtube.com/v/LT_6LFuVkZw?list=UUupvZG-5ko_eiXAupbDfxWw

Slightly different case as there are over 20 eyewitnesses listed by the defense, a recorded phone call from one of the juveniles that were in the car and video footage from security cameras.  I'm sure there is more that hasn't been released yet and shouldn't be because the case needs to be tried in a courtroom first. The problem with Zimmerman was no one really knows what happened except for him which leaves a lot of room for interjection.  What will be interesting about this case is if Stand Your Ground applies to being in public what constitutes the feeling of danger.  That would mean if I was trying to park my truck at OP Mall and someone took the spot I was waiting for, I can shoot them and claim Stand Your Ground?  Very scary thought if this case affirms SYG.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 07:51:25 AM
I couldn't find the Mississippi case, which is why it is helpful when you post a link to where you get your info, but I am sure it has been embellished.

To me whether this violence is from an 'official' Treyvon rally or not is irrelevant; Bottomline people are being assaulted by this scum making Treyvon a martyr to 'justify' their heinous actions. Of course the liberal media has no interest in these assaults because 'everything is okay'. These MSNBC 'progressives' should be known as regressives, with their constant lies and race-baiting;  They set the entire country back thirty years! Thanks MSNBC, and the rest of the liberal media, thanks....SMH

Mississippi- www.wreg.com/2013/07/15/man-claims-attack-was-trayvon-retaliation/

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 08:16:00 AM


To me whether this violence is from an 'official' Treyvon rally or not is irrelevant; Bottomline people are being assaulted by this scum making Treyvon a martyr to 'justify' their heinous actions. Of course the liberal media has no interest in these assaults because 'everything is okay'. These MSNBC 'progressives' should be known as regressives, with their constant lies and race-baiting;  They set the entire country back thirty years! Thanks MSNBC, and the rest of the liberal media, thanks....SMH

Mississippi- www.wreg.com/2013/07/15/man-claims-attack-was-trayvon-retaliation/

Alabama- www.loop21.com/life/revenge-for-trayvon-martin-beating-mobile-alabama

That's a shame because taking it out of context only spurs hate and bigotry. Also your Alabama posting has nothing to do with it, due to the fact that it happened over a year ago. And by 'scum' do you mean all young males? All black males? All those wearing a hoodie? Please do not generalize. A few incidents a calamity does not make.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 08:26:37 AM
That's a shame because taking it out of context only spurs hate and bigotry. Also your Alabama posting has nothing to do with it, due to the fact that it happened over a year ago. And by 'scum' do you mean all young males? All black males? All those wearing a hoodie? Please do not generalize. A few incidents a calamity does not make.

Right on about that old Alabama posting, my bad. Yeah, by scum I mean the people who are doing these racially motivated attacks; They happen to be black, and so do I BTW. Why is color brought up whenever someone is black? If the people were white, and I said scum no one would say anything. Regardless of color, why stick up for those assailants anyway? I know I sound like a right-winger regarding the MSNBC bashing, but believe me I call the conservatives out when they do something stupid also. I refuse to be put into a bubble of lies, liberal or conservative.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 16, 2013, 08:35:10 AM
I really found this juror's comments to be infuriating.

That poor, sympathetic George Zimmerman, heart full of love, just found himself in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Quote
"I think George Zimmerman is a man whose heart was in the right place, but just got displaced by the vandalism in the neighborhoods, and wanting to catch these people so badly that he went above and beyond what he really should have done," she said.

If anything, Zimmerman was guilty of not using "good judgment," the juror said.

"When he was in the car, and he had called 911, he shouldn't have gotten out of that car," she said.

She also said she believes Martin threw the first punch in the confrontation that followed.

"I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn't have been there. But Trayvon decided that he wasn't going to let him scare him ... and I think Trayvon got mad and attacked him," she said.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 08:44:47 AM
Most people who commit crimes are guilty of not using good judgement. I had to bite my lip on that quote.  Zimmerman's attorneys did a great job, considering they've convinced the jury that he's the victim instead of the kid who died as a result of him not using "good judgment". 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 09:09:54 AM
^the lawyers also did a great job on jury selection as it is has been proven that it is harder for a woman to sentence someone. The female brain will look at a male offender in a motherly view whereas a male brain will typically assign the attributes of someone whom he personally knew that broke the law to base his decision.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AKIRA on July 16, 2013, 09:12:52 AM
brain profiling?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 09:14:58 AM
That's a shame because taking it out of context only spurs hate and bigotry. Also your Alabama posting has nothing to do with it, due to the fact that it happened over a year ago. And by 'scum' do you mean all young males? All black males? All those wearing a hoodie? Please do not generalize. A few incidents a calamity does not make.

Right on about that old Alabama posting, my bad. Yeah, by scum I mean the people who are doing these racially motivated attacks; They happen to be black, and so do I BTW. Why is color brought up whenever someone is black? If the people were white, and I said scum no one would say anything. Regardless of color, why stick up for those assailants anyway? I know I sound like a right-winger regarding the MSNBC bashing, but believe me I call the conservatives out when they do something stupid also. I refuse to be put into a bubble of lies, liberal or conservative.

No one is sticking up for them, it's more like let's not blow it out of proportion. And if notice I only used attributes that were pertinent to this case.  Had Trayvon been Asian or one the attackers in your selected articles been Indian I would've said that.  No racial intention implied, interesting that's how you perceived it.  Maybe that shows the underlying issue in our communities.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 09:20:06 AM
brain profiling?

Haha believe it or not is very true. My college roommate now works in Tulsa and that is all he does, analyze people for jury selections and prospective employees for corporations. Heck there are even studies going on right now at Eckerd University in St Pete to determine if one will return to prison solely based on their facial expression from a release day mugshot.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 16, 2013, 09:37:57 AM
I know someone mentioned Emmett Till, but the case that this more eerily resembles is the Rudolph Hargett murder that took place in Jacksonville the night after the MLK assassination.

The more things change...

(http://i.imgur.com/ddY0gHf.jpg)

A year later:

(http://i.imgur.com/33znCA6.jpg)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: AKIRA on July 16, 2013, 09:43:55 AM
It seems we are designed to look for (a profile established by) patterns.  Thats basically what an IQ test is - a search for order within the questions to find the right answer.  The more attuned to patterns, higher the score.

One question is how much of GZ belief TM was suspicious is based on TM being black versus suspiciousness based on behavior, time of day, environment, etc.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 10:06:51 AM
^to which only GZ can positively attest to, which therein lies the dilemma leaving room for interpretation, manipulation and thus fostering passionate debate.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 10:47:24 AM
Oh come on.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 12:18:03 PM
Most people who commit crimes are guilty of not using good judgement. I had to bite my lip on that quote.  Zimmerman's attorneys did a great job, considering they've convinced the jury that he's the victim instead of the kid who died as a result of him not using "good judgment".

Isnt that really the crux of it? Had Travon simply gone home, or called the cops, rather than confronting Zimmerman, nobody would have died. There is no indication that Zimmerman was itching to kill, and seemingly was doing what so many other people across the country do in patrolling his neighborhood. Was he perhaps a bit too agressive? Arguably, perhaps, but the truth appears that he did not confront Travon martin. He followed him. He called the non-emergency number, he gave an accurate description, and only when he was physically confronted did bad shit happen.

The lesson for us to teach our children is, if you feel like a creep is following you, remove yourself from the situation, and call the police. If you dont trust the police, then go somewhere you feel safe, and lock the door.

I am not justifying anything by saying this. Its sad that Travon is dead, and its also sad that Zimmerman, a guy who thought he was being a good neighbor has now been vilified, and will forever have blood on his hands.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 01:04:32 PM
He will forever have blood on his hands because he has blood on his hands.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 16, 2013, 01:05:23 PM
Most people who commit crimes are guilty of not using good judgement. I had to bite my lip on that quote.  Zimmerman's attorneys did a great job, considering they've convinced the jury that he's the victim instead of the kid who died as a result of him not using "good judgment".
Had Travon simply gone home, or called the cops, rather than confronting Zimmerman, nobody would have died.

You can't seriously be suggesting that the onus of guilt falls on the threatened kid just going about his business, rather than the armed adult who blindly assumed his behavior criminal and pursued him through the neighborhood?

Whether or not Zimmerman started the actual physical confrontation, he was 100% the instigator in this situation. An adult stalking a child through the neighborhood is a threatening gesture, and one that we've all been warned about since kindergarten. It's a gesture that Martin had every right to defend themselves against, even physically, regardless of the sissified "run home and tell Mommy!" society you'd like us all to live in.

It's just absolute crap that people are so willing to give the benefit of the doubt to and sympathize with an armed neighborhood loon known to call the police about 4' foot tall, 7-year old black kids walking the neighborhood, rather than giving the benefit of the doubt to the dead kid in the street who's only crime was walking home while black.

When an unarmed kid gets shot dead in the street by a gun-toting adult with a vigilante history, you have to blame the adult.

In 50 cases out of 50.

I can completely understand the argument that the state didn't do a good enough job presenting its case, but it just turns my stomach to hear "Poor Zimmerman" crap like this. He's not a victim of circumstance. He murdered a minor in cold blood that he chose, against instruction, to engage. Trayvon Martin isn't dead because he chose not to run home and call the police or tell Mommy, he is dead because a low-life Dog the Bounty Hunter wanna be  decided to take the law into his own hands.

Just unbelievable to me that it could be viewed any other way.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 01:13:11 PM
(http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/sheclown2/6d0a0f2c-dd77-4876-8a77-289659322dff.jpg) (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/sheclown2/media/6d0a0f2c-dd77-4876-8a77-289659322dff.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 16, 2013, 01:13:52 PM
(Just unbelievable to me that it could be viewed any other way.) It was by the jury they found George Zimmerman Not Guilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As I clearly stated, I can understand the argument for why there wasn't a conviction, but I cannot understand the "Zimmerman as the victim" narrative.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 01:17:10 PM
I know someone mentioned Emmett Till, but the case that this more eerily resembles is the Rudolph Hargett murder that took place in Jacksonville the night after the MLK assassination.

The more things change...

(http://i.imgur.com/ddY0gHf.jpg)

A year later:

(http://i.imgur.com/33znCA6.jpg)

+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 01:23:10 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Apache on July 16, 2013, 01:23:35 PM
Most people who commit crimes are guilty of not using good judgement. I had to bite my lip on that quote.  Zimmerman's attorneys did a great job, considering they've convinced the jury that he's the victim instead of the kid who died as a result of him not using "good judgment".

Isn't that really the crux of it? Had Travon simply gone home, or called the cops, rather than confronting Zimmerman, nobody would have died. There is no indication that Zimmerman was itching to kill, and seemingly was doing what so many other people across the country do in patrolling his neighborhood. Was he perhaps a bit too agressive? Arguably, perhaps, but the truth appears that he did not confront Travon martin. He followed him. He called the non-emergency number, he gave an accurate description, and only when he was physically confronted did bad shit happen.

The lesson for us to teach our children is, if you feel like a creep is following you, remove yourself from the situation, and call the police. If you dont trust the police, then go somewhere you feel safe, and lock the door.

I am not justifying anything by saying this. Its sad that Travon is dead, and its also sad that Zimmerman, a guy who thought he was being a good neighbor has now been vilified, and will forever have blood on his hands.

I think the crux of the situation is... some people feel Zimmerman should be able to defend himself against what turned out not to be a burglar, while they feel Martin should have run away and left the possibly dangerous situation...on the other hand some people feel Martin should have been able to defend himself from a stranger following him and that Zimmerman should have gone home to avoid a potentially dangerous situation.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 01:29:07 PM
It seems two of the forum threads have started a cross over conversation.  I am going to put up a post that was shared on the Profiling thread here because it also speaks to this issue.  Ron Mexico, reply 21.  http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,18960.msg336961/topicseen.html#new

The conversation is continuing on the Profiling thread right now.

Quote
By JASON L. RILEY
George Zimmerman's acquittal of murder charges in a Florida court has been followed by predictable calls for America to have a "national conversation" about this or that aspect of the case. President Obama wants to talk about gun control. Civil-rights leaders want to talk about racial profiling. Others want to discuss how the American criminal justice system supposedly targets black men.

All of which is fine. Just don't expect these conversations to be especially illuminating or honest. Liberals in general, and the black left in particular, like the idea of talking about racial problems, but in practice they typically ignore the most relevant aspects of any such discussion.

Any candid debate on race and criminality in this country would have to start with the fact that blacks commit an astoundingly disproportionate number of crimes. African-Americans constitute about 13% of the population, yet between 1976 and 2005 blacks committed more than half of all murders in the U.S. The black arrest rate for most offenses—including robbery, aggravated assault and property crimes—is typically two to three times their representation in the population. The U.S. criminal-justice system, which currently is headed by one black man (Attorney General Eric Holder) who reports to another (President Obama), is a reflection of this reality, not its cause.

"High rates of black violence in the late twentieth century are a matter of historical fact, not bigoted imagination," wrote the late Harvard Law professor William Stuntz in "The Collapse of American Criminal Justice." "The trends reached their peak not in the land of Jim Crow but in the more civilized North, and not in the age of segregation but in the decades that saw the rise of civil rights for African Americans—and of African American control of city governments."

The left wants to blame these outcomes on racial animus and "the system," but blacks have long been part of running that system. Black crime and incarceration rates spiked in the 1970s and '80s in cities such as Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago and Philadelphia, under black mayors and black police chiefs. Some of the most violent cities in the U.S. today are run by blacks.

The jury's only job in the Zimmerman trial was to determine whether the defendant broke the law when he shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year in a gated community near Orlando, Fla. In cases of self-defense, it doesn't matter who initiated the confrontation; whether Mr. Zimmerman singled out Martin because he was a black youngster in a neighborhood where there had been a series of burglaries by black youngsters; or whether Mr. Zimmerman disregarded what the police dispatcher told him before he got out of his car. Nor does it matter that Martin was unarmed and minding his own business when Mr. Zimmerman approached.

All that really mattered in that courtroom is whether Mr. Zimmerman reasonably believed that his life was in danger when he pulled the trigger. Critics of the verdict might not like the statutes that allowed for this outcome, but the proper response would not have been for the jury to ignore them and convict.

Did the perception of black criminality play a role in Martin's death? We may never know for certain, but we do know that those negative perceptions of young black men are rooted in hard data on who commits crimes. We also know that young black men will not change how they are perceived until they change how they behave.

The homicide rate claiming black victims today is seven times that of whites, and the George Zimmermans of the world are not the reason. Some 90% of black murder victims are killed by other blacks.

So let's have our discussions, even if the only one that really needs to occur is within the black community. Civil-rights leaders today choose to keep the focus on white racism instead of personal responsibility, but their predecessors knew better.

"Do you know that Negroes are 10 percent of the population of St. Louis and are responsible for 58% of its crimes? We've got to face that. And we've got to do something about our moral standards," Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. told a congregation in 1961. "We know that there are many things wrong in the white world, but there are many things wrong in the black world, too. We can't keep on blaming the white man. There are things we must do for ourselves."

Mr. Riley is a member of the Journal's editorial board.

A version of this article appeared July 16, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Race, Politics and the Zimmerman Trial
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 01:29:21 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: 4thlittle on July 16, 2013, 01:36:03 PM
You can't seriously be suggesting that the onus of guilt falls on the threatened kid just going about his business, rather than the armed adult who blindly assumed his behavior criminal and pursued him through the neighborhood?

Whether or not Zimmerman started the actual physical confrontation, he was 100% the instigator in this situation. An adult stalking a child through the neighborhood is a threatening gesture, and one that we've all been warned about since kindergarten. It's a gesture that Martin had every right to defend themselves against, even physically, regardless of the sissified "run home and tell Mommy!" society you'd like us all to live in.

It's just absolute crap that people are so willing to give the benefit of the doubt to and sympathize with an armed neighborhood loon known to call the police about 4' foot tall, 7-year old black kids walking the neighborhood, rather than giving the benefit of the doubt to the dead kid in the street who's only crime was walking home while black.

When an unarmed kid gets shot dead in the street by a gun-toting adult with a vigilante history, you have to blame the adult.

In 50 cases out of 50.

I can completely understand the argument that the state didn't do a good enough job presenting its case, but it just turns my stomach to hear "Poor Zimmerman" crap like this. He's not a victim of circumstance. He murdered a minor in cold blood that he chose, against instruction, to engage. Trayvon Martin isn't dead because he chose not to run home and call the police or tell Mommy, he is dead because a low-life Dog the Bounty Hunter wanna be  decided to take the law into his own hands.

Just unbelievable to me that it could be viewed any other way.

KenFSU: 

You refer to TM as a child but then claim that he need not be "sissified" by calling the police or telling Mommy.  So, GZ made a mistake following TM on foot.  Is it seriously your contention that TM had "every right" to escalate the situation by punching and then beating up GZ?  If your son were faced with a range of choices in that situation, would you encourage him to do the same as TM so he wouldn't take the "sissified" course of action?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 01:36:51 PM
Yes SheClown I do, because race wasn't a factor. Race does not determine thought process, as a matter of fact the genes that determine race have no impact whatsoever on the development of your brain. An Asian kid raised in an environment of extreme poverty will have the same mentality as those around him. Instead of being the stereotypical math/science genius.

Where do you feel race was a factor here? You believe had it been a white 'skater' kid Zimmerman wouldn't have followed? If you are using that basis, than actually it is more probable that he would follow a black person the least, as they are stereotypically more confrontational and aggressive. There are too many holes in the race card, idk why you continue to play it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 01:42:21 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 01:47:11 PM
Wasn't it a few organized protests that brought the attention to this case?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: KenFSU on July 16, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

I guess this is where our opinions differ. To me, the term "instigate" has a very narrow definition. In my opinion, which is only that, Zimmerman initiated the event by following Martin. His pursuit of Martin, against advisement, can only be seen as Zimmerman going on the offensive. Whatever happened next was in direct response of Zimmerman's instigation, which is why I think he deserves the largest slice of whatever blame diagram people want to sketch out. He's also the one who pulled the trigger during a fist fight.

Quote
Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

I posted the article because I found the similarities between the two cases striking. Profiling leads to murder leads to acquittal on self defense grounds. We have come a tremendous way, no doubt. I'm so white that I sunburn on my way to the mailbox, but in this particular case, I think it's impossible to divorce race from the circumstances. It's not even a black/white/hispanic/arab/asian thing, but rather a profiling thing. I don't think we live in this horribly racist country. In fact, things are as good as they've ever been. But it's hard to deny that both the mass media and the courts can still be guilty of putting less value on black suffering than that of whites. Again, things are getting better every year (Axe Handle Saturday wasn't even covered in the Times-Union in the 1960s), but were living in a fantasy land if we don't think that race was one of many components of this case.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 01:50:09 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

100% agree as well, however thankfully the media is not our justice system and the people make the laws, not FOX or CNN.  We all know the news puts their spin on it, however I don't think anyone is looking to them for justice or change so they really don't matter other than to give us pieces of a puzzle. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 01:53:55 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

I guess this is where our opinions differ. To me, the term "instigate" has a very narrow definition. In my opinion, which is only that, Zimmerman initiated the event by following Martin. His pursuit of Martin, against advisement, can only be seen as Zimmerman going on the offensive. Whatever happened next was in direct response of Zimmerman's instigation, which is why I think he deserves the largest slice of whatever blame diagram people want to sketch out. He's also the one who pulled the trigger during a fist fight.

Quote
Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

I posted the article because I found the similarities between the two cases striking. Profiling leads to murder leads to acquittal on self defense grounds. We have come a tremendous way, no doubt. I'm so white that I sunburn on my way to the mailbox, but in this particular case, I think it's impossible to divorce race from the circumstances. It's not even a black/white/hispanic/arab/asian thing, but rather a profiling thing. I don't think we live in this horribly racist country. In fact, things are as good as they've ever been. But it's hard to deny that both the mass media and the courts can still be guilty of putting less value on black suffering than that of whites. Again, things are getting better every year (Axe Handle Saturday wasn't even covered in the Times-Union in the 1960s), but were living in a fantasy land if we don't think that race was one of many components of this case.

I can understand your points and for the most part agree.  The only place I truly differ is that I feel race only plays in on whether or not Zimmerman followed/instigated/murdered purely because Martin was black. Any other way to view the race card is in the eyes of the beholder in my opinion.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:00:49 PM
Wasn't it a few organized protests that brought the attention to this case?

The protests were based on race. Of it being a white vs. black issue. This narrative was spun in the media by people like Al Sharpton:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/13/Media-Zimmerman-Coverage-Rap-Sheet



Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:06:02 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?


Gloria, I think history has shown us that ones race as it goes to the propensity for crime is a factor in how the crime is perceived and how it is prosecuted.  I think this case became the media sensation that it is because race was put to the forefront and the reason that happened is different depending on agenda's.  Some of those political and some of those for media ratings. 

I do agree that if this crime had involved individuals of the same race it would have not made headlines.  I look at this particular situation as one where the guy who pulled the trigger was charged, prosecuted and found not guilty under the law as the laws are written and administered.  I think the jury of six women, five White and one not did follow the law without prejudice.  As the one juror who was interviewed said, they never talked about race during their deliberations and that they felt that Zimmerman thought that it was Trayvon's actions and not his race that made him suspect that night.  It was testified to that he was out in the rain, cutting through back yards and stopping to look in windows.  I think those actions could reasonably be viewed as suspicious in a community where there has been a rash of break ins without race being a factor.  I think if my own son was there that night dressed in a hoodie, cutting through back yards and peering into windows his actions would have been viewed as suspicious.  I also do not believe for a minute that the women of the jury did not weigh all of the evidence in order to come to a lawful verdict.

I think there are many cases that scream racism but this is not one of them.  Even if Zimmerman himself is a bigot, I don't believe it was Trayvon's race that called attention to him.  I think it was a variety of factors, perhaps including the hoodie.  I have asked my youngest son to never put up his hoodie when in public because it hides ones face.  I will admit that is a paranoia on my part but not because I think it would cause him to be profiled as a Black but because it could make him appear suspicious to some.

Zimmerman is a guy who was stupid enough to get out of his car a follow someone he found suspicious. It was shortsighted and ended up being tragic. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:07:03 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.
Was it irresponsible gun ownership or the laws for stand your ground?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 02:13:55 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.
Was it irresponsible gun ownership or the laws for stand your ground?

I would say both, the media was itching for something big to happen in Florida because such a controversial law was passed. And had Zimmerman been a responsible gun owner, he would've assessed the situation and only fired as a last resort, not some scrapes and bruises.  But personally, I feel Stand Your Ground is just a matchbox waiting in the kindling and should be a thread of its own.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:17:05 PM
Here is the text from the Tampa article:  http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-a-duty-to-retreat-from-a-fla-law-as-it-stands/2131594
   
There is a difference between respecting the jury's verdict clearing George Zimmerman in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin and acknowledging the essential injustice of a Florida law that all but encourages reckless behavior. The verdict Saturday says less about race in America than it does this nation's capacity for violence. Another innocent life has been lost, and the nation searches again for some meaning beyond that the tragedy was lawful.

The jury late Saturday cleared Zimmerman of second-degree murder and a lesser charge of manslaughter in the February 2012 fatal shooting of Martin in the Central Florida city of Sanford. The neighborhood watch volunteer had ignored a police dispatcher's advice and followed the 17-year-old as he walked home from a convenience store in a gated, suburban community. Zimmerman — concerned about burglaries in the area — confronted Martin, and claimed he shot the unarmed teen in self-defense after Martin knocked him to the ground and beat his head on the concrete.

The prosecution presented an incoherent narrative at trial, but the case was hard from the start. Authorities initially sent mixed signals about whether a crime took place, and race (Martin was black, Zimmerman is Hispanic) interjected a sharp and polarizing emotion into the case. The jurors owe the nation some insight into what led to an acquittal; a fuller understanding of the verdict could ease public tensions. But a major factor was the Florida law that gives people wide latitude to use deadly force to defend themselves — even if they cause the confrontation.
Related News/Archive

While Zimmerman did not seek immunity from charges under "stand your ground," he apparently benefited from a less-discussed part of the 2005 law that expanded protections for using force in self-defense. Before the law, defendants had to show that they used every reasonable means to avoid danger before using force. But "stand your ground" removed the obligation to retreat in most circumstances. Zimmerman not only had no legal duty to retreat, the judge said in jury instructions, but the right to stand his ground and meet force with force.

In the most comprehensive effort of its kind, the Tampa Bay Times last year examined 200 "stand your ground" cases and found that the law has worked to free killers and violent attackers whose self-defense claims seem questionable at best. In nearly a third of the cases examined by the Times, defendants initiated the fight — and still went free. A former Republican state senator who sponsored the bill said the law was never meant to protect defendants who put themselves in harm's way. But the criminal justice system has been blind to that intent, as defendants merely have to show reasonable cause to fear bodily harm.

The most productive way to channel the frustration with the verdict is to change Florida's "stand your ground" law to recognize that individuals who initiate confrontations are not then immune from responsibility of the consequences. Legitimate self-defense cases would still be protected, but it would remove the near-amnesty that people have to act recklessly, putting themselves and others in harm's way. The law as it stands is an invitation to more bloodshed and heartache, and a society more divided.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:19:57 PM
Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.
They certainly allow for it.  No argument about that from me. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:24:27 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.


Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:26:16 PM
Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

That is simply your opinion. That is not factual.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 02:37:56 PM
Guns are meant for self-defense. If you are a responsible conceal carry holder, and you are jumped, hit, and you think someone is reaching for your gun... you are defending yourself.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 02:39:29 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.


Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.



Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:40:11 PM
Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

That is simply your opinion. That is not factual.

dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

No, they're not. That's why we have gun laws, concealed weapons permits, etc.

I don't hear of guns being used as a negotiation point in day to day life. Do you? When's the last time you heard of someone using a gun to cut in line at the grocery store? Or negotiate a better dinner bill with their waiter? Or to get a better rate from their lawn guy? Oddly, I can't recall many incidents ever happening like this.

Surely, you can google and find an isolated incident (or 5) of some crazy who has done something like this before in an attempt to prove how commonly uncommon it might be.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: strider on July 16, 2013, 02:43:35 PM
So, you are walking down the street and some stalker walks up and grabs you in your privates.  You resist and you hit the guy in the face.  He pulls a legal gun and shoots you.  Today there is a very good chance he will get away with it.

This is what this case, this jury and what the court instructions told me.  Once the tables are turned and you, the initial victim, have the upper hand, "Stand Your Ground" switches from you to your attacker and he gains the protection.

I was feeling better believing it was all about race, Zimmerman got off because Martin was black  At least then it made sense.  Wasn't any more right, but one can understand it.  History and personal experience tells us it still happens more than we like it to.

The actual result without playing the race card? Now that is what is really scary. 

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:48:08 PM
dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

And I would totally suggest that you reconsider your fairly silly claims about my words.  I have said from the beginning that its about another gun owner murdering someone in cold blood, but getting away with it legally.

The race discussion was started by a fairly racist troll, and I responded to him.

Sorry that you are having trigger word issues.

You on page 19: "NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:48:17 PM
Ken I don't believe anyone thinks Zimmerman is not at fault.  It is just that fault lies in both parties. You can no more say Zimmerman instigated it than one can say Trayvon shouldn't have confronted. That's the point, had either one made an alternate choice the outcome would've been different.

Thankfully, as noted today, we are beginning to move from drawing lines in the sand and being defensive and starting to meet in the middle to assess and evaluate the situation. Hopefully, this will spur conversation to make less Trayvons and Zimmermans in the future.

Of course, by posting articles like that, we are making it a race issue
. Which Martin/Zimmerman wasn't in the eyes of the jury that made the decision.  So as long as we continue to base all opinions on race, we will never progress forward.  And that is our own faults. Either pushing it or allowing it to be pushed.

If both men had been black? 

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black?

Does anyone SERIOUSLY think the outcome would have been the same?
(If both men had been black?) If this would have been the case the MEDIA wouldn't have covered the trial!



I agree. If Zimmerman and Martin were the same race, we would have never heard about the case. The media created and spun the racial narrative to fit their agenda since day one.

What a crock.  It came to national attention because of the Stand Your Ground Defense.  Followed by the cops not arresting the killer.

Thats national news anyway you slice it.

Irresponsible gun ownership that resulted in a legally covered murder.


Ahhh, here's Stephen again --- Mr. "It's about race" -then- "No it's about irresponsible gun ownership".

Pick an angle you like and stick to it already.

Whether we like it or not, Zimmerman owned his gun legally and only used it as a last resort as he was being bloodied and pummeled and no one was coming to his aid. He felt his life was being threatened and a jury agreed with that.



Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Yes Jeffrey all those thing could have happened but they didn't.  If you watched the trial and listened to what was said about how the law applies to this situation the case turned on the fact that at the moment Zimmerman perceived he was at risk of "serious bodily harm" he could lawfully pull the trigger.  It is also speculation that this was or was not the only thing Zimmerman could have done.  The reality is that it did happen and the way the law is written today, along with the charges the State chose to go with which specifies a jury cannot convict if there is reasonable doubt is precisely why this case ended the way it did.  I am by no means absolving Zimmerman.  He should have kept his bottom in his car but he didn't.  Leaving his car was stupid, shortsighted, a whole bunch of things, but it wasn't illegal.  To me it looks like the law is what needs to be discussed and revisited.  Deciding after the fact who was responsible or not won't change the outcome.  When we the people think there is injustice in our system, we need to address that injustice and work to change the system. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 02:50:19 PM
I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 02:54:18 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

JeffreyS, last resort as in he's on the ground, being bloodied and pummeled by someone bigger than him, he is obviously losing the fight, and no one is coming to his aid. Would your life not feel threatened if you were in his position? Would you lay there and get beaten unconscious?

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car. As I pointed out earlier in this thread, he (and Trayvon) had opportunities to end the situation and neither of them did. It's a tragedy from every angle.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: acme54321 on July 16, 2013, 02:55:44 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 02:56:58 PM
Some posts on other threads have touched on this and when it passed into law I had a feeling it would only be a matter of time until tragedy happened.

As a disclaimer, I do not own any firearms however I do support people's right to carry. I do not support Stand Your Ground as it is written.

Stand your ground laws are irresponsible gun ownership.

Guns are meant for self-defense. If you are a responsible conceal carry holder, and you are jumped, hit, and you think someone is reaching for your gun... you are defending yourself.

Though I am a proponent of Right to Carry, I do not believe in Stand Your Ground. A study done by a Tampa newspaper proves its faults outweighs its benefits IMO. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133 (http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133)

Quote
Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1188, ch. 97-102; s. 2, ch. 2005-27.
 
 
776.013?Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
 
(1)?A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a)?The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b)?The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2)?The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a)?The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b)?The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c)?The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d)?The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3)?A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4)?A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5)?As used in this section, the term:

(a)?“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b)?“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c)?“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
 
 
776.032?Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1)?A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2)?A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3)?The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27
 
 
776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—
 
The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
 
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

What are your thoughts? Is this a necessary law? Is it the media just blowing it out of proportion? Is it the conservatives trying to keep votes?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:57:39 PM
dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

And I would totally suggest that you reconsider your fairly silly claims about my words.  I have said from the beginning that its about another gun owner murdering someone in cold blood, but getting away with it legally.

The race discussion was started by a fairly racist troll, and I responded to him.

Sorry that you are having trigger word issues.

You on page 19: "NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

yes.  your trigger word.  If you don't actually know anything about the case, the context, or what people have actually said, why on earth are you debating this, Jameson?  You arent asking questions, you are making statements, and they don't make you seem either informed or terribly engaged. 

In fact they make you seem the opposite.
Truth is a lot of people are making statements about this case all across the country and beyond who don't know the particulars which is why we have a court of law and a jury.  The jury listened for 5 long weeks to testimony and evidence on both sides and were charged to come up with a verdict under Florida Law.  They did so and rendered a not guilty under the law.  This does not mean they did not think the first error was Zimmermans, they did. 

I was very interested to hear the words of the juror who spoke to Anderson Cooper on CNN last night.  It explains why the jury came up with the verdict and what they thought happened.  At the very least I think people can go to the CNN site and listen to what the jury thought.  That in many ways can bring folks up to speed on what happened in this trial.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 02:58:13 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?

No I am suggesting he intentionally murdered Trayvon Martin.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 02:58:40 PM
Stephen, please do not use phrases like 'racist troll' just because someone disagrees with you. I know that you are 100% in that liberal media bubble like alot of people are, but speaking facts doesn't make one 'racist'.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: acme54321 on July 16, 2013, 02:59:08 PM
I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

Serious question:  Have you ever fired a pistol?  Or a firearm? 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 02:59:50 PM

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car.

then thats the end of the story.
Respectfully Stephen, that is not the end of the story.  It should have been but it wasn't and the law cannot convict someone for being stupid enough to follow someone they thought was suspicious. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: acme54321 on July 16, 2013, 03:00:27 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?

No I am suggesting he intentionally murdered Trayvon Martin.

So?  I'm questioning where you said one of his alternate options would have been to fire a warning shot.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 03:02:16 PM
dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

And I would totally suggest that you reconsider your fairly silly claims about my words.  I have said from the beginning that its about another gun owner murdering someone in cold blood, but getting away with it legally.

The race discussion was started by a fairly racist troll, and I responded to him.

Sorry that you are having trigger word issues.

You on page 19: "NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

yes.  your trigger word.  If you don't actually know anything about the case, the context, or what people have actually said, why on earth are you debating this, Jameson?  You arent asking questions, you are making statements, and they don't make you seem either informed or terribly engaged. 

In fact they make you seem the opposite.

Really, Stephen? Because on Page 2 of this thread you link to and quote and article from HuffPo in reply to no one about Zimmerman and his family being a bunch of racists.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:02:48 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?

No I am suggesting he intentionally murdered Trayvon Martin.
The jury who listened to the evidence thought he did not Jeffrey.  To say that he did is an assumption especially not having had been privy to all the testimony and facts.  No one disputes the fact that Zimmerman got out of the car and that he shot Trayvon and that Zimmerman's initial actions opened the door to a final confrontation, so in that way he has fault, but those actions are not illegal.  Floridians and society need to look at our laws at this point because the whys and hows behind Trayvon's death and Zimmermans actions cannot be undone.  I would also remind everyone that Trayvon's family will be suing Zimmerman in civil court and the outcome there may be very different in that testimony not given in this trial as to character and background can and will come out and Zimmerman if called, must testify.  Remember OJ Simpson was found not guilty in criminal court but guilty in civil court and civil action can include jail time. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:03:13 PM
I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

Serious question:  Have you ever fired a pistol?  Or a firearm? 

Shotguns many times, a rifle twice and the only hand guns were for BBs and pellets.  Clay pigeons and a few failed hunting trips.

My question was serious as well is that not a two hand action gun?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:05:16 PM
Last resort??? where as I have disagreed on a lot of your points none seemed foolish until this one but it is ridiculous.  He had lots of other options including minding his own damn business, firing a warning shot and my favorite don't use a gun in a fist fight.

Fire a warning shot?  So you suggest wildy failing a gun around while beating beaten and pulling the trigger at random?

No I am suggesting he intentionally murdered Trayvon Martin.
The jury who listened to the evidence thought he did not Jeffrey.  To say that he did is an assumption especially not having had been privy to all the testimony and facts.

We are not in the jury's shoes living life often requires making reasonable assumptions. I believe he did I stated it as such.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 03:06:11 PM

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car.

then thats the end of the story.
Respectfully Stephen, that is not the end of the story.  It should have been but it wasn't and the law cannot convict someone for being stupid enough to follow someone they thought was suspicious.

Respectfully Diane. 

In the conversation with Jameson over why Zimmerman should have been tried and/or convicted, if no one disagrees that Zimmerman should have stayed in the car, then everything that happens after that is Zimmermans responsibility.  End of story.

So you are subscribing to the mind my own business and if its not my house they're breaking into I know nothing attitude?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Traveller on July 16, 2013, 03:07:12 PM
So, you are walking down the street and some stalker walks up and grabs you in your privates.  You resist and you hit the guy in the face.  He pulls a legal gun and shoots you.  Today there is a very good chance he will get away with it.

Not under the language of the "stand your ground" statute as I understand it.

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Section 776.013(3), Florida Statutes.

I would argue grabbing someone else's privates without their consent constitutes an unlawful activity, rendering the stand-your-ground defense inapplicable.

The offense of battery occurs when a person actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other. Section 784.03(1)(a)1., Florida Statutes.

Granted, without living witness, how can the state prove that the shooter committed the initial battery?  Under the prosecutorial immunity provision of Section 776.032, the police can't even question the shooter once he claims self defense unless they have probable cause that shows otherwise.  This is the statute that demands revision in my opinion.  Under centuries of common law, the burden was on the defendant to prove self-defense based on a preponderance of the evidence.  Now, the state must prove lack of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.  This burden is nearly impossible to meet without a living witness to testify.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:11:58 PM
I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

Serious question:  Have you ever fired a pistol?  Or a firearm? 

Shotguns many times, a rifle twice and the only hand guns were for BBs and pellets.  Clay pigeons and a few failed hunting trips.

My question was serious as well is that not a two hand action gun?
There was testimony in the trial about this Jeffrey.  I don't know much about gun's by my recollection is that the guy was ready to fire once the trigger was pulled.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 03:12:58 PM
If Trayvon Martin didn't attack Zimmerman first he still lives today, end of story.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:13:36 PM

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car.

then thats the end of the story.
Respectfully Stephen, that is not the end of the story.  It should have been but it wasn't and the law cannot convict someone for being stupid enough to follow someone they thought was suspicious.

Respectfully Diane. 

In the conversation with Jameson over why Zimmerman should have been tried and/or convicted, if no one disagrees that Zimmerman should have stayed in the car, then everything that happens after that is Zimmermans responsibility.  End of story.
Morally I agree it was.  Legally the law could not convict him for his actions.  The outcome I think we all agree was tragic and Zimmerman's choices set this all in motion.  That is fact.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 16, 2013, 03:15:08 PM
So, you are walking down the street and some stalker walks up and grabs you in your privates.  You resist and you hit the guy in the face.  He pulls a legal gun and shoots you.  Today there is a very good chance he will get away with it.

Not under the language of the "stand your ground" statute as I understand it.

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Section 776.013(3), Florida Statutes.

I would argue grabbing someone else's privates without their consent constitutes an unlawful activity, rendering the stand-your-ground defense inapplicable.

The offense of battery occurs when a person actually and intentionally touches or strikes another person against the will of the other. Section 784.03(1)(a)1., Florida Statutes.

Granted, without living witness, how can the state prove that the shooter committed the initial battery?  Under the prosecutorial immunity provision of Section 776.032, the police can't even question the shooter once he claims self defense unless they have probable cause that shows otherwise.  This is the statute that demands revision in my opinion.  Under centuries of common law, the burden was on the defendant to prove self-defense based on a preponderance of the evidence.  Now, the state must prove lack of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.  This burden is nearly impossible to meet without a living witness to testify.

The law states they may detain in order to investigate however they may not arrest. As per 776.032(2)

Quote
(1)?A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2)?A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:15:30 PM
If Trayvon Martin didn't attack Zimmerman first he still lives today, end of story.

Yes of course the onus is on the 17 year old not to over react after he gave fleeing a try instead of the 28 year old who gave carrying a gun a try.  Sound logic.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 16, 2013, 03:16:56 PM
dude, guns arent meant to be a negotiation point in day to day living.  To treat them as such is irresponsible, and downright dangerous.

And I would totally suggest that you reconsider your fairly silly claims about my words.  I have said from the beginning that its about another gun owner murdering someone in cold blood, but getting away with it legally.

The race discussion was started by a fairly racist troll, and I responded to him.

Sorry that you are having trigger word issues.

You on page 19: "NO ONE questions the fact that profiling happened, and thats about as racist as it gets."

yes.  your trigger word.  If you don't actually know anything about the case, the context, or what people have actually said, why on earth are you debating this, Jameson?  You arent asking questions, you are making statements, and they don't make you seem either informed or terribly engaged. 

In fact they make you seem the opposite.

Really, Stephen? Because on Page 2 of this thread you link to and quote and article from HuffPo in reply to no one about Zimmerman and his family being a bunch of racists.

We'll just let this be, Stephen. Silence is golden.

Moving on.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:18:52 PM
btw TM's overreaction would have likely left GZ sore for a while as most ass whippings do.  GZ overreaction was more deadly in nature. Disproportionate and everyone who has been in a fist fight knows it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:19:04 PM
If Trayvon Martin didn't attack Zimmerman first he still lives today, end of story.
I think making this determination is what has many in disagreement.  I believe it is the use of the word "first".
The facts of the actions of Zimmerman and Trayvon collide on that word.  Zimmerman got out of the car "first" so he was the first person whose actions led to the confrontation.  Testimony and forensic evidence indicated that Trayvon got physical "first".  In the end the actions of both led to the final outcome.  The jurors did believe that Trayvon punched Zimmerman and that Zimmerman was in fear of "great bodily harm or death". 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:23:35 PM
Agree and I wonder why the judge wouldn't let the state put the first aggressor rule into the jury instructions.  They would still be free to determine if it applied. My understanding is that in cases where self defense is claimed the rule is often put in the jury instructions. 

I won't claim to know more about the law than the judge on the ruling but I would like an explanation from her.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:29:10 PM
Agree and I wonder why the judge wouldn't let the state put the first aggressor rule into the jury instructions.  They would still be free to determine if it applied. My understanding is that in cases where self defense is claimed the rule is often put in the jury instructions. 

I won't claim to know more about the law than the judge on the ruling but I would like an explanation from her.
Do you know for a fact if the judge didn't allow it or if the prosecution didn't request it? 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 03:30:33 PM
Is following someone enough to be considered first agressor? If so does that not make every neighborhood watch in america guilty of it?

I have not heard anyone claim Zimmerman initiated contact.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: bill on July 16, 2013, 03:35:54 PM
Maybe there was some prejudice in this case....

Jeantel explained that during her telephone conversation with Trayvon Martin on the night of his death, she warned Martin to run from George Zimmerman because he might be a rapist:

PIERS MORGAN: And he was freaked out by it?

RACHEL JEANTEL: Yes. Definitely, after I say ‘may be a rapist,’ for every boy, for every man, every — who’s not that kind of way, seeing a grown man following them, would they be creep out? … And people need to understand, he didn’t want that creepy ass cracker going to his father or girlfriend’s house to go get — mind you, his little brother was there. You know — now, mind you, I told you — I told Trayvon it might have been a rapist.

Jeantel went on to say that any parent who would encourage his child to remain standing calmly in the face of such a threat — rather than to run or fight — would be likely to see his child “in the news for a missing person.”

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:40:31 PM
Agree and I wonder why the judge wouldn't let the state put the first aggressor rule into the jury instructions.  They would still be free to determine if it applied. My understanding is that in cases where self defense is claimed the rule is often put in the jury instructions. 

I won't claim to know more about the law than the judge on the ruling but I would like an explanation from her.
Do you know for a fact if the judge didn't allow it or if the prosecution didn't request it? 
The prosecution requested it and the defense objected according to Thom Hartman on the SeriusXM left station.  He was interested in talking about it as though the defense lawyer who said it would turn out to be a mistake had strong armed the judge with the threat of appeal. The lawyer who was the guest did not know why she ruled as such but doubted the judge was intimidated by anyone.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 03:43:11 PM
Is following someone enough to be considered first agressor? If so does that not make every neighborhood watch in america guilty of it?

I have not heard anyone claim Zimmerman initiated contact.

Legally I don't think so.  I do think if someone runs from you and you pursue without any knowledge of wrongdoing on their part it should (but doesn't)constitute a mild form of harassment.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 03:43:59 PM
I haven't read any of the other threads in a few hours but I'll try to give you the perspective I've grown up with and have been taught over the years on some of your observations.

^Interesting pieces to be sure.  What I am trying to come to balance with is what is happening beyond the rhetoric.  In Jacksonville at least some of the crimes being committed that place Blacks as the victims also have Blacks as the perp.  The stats I have seen in the past when working with those working on the issue of crime and prevention have pointed to a great deal of crime between Blacks that statistically is higher than other races when population is factored in.  Like the 09 area code.  I do believe that there is a great influence when it comes to poverty and environment as Ennis mentioned and look forward to more input about that.

The 09 area code is one with high poverty levels and a higher population density than most of Jacksonville.  It also has more limited access to many things we take for granted in other areas of town, such as retail, medical services, grocery stores, good schools, libraries, maintained parks, etc.  Historically, it's an area that has also been redlined, leading to lower property values and a lower chance in the growth of family wealth over an extended period of time. 

The stats you suggest on black-on-black crime are going to stand out here because it's a majority black area of town that is also an environment of economic distress.  For comparison's sake, find another dense population living in a certain section of a community (say any border town in Texas), and you can find similar statistics for different race.  The point I'm trying to make here is this is the "effect" of an economic/environmental situation.  Not racial. 

Race plays a larger role in American numbers because we have public subsidized policies, real estate practices, and laws that have helped create (on average) a large gulf in wealth based along skin color.  Many here will probably disagree, but I'm prepared to go into detail with certain laws and examples for anyone who's up to the challenge.

Quote
But there is something else going on as well.  During ride alongs with the JSO I have have witnessed many incidents where citizens call each other the "n" word with venom and they are all of the Black race.

Right or wrong, I grew up in an economically distressed black neighborhood.  For us, the "n" word was tossed around back and forth with no proplem.  It could be used to show respect, it could also be used to show disrespect.  I don't know exactly, why, that's just how it's always been since I was a little kid.  However, if someone white said it, it would always be taken as an insult and result in some type of confrontation.  I don't know if something similar takes place with other racial slurs in other communities, all I can share with you is my own experience within the community I know.

Quote
I have also seen flareups over the shade of Black one happens to be and value associated with one another based on degree of color.  That is something that tells me at least that this may go beyond economics and toward something unspoken and painful in the Black psyche.

This dates back to slavery.  Blacks were pitted against each other by slave owners to keep them divided.  The lighter you were, the better you were.  This plays into the idea of setting a long pattern of an economic hierarchy system based on skin color.  This wasn't really an issue in my community.  If you were black, you were black.  Didn't matter if you were dark or "red-boned".  I wasn't really introduced to this on a large level until going away to college.

Quote
Please know and accept me at my word that I am not laying down judgments but rather sharing ideas and experiences that have mostly come through my deep associations with members of the Black community.  I simply want to understand so that there can be healing and clarity of thought where needed in our community and society in general.

No judgment taken.  I have no problem explaining things I may have insight into via my own life experiences.  Also, recognize, we're not too far past the Jim Crow era.  For me, it's only one generation. My parents grew up during segregation and were young adults during the Civil Rights era.  My grandparent's young years fell between the 1920s and 1940s.  Until my granddad made his kids finish school, it was the norm for all boys to quit school in the third grade and become family income producers by sharecropping.  You can't create family wealth that way!

Nevertheless, my whole life, they've drilled me on their experiences and what to look out for myself.  I remember, the most embarrassed I've ever been in my life was in high school when my mom forbid me from going to the movies with two girls waiting for me outside (they were white and hispanic). Moms is barely 5' but she struck fear in my heart that day.  She's not racist but her life experiences with the KKK, civil rights era, etc. had shaped her mind that she could protect her almost grown baby by keeping him away from a potential situation that she felt was dangerous (and that actually was during most of her lifetime at that point).

With that in mind, me and my brothers grew being told, life isn't fair, we're starting behind the eight-ball, family member "x" was arrested or killed for being black, etc. and we'll have to work twice as hard to achieve success. 

For me, in my younger years, it led to me not even voting in elections because my hood had always been the hood regardless of what party was in office.  Not believing in the concept of trickle down economics, based on personal life experience, is one of the primary reasons I'm an independent today. However, all that childhood preaching, combined with seeing others in the hood turn out working labor jobs for little cash, living check to check or in prison has turned into drive for me now.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 03:52:43 PM
TMZ has some good coverage of the verdict, hell more factual and newsworthy than MSNBC

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1U6x5Y0aVw
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: acme54321 on July 16, 2013, 03:54:02 PM
I am glad you are back to making reasonable points. I agree the laws are the biggest problem in this case.

I am still wondering when he cocked that slide? Certainly the contention isn't that he pulled the gun during the fisticuffs (that were in this one magical instance going to lead to death), released the safety, operated the two hand action of the slide but then couldn't execute a warning shot or a leg shot  instead of a perfect "one shot one kill" style shot to the middle of TM's heart.

Serious question:  Have you ever fired a pistol?  Or a firearm? 

Shotguns many times, a rifle twice and the only hand guns were for BBs and pellets.  Clay pigeons and a few failed hunting trips.

My question was serious as well is that not a two hand action gun?

No.  It's double action with no external safety.  As long as there is a round in the chamber it will fire if the trigger is pulled.  A round would be chambered before the weapon is holstered.  Not many concealed carry guns have traditional safeties or require a round be chambered immediately before firing, those features would defeat the purpose.

Additionally, firing any sort of warning shot is extremely bad practice and illegal.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 03:57:06 PM
Thank you for you words and insight.  If I may Ennis, I think it is the volatile double standard when it comes to the use of racially charge words like ni@@er that bothers many non Blacks along with some sense of discrimination toward Whites who simply because they are White are thought to harbor racist feelings or indifferent to the struggles of low income individuals including Blacks.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I don't know if you have been over to the "profiling" thread, but there is an overlap discussion there about this issue. When you get the time will you check out the conversation there and respond.  I am wondering if there is a way to move the conversation on the profile thread to this one to maintain clarity?  I also intend to engage other portions of your post as well.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 04:02:30 PM
I think thats fair.

I think what occurred was a tragedy. I think the efforts to paint Zimmerman or Martin as a saint or villain are misplaced.

Martain was not just a poor little kid with Skittles and Arizona Iced tea. He was a cocksure, wanna be thug who decided to confront the "cracker" who was bothering him. I dont think anyone should be harassed while walking around, and I dont know what I might have done in his shoes.

Conversely, I have been in Zimmermans shoes. He was trying to do a good thing. He was perhaps a bit too agressive, but not the point of confronting anyone. Yes, he probably should not have gotten out of his car, but there is no law against that either.

There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 04:08:23 PM
Thank you for you words and insight.  If I may Ennis, I think it is the volatile double standard when it comes to the use of racially charge words like ni@@er that bothers many non Blacks along with some sense of discrimination toward Whites who simply because they are White are thought to harbor racist feelings or indifferent to the struggles of low income individuals including Blacks.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I don't know.  This stuff is ingrained in many after years of injustices.  For all I know, to some, the level of hopelessness can be so great that it could feel like that word is all they have.  It took centuries to get to where we're at today and it could take centuries to turn things around. However, keep in mind, you're dealing with a situation where you're looking at a portion of the population that has a higher poverty rate and lower access to educational opportunities many take for granted.  It's an environment and economic situation that many will never truly understand or grasp. 

However, I know this.  Change the environment and economic status, change the results for future generations.  That not only applies to the example I gave with my grandfather but also well known families, such as the Kennedys.

Quote
I don't know if you have been over to the "profiling" thread, but there is an overlap discussion there about this issue. When you get the time will you check out the conversation there and respond.  I am wondering if there is a way to move the conversation on the profile thread to this one to maintain clarity?

I haven't had time to look.  Partially because I've been working today and partially because some of the opinions/ignorance infuriates me.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 04:16:22 PM
^  When you do look, I think you will see we have many parallel thoughts. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 16, 2013, 04:19:48 PM
Jeffrey,

Here is the Florida "Use of Force by Aggressor" law:

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 04:22:22 PM
I think that there is some confusion also in what Zimmerman was tried under. He did not claim innocent under the Shoot First law. He claimed self defense.

Be mad at shoot first all you want, but it wasnt what got him acquitted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DreD3TjByv4
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 04:29:33 PM
Jeffrey,

Here is the Florida "Use of Force by Aggressor" law:

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Thanks for sharing this NN.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 04:48:38 PM
Thanks NN, I can't see why if that were requested to be in the jury instructions there would be an issue with it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:00:43 PM
There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.


You can pretty much say the same thing about a person who's had too many drinks at the bar and accidentally kills someone as a result of DUI. Innocent mistakes. Most of the discussion on black vs white issues taking place right now is most likely a major result of GZ walking free.  GZ gets hit with manslaughter and does prison time, then he's no different from Mr. DUI or Southside Chicago murderer who's caught and put behind bars.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 16, 2013, 05:01:04 PM
Jeffrey, I didn't see the trial and I have no idea why any motion ws denied or granted.

As previously stated, the Florida "Stand Your Ground" law" FSS 776.013 does not directly apply to this case.  This was tried as self defense as codified in FSS 776.012:

776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

I don't believe that this case has anything to do with "stand your ground".  It does provide a discussion over the use of force in self defense.   It can also be used to discuss the "aggressor" theory.   Did Mr. Zimmerman's pursuit of Mr. Martin constitute a "provocation"?  Could that pursuit be said to "provoke the use of force against himself"?  Both Zimmerman and Martin were legally positioned and both had a right of travel.  I didn't see the trial, but was Martin's fear of Zimmerman clearly discussed and what rights he had as far as self defense?  Obviously, the jury saw the testimony of a break in the pursuit as stopping any aggression by Zimmerman.  The racial discussion seems to be discounted by the available evidence...(the fact that Zimmerman only identified race when asked, the fact that he seemed not to be sure of Martins race, and the FBI finding of no racial overtones in the case). 

This case was clearly decided on self defense only, even according to the jurors who have spoken out.  They apparently decided to discard the pursuit as a cause of the homicide.  The right of Zimmerman to carry a concealed firearm seems to me to be settled law.  Whether he misused that right by using deadly force when it was unwarranted has been decided by the jury. 

So the central questions here, whether we agree with them are not, have been settled. 

-The prosecutor, jury, and FBI saw no racial animus. 

-The fact that Zimmerman pursued Martin, even to the point of exiting his vehicle, was not recognized by the jury as an element of "crime".

MANSLAUGHTER
782.07?Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.—
(1)?The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

In this case, the jury apparently did not see culpable negligence or attach "unlawful justification" to the pursuit.

-The jury, as has been stated, agreed that Zimmerman felt "in fear of his life or great bodily harm" while on his back with Martin on top physically striking him. 

The argument against any one of these three points was apparently either not made, or was too weak, or did not conform to the available evidence enough for the jurors to convict.

I think the laws are suitable.  The system we have looked at these statutes and decided to acquit.  I don't believe that weakening the current laws on the justifiable use of force would be advantageous to the citizens of the state. 

I believe that the actions of both parties contributed to the tragic death of Mr. Martin that night.  I believe that Mr. Zimmermans actions in pursuing Martin were reckless, and again lacking access to the evidence, appeared negligent.  Based on what I have heard, I would hesitate to criticize the use of force by a citizen on their back being beaten.  Such physical confrontations can easily lead to great bodily harm or even death.  I wouldn't question Martin stopping and challenging someone following him as well.  But, again absent contradictory testimony, according to Zimmerman no warning or questioning was spoken.   I just don't see how we could responsibly change laws to avert a tragic set of events such as this.  Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: peestandingup on July 16, 2013, 05:02:49 PM
Thank you for you words and insight.  If I may Ennis, I think it is the volatile double standard when it comes to the use of racially charge words like ni@@er that bothers many non Blacks along with some sense of discrimination toward Whites who simply because they are White are thought to harbor racist feelings or indifferent to the struggles of low income individuals including Blacks.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

I don't know.  This stuff is ingrained in many after years of injustices.  For all I know, to some, the level of hopelessness can be so great that it could feel like that word is all they have.  It took centuries to get to where we're at today and it could take centuries to turn things around. However, keep in mind, you're dealing with a situation where you're looking at a portion of the population that has a higher poverty rate and lower access to educational opportunities many take for granted.  It's an environment and economic situation that many will never truly understand or grasp. 

However, I know this.  Change the environment and economic status, change the results for future generations.  That not only applies to the example I gave with my grandfather but also well known families, such as the Kennedys.

I honestly think you've cracked it, Ennis. I'd also go a step further & say that keeping "business as usual" is part of the harsh reality. Prisons need filled, crimes need to be committed, etc in order to sustain what is currently in place. And you dont get that by empowering people, of any race, to truly take control of their situation. Education is also key, but de-funding is the name of that game as well. We can apparently fund endless wars that do nothing, security farces up the wazoo, prisons, etc, but not education. That should tell you something right there.

And it's unfortunate that many blacks (and many under class whites too) aren't educated enough to see the reality of this. So instead, they turn their anger on each other, some random person on the street, or an entire group of regular everyday people for their woes. Its what I was sorta alluding to in my earlier comment on how many blacks are all of a sudden riled up because a black man/teen was shot by a non-black. When blacks killing blacks happens every single day, all over the country. Some go to jail for it, yes. But some don't. And besides, dead is dead. And even the people that get sent to prisons for these crimes are "dead" in a way. Its just another waste of life.

That's why I've mostly kept my mouth shut about this stuff lately when talking to anyone. I feel, although an important case, that it's a huge distraction from the ugly realities of day to day life for many people. And the people arguing about it are completely misguided & not seeing the forest for one single tree.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:02:53 PM
Jeffrey,

Here is the Florida "Use of Force by Aggressor" law:

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

Thanks for sharing this NN.

I don't think anyone can deny the bolded part.  GZ's injuries were not consistent with this thought but it's hard to prove he didn't think TM would kill him.  After all, to him, TM was a thug looking to rob someone in his community.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 16, 2013, 05:06:55 PM
There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.


You can pretty much say the same thing about a person who's had too many drinks at the bar and accidentally kills someone as a result of DUI. Innocent mistakes. Most of the discussion on black vs white issues taking place right now is most likely a major result of GZ walking free.  GZ gets hit with manslaughter and does prison time, then he's no different from Mr. DUI or Southside Chicago murderer who's caught and put behind bars.

I would actually put it the other way Lake. 

In DUI cases, the act of drinking and then getting behind the wheel establishes negligence. 

In this case, the act of pursuit, continuous surveillance without questioning or verbal contact, even to the point of exiting the vehicle without identification visually or verbally, actually searching for Martin on foot, and the resulting fear that placed in a young Mr. Martin.  That would seem to be the argument that establishes negligence on the part of Mr. Zimmerman leading to manslaughter.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: johnnyman on July 16, 2013, 05:13:49 PM

No one is disputing the fact that he should have stayed in the car.

then thats the end of the story.

Stephen, if you ever want to get out of jury duty if it ever comes up for you, just provide them with your post here.  Pure genius man.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:15:11 PM
Quote
And it's unfortunate that many blacks (and many under class whites too) aren't educated enough to see the reality of this. So instead, they turn their anger on each other, some random person on the street, or an entire group of regular everyday people for their woes.

I don't think this is the case either.  The situation stems from economics.  People still have kids, have to pay bills and still need places to live and cars for access.  This requires money regardless of whether you have a college degree/job or not.  You're broke, behind on the bills, the car needs to be repaired, and there's no food in the frige for the kids.  What are you going to do?  For many, doing illegal things are simply a desperate means of survival.  However, the flip end of that, is it also leads to felonies (which screw you up long term even more) and confrontations. In many circumstances, those confrontations (could be as simple as fighting over turf to make illegal money) result in death.  It's a pretty bad cycle but it's an economic and environmental one.  Not racial.

Quote
Its what I was sorta alluding to in my earlier comment on how many blacks are all of a sudden riled up because a black man/teen was shot by a non-black.

GZ/TM is a non-story if GZ is locked away behind bars for manslaughter.  He's no different from the drunk driver doing time for killing an innocent pedestrian or someone on the Southside of Chicago getting arrested for murder. Right or wrong, the way things went down (jury finds killer not guilty), makes it another sad chapter in what one segment of the population deems as a list of injustices (especially, since the Florida law allows such an event to legally take place).  Just goes to show, things aren't all peaches and cream despite some trying to paint our picture in that light.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 16, 2013, 05:15:20 PM
I glad that Jesse Jackson is actually doing something worthwhile today. He's in town concerning the lady who got twenty years for a warning shot. I'll give credit when it's due, esp when it's rare.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 05:23:46 PM
There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.


You can pretty much say the same thing about a person who's had too many drinks at the bar and accidentally kills someone as a result of DUI. Innocent mistakes. Most of the discussion on black vs white issues taking place right now is most likely a major result of GZ walking free.  GZ gets hit with manslaughter and does prison time, then he's no different from Mr. DUI or Southside Chicago murderer who's caught and put behind bars.

I would actually put it the other way Lake. 

In DUI cases, the act of drinking and then getting behind the wheel establishes negligence. 

In this case, the act of pursuit, continuous surveillance without questioning or verbal contact, even to the point of exiting the vehicle without identification visually or verbally, actually searching for Martin on foot, and the resulting fear that placed in a young Mr. Martin.  That would seem to be the argument that establishes negligence on the part of Mr. Zimmerman leading to manslaughter.
The prosecution argued this very point aggressively but they failed to make their case.  Actually, the only verbal exchange between Zimmerman and Martin that was testified to was that when Trayvon approached Zimmerman he was alleged to have stated "Do you have a problem with me?" and Zimmerman responded "No I don't have a problem with you?" and then Trayvon punched him.  The jury believed what Zimmerman said about Trayvon being the the one to initiate the physical attack and they also felt that the evidence and forensics as well as professional testimony backed up Zimmerman's explanation of how the physical altercation went down.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:24:57 PM
There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.


You can pretty much say the same thing about a person who's had too many drinks at the bar and accidentally kills someone as a result of DUI. Innocent mistakes. Most of the discussion on black vs white issues taking place right now is most likely a major result of GZ walking free.  GZ gets hit with manslaughter and does prison time, then he's no different from Mr. DUI or Southside Chicago murderer who's caught and put behind bars.

I would actually put it the other way Lake. 

In DUI cases, the act of drinking and then getting behind the wheel establishes negligence. 

In this case, the act of pursuit, continuous surveillance without questioning or verbal contact, even to the point of exiting the vehicle without identification visually or verbally, actually searching for Martin on foot, and the resulting fear that placed in a young Mr. Martin.  That would seem to be the argument that establishes negligence on the part of Mr. Zimmerman leading to manslaughter.

Yes. Much better description than mine!
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:27:43 PM
The prosecution argued this very point aggressively but they failed to make their case.  Actually, the only verbal exchange between Zimmerman and Martin that was testified to was that when Trayvon approached Zimmerman he was alleged to have stated "Do you have a problem with me?" and Zimmerman responded "No I don't have a problem with you?" and then Trayvon punched him.  The jury believed what Zimmerman said about Trayvon being the the one to initiate the physical attack and they also felt that the evidence and forensics as well as professional testimony backed up Zimmerman's explanation of how the physical altercation went down.

The juror I heard on tv, said none of the events leading up to GZ shooting TM mattered to her as much as if GZ felt his life was in danger the instant he fired the shoot killing TM.  I'm sure everyone believes that.  I don't agree with the outcome but I certain believe GZ feared for his life at that moment.  However, she also saw GZ and TM as equal victims.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: johnnyman on July 16, 2013, 05:32:16 PM
There are a lot of different ways things could have gone down that night. There was no racism. There was simply a series of moderately bad decisions on behalf of two people. Zimmermans mistake getting out his car, and Martins was to jump someone who he had no idea if he was armed or not. This led to one life ended, and the other one basically ruined.

Its sad, and as much as we try to paint it as a black and white issue, its so nuanced that its a folly to try to make it seem simple.


You can pretty much say the same thing about a person who's had too many drinks at the bar and accidentally kills someone as a result of DUI. Innocent mistakes. Most of the discussion on black vs white issues taking place right now is most likely a major result of GZ walking free.  GZ gets hit with manslaughter and does prison time, then he's no different from Mr. DUI or Southside Chicago murderer who's caught and put behind bars.

I would actually put it the other way Lake. 

In DUI cases, the act of drinking and then getting behind the wheel establishes negligence. 

In this case, the act of pursuit, continuous surveillance without questioning or verbal contact, even to the point of exiting the vehicle without identification visually or verbally, actually searching for Martin on foot, and the resulting fear that placed in a young Mr. Martin.  That would seem to be the argument that establishes negligence on the part of Mr. Zimmerman leading to manslaughter.

Yes. Much better description than mine!

This is a good analogy.  I would add though,,, if the car gets on top of you and starts to bash your head into the ground,,, you have the right to put it in a salvage yard compactor till it stops.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 05:40:39 PM
Quote
And it's unfortunate that many blacks (and many under class whites too) aren't educated enough to see the reality of this. So instead, they turn their anger on each other, some random person on the street, or an entire group of regular everyday people for their woes.

I don't think this is the case either.  The situation stems from economics.  People still have kids, have to pay bills and still need places to live and cars for access.  This requires money regardless of whether you have a college degree/job or not.  You're broke, behind on the bills, the car needs to be repaired, and there's no food in the frige for the kids.  What are you going to do?  For many, doing illegal things are simply a desperate means of survival.  However, the flip end of that, is it also leads to felonies (which screw you up long term even more) and confrontations. In many circumstances, those confrontations (could be as simple as fighting over turf to make illegal money) result in death.  It's a pretty bad cycle but it's an economic and environmental one.  Not racial.

Quote
Its what I was sorta alluding to in my earlier comment on how many blacks are all of a sudden riled up because a black man/teen was shot by a non-black.

GZ/TM is a non-story if GZ is locked away behind bars for manslaughter.  He's no different from the drunk driver doing time for killing an innocent pedestrian or someone on the Southside of Chicago getting arrested for murder. Right or wrong, the way things went down (jury finds killer not guilty), makes it another sad chapter in what one segment of the population deems as a list of injustices (especially, since the Florida law allows such an event to legally take place).  Just goes to show, things aren't all peaches and cream despite some trying to paint our picture in that light.
I agree that poverty can undoubtedly lead to crime.  What I think is missing in this equation is the fact that there are services in place to help feed and house people though they are admittedly lacking especially in view of the fact that many families, including the middle class are struggling to get by.  So the question becomes why do some turn to crime and others do not?  Do you think it goes beyond poverty and also includes education which directly effects ones status in the job market?  I know many people who have to work two and three jobs to get by, but do that rather than resort to crime.

To your second point, I do believe that some people feel that the Trayvon death is another chapter in a sad long history of someone who was responsible for the death of a Black man and that someone walking.  But the reality is that he walked because of how the laws are written and not because of his race.  I personally think it is unfortunate that this case became the "bellwether" for racial reform when it is more about how our laws written and applied.  I don't know who thinks everything is peaches and cream though?  I think and have expressed our society has some serious problems to overcome.  Can your clarify a bit more?  Thanks.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:42:03 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 05:50:49 PM
If we have learned anything from this trial it is to make a video telling your side of the story. That way you can testify without being cross examined. That is one rare gift GZ will be eternally greatful to the police for.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 05:53:00 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described. 
Doesn't this go back to the law though?  I don't think this ruling impacts ones ability to defend themselves.  I think it says that if you are the aggressor in a physical altercation you are not the victim at that moment and have become the aggressor.  That's what it seems like in my view.  Not defending either person here by the way just suggesting another perspective.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 05:58:10 PM
I agree that poverty can undoubtedly lead to crime.  What I think is missing in this equation is the fact that there are services in place to help feed and house people though they are admittedly lacking especially in views of the fact that many families, including the middle class are struggling to get by.

The assumption here is that every actual knows what resources are available, has access to them and that certain services aren't restricting certain segments of the population they are intended to serve. 

Quote
So the question becomes why do some turn to crime and others do not? Do you think it goes beyond poverty and also includes education which directly effects ones status in the job market?  I know many people who have to work two and three jobs to get by, but do that rather than resort to crime.

I can't answer why mankind resorts to crime.  I know many people of various races who work multiple jobs and others with criminal records longer than the length of the St. Johns River. However, from what I can tell, there's a direct correlation between crime, money and power, regardless of skin color.

Quote
To your second point, I do believe that some people feel that the Trayvon death is another chapter in a sad long history of someone who was responsible for the death of a Black man and that someone walking.  But the reality is that he walked because of how the laws are written and not because of his race.

Of course.  The laws that led to similar outcomes to the black community in the past were also written a certain way. So, the challenge is the change them, if you're in the segment of the population that doesn't agree with them.  My guess, is that's where all the debate and protesting will ultimately end up.

Quote
I personally think it is unfortunate that this case became the "bellwether" for racial reform when it is more about how are laws are written and applied.  I don't know who thinks everything is peaches and cream though.  I think and have expressed our society has some serious problems to overcome.  Can your clarify a bit more?  Thanks.

Whenever, I hear or read someone say everyone in this city, state or country has equal opportunity and access to certain things, in my mind, I believe that person is looking at the world with blinders on.  It's even worse when someone born and living with a golden spoon in their mouth decides to lecture a specific population living in an economic situation they've never had to personally deal with.  I felt the same way about Oprah when she'd lecture people on raising kids.  We have our challenges but we'll never overcome them if we're not willing to have a serious discussion about addressing and resolving our faults.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 06:04:21 PM
Thanks Ennis, this better helps me understand another viewpoint.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 06:09:33 PM
What is literally sickening is that people seem to think this is an opportunity for them to decide whether or not the dead child was a 'good' person.

This is the problem with this kind of nonsense.  It puts people in the position of passing judgement on the actual 'value' of the life of this child rather than on the circumstances of the murder.

If it turned out that Trayvon was a bad person, would it be ok to attack and then murder him?

Really?

And then who would be the judge of whether or not a persons life was worth getting worked up about?

Thats the literal opposite of rule by Law.
Unfortunately Stephen there are people who are prone to blame or judge in this manner.  It reminds me of so many cases where a woman is assaulted or raped and then finds her character attacked and victimized all over again.  I hear you loud and clear.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 16, 2013, 06:23:10 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described.

Do you think its ok that "victim" threw the first punch? Should that not come into play, thus calling into question the character of the victim?

If you were in this situation, would you have gone home and called the police, or would you have confronted, and attacked the person following you, without regard to if that person is armed or not?

I am not asking this as a legal question. This is a question of common
ense and self preservation.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 06:27:41 PM
What is literally sickening is that people seem to think this is an opportunity for them to decide whether or not the dead child was a 'good' person.

This is the problem with this kind of nonsense.  It puts people in the position of passing judgement on the actual 'value' of the life of this child rather than on the circumstances of the murder.

If it turned out that Trayvon was a bad person, would it be ok to attack and then murder him?

Really?

And then who would be the judge of whether or not a persons life was worth getting worked up about?

Thats the literal opposite of rule by Law.
Unfortunately Stephen there are people who are prone to blame or judge in this manner.  It reminds me of so many cases where a woman is assaulted or raped and then finds her character attacked and victimized all over again.  I hear you loud and clear.

Yes.  Its unbelievable, really.

Everyone feels entitled until it happens to one of their own.

A couple of the comments on this thread have literally sickened me.  Especially the ones along the lines of 'people are portraying the 17 year old as some kind of 'good' person....'

Shame.  Seriously, Shame.  To my mind its the sign of someone who has completely lost their moral compass.
Agreed.  Did you mean to say portraying a 17 year old as a bad person?   Trayvon was pretty much an average kid making pretty average mistakes, i.e. his school suspension which has happened to many people in their youth and today.  Not to mention messing with weed.  I grew up in the sixties and frankly almost everyone I knew would be losers today if we were to question their use of MJ, including those who didn't inhale.  lol
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 06:33:22 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described.

Do you think its ok that "victim" threw the first punch? Should that not come into play, thus calling into question the character of the victim?

If you were in this situation, would you have gone home and called the police, or would you have confronted, and attacked the person following you, without regard to if that person is armed or not?

I am not asking this as a legal question. This is a question of common sense and self preservation.

Demo, I know you were speaking to Stephen.  I hope you don't mind me chiming in on the issue of the first punch thrown.  Trayvon was a 17 year old boy who was at the age when they are raging with testosterone and trying to define their prowess as a man.  I know this because I have two sons.  The combination of maturity (i.e. he's a kid), hormones and fear are understandable and likely the reason he did what he did.  I don't condone it but I sure as heck can understand it.  Just think of yourself as a teenager.  If there is not a list of things you did or said that you should not have and that in fact were potentially dangerous you may be an angel.  Remember that kids don't think things through when excited and that's the reality for Trayvon I believe.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 16, 2013, 09:00:33 PM
Agreed.  Did you mean to say portraying a 17 year old as a bad person?   Trayvon was pretty much an average kid making pretty average mistakes, i.e. his school suspension which has happened to many people in their youth and today.  Not to mention messing with weed.  I grew up in the sixties and frankly almost everyone I knew would be losers today if we were to question their use of MJ, including those who didn't inhale.  lol
While his character was not an issue in the trial (nor should it have been as Zimmerman was not aware of it), painting Martin as an average kid is a little untruthful.  He may have not been a bad seed but he was not far from it.  Again, that does not matter ultimately.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: peestandingup on July 16, 2013, 09:02:26 PM
GZ/TM is a non-story if GZ is locked away behind bars for manslaughter.  He's no different from the drunk driver doing time for killing an innocent pedestrian or someone on the Southside of Chicago getting arrested for murder. Right or wrong, the way things went down (jury finds killer not guilty), makes it another sad chapter in what one segment of the population deems as a list of injustices (especially, since the Florida law allows such an event to legally take place).  Just goes to show, things aren't all peaches and cream despite some trying to paint our picture in that light.

I see your point, but I still think most aren't concentrating on the relevant issues. And let's not kid ourselves. You & I both know there are TONS of these very same injustices when it comes to black on black crime. They may not be televised, except for a small on air mention or blurb in a paper somewhere, but they're there & it ends up being another forgotten statistic. No outcry, no protests, no bumper stickers, no network news channels milking it for everything's its worth. Nothing.

So I think we all need to stop pretending this wasn't people taking the race bait & running with it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 09:07:22 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described.

Do you think its ok that "victim" threw the first punch? Should that not come into play, thus calling into question the character of the victim?

If you were in this situation, would you have gone home and called the police, or would you have confronted, and attacked the person following you, without regard to if that person is armed or not?

I am not asking this as a legal question. This is a question of common
ense and self preservation.


You'd be a prime candidate to get mugged or get your entire family shot up.  When looking from the victim's perspective of the situation, the story line would go something like this:

1. It's dark and raining and some creepy guy is obviously following me.  I'm going to speed up (this is validated in the conversation with the girlfriend and GZ's 911 call of the victim starting to run).

2. You've increased your speed and creepy guy who you don't know continues in pursuit of you.  Creepy guy is obviously going to attempt to rob me.

3. For those who say run home and call 911, why would you want to show the mugger where you live and expose them to your little brother who's at home alone?  If creepy mugger guy is in hot pursuit of you, what good is it going to do you then to call 911, when dude is obviously seconds away?

4. You need to make a split decision here to keep from being mugged by creepy guy (remember, TM has no idea that GZ is over zealous neighborhood vigilante). You don't want creepy guy following you all the way home and you don't want him to catch up to you from behind and catch you off guard.

In this situation, you are provoked and in fear.  One of your logical options is to go on the defensive and attempt to turn the tables on creepy mugger guy by fighting for your life. With that said, no one has a real idea of who threw the first punch (doesn't mean it had to land), what was said, etc. during that physical confrontation except GZ.  Everything else is educated guesses and assumptions.  All we really know is TM was a better fighter than GZ, causing GZ (in fear of course) shot the victim in self defense of a situation GZ initiated.

With that being said, the flawed part on TM's decision to fight for his life, instead of letting the mugger attack him at home (remember GZ obviously up to no good from the victim's perspective), is that people legally pack heat these days.  Back in the old days, GZ would have taken a good whipping, but both would have lived and moved on. These days a lot of crazy people can legally pack heat, shot you for conflicts they generate and legally get away with it, if the victim starts getting the best of them.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 09:10:17 PM
Agreed.  Did you mean to say portraying a 17 year old as a bad person?   Trayvon was pretty much an average kid making pretty average mistakes, i.e. his school suspension which has happened to many people in their youth and today.  Not to mention messing with weed.  I grew up in the sixties and frankly almost everyone I knew would be losers today if we were to question their use of MJ, including those who didn't inhale.  lol
While his character was not an issue in the trial (nor should it have been as Zimmerman was not aware of it), painting Martin as an average kid is a little untruthful.  He may have not been a bad seed but he was not far from it.  Again, that does not matter ultimately.

Go sleep with a 17-year-old girl in this state and see what happens to you. He was an average kid. Nothing has been presented to suggest otherwise.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 09:11:40 PM
Agreed.  Did you mean to say portraying a 17 year old as a bad person?   Trayvon was pretty much an average kid making pretty average mistakes, i.e. his school suspension which has happened to many people in their youth and today.  Not to mention messing with weed.  I grew up in the sixties and frankly almost everyone I knew would be losers today if we were to question their use of MJ, including those who didn't inhale.  lol
While his character was not an issue in the trial (nor should it have been as Zimmerman was not aware of it), painting Martin as an average kid is a little untruthful.  He may have not been a bad seed but he was not far from it.  Again, that does not matter ultimately.
Agree about the background being unimportant to Zimmerman but do you have information that the rest of the world doesn't that Trayvon was not far from being a bad seed as opposed to kid acting out?  (I always feel compelled to put a disclaimer that this is not a challenge, just wanting to know the basis by which you came to you conclusion about his character.)

On another note, there will be a civil trial as such all of the issues of background and character will come out with regard to both Zimmerman and Trayvon. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 09:12:58 PM
Agreed.  Did you mean to say portraying a 17 year old as a bad person?   Trayvon was pretty much an average kid making pretty average mistakes, i.e. his school suspension which has happened to many people in their youth and today.  Not to mention messing with weed.  I grew up in the sixties and frankly almost everyone I knew would be losers today if we were to question their use of MJ, including those who didn't inhale.  lol
While his character was not an issue in the trial (nor should it have been as Zimmerman was not aware of it), painting Martin as an average kid is a little untruthful.  He may have not been a bad seed but he was not far from it.  Again, that does not matter ultimately.

Go sleep with a 17-year-old girl in this state and see what happens to you. He was an average kid. Nothing has been presented to suggest otherwise.



+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 09:18:26 PM
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?

For you guys to stop vilifying the deceased.  He didn't deserve what happened to him and it wasn't his fault GZ started the chain of events that led to his death.  The rest (the real life cases and fallout to come) will happen on their own as the issue runs its course through the system.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 09:19:53 PM
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described.

Do you think its ok that "victim" threw the first punch? Should that not come into play, thus calling into question the character of the victim?

If you were in this situation, would you have gone home and called the police, or would you have confronted, and attacked the person following you, without regard to if that person is armed or not?

I am not asking this as a legal question. This is a question of common
ense and self preservation.


You'd be a prime candidate to get mugged or get your entire family shot up.  When looking from the victim's perspective of the situation, the story line would go something like this:

1. It's dark and raining and some creepy guy is obviously following me.  I'm going to speed up (this is validated in the conversation with the girlfriend and GZ's 911 call of the victim starting to run).

2. You've increased your speed and creepy guy who you don't know continues in pursuit of you.  Creepy guy is obviously going to attempt to rob me.

3. For those who say run home and call 911, why would you want to show the mugger where you live and expose them to your little brother who's at home alone?  If creepy mugger guy is in hot pursuit of you, what good is it going to do you then to call 911, when dude is obviously seconds away?

4. You need to make a split decision here to keep from being mugged by creepy guy (remember, TM has no idea that GZ is over zealous neighborhood vigilante). You don't want creepy guy following you all the way home and you don't want him to catch up to you from behind and catch you off guard.

In this situation, you are provoked and in fear.  One of your logical options is to go on the defensive and attempt to turn the tables on creepy mugger guy by fighting for your life. With that said, no one has a real idea of who threw the first punch (doesn't mean it had to land), what was said, etc. during that physical confrontation except GZ.  Everything else is educated guesses and assumptions.  All we really know is TM was a better fighter than GZ, causing GZ (in fear of course) shot the victim in self defense of a situation GZ initiated.

With that being said, the flawed part on TM's decision to fight for his life, instead of letting the mugger attack him at home (remember GZ obviously up to no good from the victim's perspective), is that people legally pack heat these days.  Back in the old days, GZ would have taken a good whipping, but both would have lived and moved on. These days a lot of crazy people can legally pack heat, shot you for conflicts they generate and legally get away with it, if the victim starts getting the best of them.
The young lady was on CNN last night on one of their evening programs.  She said she had suggested to Trayvon that the guy following him was likely a rapist which is why he ran.
Seems like the poor actual victim (especially viewed from their perspective of the same situation) literally has no right to defend themselves.  That should be a concern with the interpretation of such policies as described.

Do you think its ok that "victim" threw the first punch? Should that not come into play, thus calling into question the character of the victim?

If you were in this situation, would you have gone home and called the police, or would you have confronted, and attacked the person following you, without regard to if that person is armed or not?

I am not asking this as a legal question. This is a question of common
ense and self preservation.


You'd be a prime candidate to get mugged or get your entire family shot up.  When looking from the victim's perspective of the situation, the story line would go something like this:

1. It's dark and raining and some creepy guy is obviously following me.  I'm going to speed up (this is validated in the conversation with the girlfriend and GZ's 911 call of the victim starting to run).

2. You've increased your speed and creepy guy who you don't know continues in pursuit of you.  Creepy guy is obviously going to attempt to rob me.

3. For those who say run home and call 911, why would you want to show the mugger where you live and expose them to your little brother who's at home alone?  If creepy mugger guy is in hot pursuit of you, what good is it going to do you then to call 911, when dude is obviously seconds away?

4. You need to make a split decision here to keep from being mugged by creepy guy (remember, TM has no idea that GZ is over zealous neighborhood vigilante). You don't want creepy guy following you all the way home and you don't want him to catch up to you from behind and catch you off guard.

In this situation, you are provoked and in fear.  One of your logical options is to go on the defensive and attempt to turn the tables on creepy mugger guy by fighting for your life. With that said, no one has a real idea of who threw the first punch (doesn't mean it had to land), what was said, etc. during that physical confrontation except GZ.  Everything else is educated guesses and assumptions.  All we really know is TM was a better fighter than GZ, causing GZ (in fear of course) shot the victim in self defense of a situation GZ initiated.

With that being said, the flawed part on TM's decision to fight for his life, instead of letting the mugger attack him at home (remember GZ obviously up to no good from the victim's perspective), is that people legally pack heat these days.  Back in the old days, GZ would have taken a good whipping, but both would have lived and moved on. These days a lot of crazy people can legally pack heat, shot you for conflicts they generate and legally get away with it, if the victim starts getting the best of them.
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?
Because this is a conversation to get underneath why this case has gotten the attention it has.  Only by hearing everyone's perspectives and talking them through can we begin to understand why some see this as connected to race and others don't.  It's important for society to understand so that we can change laws, idea's and whatever else we need to evolve above.  Many people are trying to come to terms with what all of this means I do believe.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 09:23:54 PM
^Same for white on white crime. Small blurbs here or there but no protests, bumper stickers, networks and news channels.   

In both situations and others, people typically end up being arrested.  The only reason this particular issue is all over news channels and really going mainstream is that the guy who started and ended the entire thing legally walked.  That's the major difference from typical shootings, killings, etc. (regardless of race) where the murder is identified and tried in court.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes events like this to get discussion going on the larger issue at hand.  Just look at MJ the past few days.  Everyone knows Jax is a city struggling with racial divide.  Yet we've never really dived into it on this forum.  Now there's rapidly growing threads on similar topics all over this site.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 09:25:06 PM
If we cannot see the role racism played in this -- if we are unwilling to talk about it due to denial or discomfort -- we stand ZERO chance of making significant change and, ultimately,  will play out the same scenario until the end of our days.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: peestandingup on July 16, 2013, 09:59:45 PM
^Same for white on white crime. Small blurbs here or there but no protests, bumper stickers, networks and news channels.   

In both situations and others, people typically end up being arrested.  The only reason this particular issue is all over news channels and really going mainstream is that the guy who started and ended the entire thing legally walked.  That's the major difference from typical shootings, killings, etc. (regardless of race) where the murder is identified and tried in court.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes events like this to get discussion going on the larger issue at hand.  Just look at MJ the past few days.  Everyone knows Jax is a city struggling with racial divide.  Yet we've never really dived into it on this forum.  Now there's rapidly growing threads on similar topics all over this site.

Of course. So what does it all mean? That we're all looking out for our "own kind" only if a member of the "other kind" kills one of "ours"?? And that the media only pushes forward these juicy stories, while leaving others in the dust, because they know we'll all lap it up?? I don't know. But like we both said, there's bigger things at play here that I honestly don't think the general population is really talking about, or even acknowledging.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 16, 2013, 10:02:56 PM
How can there be "moving on?"  It is inconceivable.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 10:13:17 PM
Gloria, can you share why it is your view this is all about race and that those who refuse to draw the same conclusion are in denial or discomfort?  What in your mind makes you sure that race was the driving factor in the unfortunate incident that ended with the death of Trayvon?
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 10:17:56 PM
^Same for white on white crime. Small blurbs here or there but no protests, bumper stickers, networks and news channels.   

In both situations and others, people typically end up being arrested.  The only reason this particular issue is all over news channels and really going mainstream is that the guy who started and ended the entire thing legally walked.  That's the major difference from typical shootings, killings, etc. (regardless of race) where the murder is identified and tried in court.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes events like this to get discussion going on the larger issue at hand.  Just look at MJ the past few days.  Everyone knows Jax is a city struggling with racial divide.  Yet we've never really dived into it on this forum.  Now there's rapidly growing threads on similar topics all over this site.
Ennis the truth is that many people guilty of crimes including murder walk because there is not enough proof of their guilt.  I think this case became the media sensation it has is because media decided to make it about race.

I agree this discussion needs to be had.  As trying and emotionally draining as it is, the issue of race needs to be completely aired. 
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 16, 2013, 10:21:50 PM
^Same for white on white crime. Small blurbs here or there but no protests, bumper stickers, networks and news channels.   

In both situations and others, people typically end up being arrested.  The only reason this particular issue is all over news channels and really going mainstream is that the guy who started and ended the entire thing legally walked.  That's the major difference from typical shootings, killings, etc. (regardless of race) where the murder is identified and tried in court.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes events like this to get discussion going on the larger issue at hand.  Just look at MJ the past few days.  Everyone knows Jax is a city struggling with racial divide.  Yet we've never really dived into it on this forum.  Now there's rapidly growing threads on similar topics all over this site.

Of course. So what does it all mean? That we're all looking out for our "own kind" only if a member of the "other kind" kills one of "ours"?? And that the media only pushes forward these juicy stories, while leaving others in the dust, because they know we'll all lap it up?? I don't know. But like we both said, there's bigger things at play here that I honestly don't think the general population is really talking about, or even acknowledging.
I think we are working toward that "bigger thing" in the conversations going on in various threads right now.  In my opinion regardless of what drove the Martin/Zimmerman tragedy to be viewed as a racial confrontation it has created an in your face wake up call that deeply felt ideas and emotions about race still exist today and they need to be addressed and so far on this forum we are doing our best to do that.:)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: If_I_Loved_you on July 16, 2013, 10:43:29 PM
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?

For you guys to stop vilifying the deceased.  He didn't deserve what happened to him and it wasn't his fault GZ started the chain of events that led to his death.  The rest (the real life cases and fallout to come) will happen on their own as the issue runs its course through the system.
Look I'm sorry Trayvon Martin is dead and the pain his Family and Friends will feel for the rest of their lives. But I also must feel sorry for the Zimmerman Family it's the Right thing to do. The Martin family are church going Christians who believe in God. If you really believe in God you must Forgive the person that has hurt you. If you don't they win. “To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you.”
? C.S. Lewis
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 16, 2013, 11:17:21 PM
I don't think I will move on until the laws are changed so that murders similar to the one GZ committed are punished as criminal behavior. 
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 11:25:07 PM
Ennis the truth is that many people guilty of crimes including murder walk because there is not enough proof of their guilt.  I think this case became the media sensation it has is because media decided to make it about race.

There's was enough proof.  In this unique case it was a situation where the law allowed it, for how it played out.

As for the media, the media is going to highlight whatever generates views. It's always been that way. However, media or not, for a certain segment of the population, it is about race. Up until the Emmett Till murder, legalized lynching came a dime a dozen in the certain areas of the country.  Like now, it went big when the media got a hold of it.  In the end, change for the better ended up happening.  I believe the same could happen now. 

I'm not sure of what the exact change could be.  It could be as simple as modifying a portion of the aggressor rule Not Now posted.  It could be something greater. Or maybe we sweep everything under the rug until something similar happens again? Only time will tell.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 11:29:05 PM
^Same for white on white crime. Small blurbs here or there but no protests, bumper stickers, networks and news channels.   

In both situations and others, people typically end up being arrested.  The only reason this particular issue is all over news channels and really going mainstream is that the guy who started and ended the entire thing legally walked.  That's the major difference from typical shootings, killings, etc. (regardless of race) where the murder is identified and tried in court.

Unfortunately, sometimes it takes events like this to get discussion going on the larger issue at hand.  Just look at MJ the past few days.  Everyone knows Jax is a city struggling with racial divide.  Yet we've never really dived into it on this forum.  Now there's rapidly growing threads on similar topics all over this site.

Of course. So what does it all mean? That we're all looking out for our "own kind" only if a member of the "other kind" kills one of "ours"??

No. It means there's no reason to isolate problems along racial lines when the real underlying issue to tackle is economic and environmental. If we can work on those, you'll dramatically improve whatever color on color we attempt to assign to a crime.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 16, 2013, 11:30:22 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 11:32:02 PM
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?

For you guys to stop vilifying the deceased.  He didn't deserve what happened to him and it wasn't his fault GZ started the chain of events that led to his death.  The rest (the real life cases and fallout to come) will happen on their own as the issue runs its course through the system.
Look I'm sorry Trayvon Martin is dead and the pain his Family and Friends will feel for the rest of their lives. But I also must feel sorry for the Zimmerman Family it's the Right thing to do. The Martin family are church going Christians who believe in God. If you really believe in God you must Forgive the person that has hurt you. If you don't they win. “To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you.”
? C.S. Lewis

If one is a church going person, then they should have no problem with those who want, advocate and work to see laws modified that will help limit tragedies like this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 11:35:45 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is not clear evidence to convict GZ.

All the evidence is there. The cause and effect is clear as day.  In this case, you just have a situation where it was legal for one to kill another, even if the victim didn't start the confrontation. 

Quote
Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

This is my hope as opposed to this stuff being swept under the rug again.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: If_I_Loved_you on July 16, 2013, 11:41:07 PM
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?

For you guys to stop vilifying the deceased.  He didn't deserve what happened to him and it wasn't his fault GZ started the chain of events that led to his death.  The rest (the real life cases and fallout to come) will happen on their own as the issue runs its course through the system.
Look I'm sorry Trayvon Martin is dead and the pain his Family and Friends will feel for the rest of their lives. But I also must feel sorry for the Zimmerman Family it's the Right thing to do. The Martin family are church going Christians who believe in God. If you really believe in God you must Forgive the person that has hurt you. If you don't they win. “To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you.”
? C.S. Lewis

If one is a church going person, then they should have no problem with those who want, advocate and work to see laws modified that will help limit tragedies like this.
Every positive value has its price in negative terms... the genius of Einstein leads to Hiroshima.”
? Pablo Picasso
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 16, 2013, 11:44:23 PM
What was the negative of allowing women to vote?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: ronchamblin on July 17, 2013, 12:27:13 AM
Profiling.... I must admit that, thirty or forty years ago, being in the retail business, I found myself being more suspicious of young black fellows simply wandering around in my store; that is, as compared to white fellows.  However, over the years I've found so many white fellows as thieves, exceeding in number that of the young black fellows, that my profiling of young black has gone to zero.    The whites and blacks have become equal ... and that’s the way it should be in all aspects of life.

My observations in other aspects of society have allowed me, certainly, to much more easily avoid the pre-judgements of others due to color -- and this ....  in spite of what was taught us southern whites by the generation before us.

We should, if we are able and of a mind, strive to be free -- free from prejudice against other colors and ethnics ... free from the restrictions and narrowness of mind due to religions ..... free from blind and "excessive" ties to one's ethnicity or country. 

Failure to do so allows or encourages suspicion, division, hatred, and ultimately conflict and even war.  We should imagine ourselves to be citizens of the world, else we will, through our suspicions and divisions, make decisions resulting in the destruction of it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: simms3 on July 17, 2013, 01:15:23 AM
At the risk of sounding so ignorant, I believe that this whole tragedy could have been avoided.  I admit I was once one of the least street smart people I knew, which led to quite a few problems (I was actually pretty savagely beaten by members of a different race when I didn't understand that their asking me for my cell phone was a clue that they were up to no good...I was also alone in an environment not favorable to me).

I don't think GZ was "out to kill black men" that night.  He actually led the charge to protest the killing of another black male by the same Sanford police a couple years back.  He was 50% Hispanic with a little black in him himself.  He lived in as diverse a neighborhood as it can get, with blacks, Hispanics, whites and a few Asians sprinkled in, and they all elected him to be neighborhood watch years ago, and they (along with GZ's coworkers) all stood by him for character support (which I think says a lot).  When GZ called in incidents to police, he never volunteered race until asked specifically, and there were never any incidents before.

I don't factually know what happened that night...all I know is what was testimony, what was withheld (now), what was presented, and what the outcome was.  I truly believe that a guy like GZ wasn't out to shoot innocent victims.  I understand where both parties are coming from - perhaps TM was completely innocent and naive and GZ was acting on many past incidents and experience.  I don't think GZ was trigger happy, but I also don't think TM did a good enough job dispelling the situation (many here say they would "fight", but really?  Well-placed words do so much more!).

In a land where it's legal and highly protected to conceal and carry, and in stand your ground states with high crime, I would think it prudent to make sure you aren't pressing anyone's buttons or sending any signals off.  Unfortunately due to statistics and perhaps some sad stereotypes and whatever conditions which may be unfair that lead to these things, if you are a young black male (wearing a hoodie at night in a targeted neighborhood walking in backyards as opposed to the sidewalk, in the rain I might add) I would be extra careful to avoid confrontation and make your presence and intentions known (as a very innocent looking blonde-haired blue-eyed white male, even I would avoid this sitation and jog or walk briskly on a public sidewalk with an obvious destination in my head if it were raining, or sunny!!).  Sad but this is reality.  Neither party is completely innocent or completely guilty.  Maybe laws need to be changed, but this so far has been an issue that further divides people rather than unites them.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 01:32:19 AM
Simms, I'm not sure of how hard it was raining or if the rain started after he was already away from home but wearing a hoodie on a cold rainy night in February is appropriate attire.

Quote
if you are a young black male (wearing a hoodie at night in a targeted neighborhood walking in backyards as opposed to the sidewalk, in the rain I might add) I would be extra careful to avoid confrontation and make your presence and intentions known

If GZ was a uniformed officer, this would make sense. While we all know who GZ is, due to the media, he was nothing more than a street thug up to no good that night, from the victim's perspective.

According to his lady friend on the phone with him at the time, GZ was a creep seeking to mug or rape him. He even quickened his pace to get away, only to have GZ quicken his to follow. Well-placed words in that situation (remember, GZ's a thug to the victim at this point) aren't going to do anything.

TM was also visiting his dad, who lived in this gated community. I don't know if anyone is aware that he knew neighborhood vigilantes were over zealously profiling black youths in the area. Perhaps if he did, the situation would have ended up differently.  Unfortunately, we'll never know.

Quote
Maybe laws need to be changed, but this so far has been an issue that further divides people rather than unites them.

From my perspective, the laws need to be changed and yes, it divides people rather than unites, but it's something that has to be addressed sooner or later.



Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Keith-N-Jax on July 17, 2013, 02:43:32 AM
GZ was told not to pursue TM but he did anyway. Funny how people seem to forget this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: I-10east on July 17, 2013, 05:50:06 AM
I'm gonna say my unpopular, and unbiased take on this whole Zimmerman thing for the last time, because I don't see colors unlike alot of people. To be honest, I'm sick and tired of this entire situation. I'm aware of Seminole County's history of racism, the reason that Duval had to take over, although IMO this was the wrong case at the wrong time, and a mountain was made out of a molehill, thanks to the 'gotcha' media, and the outrage. Duval, or Seminole, the outcome would still be the same.

This was a railroad attempt from the get-go; CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific all together don't have the track mileage that this Zimmerman railroad attempt has. Why you ask? Because Angela Corey clearly withheld key evidence, Trayvon's capability in MMA ie punch in the nose, and mount & ground and pound (from his cell phone). Like it or not, that was evidence that was supposed to be turned over. What's a more significant event, getting out of a car (which isn't illegal) not following through a comment from a dispatcher (again not illegal) or getting blasted in the face, mounted and beaten the crap out of? Enough of that. People say that 'Angela Corey should've pursued manslaughter'. Well, in this railroad attempt, the judge put manslaughter on the table at the last minute along with the original charge murder 2. So I don't get why people are mad with Corey on that, I don't believe that this methodical jury was 'confused' whatsoever.

I don't see any additional charges on Zimmerman. Eric Holder from the NAACP pretty much conceded that in the Orlando convention (Federal charges) as he focused on 'changing laws' to keep the masses in check. What laws changed? I dunno. Besides, the Feds already looked through this case. Regarding a civil case, a self defense case (which this is, don't know why some or talking 'stand your ground') Zimmerman should have immunity. These protests are classic 'selective outrage' from the black community. Hundreds and hundreds of Trayvon's are murdered in black on black violence throughout the US, yet this Zimmerman thing (which can be argued either way, and that evidence pointing mainly ONE way) remains the focal point. I'm done with this overblown trial, SMH...
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 17, 2013, 07:08:56 AM
Gloria, can you share why it is your view this is all about race and that those who refuse to draw the same conclusion are in denial or discomfort?  What in your mind makes you sure that race was the driving factor in the unfortunate incident that ended with the death of Trayvon?

 CHARLES M. BLOW says it much better than I could.

 New York Times

Op-Ed Columnist
The Whole System Failed Trayvon Martin
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/opinion/the-whole-system-failed.html?_r=0
Quote

.......
 Sometimes people just need a focal point. Sometimes that focal point becomes a breaking point.

The idea of universal suspicion without individual evidence is what Americans find abhorrent and what black men in America must constantly fight. It is pervasive in policing policies — like stop-and-frisk, and in this case neighborhood watch — regardless of the collateral damage done to the majority of innocents. It’s like burning down a house to rid it of mice.

As a parent, particularly a parent of black teenage boys, I am left with the question, “Now, what do I tell my boys?”

We used to say not to run in public because that might be seen as suspicious, like they’d stolen something. But according to Zimmerman, Martin drew his suspicion at least in part because he was walking too slowly.

So what do I tell my boys now? At what precise pace should a black man walk to avoid suspicion?

And can they ever stop walking away, or running away, and simply stand their ground? Can they become righteously indignant without being fatally wounded?

Is there anyplace safe enough, or any cargo innocent enough, for a black man in this country? Martin was where he was supposed to be — in a gated community — carrying candy and a canned drink.

The whole system failed Martin. What prevents it from failing my children, or yours?

I feel that I must tell my boys that, but I can’t. It’s stuck in my throat. It’s an impossibly heartbreaking conversation to have. So, I sit and watch in silence, and occasionally mouth the word, “breathe,” because I keep forgetting to.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 07:21:41 AM
That's just a stupid article, and I hope you can say it better than that.

One horrible event that likely had nothing to do with race, and now no African American is safe in this country.  Never mind that Florida law led to the acquittal, and not every state has the same laws.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: 4thlittle on July 17, 2013, 08:23:29 AM
Here is a link to a good article:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/07/trayvon_martin_verdict_racism_hate_crimes_prosecution_and_other_overreactions.html

"You Are Not Trayvon Martin

His death wasn’t about race, guns, or your pet issue. It was about misjudgment and overreaction—exactly what we’re doing now to the verdict."

This article and post #481 by thelakelander make some good points from TM's perspective that I had not considered before.  Specifically, what GZ could have done differently to prevent the situation from escalating even after he left his car and started following/ looking for TM.  (Announce that he was with Neighborhood Watch and let TM know that he was reaching for his phone before he got hit by TM.  The Slate article makes the point that it is possible that TM hit GZ after perceiving that he was reaching for some type of weapon instead of his phone).

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 08:26:35 AM
I'm gonna say my unpopular, and unbiased take on this whole Zimmerman thing for the last time, because I don't see colors unlike alot of people. To be honest, I'm sick and tired of this entire situation. I'm aware of Seminole County's history of racism, the reason that Duval had to take over, although IMO this was the wrong case at the wrong time, and a mountain was made out of a molehill, thanks to the 'gotcha' media, and the outrage. Duval, or Seminole, the outcome would still be the same.

This was a railroad attempt from the get-go; CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific all together don't have the track mileage that this Zimmerman railroad attempt has. Why you ask? Because Angela Corey clearly withheld key evidence, Trayvon's capability in MMA ie punch in the nose, and mount & ground and pound (from his cell phone). Like it or not, that was evidence that was supposed to be turned over. What's a more significant event, getting out of a car (which isn't illegal) not following through a comment from a dispatcher (again not illegal) or getting blasted in the face, mounted and beaten the crap out of? Enough of that. People say that 'Angela Corey should've pursued manslaughter'. Well, in this railroad attempt, the judge put manslaughter on the table at the last minute along with the original charge murder 2. So I don't get why people are mad with Corey on that, I don't believe that this methodical jury was 'confused' whatsoever.

I don't see any additional charges on Zimmerman. Eric Holder from the NAACP pretty much conceded that in the Orlando convention (Federal charges) as he focused on 'changing laws' to keep the masses in check. What laws changed? I dunno. Besides, the Feds already looked through this case. Regarding a civil case, a self defense case (which this is, don't know why some or talking 'stand your ground') Zimmerman should have immunity. These protests are classic 'selective outrage' from the black community. Hundreds and hundreds of Trayvon's are murdered in black on black violence throughout the US, yet this Zimmerman thing (which can be argued either way, and that evidence pointing mainly ONE way) remains the focal point. I'm done with this overblown trial, SMH...

I won't go through all of this, other to say we need to worry about all crime, black-on-black, white-on-white, green-on-green, whatever.  Let's stop acting like one skin color has problems and no others do. Being black, it's kind of insulting. As people, we're all the same. Crime isn't racial.  The stronger correlation is economic and environmental. Even with GZ, one can argue the environment helped lead GZ to being an over zealous neighborhood watch dude.

As for this particular case, the law allows the killing.  That's the main problem most people have with the outcome. Nevertheless, it's pretty easy to see that they'll eventually hit GZ with something else like a civil suit as the process works it's way through the system. He'll live out the rest of his days in fear, hiding and being broke. 

However, the ongoing issue for those in opposition will be to modify whatever allows for aggressors to start a conflict and kill the victim in self defense as soon as the victim gets the best of them.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 17, 2013, 08:53:35 AM
I suppose I see it as "stand your ground" is a symptom of a larger problem.  And it most definitely needs to go away.  But when it is gone, what will take its place?

Already there are boycotts called against Florida and its merchants. 

I love living in the south, the heat and the humidity even.  The spanish moss dripping from cool looking trees.  Things that scurry around in the low lying vegetation as I walk by.

I love the thunderstorms which open up in the midst of sunny skies and leave you wondering what will happen next, and the way the world sounds sort of muffled sometimes by the canopy of humidity.

But I don't love the oppressive racism which is so prevalent and yet so denied -- the rest of the world sees it.  But we don't?

I am a transplant from up north.  Perhaps that alters my world view.

At the end of it all, this case validates the idea that is it appropriate to be afraid of a young black man. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 09:02:31 AM

But I don't love the oppressive racism which is so prevalent and yet so denied -- the rest of the world sees it.  But we don't?

I am a transplant from up north.  Perhaps that alters my world view.

At the end of it all, this trial tells us that is it appropriate to be afraid of a young black man.

Yeah, the North is just known as the bastion of racial harmony.

And no, the trial didn't tell us that. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 17, 2013, 09:11:48 AM

But I don't love the oppressive racism which is so prevalent and yet so denied -- the rest of the world sees it.  But we don't?

What a ridiculous statement.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 09:18:54 AM

But I don't love the oppressive racism which is so prevalent and yet so denied -- the rest of the world sees it.  But we don't?

I am a transplant from up north.  Perhaps that alters my world view.

At the end of it all, this trial tells us that is it appropriate to be afraid of a young black man.

Yeah, the North is just known as the bastion of racial harmony.

And no, the trial didn't tell us that.

Perhaps it didnt tell you that.

So one man using lethal force in response to being attacked told you it's, "appropriate to be afraid of young, Black men"?

What did the OJ decision tell you? 

Is it really that hard to allow a single decision to be just that? 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 09:25:46 AM
The trial tells me that if I have a concealed weapons permit, I can go provoke duvalbill into an altercation and if I feel my life is being threatened, I can then use my weapon to end duvalbill's existence (in the name of self defense of course) and not worry about doing any time behind bars.  Seems pretty unreasonable to me. Personally, I believe something allowing this exact situation to happen should be changed.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 09:37:37 AM
The trial tells me that if I have a concealed weapons permit, I can go provoke duvalbill into an altercation and if I feel my life is being threatened, I can then use my weapon to end duvalbill's existence (in the name of self defense of course) and not worry about doing any time behind bars.  Seems pretty unreasonable to me. Personally, I believe something allowing this exact situation to happen should be changed.

This I can agree with, but I don't know why racial overtones were thrust into this matter to begin with.

Zimmerman's friend even tried to go on air to show that his friend wasn't racist, but that didn't stop people from asserting "profiling."  In fact, many in the media seemingly  suggested that he was an "Uncle Tom," or not a good friend to him.

The irony was and is palpable.  On one hand, many in the media labeled Zimmerman a racist without knowing him, and then seek to discredit a person who actually knew him.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 09:38:47 AM
When some psychotic white guy kills classrooms full of small children, we are told not to worry:  its just a psycho---not typical, not rational, doesnt pertain to the rest of responsible gun owners.

And people, while hesitant, reluctantly decide on the side of reasonableness and optimism and acquiesce.

But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.

In a country where reasonable people are already uneasy about these murders happening with accelerating frequency, its really shocking how tone deaf the radicals are.

Says Zimmerman deserves to die, then calls others "radicals."

Ridiculous.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:40:25 AM
I don't think I will move on until the laws are changed so that murders similar to the one GZ committed are punished as criminal behavior. 


How, exactly, would you rewrite the law?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:41:45 AM
George Zimmerman has been found Not Guilty what has to happen to George for YOU to move on?

For you guys to stop vilifying the deceased.  He didn't deserve what happened to him and it wasn't his fault GZ started the chain of events that led to his death.  The rest (the real life cases and fallout to come) will happen on their own as the issue runs its course through the system.
Look I'm sorry Trayvon Martin is dead and the pain his Family and Friends will feel for the rest of their lives. But I also must feel sorry for the Zimmerman Family it's the Right thing to do. The Martin family are church going Christians who believe in God. If you really believe in God you must Forgive the person that has hurt you. If you don't they win. “To be a Christian means to forgive the inexcusable because God has forgiven the inexcusable in you.”
? C.S. Lewis

If one is a church going person, then they should have no problem with those who want, advocate and work to see laws modified that will help limit tragedies like this.

Lake,

I would ask you the same question...how, exactly, would you rewrite the law?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 09:45:45 AM
NN, can you repost it again?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 09:49:50 AM
When some psychotic white guy kills classrooms full of small children, we are told not to worry:  its just a psycho---not typical, not rational, doesnt pertain to the rest of responsible gun owners.

And people, while hesitant, reluctantly decide on the side of reasonableness and optimism and acquiesce.

But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.

In a country where reasonable people are already uneasy about these murders happening with accelerating frequency, its really shocking how tone deaf the radicals are.

Says Zimmerman deserves to die, then calls others "radicals."

Ridiculous.

are you delusional?  Who said this?


I misread, apologies.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 17, 2013, 10:03:13 AM
and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die


You are better than this sort of hyperbole.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: 4thlittle on July 17, 2013, 10:09:10 AM
I don't think I will move on until the laws are changed so that murders similar to the one GZ committed are punished as criminal behavior. 


How, exactly, would you rewrite the law?

Good question.  Each state has murder, manslaughter, and self-defense laws.  Is there a state statutory scheme on those issues that should be Florida's model?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 10:18:11 AM
Here you go:

776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

776.013?Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1)?A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b)?The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2)?The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a)?The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b)?The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c)?The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d)?The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3)?A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4)?A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5)?As used in this section, the term:
(a)?“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b)?“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c)?“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.

776.031?Use of force in defense of others.—A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate the other’s trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if the person is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.



These are the statutes that I believe apply to civilians.  To see all of Chapter 776:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/Chapter776
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 17, 2013, 10:18:29 AM
and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die


You are better than this sort of hyperbole.


um.  a little late to the ball game.  look up and check out the above statements.
No, I was addressing what you really meant to say: that we are told that Martin deserved to die.  No one has said anything resembling that statement.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 17, 2013, 10:19:21 AM
The traditional requirement to avoid lethal force served us pretty well for a hundred years or so.  what was wrong with that?
For the record, I am in complete agreement with this statement.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Demosthenes on July 17, 2013, 10:22:35 AM
and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die


You are better than this sort of hyperbole.

Is he?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: 4thlittle on July 17, 2013, 10:24:01 AM
The traditional requirement to avoid lethal force served us pretty well for a hundred years or so.  what was wrong with that?

Did it? I don't know whether that is the case or not.  Avoid lethal force: (1) completely?; (2) unless you reasonably fear that you will die if you don't use lethal force?; (3) unless you reasonably fear that you will die if you don't use lethal force AND something else -- you did not (a) cause; (b) provoke; or (c) escalate the situation?

I suspect these legal standards have always been controversial, especially since they deal with matters of life and death. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: sheclown on July 17, 2013, 10:28:54 AM
The question is. "Is self defense color blind?"
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: MEGATRON on July 17, 2013, 10:41:33 AM
The question is. "Is self defense color blind?"
How is that the question?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: strider on July 17, 2013, 10:52:29 AM
Quote
776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

This is the part that I believe would be relevant to Zimmerman.  I think that it is a given that he was initially the aggressor and so the passage above gives him the protection even though he initialed the conflict. It is why I think that under the current law, the protection of "stand or ground" or what actions can be defined as self-defense switch back and forth between two in conflict depending upon whom is winning. Of course, accurate and honest eye witness testimony would also determine that but without real evidence to the contrary, it ends up being the one who wins to tell his story.  Doesn't seem like a very well written law to me.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: strider on July 17, 2013, 10:55:44 AM
The question is. "Is self defense color blind?"
How is that the question?

If Martin had knocked out Zimmerman with his first punch and put him in the hospital, would Martin be in jail right now?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: fsquid on July 17, 2013, 11:13:46 AM
Quote
Already there are boycotts called against Florida and its merchants. 

I doubt many will cancel Disney plans because of this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: BridgeTroll on July 17, 2013, 11:22:09 AM
Quote
Already there are boycotts called against Florida and its merchants. 

I doubt many will cancel Disney plans because of this.

My plans for Sanford are on hold though...
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: BridgeTroll on July 17, 2013, 11:41:52 AM
In those other threads most who took great issue with the outcome of the trial defined Zimmerman as the aggressor.  Meaning that the act of following someone deemed suspicious is enough to warrant the label as "aggressor".  IMHO the only modification to the law would be to more clearly define aggressor.

Quote
776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 11:46:09 AM
When some psychotic white guy kills classrooms full of small children, we are told not to worry:  its just a psycho---not typical, not rational, doesnt pertain to the rest of responsible gun owners.

And people, while hesitant, reluctantly decide on the side of reasonableness and optimism and acquiesce.

But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.

In a country where reasonable people are already uneasy about these murders happening with accelerating frequency, its really shocking how tone deaf the radicals are.

The Aurora Movie theater shootings and the Newtown shootings were both committed by mentally unstable people.

In Aurora, they already had the strictest gun laws. Holmes knew that when he stood up and started shooting in the theater that there was going to be no one shooting back at him. Do you think he would have attempted the same stunt if the possibility was there of 3-4 people might have opened fire back at him? No. He wouldn't. Because he is a coward.

A week after Aurora, this happened. A "gun nut" saved lives:

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

In Newtown, Adam Lanza killed his mother and stole her guns to commit his disgusting act. He was a crazy person who obtained his guns illegally - by killing someone else and taking guns from their home. How would stricter gun laws have prevented that? It wouldn't. He was mentally ill. And just like Holmes, he knew that when he got to his destination, that there would be no one there to stop him. No resource officer, no security, nothing. And when he started to hear police sirens, he off'd himself. Coward.

The real issue in regards to Holmes and Lanza is mental illness. How many times have people come out after the fact and said "I wish I would have said something"? It is up to us to be aware of our surroundings and report odd behavior if we see it. Along with that, no one seems to want to talk about the side effects of the medications they were on. Nope. Because it's all about guns.

Would stricter gun laws have stopped Herman Pickens from killing Robert Sutton at Mojo No.4 a couple of weeks ago? He was a convicted felon who has been arrested every year of his adult life who used a stolen gun.

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country yet 54 people were shot dead during the Zimmerman trial. The majority of their murders are gang, robbery, or drug related. You think that gang members go through background checks to obtain their weapons?

Just last week, a 16 year old was shot dead for refusing to join a gang. (Did Chicago hold a rally to show their disdain about his senseless killing? No. But they did have a rally to protest the Zimmerman verdict over 1,000 miles away.)

You say: "But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing? He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.[/b]"

Maybe I've missed something in the 30+ pages of this thread, but at NO point have I read anyone say that Trayvon "deserved to die". People pointing out facts about Trayvon's past (just like you have done to Zimmerman as far back as page 2) does not mean that the kid deserved to die.

It's a tragedy. No one wins.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 12:02:57 PM
When some psychotic white guy kills classrooms full of small children, we are told not to worry:  its just a psycho---not typical, not rational, doesnt pertain to the rest of responsible gun owners.

And people, while hesitant, reluctantly decide on the side of reasonableness and optimism and acquiesce.

But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing?

He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.

In a country where reasonable people are already uneasy about these murders happening with accelerating frequency, its really shocking how tone deaf the radicals are.

The Aurora Movie theater shootings and the Newtown shootings were both committed by mentally unstable people.

In Aurora, they already had the strictest gun laws. Holmes knew that when he stood up and started shooting in the theater that there was going to be no one shooting back at him. Do you think he would have attempted the same stunt if the possibility was there of 3-4 people might have opened fire back at him? No. He wouldn't. Because he is a coward.

A week after Aurora, this happened. A "gun nut" saved lives:

http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

In Newtown, Adam Lanza killed his mother and stole her guns to commit his disgusting act. He was a crazy person who obtained his guns illegally - by killing someone else and taking guns from their home. How would stricter gun laws have prevented that? It wouldn't. He was mentally ill. And just like Holmes, he knew that when he got to his destination, that there would be no one there to stop him. No resource officer, no security, nothing. And when he started to hear police sirens, he off'd himself. Coward.

The real issue in regards to Holmes and Lanza is mental illness. How many times have people come out after the fact and said "I wish I would have said something"? It is up to us to be aware of our surroundings and report odd behavior if we see it. Along with that, no one seems to want to talk about the side effects of the medications they were on. Nope. Because it's all about guns.

Would stricter gun laws have stopped Herman Pickens from killing Robert Sutton at Mojo No.4 a couple of weeks ago? He was a convicted felon who has been arrested every year of his adult life who used a stolen gun.

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country yet 54 people were shot dead during the Zimmerman trial. The majority of their murders are gang, robbery, or drug related. You think that gang members go through background checks to obtain their weapons?

Just last week, a 16 year old was shot dead for refusing to join a gang. (Did Chicago hold a rally to show their disdain about his senseless killing? No. But they did have a rally to protest the Zimmerman verdict over 1,000 miles away.)

You say: "But here is an example of a person who has shot another child to death, a person who we are now being assured is a reasonable, typical, and rational gun owner, and what are we being told about the child killing? He deserved to die, and the killer should have no consequences.[/b]"

Maybe I've missed something in the 30+ pages of this thread, but at NO point have I read anyone say that Trayvon "deserved to die". People pointing out facts about Trayvon's past (just like you have done to Zimmerman as far back as page 2) does not mean that the kid deserved to die.

It's a tragedy. No one wins.
thank you for proving my post, literally point by point.

Because I point out the fact that your chest-pounding for stricter gun laws would have prevented none of the above because the issue is much deeper than that? Got it.

The fact that will ignore the illegal gun exploits of people like Herman Pickens and Chicago gang members while at the same time trying to lump people like Adam Lanza, James Holmes, GZ, and Joe Anybody who happens to be a law-abiding citizen with a concealed weapons permit who is a gun enthusiast who only uses his guns at the range or to go hunting and has never been accused or convicted of any crime - much less one involving a gun - together into the same category to fit your "gun nut" argument is not only ridiculous, but stereotypical.

But hey, stereotypes are a real time-saver.

Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: KenFSU on July 17, 2013, 12:08:45 PM
In those other threads most who took great issue with the outcome of the trial defined Zimmerman as the aggressor.  Meaning that the act of following someone deemed suspicious is enough to warrant the label as "aggressor".  IMHO the only modification to the law would be to more clearly define aggressor.

Quote
776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—

+1

Let's say Zimmerman had been simply sitting on a park bench hanging out and Martin approached him, threatened his life ("you're going to die tonight"), and attacked him. If Zimmerman found himself being strangled, assaulted to the point of fearing for his life, or had reasonable suspicion that Martin was armed with a deadly weapon, I'd have zero problem with Zimmerman using deadly force to stop the attack. Conversely, let's say that on that tragic evening, Zimmerman had instigated the physical confrontation with Martin after following him through the neighborhood. If Martin would have been in legitimate fear for his life, I'd have no problem with him using deadly force either. If you instigate a sustained physical attack without provocation, particularly on a stranger, or if you break into someone's home or vehicle, I don't think you deserve the benefit of the doubt.

It's Zimmerman initial pursuit that muddies everything to me in this case, and the reason that "aggressor" needs to be more clearly defined to take provocation into account before further similar incidents can take place.

Even then though, there are just so many shades of gray, and so much room for misinterpretation and he-said/she-said, that these things really need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:16:38 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     


More info will come about about the character of everyone involved during the civil trial and the burden of proof will be much different. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 12:17:19 PM
Quote
But hey, stereotypes are a real time-saver.

youve summed up your position perfectly, and its the very reason why your point of view makes us less safe, not more safe.

Im sorry Jameson, but you sound irresponsible and reckless with other people's lives.

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 12:26:08 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 12:27:11 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     


More info will come about about the character of everyone involved during the civil trial and the burden of proof will be much different. 


Assuming there is one.

It doesn't make much sense to sue someone that doesn't have money.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 12:28:03 PM
Lake,

I would ask you the same question...how, exactly, would you rewrite the law?

I'd probably start here. 

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

These are the statutes that I believe apply to civilians.  To see all of Chapter 776:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/Chapter776
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:31:19 PM
Simms, I'm not sure of how hard it was raining or if the rain started after he was already away from home but wearing a hoodie on a cold rainy night in February is appropriate attire.

Quote
if you are a young black male (wearing a hoodie at night in a targeted neighborhood walking in backyards as opposed to the sidewalk, in the rain I might add) I would be extra careful to avoid confrontation and make your presence and intentions known

If GZ was a uniformed officer, this would make sense. While we all know who GZ is, due to the media, he was nothing more than a street thug up to no good that night, from the victim's perspective.

According to his lady friend on the phone with him at the time, GZ was a creep seeking to mug or rape him. He even quickened his pace to get away, only to have GZ quicken his to follow. Well-placed words in that situation (remember, GZ's a thug to the victim at this point) aren't going to do anything.

TM was also visiting his dad, who lived in this gated community. I don't know if anyone is aware that he knew neighborhood vigilantes were over zealously profiling black youths in the area. Perhaps if he did, the situation would have ended up differently.  Unfortunately, we'll never know.

Quote
Maybe laws need to be changed, but this so far has been an issue that further divides people rather than unites them.

From my perspective, the laws need to be changed and yes, it divides people rather than unites, but it's something that has to be addressed sooner or later.




Not sure about being aware of other "vigilantes" in the community profiling Blacks comment Ennis. :)  This is a racially mixed community with Blacks in residence.  Unless you have proof of their being "vigilantes" in that community perhaps that descriptive is unfair.  During and after the trial several month's of reports detailing criminal activity in the community were presented into evidence.  In one case, a woman from that community testified to the case which directly impacted her, which had to do with two teenage Black kids who broke into her home while she was in it.  One of the teens was caught and charge and as it turned out he lived in the self same neighborhood.  It also turns out that the other crimes also had young Blacks as the perp and this is a matter of record.  In that light, I don't think we can truly claim there were
vigilante attitudes at work here and Zimmerman was feeding into them.  I think many in the neighborhood were on alert to suspicious behavior, especially after the break in with the woman and child home alone.  As it turns out the police got there in time and grabbed the offender.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 12:37:51 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

I dont think anyone has called you 'insults', Jameson.  But Im surprised that you can actually be offended while defending the murder of a child.  But, hey, different strokes, i guess.

Spin spin spin, Stephen. I have not defended the murder of a child. That is simply how you interpret anyone who has a differing opinion from you in regards to any portion of the Zimmerman case.

And in typical liberal fashion, the debate ends with you resorting to name-calling.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:40:17 PM
GZ was told not to pursue TM but he did anyway. Funny how people seem to forget this.
No one has forgotten this and it has be discussed at length here on the forum.  He was asked by police if he was following the person he thought suspicious.  He answered that he was the police told him "we don't need you to do that".  He was not directly told to stop following him.  I think what may have helped push him forward is that the officer then asked him twice about where Trayvon was located and for a street name.

I have yet to hear anyone say that Zimmerman getting out of the car to follow was not what set all of this in motion.  It did.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 12:41:56 PM
Not sure about being aware of other "vigilantes" in the community profiling Blacks comment Ennis. :)  This is a racially mixed community with Blacks in residence.  Unless you have proof of their being "vigilantes" in that community perhaps that descriptive is unfair.
 

Maybe, but what else do you call an over zealous neighborhood watch person who keeps going after someone they've personally profiled despite being told not too?  Nevertheless, by the same token, there's no proof that the victim (who was not a permanent resident) knew black youth were being profiled by people like GZ.  All the documented evidence suggests the victim thought GZ was a creepy guy following him to do bodily harm.

Btw, how did GZ get the position of neighborhood watch guy?  Was he elected or appointed by some home owner's association or did a few guys in the area take this task upon themselves?


Quote
During and after the trial several month's of reports detailing criminal activity in the community were presented into evidence.  In one case, a woman from that community testified to the case which directly impacted her, which had to do with two teenage Black kids who broke into her home while she was in it.  One of the teens was caught and charge and as it turned out he lived in the self same neighborhood.  It also turns out that the other crimes also had young Blacks as the perp and this is a matter of record.  In that light, I don't think we can truly claim there were
vigilante attitudes at work here and Zimmerman was feeding into them.  I think many in the neighborhood were on alert to suspicious behavior, especially after the break in with the woman and child home alone.  As it turns out the police got there in time and grabbed the offender.

This doesn't suggest that the victim knew anything about this.  All he had was a weird guy, he did not know, following him on a dark rainy and cold night in a little country town he wasn't as familiar with.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:44:36 PM
I'm gonna say my unpopular, and unbiased take on this whole Zimmerman thing for the last time, because I don't see colors unlike alot of people. To be honest, I'm sick and tired of this entire situation. I'm aware of Seminole County's history of racism, the reason that Duval had to take over, although IMO this was the wrong case at the wrong time, and a mountain was made out of a molehill, thanks to the 'gotcha' media, and the outrage. Duval, or Seminole, the outcome would still be the same.

This was a railroad attempt from the get-go; CSX, Norfolk Southern, and Union Pacific all together don't have the track mileage that this Zimmerman railroad attempt has. Why you ask? Because Angela Corey clearly withheld key evidence, Trayvon's capability in MMA ie punch in the nose, and mount & ground and pound (from his cell phone). Like it or not, that was evidence that was supposed to be turned over. What's a more significant event, getting out of a car (which isn't illegal) not following through a comment from a dispatcher (again not illegal) or getting blasted in the face, mounted and beaten the crap out of? Enough of that. People say that 'Angela Corey should've pursued manslaughter'. Well, in this railroad attempt, the judge put manslaughter on the table at the last minute along with the original charge murder 2. So I don't get why people are mad with Corey on that, I don't believe that this methodical jury was 'confused' whatsoever.

I don't see any additional charges on Zimmerman. Eric Holder from the NAACP pretty much conceded that in the Orlando convention (Federal charges) as he focused on 'changing laws' to keep the masses in check. What laws changed? I dunno. Besides, the Feds already looked through this case. Regarding a civil case, a self defense case (which this is, don't know why some or talking 'stand your ground') Zimmerman should have immunity. These protests are classic 'selective outrage' from the black community. Hundreds and hundreds of Trayvon's are murdered in black on black violence throughout the US, yet this Zimmerman thing (which can be argued either way, and that evidence pointing mainly ONE way) remains the focal point. I'm done with this overblown trial, SMH...
Actually, your view is shared by many and most of the points you are pointing to are points with which I agree.  I think the Zimmerman case has become a dumping ground for long felt injustices that are valid at their core but are not bred of this case as much as this case has been tied to a legacy of past hurts, outrages and victimization.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 12:46:00 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

I dont think anyone has called you 'insults', Jameson.  But Im surprised that you can actually be offended while defending the murder of a child.  But, hey, different strokes, i guess.

Spin spin spin, Stephen. I have not defended the murder of a child. That is simply how you interpret anyone who has a differing opinion from you in regards to any portion of the Zimmerman case.

And in typical liberal fashion, the debate ends with you resorting to name-calling.
Yawn.

So what are you defending Jameson?

Why don't you state that clearly for the record?

Are you kidding? I've been posting since page 18.

I agree with the verdict, yet at the same time I see both sides of it and I think it is a tragedy that a 17 year old died.

That is it in a nutshell. Anyone can see that by my second post in this thread on page 18.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 12:46:19 PM
I think what may have helped push him forward is that the officer then asked him twice about where Trayvon was located and for a street name.

If you're neighborhood watch guy, shouldn't you be familiar with your neighborhood?  One would think, someone familiar with their neighborhood would be able to answer those questions immediately and without any type of movement on their part.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 12:49:16 PM
Actually, your view is shared by many and most of the points you are pointing to are points with which I agree.  I think the Zimmerman case has become a dumping ground for long felt injustices that are valid at their core but are not bred of this case as much as this case has been tied to a legacy of past hurts, outrages and victimization.

From what I can tell, the verdict based upon the state law legally allowing what happened is what has really fanned the fire.  GZ goes to jail for murder, manslaughter or what ever, then life goes on. However, profile and kill black youth minding his own business, then get verdict of not guilty by all white jury and you have all the necessary ingredients for what's taking place now.

For many, this situation is a harsh reminder of many past injustices.  If the focus of the issue is the law and working to change it, then the discussion being bred from this case is valid.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: BridgeTroll on July 17, 2013, 12:49:18 PM
Quote
It's Zimmerman initial pursuit that muddies everything to me in this case

The key word here is "pursuit".  Does the act of following someone constitute pursuit?  As a neighborhood watch person... should he have the right to follow to find out where the "suspicious" person is headed?  Is this overzealous?  Is it overzealous enough to be addressed in the law above?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Mitch Weaver on July 17, 2013, 12:49:56 PM
Not sure why everyone is so upset with the Stand Your Ground Law. It was not applicable in this case and it disproportionately BENEFITS black suspects more than white suspects in Florida.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:50:08 PM
Original Jury Count:  Five of the six believed Zimmerman was guilty.

And now the other jury members are distancing themselves from the woman who spoke on Anderson Cooper.

By the way, her attorney husband had already signed a book deal for her about her experiences on the trial.

http://news.yahoo.com/zimmerman-jury-initially-split-3-2-1-verdict-005342718.html

Quote
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The jury in George Zimmerman's trial initially had three votes for not guilty, two votes for manslaughter and one vote for second-degree murder when deliberations began, juror B-37 told CNN on Monday.

The jury later reached a unanimous verdict of not guilty.

"There was a couple of them in there that wanted to find him guilty of something. And after hours and hours and hours of deliberating over the law, and reading it over and over and over again, we just decided there's no other way or place to go," she told CNN.
Original count had three not guilty's, two for manslaughter and one for murder 2.  The book deal was pulled according to reporting by CNN.  Four other jurors made the statement that the juror on Anderson Coopers CNN show did not speak for them just herself.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 12:56:24 PM
Lake,

I would ask you the same question...how, exactly, would you rewrite the law?

I'd probably start here. 

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

These are the statutes that I believe apply to civilians.  To see all of Chapter 776:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/Chapter776

OK, it looks like the most applicable to this case.  Would you simply erase this exception or word it differently?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 12:56:53 PM
Not sure why everyone is so upset with the Stand Your Ground Law. It was not applicable in this case and it disproportionately BENEFITS black suspects more than white suspects in Florida.

It's not about black vs white suspects.  This type of thinking helps fan divide and flames as well.  The major issue is the state law allowing the aggressor to pursue and kill the victim and then go home without any punishment. Race is then dumped into it when you start looking at our history and a ton of public policies that have been based upon skin color.  It then goes haywire when all the self interest groups and media on both sides jump into the mix.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 12:59:55 PM
Not sure about being aware of other "vigilantes" in the community profiling Blacks comment Ennis. :)  This is a racially mixed community with Blacks in residence.  Unless you have proof of their being "vigilantes" in that community perhaps that descriptive is unfair.
 

Maybe, but what else do you call an over zealous neighborhood watch person who keeps going after someone they've personally profiled despite being told not too?  Nevertheless, by the same token, there's no proof that the victim (who was not a permanent resident) knew black youth were being profiled by people like GZ.  All the documented evidence suggests the victim thought GZ was a creepy guy following him to do bodily harm.

Btw, how did GZ get the position of neighborhood watch guy?  Was he elected or appointed by some home owner's association or did a few guys in the area take this task upon themselves?


Quote
During and after the trial several month's of reports detailing criminal activity in the community were presented into evidence.  In one case, a woman from that community testified to the case which directly impacted her, which had to do with two teenage Black kids who broke into her home while she was in it.  One of the teens was caught and charge and as it turned out he lived in the self same neighborhood.  It also turns out that the other crimes also had young Blacks as the perp and this is a matter of record.  In that light, I don't think we can truly claim there were
vigilante attitudes at work here and Zimmerman was feeding into them.  I think many in the neighborhood were on alert to suspicious behavior, especially after the break in with the woman and child home alone.  As it turns out the police got there in time and grabbed the offender.

This doesn't suggest that the victim knew anything about this.  All he had was a weird guy, he did not know, following him on a dark rainy and cold night in a little country town he wasn't as familiar with.
The victim would have known nothing of this.  My question was geared toward the statement that there were other vigilantes profiling Blacks.  There is no proof of that.  That's what I am saying.  I think if we are to get through this conversation and keep our heads on straight, we need to speak to the situation as factually as we can and this case is really short of facts.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 01:00:33 PM
Lake,

I would ask you the same question...how, exactly, would you rewrite the law?

I'd probably start here. 

776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1)?Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

(2)?Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a)?Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

(b)?In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

These are the statutes that I believe apply to civilians.  To see all of Chapter 776:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/Chapter776

OK, it looks like the most applicable to this case.  Would you simply erase this exception or word it differently?

I'd leave this up to those more well versed in law but I'd probably erase this exception.  However, before that can be done, this would have to be properly reviewed in context with other laws on the books.  Just isolating and erasing it would be cherry picking and could have negative impacts elsewhere.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 01:03:14 PM
Not sure about being aware of other "vigilantes" in the community profiling Blacks comment Ennis. :)  This is a racially mixed community with Blacks in residence.  Unless you have proof of their being "vigilantes" in that community perhaps that descriptive is unfair.
 

Maybe, but what else do you call an over zealous neighborhood watch person who keeps going after someone they've personally profiled despite being told not too?  Nevertheless, by the same token, there's no proof that the victim (who was not a permanent resident) knew black youth were being profiled by people like GZ.  All the documented evidence suggests the victim thought GZ was a creepy guy following him to do bodily harm.

Btw, how did GZ get the position of neighborhood watch guy?  Was he elected or appointed by some home owner's association or did a few guys in the area take this task upon themselves?


Quote
During and after the trial several month's of reports detailing criminal activity in the community were presented into evidence.  In one case, a woman from that community testified to the case which directly impacted her, which had to do with two teenage Black kids who broke into her home while she was in it.  One of the teens was caught and charge and as it turned out he lived in the self same neighborhood.  It also turns out that the other crimes also had young Blacks as the perp and this is a matter of record.  In that light, I don't think we can truly claim there were
vigilante attitudes at work here and Zimmerman was feeding into them.  I think many in the neighborhood were on alert to suspicious behavior, especially after the break in with the woman and child home alone.  As it turns out the police got there in time and grabbed the offender.

This doesn't suggest that the victim knew anything about this.  All he had was a weird guy, he did not know, following him on a dark rainy and cold night in a little country town he wasn't as familiar with.
The victim would have known nothing of this.  My question was geared toward the statement that there were other vigilantes profiling Blacks.  There is not proof of that is what I am saying.  I think if we are to get through this conversation and keep our heads on straight, we need to speak to the situation as factually as we can and this case is really short of facts.  :)


That's not what I was meaning to imply when I wrote this:

TM was also visiting his dad, who lived in this gated community. I don't know if anyone is aware that he knew neighborhood vigilantes were over zealously profiling black youths in the area. Perhaps if he did, the situation would have ended up differently.  Unfortunately, we'll never know.

Maybe it should have been written like this:

TM was also visiting his dad, who lived in this gated community. I don't know if anyone is aware that he knew a neighborhood vigilante was over zealously profiling black youths in the area. Perhaps if he did, the situation would have ended up differently.  Unfortunately, we'll never know.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 01:03:26 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     


More info will come about about the character of everyone involved during the civil trial and the burden of proof will be much different. 


Assuming there is one.

It doesn't make much sense to sue someone that doesn't have money.
I don't quite agree.  It does make sense if one is interested in justice, not money.  But if it is about money, this type of suit means that if Zimmerman is found guilty he can possibly serve time depending upon Florida Law, but if there is a financial finding that would mean that if Zimmerman ever wrote a book or took a movie deal along with a complete variety of money making endeavors, that money would go to the financial judgement i.e. the Martin's.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 01:06:34 PM
I think what may have helped push him forward is that the officer then asked him twice about where Trayvon was located and for a street name.

If you're neighborhood watch guy, shouldn't you be familiar with your neighborhood?  One would think, someone familiar with their neighborhood would be able to answer those questions immediately and without any type of movement on their part.
Agreed.  But Zimmerman may have seen this as some sort of an indicator to move forward. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 01:17:43 PM
I think I said earlier in this thread that this discussion is a necessary one and one that can only be had with civility.  There is a tendency on the part of some to feel as though statements outside of their viewpoint are attacks on their point of view.  I think allowing ourselves to get caught up in a contest of words and dragging up statements made by posters in the past on other issues really does nothing to enhance the discussion but rather derails an important conversation and replaces it with personal tit for tat exchanges.  I think everyone should be allowed the courtesy of their opinion without being called names or supporters of child murder or any other thing that is insulting.  Reasonable people can look at a single situation and have reasonable differences in their views.  Can we please keep this about the issues at hand and not about insults? Can we also agree not to take personal insult from others views but rather to actually listen to what their feelings are?  We don't have to agree with them but I promise you, understanding others views and why they may feel the way they do is key to unlocking the differences among people, including perceptions of race. :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: duvalbill on July 17, 2013, 01:44:33 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     


More info will come about about the character of everyone involved during the civil trial and the burden of proof will be much different. 


Assuming there is one.

It doesn't make much sense to sue someone that doesn't have money.
I don't quite agree.  It does make sense if one is interested in justice, not money.  But if it is about money, this type of suit means that if Zimmerman is found guilty he can possibly serve time depending upon Florida Law, but if there is a financial finding that would mean that if Zimmerman ever wrote a book or took a movie deal along with a complete variety of money making endeavors, that money would go to the financial judgement i.e. the Martin's.

Debtor jail doesn't exist anymore (Unless it pertains to child support), so he's not getting any jail time.

Florida is considered a debtor's paradise, so it would likely be a waste of money to pursue a civil suit.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 02:09:04 PM
Boy .... lots of discussion since I've dropped by.  The killing and the verdict is all over the media .... all over the world.

It's good though .... raises issues needing discussion and resolution.

Too bad there is no clear evidence at this point to convict GZ.  Maybe someone, out of the blue, will come forth as a witness, or will come up with a good video of the events ...  with sound ....  so that a jury can convict based on what actually happened.  As we've seen, its difficult to convict based on assumptions or emotional aspects.  And I am so happy for all citizens that murder convictions cannot be based on assumptions, but must rely on facts and on clear evidence.

Even without a conviction, the movers and shakers can now work on needed changes in any laws about guns and stuff.... and maybe about related societal problems.

I still think that the FBC had something to do with this thing.     


More info will come about about the character of everyone involved during the civil trial and the burden of proof will be much different. 


Assuming there is one.

It doesn't make much sense to sue someone that doesn't have money.
I don't quite agree.  It does make sense if one is interested in justice, not money.  But if it is about money, this type of suit means that if Zimmerman is found guilty he can possibly serve time depending upon Florida Law, but if there is a financial finding that would mean that if Zimmerman ever wrote a book or took a movie deal along with a complete variety of money making endeavors, that money would go to the financial judgement i.e. the Martin's.

Debtor jail doesn't exist anymore (Unless it pertains to child support), so he's not getting any jail time.

Florida is considered a debtor's paradise, so it would likely be a waste of money to pursue a civil suit.

hardly.  there are book deals and movie rights already in the offering.  THis murderer is going to walk scot free and make a milion dollars for killing a kid in the suburbs.  Welcome to America bro.
The exploitation of this tragedy is already shameful and growing.  Pierce Morgan on CNN had the young lady friend of Trayvon on his show.  The first thing out of his mouth to her was "You know you are famous now right"?  So it goes.  Politicians and folks looking to profit are all over this right now. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 02:11:01 PM
Lake,

I agree that negative impacts are a likely result.  "Provoking" can mean a lot of things.  If StephenDare! is following someone down the street calling them an "autistic fugue"  and commences to get pounded to the point of losing his life, does he forfeit his right to self defense of his life by his in ital actions?  (Sorry Dare!, just a recent example ;) )

I can see many situations where the current law would seem to fit, and many where the current law does not seem correct.  Like many areas of law, it is a judgement call.  We can't legislate every detail.  I understand the history of race relations and the need for attention to equal treatment.  It must be tough to try to write these laws to fit in every case.  It must be tough to be a juror in such a case and make a decision to the best of your ability.  Our system has a series of decisions that have to be made before a conviction takes place.  Normally, a Police Officer must feel there is probable cause for arrest.  This decision is reviewed by both Police supervisors and in most cases of violence by the State Attorney's office.  The Prosecutor must agree not only with the probable cause but that there is sufficient evidence for conviction.  The Police and the State Attorney are also responsible for ensuring that any evidence which tends to exonerate the accused is collected and shared as well as any incriminating evidence.  A Grand Jury may be consulted.  A Judge will decide any motions and oversee the selection of a jury of peers.  A fair trial must be held.  A LOT of decisions and a LOT of people must decide before guilt is assigned.  In order for this system to be accepted, the people have to be reasonably certain that the people making the decisions are fair.  The people have to be reasonably certain that the laws are fair and equally apply as written.  This is where we are at.  The jury has spoken in the Zimmerman trial.  But it is apparent that a substantial number of the public does not have confidence in the system, be it the people making the decisions or the fairness and equality of the laws. 

What I am attempting to do here is establish any logical argument against the laws...the applicable Florida State Statutes.  I agree with Lake as to what actual statute applies, but I would hesitate to change the laws.  I recognize that there are many who would disagree with me.  But I am confident in my logic.  I believe that we now have to work on the confidence of the people in the legal system that we have.  I am still willing to entertain any suggested changes in the law as well.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 02:14:24 PM
The exploitation of this tragedy is already shameful and growing.  Pierce Morgan on CNN had the young lady friend of Trayvon on his show.  The first thing out of his mouth to her was "You know you are famous now right"?  So it goes.  Politicians and folks looking to profit are all over this right now. 

^Tom Joyner is going to pay to help her finish high school and her tuition for college.  Last night, he mentioned EWC, FAMU, BCC, and Florida Memorial as possibilities through a program he offers for inner city kids. This is one of the resulting storylines that will ultimately be ignored.  She'll have an opportunity to change her economic and environmental situation through continued education.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 02:22:01 PM
Lake,

I agree that negative impacts are a likely result.  "Provoking" can mean a lot of things.  If StephenDare! is following someone down the street calling them an "autistic fugue"  and commences to get pounded to the point of losing his life, does he forfeit his right to self defense of his life by his in ital actions?  (Sorry Dare!, just a recent example ;) )

I can see many situations where the current law would seem to fit, and many where the current law does not seem correct.  Like many areas of law, it is a judgement call.  We can't legislate every detail.  I understand the history of race relations and the need for attention to equal treatment.  It must be tough to try to write these laws to fit in every case.  It must be tough to be a juror in such a case and make a decision to the best of your ability.  Our system has a series of decisions that have to be made before a conviction takes place.  Normally, a Police Officer must feel there is probable cause for arrest.  This decision is reviewed by both Police supervisors and in most cases of violence by the State Attorney's office.  The Prosecutor must agree not only with the probable cause but that there is sufficient evidence for conviction.  The Police and the State Attorney are also responsible for ensuring that any evidence which tends to exonerate the accused is collected and shared as well as any incriminating evidence.  A Grand Jury may be consulted.  A Judge will decide any motions and oversee the selection of a jury of peers.  A fair trial must be held.  A LOT of decisions and a LOT of people must decide before guilt is assigned.  In order for this system to be accepted, the people have to be reasonably certain that the people making the decisions are fair.  The people have to be reasonably certain that the laws are fair and equally apply as written.  This is where we are at.  The jury has spoken in the Zimmerman trial.  But it is apparent that a substantial number of the public does not have confidence in the system, be it the people making the decisions or the fairness and equality of the laws. 

What I am attempting to do here is establish any logical argument against the laws...the applicable Florida State Statutes.  I agree with Lake as to what actual statute applies, but I would hesitate to change the laws.  I recognize that there are many who would disagree with me.  But I am confident in my logic.  I believe that we now have to work on the confidence of the people in the legal system that we have.  I am still willing to entertain any suggested changes in the law as well.

and it would be even more compelling if there was a meteor shower striking earth and we were being invaded by north korea, right?  Laws are not made for the extremes, isnt that what you constantly imply when it comes to limiting gun sales, but apparently when we are considering how to shoot kids, then we must always put ourselves in the most extreme scenario?  Whatever, notnow, this is some of the worst sophistry possible.

I have no idea what you are trying to say.  If you think the laws should be changed, then a useful input would be to suggest what change that should be. 

Please be civil.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 02:22:59 PM
The exploitation of this tragedy is already shameful and growing.  Pierce Morgan on CNN had the young lady friend of Trayvon on his show.  The first thing out of his mouth to her was "You know you are famous now right"?  So it goes.  Politicians and folks looking to profit are all over this right now. 

^Tom Joyner is going to pay to help her finish high school and her tuition for college.  Last night, he mentioned EWC, FAMU, BCC, and Florida Memorial as possibilities through a program he offers for inner city kids. This is one of the resulting storylines that will ultimately be ignored.  She'll have an opportunity to change her economic and environmental situation through continued education.

Good to hear some good that will result from all of this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 02:23:49 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

I dont think anyone has called you 'insults', Jameson.  But Im surprised that you can actually be offended while defending the murder of a child.  But, hey, different strokes, i guess.

Spin spin spin, Stephen. I have not defended the murder of a child. That is simply how you interpret anyone who has a differing opinion from you in regards to any portion of the Zimmerman case.

And in typical liberal fashion, the debate ends with you resorting to name-calling.
Yawn.

So what are you defending Jameson?

Why don't you state that clearly for the record?

Are you kidding? I've been posting since page 18.

I agree with the verdict, yet at the same time I see both sides of it and I think it is a tragedy that a 17 year old died.

That is it in a nutshell. Anyone can see that by my second post in this thread on page 18.

Well good for you then, what are you arguing about if thats all?

Now you're acting aloof and oblivious to anything and everything I've offered to the debate throughout 20 pages of this thread. Not surprising.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 02:28:45 PM
Lake,

I agree that negative impacts are a likely result.  "Provoking" can mean a lot of things.  If StephenDare! is following someone down the street calling them an "autistic fugue"  and commences to get pounded to the point of losing his life, does he forfeit his right to self defense of his life by his in ital actions?  (Sorry Dare!, just a recent example ;) )

I can see many situations where the current law would seem to fit, and many where the current law does not seem correct.  Like many areas of law, it is a judgement call.  We can't legislate every detail.  I understand the history of race relations and the need for attention to equal treatment.  It must be tough to try to write these laws to fit in every case.  It must be tough to be a juror in such a case and make a decision to the best of your ability.  Our system has a series of decisions that have to be made before a conviction takes place.  Normally, a Police Officer must feel there is probable cause for arrest.  This decision is reviewed by both Police supervisors and in most cases of violence by the State Attorney's office.  The Prosecutor must agree not only with the probable cause but that there is sufficient evidence for conviction.  The Police and the State Attorney are also responsible for ensuring that any evidence which tends to exonerate the accused is collected and shared as well as any incriminating evidence.  A Grand Jury may be consulted.  A Judge will decide any motions and oversee the selection of a jury of peers.  A fair trial must be held.  A LOT of decisions and a LOT of people must decide before guilt is assigned.  In order for this system to be accepted, the people have to be reasonably certain that the people making the decisions are fair.  The people have to be reasonably certain that the laws are fair and equally apply as written.  This is where we are at.  The jury has spoken in the Zimmerman trial.  But it is apparent that a substantial number of the public does not have confidence in the system, be it the people making the decisions or the fairness and equality of the laws. 

What I am attempting to do here is establish any logical argument against the laws...the applicable Florida State Statutes.  I agree with Lake as to what actual statute applies, but I would hesitate to change the laws.  I recognize that there are many who would disagree with me.  But I am confident in my logic.  I believe that we now have to work on the confidence of the people in the legal system that we have.  I am still willing to entertain any suggested changes in the law as well.

I'm sorry, but Stephen the liberal doesn't see calling someone an "autistic fugue" as an insult. You now owe him an apology.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 02:31:09 PM
It would place fear in me if I were being followed by an unknown person in a vehicle on a lonely dark night.  Zimmerman's decision to "follow" what he thought was a suspicious person, even to the point of dismounting and walking, places some responsibility on him in my eyes.  While Martin certainly should not have responded by going to immediate blows, his age and lack of experience while in fear would explain such a decision to me.  A CCW should be aware of what situations they are entering into. 

The jury has spoken in this case.  I did not hear all of the testimony and this is just my two cents.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 02:36:05 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

I dont think anyone has called you 'insults', Jameson.  But Im surprised that you can actually be offended while defending the murder of a child.  But, hey, different strokes, i guess.

Spin spin spin, Stephen. I have not defended the murder of a child. That is simply how you interpret anyone who has a differing opinion from you in regards to any portion of the Zimmerman case.

And in typical liberal fashion, the debate ends with you resorting to name-calling.
Yawn.

So what are you defending Jameson?

Why don't you state that clearly for the record?

Are you kidding? I've been posting since page 18.

I agree with the verdict, yet at the same time I see both sides of it and I think it is a tragedy that a 17 year old died.

That is it in a nutshell. Anyone can see that by my second post in this thread on page 18.

Well good for you then, what are you arguing about if thats all?

Now you're acting aloof and oblivious to anything and everything I've offered to the debate throughout 20 pages of this thread. Not surprising.

Dude, I clearly asked you to state your points.  You did.  Do you need some time to finish your post or something?

I have been posting my points for 20+ pages! If you choose to act aloof like you haven't read them and haven't responded to them, then that is your issue.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 02:36:49 PM
Lake,

I agree that negative impacts are a likely result.  "Provoking" can mean a lot of things.  If StephenDare! is following someone down the street calling them an "autistic fugue"  and commences to get pounded to the point of losing his life, does he forfeit his right to self defense of his life by his in ital actions?  (Sorry Dare!, just a recent example ;) )

I can see many situations where the current law would seem to fit, and many where the current law does not seem correct.  Like many areas of law, it is a judgement call.  We can't legislate every detail.  I understand the history of race relations and the need for attention to equal treatment.  It must be tough to try to write these laws to fit in every case.  It must be tough to be a juror in such a case and make a decision to the best of your ability.  Our system has a series of decisions that have to be made before a conviction takes place.  Normally, a Police Officer must feel there is probable cause for arrest.  This decision is reviewed by both Police supervisors and in most cases of violence by the State Attorney's office.  The Prosecutor must agree not only with the probable cause but that there is sufficient evidence for conviction.  The Police and the State Attorney are also responsible for ensuring that any evidence which tends to exonerate the accused is collected and shared as well as any incriminating evidence.  A Grand Jury may be consulted.  A Judge will decide any motions and oversee the selection of a jury of peers.  A fair trial must be held.  A LOT of decisions and a LOT of people must decide before guilt is assigned.  In order for this system to be accepted, the people have to be reasonably certain that the people making the decisions are fair.  The people have to be reasonably certain that the laws are fair and equally apply as written.  This is where we are at.  The jury has spoken in the Zimmerman trial.  But it is apparent that a substantial number of the public does not have confidence in the system, be it the people making the decisions or the fairness and equality of the laws. 

What I am attempting to do here is establish any logical argument against the laws...the applicable Florida State Statutes.  I agree with Lake as to what actual statute applies, but I would hesitate to change the laws.  I recognize that there are many who would disagree with me.  But I am confident in my logic.  I believe that we now have to work on the confidence of the people in the legal system that we have.  I am still willing to entertain any suggested changes in the law as well.

Good information Not Now. 
Also, for the record, I have been informed that there is indeed no jail time adjudicated in a civil trial.  That's what I get for listening to a pseudo law professional.  lol
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 02:39:03 PM

You continue to offer no facts. Just opinion.

simply saying that repeatedly doesnt make it any more true, it just makes you sound like you are in an autistic fugue.

You have resorted to calling me insults in this thread many times and this one is the most disgusting of all.

I dont think anyone has called you 'insults', Jameson.  But Im surprised that you can actually be offended while defending the murder of a child.  But, hey, different strokes, i guess.

Spin spin spin, Stephen. I have not defended the murder of a child. That is simply how you interpret anyone who has a differing opinion from you in regards to any portion of the Zimmerman case.

And in typical liberal fashion, the debate ends with you resorting to name-calling.
Yawn.

So what are you defending Jameson?

Why don't you state that clearly for the record?

Are you kidding? I've been posting since page 18.

I agree with the verdict, yet at the same time I see both sides of it and I think it is a tragedy that a 17 year old died.

That is it in a nutshell. Anyone can see that by my second post in this thread on page 18.

Well good for you then, what are you arguing about if thats all?

Now you're acting aloof and oblivious to anything and everything I've offered to the debate throughout 20 pages of this thread. Not surprising.
Let it go please.  Others are reading your posts and you have had some valuable views in my opinion.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 02:45:26 PM
There is value in everyone's opinion in my view Stephen. I value yours.  You don't have to agree with the view being pro offered but the views of each individual play a part in the overall picture of why this trial has been received the way it has and why it seems to be so difficult to discuss issues like race.  I learned a long time ago that what may seem preposterous for me because of my values, experience and thought process may not seem that way to another perfectly reasonable human being because their values, experience and thought process is different than mine.  That is what is at the core of much dispute on a variety of issues.  We can only share our view and hope others may see the value in it.  Lambasting their view really doesn't make them more likely to listen to ones own.  At least that has been my experience.  :)
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 02:53:14 PM
The jury could only speak on what the particular issue they were tasked to address was about.  From what I understand, that issue was if GZ had a legal right to kill TM at the moment he thought his life was in fear.  Nothing else involving the incident really mattered.

In those other threads most who took great issue with the outcome of the trial defined Zimmerman as the aggressor.  Meaning that the act of following someone deemed suspicious is enough to warrant the label as "aggressor".  IMHO the only modification to the law would be to more clearly define aggressor.

Quote
776.041?Use of force by aggressor.—

Good point.  I had not looked at it from this angle.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 17, 2013, 02:55:11 PM
I don't think I will move on until the laws are changed so that murders similar to the one GZ committed are punished as criminal behavior. 


How, exactly, would you rewrite the law?

Exactly is a bit much to ask as laws need to be carefully crafted seems like there are always unintended consequences.  However what I would like to get to is some protection or additional consideration for someone who sees a situation as dangerous, creepy, sketchy ect.. and  tries to leave the area as a means resolve these feelings.  I think if you do this and trouble (or reasonably perceived trouble) stays on your heels it should constitute some form of harassment.

As it would apply to this case is that if Zimmerman's gun were used as a result of harassing TM then it wold not be justifiable for him to use deadly force during the commission of this crime.

Now I also don't want to make it easier for criminals to commit crimes.  I think we could set up parameters for reasonable watching out.   Obviously someone running off with your stereo in their arms or having just committed an assault should not be afforded this protection.

I think that if we let people bird dog 17 year olds that we can expect some of them to over react.  Really I think lots of people might over react perhaps their fight instinct kicks in, perhaps they run to their car and dangerously drive off in a panic or a million other bad decisions someone could make if they feel like they avoiding trouble didn't work.

I find it reasonable for people who choose to leave trouble alone to be left alone.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 02:58:23 PM
It would place fear in me if I were being followed by an unknown person in a vehicle on a lonely dark night.  Zimmerman's decision to "follow" what he thought was a suspicious person, even to the point of dismounting and walking, places some responsibility on him in my eyes.  While Martin certainly should not have responded by going to immediate blows, his age and lack of experience while in fear would explain such a decision to me. A CCW should be aware of what situations they are entering into

The jury has spoken in this case.  I did not hear all of the testimony and this is just my two cents.

+1


Also keep in mind that SYG played no part in the Zimmerman case as they did not use it as the defense. However using examples from the case to make your point though is fine IMO. And yes, changing the law to more accurately define "aggressor" could very well be all that needs to be done. When I read some of the cases that that Tampa newspaper found, I was appalled. People getting shot in the back, people shooting two or more unarmed people, and all getting away with it.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 03:01:33 PM


I'm sorry, but Stephen the liberal doesn't see calling someone an "autistic fugue" as an insult. You now owe him an apology.

hmm. if you think im going to react to this angle, you are sadly mistaken.  In fact, if you are implying that I think you sound like the worst, most insulting kind of way to call someone a retard, I certainly wouldnt mind if you repeated that.

So I dont know where that leaves you Jameson.

Now do you still need some time to sum up what it is that you are debating, because Im sure I don't know (and it sounds like you might not either)

If you cant, then I think we can go back to assuming this is about your need to blame Trayvon for his own murder.

You think I'm trying to get a reaction out of you? Hardly. I'm simply pointing out that you choose to use a term so loosely to insult someone on a message board that so many find offensive - especially those with mentally handicapped children, friends, etc. I find it offensive. It's disgusting.

But at the same time, I'm not at all surprised. Throughout years of discussion and debating liberals, I've found that in the end, they seem to always resort to name-calling and insults.

As for what I'm debating, I'm still waiting for you to answer the questions I asked on page 37:

Would stricter gun laws have stopped Herman Pickens from killing Robert Sutton at Mojo No.4 a couple of weeks ago? He was a convicted felon who has been arrested every year of his adult life who used a stolen gun.

Or to give me an example of how stricter gun laws would stop all of the murders in Chicago:

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country yet 54 people were shot dead during the Zimmerman trial. The majority of their murders are gang, robbery, or drug related. You think that gang members go through background checks to obtain their weapons?

Again, the fact that will ignore the illegal gun exploits of people like Herman Pickens and Chicago gang members while at the same time trying to lump people like Adam Lanza, James Holmes, GZ, and Joe Anybody who happens to be a law-abiding citizen with a concealed weapons permit who is a gun enthusiast who only uses his guns at the range or to go hunting and has never been accused or convicted of any crime - much less one involving a gun - together into the same category to fit your "gun nut" argument is not only ridiculous, but stereotypical.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:03:09 PM
There is value in everyone's opinion in my view Stephen. I value yours.  You don't have to agree with the view being pro offered but the views of each individual play a part in the overall picture of why this trial has been received the way it has and why it seems to be so difficult to discuss issues like race.  I learned a long time ago that what may seem preposterous for me because of my values, experience and thought process may not seem that way to another perfectly reasonable human being because their values, experience and thought process is different than mine.  That is what is at the core of much dispute in a variety of issues.  We can only share our view and hope others may see the value in it.  Lambasting their view really doesn't make them more likely to listen to ones own.  At least that has been my experience.  :)


Well, knowing Jameson in real life, I suspect he could probably not give a flying rats ass about race.  He's mostly a disgruntled libertarian politically, and he prefers more latitude in people's sense of personal liberties, even to be offensive if they want. (a belief that we share, although we differ on respecting social rules in different settings, I suspect)

I also suspect that he is having the race discussion because he believes in gun rights, isn't really educated on the history of the ALEC sponsored 'stand your ground' laws, and thinks that any infringement on guns is an infringement on the second amendment.

No matter how recent or egregious those laws might be.

Many people think that an anti gun agenda is being furthered by a racial discourse, not realizing that they are two separate issues that are being combined into one issue with this case.

Finally I would predict that Jameson didnt bother to read our early commentary on these exact subjects in the beginning of the thread, jumped in at a trigger word, and finds himself in the position of arguing issues that he would rather not be pigeonholed on.

Not being able to find a graceful exit, hes attempting to man his way out of the conversation with a few gruff words. ;)
I understand Stephen, but he has a right to his voice and people can give value to his words as it suits them.  The same goes for anything we post as well.  A few of us know several of the other posters personally and may even have opinions of them, but the majority who read here likely do not.  I think it is only fair to let each persons statements stand on their own.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:04:46 PM


I'm sorry, but Stephen the liberal doesn't see calling someone an "autistic fugue" as an insult. You now owe him an apology.

hmm. if you think im going to react to this angle, you are sadly mistaken.  In fact, if you are implying that I think you sound like the worst, most insulting kind of way to call someone a retard, I certainly wouldnt mind if you repeated that.

So I dont know where that leaves you Jameson.

Now do you still need some time to sum up what it is that you are debating, because Im sure I don't know (and it sounds like you might not either)

If you cant, then I think we can go back to assuming this is about your need to blame Trayvon for his own murder.

You think I'm trying to get a reaction out of you? Hardly. I'm simply pointing out that you choose to use a term so loosely to insult someone on a message board that so many find offensive - especially those with mentally handicapped children, friends, etc. I find it offensive. It's disgusting.

But at the same time, I'm not at all surprised. Throughout years of discussion and debating liberals, I've found that in the end, they seem to always resort to name-calling and insults.

As for what I'm debating, I'm still waiting for you to answer the questions I asked on page 37:

Would stricter gun laws have stopped Herman Pickens from killing Robert Sutton at Mojo No.4 a couple of weeks ago? He was a convicted felon who has been arrested every year of his adult life who used a stolen gun.

Or to give me an example of how stricter gun laws would stop all of the murders in Chicago:

Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the country yet 54 people were shot dead during the Zimmerman trial. The majority of their murders are gang, robbery, or drug related. You think that gang members go through background checks to obtain their weapons?

Again, the fact that will ignore the illegal gun exploits of people like Herman Pickens and Chicago gang members while at the same time trying to lump people like Adam Lanza, James Holmes, GZ, and Joe Anybody who happens to be a law-abiding citizen with a concealed weapons permit who is a gun enthusiast who only uses his guns at the range or to go hunting and has never been accused or convicted of any crime - much less one involving a gun - together into the same category to fit your "gun nut" argument is not only ridiculous, but stereotypical.
You have said your peace.  Everyone has heard both views.  Time for all parties to stand down. :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:08:13 PM
I am not offering advice Stephen, just commentary.  I hope that is okay.  :) 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:15:17 PM
I am not offering advice Stephen, just commentary.  I hope that is okay.  :)

yes of course!  also I finished my post, it posted before I could (blame a small teacup chuhuahua, im taking my mother her lunch while she is ill).

Would you be interested?
Yes that would be lovely, but it would have to be when these bones of mine allow me to. I am in the middle of an illness relapse right now which is difficult but not new to me. lol However I would be more than pleased to when I feel stronger. When were you thinking time wise?
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 03:17:32 PM
It would be helpful if the Tampa piece had just let the commentary go and given just the facts of the cases.  I won't put too much into that bit of journalism until I see unbiased case briefs. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:20:34 PM
Why thank you Stephen.  What topic do you have in mind?  Perhaps I can be thinking about it.  You may want to take a poll on how fascinating I might be on video though.  lmao
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:28:31 PM
Well politics is always an interesting topic for me.  :)  I have a love/hate thing going on with them.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 03:39:50 PM
Speaking of politics, what do others think the politics surrounding and within this case are?  Do you think there are any and if so how have the influenced this trial and public opinion?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Jameson on July 17, 2013, 03:48:29 PM
There is value in everyone's opinion in my view Stephen. I value yours.  You don't have to agree with the view being pro offered but the views of each individual play a part in the overall picture of why this trial has been received the way it has and why it seems to be so difficult to discuss issues like race.  I learned a long time ago that what may seem preposterous for me because of my values, experience and thought process may not seem that way to another perfectly reasonable human being because their values, experience and thought process is different than mine.  That is what is at the core of much dispute in a variety of issues.  We can only share our view and hope others may see the value in it.  Lambasting their view really doesn't make them more likely to listen to ones own.  At least that has been my experience.  :)




Well, knowing Jameson in real life, I suspect he could probably not give a flying rats ass about race.  He's mostly a disgruntled libertarian politically, and he prefers more latitude in people's sense of personal liberties, even to be offensive if they want. (a belief that we share, although we differ on respecting social rules in different settings, I suspect)

I also suspect that he is having the race discussion because he believes in gun rights, isn't really educated on the history of the ALEC sponsored 'stand your ground' laws, and thinks that any infringement on guns is an infringement on the second amendment.

No matter how recent or egregious those laws might be.

Many people think that an anti gun agenda is being furthered by a racial discourse, not realizing that they are two separate issues that are being combined into one issue with this case.

Finally I would predict that Jameson didnt bother to read our early commentary on these exact subjects in the beginning of the thread, jumped in at a trigger word, and finds himself in the position of arguing issues that he would rather not be pigeonholed on.

Not being able to find a graceful exit, hes attempting to man his way out of the conversation with a few gruff words. ;)

Diane, you are very wise and I applaud you for seeing that we are all entitled to our own opinions and that we should try to refrain from lambasting others.

Stephen, you are correct - I could care less about race. That is why I find it so frustrating that so many people have looked at the Zimmerman case racially instead of logically.

I believe in gun rights. I am a gun owner. I also think that in order for people to possess a certain type of firearm (AR-15, for example) that they should have to pass a psychological exam.

I don't see the gun issue as being fueled by racial discourse.

I did read the earlier commentary and jumped in where I saw fit. I'll debate any issue, not just the Zimmerman case, gun laws, etc.

Really, any type of debate ended when you resorted to insults. It should have stopped there and I should have discontinued posting.

Lastly, yes, I am a Libertarian but no, I am not disgruntled. I do not want people to think like me. I want people to simply think. Our individuality is what makes us unique as a whole.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: johnnyman on July 17, 2013, 04:03:50 PM
There is value in everyone's opinion in my view Stephen. I value yours.  You don't have to agree with the view being pro offered but the views of each individual play a part in the overall picture of why this trial has been received the way it has and why it seems to be so difficult to discuss issues like race.  I learned a long time ago that what may seem preposterous for me because of my values, experience and thought process may not seem that way to another perfectly reasonable human being because their values, experience and thought process is different than mine.  That is what is at the core of much dispute in a variety of issues.  We can only share our view and hope others may see the value in it.  Lambasting their view really doesn't make them more likely to listen to ones own.  At least that has been my experience.  :)




Well, knowing Jameson in real life, I suspect he could probably not give a flying rats ass about race.  He's mostly a disgruntled libertarian politically, and he prefers more latitude in people's sense of personal liberties, even to be offensive if they want. (a belief that we share, although we differ on respecting social rules in different settings, I suspect)

I also suspect that he is having the race discussion because he believes in gun rights, isn't really educated on the history of the ALEC sponsored 'stand your ground' laws, and thinks that any infringement on guns is an infringement on the second amendment.

No matter how recent or egregious those laws might be.

Many people think that an anti gun agenda is being furthered by a racial discourse, not realizing that they are two separate issues that are being combined into one issue with this case.

Finally I would predict that Jameson didnt bother to read our early commentary on these exact subjects in the beginning of the thread, jumped in at a trigger word, and finds himself in the position of arguing issues that he would rather not be pigeonholed on.

Not being able to find a graceful exit, hes attempting to man his way out of the conversation with a few gruff words. ;)

Diane, you are very wise and I applaud you for seeing that we are all entitled to our own opinions and that we should try to refrain from lambasting others.

Stephen, you are correct - I could care less about race. That is why I find it so frustrating that so many people have looked at the Zimmerman case racially instead of logically.

I believe in gun rights. I am a gun owner. I also think that in order for people to possess a certain type of firearm (AR-15, for example) that they should have to pass a psychological exam.

I don't see the gun issue as being fueled by racial discourse.

I did read the earlier commentary and jumped in where I saw fit. I'll debate any issue, not just the Zimmerman case, gun laws, etc.

Really, any type of debate ended when you resorted to insults. It should have stopped there and I should have discontinued posting.

Lastly, yes, I am a Libertarian but no, I am not disgruntled. I do not want people to think like me. I want people to simply think. Our individuality is what makes us unique as a whole.

+1
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 04:08:38 PM
Speaking to politics and political fallout.  I wonder if Scott bargained for all the attention his office would be getting when he stepped into this case?

From The Daily Record:  http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=540017

Quote
by Margie Menzel, The News Service of Florida
About 40 students sat in Tuesday at the governor’s office, waiting for Gov. Rick Scott to return from a trip to New York and take up their demand for a special legislative session addressing laws they say unfairly affect minority youth.

As of shortly before 5 p.m., they were leaving Scott’s waiting area and making plans to spend the night in the Capitol rotunda.

The students, part of a group called the Dream Defenders, said they’re responding to the “not guilty” verdict in the trial of George Zimmerman, who was charged with second-degree murder in the shooting death last year of black teen Trayvon Martin in Seminole County.

They want Florida’s controversial “stand your ground” self-defense law changed. They asked for a meeting with Scott, and when told he was unavailable, vowed to wait for his return.

They want Scott to call a special session to create a Trayvon Martin Civil Rights Act and address “stand your ground vigilantism, racial profiling and a war on youth that paints us as criminals and funnels us out of schools and into jails.”

Scott’s office put out a statement suggesting the governor is unlikely to meet their demands.

“As the governor has said, as a father and a grandfather, his heart goes out to Trayvon Martin’s family and all those affected by his death,” said communications director Melissa Sellers in an email.

“We are grateful that people across our great nation have the right to assemble and share their views. … Immediately following Trayvon Martin’s death, Gov. Scott called a bi-partisan special task force with 19 citizens to review Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. This task force listened to Floridians across the state and heard their viewpoints and expert opinions on this law. The task force recommended that the law should not be overturned, and Gov. Scott agrees,” she said.

The governor’s task force did not include opponents of the controversial “stand your ground” law, although Senate Minority Leader Chris Smith (D-Fort Lauderdale) had asked to be appointed. The panel recommended few changes, and the 2013 Legislature refused to hear any bills that would have changed “stand your ground.”

“Even the governor’s task force filed legislation that wasn’t heard,” Smith said. “There was a fear of even discussing it. But I think the more and more pressure that’s put on Florida to at least have the discussion, I think (it) will happen this year.”

The “stand-your-ground” law drew widespread publicity when Zimmerman was not arrested for 44 days after shooting the 17-year-old Martin. The law says people have a right to meet “force with force” if they reasonably believe such steps are necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.

While Zimmerman ultimately was arrested and charged with second-degree murder, a six-member jury Saturday found him not guilty.

The students sat in the governor’s waiting room from 11 a.m. until shortly before close of business. As Capitol police looked on, they sang and chanted and took turns describing their own encounters with racism.

“So you’re telling me — again — that people who look like me, we don’t matter,” said Shamile Louis, 21, a student at the University of Florida who came from Gainesville to participate.

“Our bodies don’t matter. We can lie in the street and be dead and it’s cool. I had a friend killed about a month ago in Orlando. Still no arrest. Still no nothing. Another black man gone. Another young black boy without a father. And so that’s why I’m here today,” Louis said.

Dorothy Inman-Johnson, a retired poverty-agency administrator and former mayor of Tallahassee, said she she’ll keep protesting until “stand your ground” is abolished.

“If ‘stand your ground’ was doing what these legislators said it was supposed to do, the presumption of self-defense should have been Trayvon’s, not George Zimmerman’s,” she said.

There were about 100 protestors when they first marched to Scott’s office, but their numbers dwindled as the day wore on. They ate pizza and played cards while waiting. Some said they expect buses to add to their numbers Wednesday, with groups coming from Miami, Boca Raton, Orlando and Alabama.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 04:32:53 PM
Which law is the "outrage" about?  The one that doesn't apply to this case?  The jury didn't see Zimmerman as the aggressor. 

Any other "outrage" is simply an outside agenda.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 04:38:30 PM
Not Now, what is the legal age for gun ownership in Florida or for concealed weapon permitting?  I know kids can own rifles, is that the same for handguns?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 04:40:52 PM
Stephen, the juror on CNN with Anderson Cooper said that the initial vote of the jury was three for not guilty, two for manslaughter and one for murder two.  What is the source for five jurors wanting convictions initially?  I count three initially for a conviction of some type and in the end one holdout who finally went not guilty.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 04:47:40 PM
Which law is the "outrage" about?  The one that doesn't apply to this case?  The jury didn't see Zimmerman as the aggressor. 

Any other "outrage" is simply an outside agenda.

actually.  you are saying that either the jurors who have spoken up are lying or you simply don't know what you are talking about.

five of the six looked for convictions.

And the legal system which allows you to take up for your buddy who shot kiko battles to death in front of his grandmother is what I'm referring to.

Now if you would like to re discuss the long history of precedents pushed forward by cops killing people on this basis that came before the stand your ground measures that were part of the jury instructions, then I will be glad to oblige you by linking to Chrisw's 900 different articles about cops killing young men.

But hopefully ive been able to clearly define what i am alluding to without having to retread the old conversations.

I know exactly what I am talking about.  The jury found Mr. Zimmerman "not guilty".  Your speculation on the case means absolutely nothing.

I will not respond to your goading about Officer involved shootings other than to say the accuracy of your facts remains consistently poor.  It has nothing to do with the conversation on this thread.

I will repeat myself, at the risk of engaging in foolishness with you...which law, specifically, are you "outraged" about?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 04:48:39 PM
Not Now, what is the legal age for gun ownership in Florida or for concealed weapon permitting?  I know kids can own rifles, is that the same for handguns?

18 for rifles, 21 for handguns I believe.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 05:01:27 PM
Not Now, what is the legal age for gun ownership in Florida or for concealed weapon permitting?  I know kids can own rifles, is that the same for handguns?

18 for rifles, 21 for handguns I believe.
Thank you Not Now.  So is it then illegal for a child under 18 to use a hunting rifle.  (outside of this discussion I know but just curious.

Mitch, according to what Not Now just shared, had Trayvon brought a gun to the fight that night he would have done so illegally.  Just a point worth considering when talking about that particular interaction and what may have happened. ;)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 05:02:25 PM
Which law is the "outrage" about?  The one that doesn't apply to this case?  The jury didn't see Zimmerman as the aggressor. 

Any other "outrage" is simply an outside agenda.

actually.  you are saying that either the jurors who have spoken up are lying or you simply don't know what you are talking about.

five of the six looked for convictions.

And the legal system which allows you to take up for your buddy who shot kiko battles to death in front of his grandmother is what I'm referring to.

Now if you would like to re discuss the long history of precedents pushed forward by cops killing people on this basis that came before the stand your ground measures that were part of the jury instructions, then I will be glad to oblige you by linking to Chrisw's 900 different articles about cops killing young men.

But hopefully ive been able to clearly define what i am alluding to without having to retread the old conversations.

94% of black people murdered are murdered by black people. Couldn't we make more of an impact by focusing on that number than the other 6% by (presumably) Hispanics, whites, and cops? I get it. Murder is bad. Period. I don't want to see anyone murdered. But I don't need a bunch of people who make a living by race baiting and their "look at me, I know a black person, but didn't grow up with any" white guilted counterparts in the media telling me I should be outraged by a guy being found not guilty of murder.
For the purpose of discussion, what is the source of the facts in this statement and will you please share them with a link?  Thanks
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 05:07:19 PM
Not Now, what is the legal age for gun ownership in Florida or for concealed weapon permitting?  I know kids can own rifles, is that the same for handguns?

18 for rifles, 21 for handguns I believe.
Thank you Not Now.  So is it then illegal for a child under 18 to use a hunting rifle.  (outside of this discussion I know but just curious.

Mitch, according to what Not Now just shared, had Trayvon brought a gun to the fight that night he would have done so illegally.  Just a point worth considering when talking about that particular interaction and what may have happened. ;)


Children can hunt with their parents.  Or other responsible adults.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 05:28:50 PM
Thanks for the more reasoned response.  I certainly understand the frustration felt.  I could recount many, many jury verdicts that I did not personally agree with, along with many more State Attorney or judicial decisions.  I have learned to live with our imperfect system, as you have. 


A point that I have been meaning to bring up to Lake...Black people or Gay people aren't the only ones who have an honest fear about walking places not only in the South but throughout the country.  Some of the posts you see here reflect the feeling of many whites that they are targeted and taken advantage of.  Even your implication of "yuppie apartments" is an example.  Blacks don't have the sole claim on being poor either.  The vast majority of whites struggle economically as well. 

I think we can all agree that racism in any form is detrimental.  And that despite the failings and constant attention that our criminal justice system requires, it is still the best system we have yet devised.

We can continue to disagree on political issues like gun control.  But we can only communicate when we are exchanging ideas based on facts.  Shouting matches result in...shouting matches.  I know I have been guilty of many of them.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 05:30:08 PM
I actually agree with most of what you said. I'm all about victim advocacy. Would you disagree that had Zimmerman not had a gun he may have been the victim? Although it is likely none of us would be familiar with the case.

Since everyone is pretty much making assumptions now, GZ would not have died. He just would have been a victim of a good ass kicking for a fight he started.

Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 05:36:40 PM
A point that I have been meaning to bring up to Lake...Black people or Gay people aren't the only ones who have an honest fear about walking places not only in the South but throughout the country.  Some of the posts you see here reflect the feeling of many whites that they are targeted and taken advantage of.  Even your implication of "yuppie apartments" is an example.  Blacks don't have the sole claim on being poor either.  The vast majority of whites struggle economically as well.

I really don't understand why everyone keeps saying race isn't an issue but keeps isolating events and people based on skin color.  I've been pretty consistent on all of these threads with my claim that crime isn't skin color specific.  The real relationship focuses on economics and environment. 

Quote
I think we can all agree that racism in any form is detrimental.  And that despite the failings and constant attention that our criminal justice system requires, it is still the best system we have yet devised.

There's always room for improvement. Tragedies like this will continue to push us to improve and tweek laws where needed.

Quote
We can continue to disagree on political issues like gun control.  But we can only communicate when we are exchanging ideas based on facts.  Shouting matches result in...shouting matches.  I know I have been guilty of many of them.

Definitely agree here.  My head is about to pop as I keep reading posts featuring cherry picked statistical data (clearly taken out of context), like black-on-black crime.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 05:44:48 PM
I agree that economics is the main driver.  The social problems have to be solved as well though.  It seems so simple...focus on jobs and education.  I suppose the difference between most of us would be just how to get people to work and how to keep kids in line and in school.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 05:47:16 PM
Well Ennis, don't let your head explode.  We all need you.  I would agree several of the ongoing threads are at the very least a challenge to walk though emotionally and intellectually, but this forum is doing far better in these conversations than any other social exchange I have seen currently taking place.

As far as statistics go, they are literally all over the place depending on who is doing the counting.  The only ones I can currently have in faith in are those that are in the hands of the Sheriffs office which are based on the records of crime, arrests, convictions and incarcerations for Jacksonville.  I don't have the recent numbers but they may be available on the JSO site.  However they would only represent Duval.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 05:50:30 PM
I agree that economics is the main driver.  The social problems have to be solved as well though.  It seems so simple...focus on jobs and education.  I suppose the difference between most of us would be just how to get people to work and how to keep kids in line and in school.

Social is based off of economics and environment.  What you have now is the result of several economic, political and environmental factors in place over several previous generations.    The focus is simple.  However, I think many of us may be too impatient in the wait for large scale results.  It took us generations to get to where we are today and it could take just as many to go in an opposite direction.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 05:52:58 PM
For those who are interested, here is a link to the JSO where you can find stats and info about our community including crime.  You can also contact JSO through this page and request information on criminal statistics, including breakdown by race.

http://www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office/crime-statistics.aspx
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 05:57:43 PM
There are two ways to make money... earn it or take it.   Earning it takes time.  Taking it gets you killed.

I'm a firm believer in motivation.  I think EVERYBODY wants to be successful, they just need a clear path and motivation.  Simply reward the positive, discourage the negative.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 05:59:39 PM
I agree that economics is the main driver.  The social problems have to be solved as well though.  It seems so simple...focus on jobs and education.  I suppose the difference between most of us would be just how to get people to work and how to keep kids in line and in school.

Social is based off of economics and environment.  What you have now is the result of several economic, political and environmental factors in place over several previous generations.    The focus is simple.  However, I think many of us may be too impatient in the wait for large scale results.  It took us generations to get to where we are today and it could take just as many to go in an opposite direction.
Indeed it will take a long time Ennis.  I don't know as I will be here to see the results but they will come with hard and insightful work.  I do believe your children will reap the benefit and the ones following them will marvel at these days and wonder why.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 06:01:47 PM
I said "make money".  I'm not talking about those that already have it.  And I'm not talking about 'fabulous wealth".  I'm talking about an increasing net worth that allows for a good life and a reasonable retirement.  The poverty stricken..don't have to be.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 06:02:54 PM
Indeed, but inheriting is not that bad.  :)
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 06:05:39 PM
Indeed, but inheriting is not that bad.  :)

I wouldn't know.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 06:08:11 PM
For those who are interested, here is a link to the JSO where you can find stats and info about our community including crime.  You can also contact JSO through this page and request information on criminal statistics, including breakdown by race.

http://www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office/crime-statistics.aspx

Maybe I missed it but I couldn't find the corresponding laying information on economic/environmental factors such as household income/educational levels, density, etc.  It's kind of hard to evaluate criminal statistics without understanding the context.

I know we don't have this, but it would be cool to see how public policy has impacted areas of higher than average crime over the years.  For example, historically, have certain neighborhoods been the victim of real estate redlining, meaning long time families have not seen much gain in wealth in property owned since WWII?  Are some areas dealing with the placement of federally funded housing projects where high densities of low income households are grouped together in a compact setting? 

To some, these questions may seem crazy but if this information was overlayed with crime data, combined they could tell an interesting story.  Such data could also be used in the planning of our city, revitalization of economically distressed neighborhoods, turning around stagnant neighborhoods, and preserving economically viable areas.  Such data could also look at the economic status of neighborhoods where schools and libraries have already been closed.  This could help us make rational decisions when it comes to our local budget cutting process that rears its ugly head every summer.

Anyway, I'm just brainstorming out loud.  I'd love to see what others have to think about this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Cheshire Cat on July 17, 2013, 06:11:34 PM
For those who are interested, here is a link to the JSO where you can find stats and info about our community including crime.  You can also contact JSO through this page and request information on criminal statistics, including breakdown by race.

http://www.coj.net/departments/sheriffs-office/crime-statistics.aspx

Maybe I missed it but I couldn't find the corresponding laying information on economic/environmental factors such as household income/educational levels, density, etc.  It's kind of hard to evaluate criminal statistics without understanding the context.

I know we don't have this, but it would be cool to see how public policy has impacted areas of higher than average crime over the years.  For example, historically, have certain neighborhoods been the victim of real estate redlining, meaning long time families have not seen much gain in wealth in property owned since WWII?  Are some areas dealing with the placement of federally funded housing projects where high densities of low income households are grouped together in a compact setting? 

To some, these questions may seem crazy but if this information was overlayed with crime data, combined they could tell an interesting story.  Such data could also be used in the planning of our city, revitalization of economically distressed neighborhoods, turning around stagnant neighborhoods, and preserving economically viable areas.  Such data could also look at the economic status of neighborhoods where schools and libraries have already been closed.  This could help us make rational decisions when it comes to our local budget cutting process that rears its ugly head every summer.

Anyway, I'm just brainstorming out loud.  I'd love to see what others have to think about this.
That may not be online Ennis.  It may have been a hand out during a meeting some time back.  I will try and remember what department put it together.  There is a crime mapping overlay I believe online.  If I can remember the department that had the economic overlay info perhaps you can create an overlay. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 06:23:04 PM
I said "make money".  I'm not talking about those that already have it.  And I'm not talking about 'fabulous wealth".  I'm talking about an increasing net worth that allows for a good life and a reasonable retirement.  The poverty stricken..don't have to be.
  Some one has to be, notnow.  the system is based on a 15% poverty level or below constant.  Until we eliminate human labor, you have to have cheap labor for it to work the way it does now.

Hence illegal immigration, poverty zones and the prison industry.

"The system"?  What is your source?  I would postulate that such activity is because of the poverty, rather than in support of it.  Illegal immigration undercuts wages in this country in some areas.  (Meatpacking as an example.)  I'm not sure what "poverty zones" you are speaking of...and prisons...are not an industry.  They are a drag on society that should be greatly reformed into something completely different for most prisoners.  I am sure that we will disagree on this. 

No one is "doomed" to poverty.  There is no law saying any one individual or group cannot get an education, training, and a job.  What stops them?  That is where our efforts need to be focused.  Eradicate what stops people from accomplishing success.  Be brave enough to expect success.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 06:52:21 PM
I am pretty familiar with prisons, or at least the concept.   Perhaps you misunderstand.  My statement is meant to emphasize that "prison" cannot be a useful industry.  Locking up human potential is very wasteful, no matter how many guards you employ. 

I know why the incarceration rate is rising.  And we can do a lot locally to reduce that, while changing our system of punishment. 

but the discussion is about poverty and its relationship with crime...don't forget.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 06:54:08 PM
Are you really convinced that 15% of the population must live in poverty?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 07:11:05 PM
Again, if you would simply stick to exchanging facts and ideas rather than speaking down to people, some might actually consider some of your points. 

As for prison industry, I can point you to the Florida State Prison PRIDE site:

http://www.dc.state.fl.us/pub/annual/9596/pride.html

And yes, Arizona's imigration laws were about border security.  The controversial part was allowing state and local officers to enforce federal immigration laws.   Immigration violators are returned to their home country. 

Once again, you are becoming argumentative without accurate information.

Now, last chance for a real exchange of information, are you ready to discuss the original subject, which is economic status and its effect on crime?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: strider on July 17, 2013, 07:18:03 PM
Not sure why everyone is so upset with the Stand Your Ground Law. It was not applicable in this case and it disproportionately BENEFITS black suspects more than white suspects in Florida.

Why Stand Your Ground Is Central To George Zimmerman’s Case After All

By Nicole Flatow on Jul 15, 2013 at 1:59 pm (found on Think Progress)

The Stand Your Ground law that gained notoriety in the wake of Trayvon Martin’s shooting became central to the case again last week, when written instructions advised the jury that found shooter George Zimmerman not guilty to take the law’s central provision into account.

The law that authorizes the use of unfettered deadly force with no “duty to retreat” sparked national outcry last year when police cited the statute as grounds for not arresting George Zimmerman for more than a month. Since then, reports and studies have shown that similar laws on the books in at least 21 states are discriminatory, applied arbitrarily, and associated with a higher rate of homicides. But the law faded from center stage after police pursued arrest of Zimmerman 44 days later, and Zimmerman’s lawyers opted not to specifically raise the law as a defense during trial. Had the lawyers moved to formally raise Stand Your Ground as a defense, the judge would have held a hearing devoted to whether the law immunized Zimmerman from criminal liability, and the case might have ended without ever going to a jury.

Zimmerman’s lawyer chose instead to go to trial, once again declining to specifically raise “Stand Your Ground” as a defense and keeping the law out of the trial. But the principle’s irrelevance ended the moment the jury received their instructions for deciding the case.

As Ta-Nehisi Coates reveals, the written instructions that sat with the jurors as they deliberated made very clear that under Florida law, a shooter has a right to stand his ground:

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Since Zimmerman’s lawyers opted not to invoke Stand Your Ground as a defense, observers have characterized this case as a regular old “self-defense” case, rather than a “Stand Your Ground” case. But what these jury instructions make clear is that, in Florida, there is no longer an effective distinction. Stand Your Ground is the state’s self-defense law, whether or not a defendant opts to hold a hearing specifically on the question. In fact, this section on the “Justifiable Use of Deadly Force” is the only place in all 27 pages of jury instructions in which the phrase “self-defense” is used.

And self-defense now means shooters may stand their ground not just to prevent death or great bodily harm, but also to prevent the “commission of a forcible felony.” Those who wonder why jurors didn’t expect that a reasonable person in George Zimmerman’s situation should have taken lesser action than firing a deadly shot at a kid whose arsenal consisted of candy and a soft drink – regardless of whether or not he attacked Zimmerman — may find their answer on page 11 of the jury instructions.

Given this instruction, it is worth pointing out that George Zimmerman was studying criminal justice at an online college, including Florida’s Stand Your Ground law. After jurors watched the recording of a Fox News interview in which Zimmerman claimed to have no knowledge of Florida’s Stand Your Ground law, his college professor testified that the law was covered extensively in his class, and that Zimmerman was “probably one of the better students in the class” and received an A.

Regardless of whether Zimmerman was well-versed in the statute and exploited it to his advantage, it remains the law in Florida. Its inclusion in the jury instructions as an explanation of self-defense makes all the more compelling the jury’s reasonable doubt about Zimmerman’s legal culpability, even if, as Emily Bazelon suggests, Florida is undoubtedly guilty.

The Stand Your Ground law may once again play a pivotal role in civil lawsuits against Zimmerman. As legal commentators have pointed out, the Stand Your Ground law provides the same opportunity for defendants to seek immunity from civil liability that it does from criminal, if a judge finds the defendant’s use of force was justifiable under the law’s standards. And as in this case, even if a judge doesn’t find Zimmerman immune, a jury would once again be instructed to take the Stand Your Ground rule into account.

UPDATE
In an interview on Anderson Cooper 360 Monday night, an anonymous juror from the Zimmerman panel said the Stand Your Ground law was a major factor in their deliberation.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: strider on July 17, 2013, 07:26:17 PM
NotNow, is there a established state definition of the term aggressor?  I know sometimes government definitions differ from what the normal publicly accepted definition is.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 07:27:50 PM
I am pretty familiar with prisons, or at least the concept.   Perhaps you misunderstand.  My statement is meant to emphasize that "prison" cannot be a useful industry.  Locking up human potential is very wasteful, no matter how many guards you employ. 

I know why the incarceration rate is rising.  And we can do a lot locally to reduce that, while changing our system of punishment. 

but the discussion is about poverty and its relationship with crime...don't forget.

Well not now, what do you think we do with prisoners?  They don't go do something socially useful anymore.  Perhaps some of the local jails do....

But the prison work force is a paid for facility subsidized by the american taxpayer designed to create a perfect low wage non unionized assett for industrial production.  Many of them have been retooled to manufacture parts for industry, and the private groups that own the prisons simply charge the corporations for providing them with low cost production and goods (based on slave labor) and pocket the profits.  Voila.  Its a huge industry based on enforced impoverization.  something like a million souls who arent getting out of prison anytime soon, because they are now too highly skilled at their jobs to be let go.

Did you seriously think Arizona's immigration laws were about border security?

lol.

Nothing to do with this thread but this is just a false impression of prisons fostered by years of corruption. The number of beds and inmates has been decreasing the last two years and will continue to this year. Once the Crosby incident happened in 2006 the Florida DC underwent what could now be considered a paradigm shift. This is a subject I am intimately involved with and have every report, statistic and consult done on DC since 2000 filling my den. But like I said, has nothing to do with this thread but had to put my $.02 in on such a large discrepancy.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 07:30:12 PM
It would be helpful if the Tampa piece had just let the commentary go and given just the facts of the cases.  I won't put too much into that bit of journalism until I see unbiased case briefs.
m
Agreed, I had thought same
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 07:34:02 PM
Are you really convinced that 15% of the population must live in poverty?

How do you think the system of the past twenty years works?

Once again, you are living in the past.  I am discussing the future.

When you shrink the middle class and concentrate the majority of the wealth into a few hands, there really isnt enough total wealth to support more than about 80% of the Americans in a lower to middle class lifestyle.

A statement made with no basis in fact, but simply repeating ideology that you have read.  This is a sad point of view.

Its not that there is unlimited money circulating and you need to go dig up a portion of it, you know.

There is a constant demand for skilled labor and knowledge.  Our young people should be filling that demand.
http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9231486/10_hot_IT_skills_for_2013

There are very hard working people who will never be worth more than a few thousand people, and it doesnt have anything to do with 'how hard' they want it.

I suppose you meant "a few thousand dollars".  I disagree.  Anyone can "work smarter".   Will you gain wealth cleaning a house for a room + $50 a week?  No.  How about if you clean five houses for $20 an hour?

Its something I was trying to talk to you about a couple of years ago with the migrant labor issue.  Do you really think that most Americans could afford to eat if the food was being harvested and processed by people making American wages?  Or even minimum wage?

What do you rely on for this view?  You seem to want to speak for the entire agriculture industry, while you are unaware that many farms work at minimum wage or higher.  While some dependency on less than legal wages has been developed, why would anyone want to continue such a system?  Slave wages for non citizens?  In your world if the illegal immigrant is granted citizenship he/she will no longer be able to work, unless they work for illegal wages.   None of that drivel is true.

If you think about it, students live in poverty while going through college. Its part of the experience for most people.  If they could afford to work a job and pay for their school, why on earth would they be desperate to take on the crippling debts that are more than mortgages used to be in order to get a degree?

Poverty?  Debts more than mortgages?  Most young people are still supported by their parents.  For those of us who financed our own education, there are many options.  Mine was the GI Bill.  And anyone that is borrowing as much as a mortgage better be finishing medical school.   Many states are fighting the rising cost of education.  This should be encoraged.

And right now, 1 out of every 6 Americans are getting food stamps.  Now thats in addition to all the people who don't really qualify.

Yeah.  I don't agree with the democrats ruining opportunity either.  And it is getting worse.  The answer to food stamps..and welfare is jobs.

What do you think the real statistics are when you factor in migrant labor, 2 million people in prisons, many many more in jails and work farms, and the undocumented poor?

I don't know what "real statistics" you are referring to.

Perhaps you should consider what I suggested several posts ago, completely rethinking how we punish criminals.  and again providing a clear step by step path to success to our young people and rewarding productive behavior, while strongly taking a stand against destructive or negative activities.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 07:35:08 PM
I am pretty familiar with prisons, or at least the concept.   Perhaps you misunderstand.  My statement is meant to emphasize that "prison" cannot be a useful industry.  Locking up human potential is very wasteful, no matter how many guards you employ. 

I know why the incarceration rate is rising.  And we can do a lot locally to reduce that, while changing our system of punishment. 

but the discussion is about poverty and its relationship with crime...don't forget.

Well not now, what do you think we do with prisoners?  They don't go do something socially useful anymore.  Perhaps some of the local jails do....

But the prison work force is a paid for facility subsidized by the american taxpayer designed to create a perfect low wage non unionized assett for industrial production.  Many of them have been retooled to manufacture parts for industry, and the private groups that own the prisons simply charge the corporations for providing them with low cost production and goods (based on slave labor) and pocket the profits.  Voila.  Its a huge industry based on enforced impoverization.  something like a million souls who arent getting out of prison anytime soon, because they are now too highly skilled at their jobs to be let go.

Did you seriously think Arizona's immigration laws were about border security?

lol.

Nothing to do with this thread but this is just a false impression of prisons fostered by years of corruption. The number of beds and inmates has been decreasing the last two years and will continue to this year. Once the Crosby incident happened in 2006 the Florida DC underwent what could now be considered a paradigm shift. This is a subject I am intimately involved with and have every report, statistic and consult done on DC since 2000 filling my den. But like I said, has nothing to do with this thread but had to put my $.02 in on such a large discrepancy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/44936562/ns/business-cnbc_tv/t/private-prison-industry-grows-despite-critics/#.Ueco7pU_7PY

After I posted that I thought I should have gone back and edited. I was speaking purely in terms of Florida. Each state is responsible for the operation of their own prisons and the federal government (illegal immigrants fall here) for their own facilities.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 08:09:30 PM
I read your link about private prison industries.  I can see how you could come to the conclusions that you have.  Are you aware that only 16% of the prison population (Federal) work in such industries?  Most perform sundry duties around the prison for less money (meal prep, etc.).

What "digging" have you done?  I have shown you the demand for skills and skilled labor in this country.  Your argument that "there's not enough money to go around" has no basis in reality.  Is there any study that substantiates such a claim?  Your characterization of both the need for illegal wages and the "poverty" of college students was ... just.... incorrect.  Off the cuff?  Your statements exemplify "off the cuff".

I do not accept that we can not defeat poverty and all of the injuries that it causes people.  I refuse to accept that nothing can be done.  We have a federal government that freely spends TRILLIONS of dollars.  We can change this.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: HisBuffPVB on July 17, 2013, 08:15:06 PM
The jury spoke. The jury system, a jury of peers, goes back some 800 years, peers mean citizens, and is a color blind term, eg. one does not have a jury based on a racial, age or other makeup, it is made up of people qualified who are then vetted by both the prosecutors and defense. It may be open to discussion as to whether racial makeup should be considered. Both sides present their evidence within the rules of evidence. Both sides bring forth witnesses, depending on the ability and the quality of the attorney's, some witnesses are better prepped than others, though all are supposed to tell the truth as they know it to be, in fact are sworn to tell the truth. Having lost a grandson, I grieve for the family who in this case lost their son, but the jury heard all the evidence and the arguments and the jury spoke.
Now, personally, I think that GZ was overcharged and the prosecutor could not overcome that decision, I thought he would get manslaughter, but never thought the elements of 2nd degree murder were in play. I further think that it would be improper for the justice department now to file charges against GZ, again, the elements for Civil Rights violations will not be in play.
My heart goes out to Trayvon's parents. I am only lucky that at 17 I did not get into a situation like that.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 08:31:47 PM
NotNow, is there a established state definition of the term aggressor?  I know sometimes government definitions differ from what the normal publicly accepted definition is.

I am not aware of a definition in the statutes.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 08:36:46 PM
NotNow, is there a established state definition of the term aggressor?  I know sometimes government definitions differ from what the normal publicly accepted definition is.

I am not aware of a definition in the statutes.

True there isn't and I even believe it is up to the police officer or state attorney's interpretation of the events to define and determine "aggressor" case by case
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: I-10east on July 17, 2013, 08:37:09 PM
Yall heard about this "Boycott Florida" stuff because of the stand your ground law. Although Florida isn't exactly the only state with stand your ground with twenty-thirty some odd states using this law. I guess that the backlash is from all of these high profile cases; Even though the most high profile one, the law wasn't used.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 08:40:42 PM
^I am still undetermined as to whether its a real thing or media hyperbole. Surprisingly enough, there is a true stand your ground defense going to through Duval right now that has recieved very little media attention. It was the teenager shot at the gas station, the name is escaping me right now.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: I-10east on July 17, 2013, 08:47:48 PM
^^^Jordan Davis. All of the posts I saw on TU (which kinda have a rep for conservative posters) think that the Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis cases are 'apples and oranges' with the Davis case being clearly the 'slam dunk' one as Michael Dunn was dead wrong, and the other case arguments can be made either way. I have to agree with that sentiment.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:09:11 PM
Michael Dunn shot Jordan Davis at the Gate.  Did Dunn's attorney make a motion for a SYG dismissal?
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 17, 2013, 09:20:12 PM
Which law is the "outrage" about?  The one that doesn't apply to this case? 

If you are saying the stand your ground law didn't apply that is not quite true.  Where as GZ did not use the stand your ground defense the passage of that law radically changed jury instructions in self defense cases.


Pre stand your ground instructions:

"The defendant cannot justify the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless he used every reasonable means within his power and consistent with his own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force.

The fact that the defendant was wrongfully attacked cannot justify his use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm if by retreating he could have avoided the need to use that force."

Stand your ground current instructions:

If the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I don't know what difference that would have made but yes stand your ground is part of this case.
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 09:23:58 PM
Michael Dunn shot Jordan Davis at the Gate.  Did Dunn's attorney make a motion for a SYG dismissal?

I do not believe the motion has been filed yet, but it has been claimed as his defense. Of course, being that he has switched lawyers maybe that'll change.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JayBird on July 17, 2013, 09:26:38 PM
^Now there is an angle I had not considered.  Do we have criminal lawyers on MJ?  Valid?  It does back up Ennis' initial statement that the law is what needs to be changed.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:43:51 PM
As usual, you are veering waaayy off of the subject.  Do you now want to patter back and forth about government spending?  Just google us federal spending for the most recent year.  You will find SS and medicare/medicade are the largest chunks.  Are we done now? 

This thread is about the Zimmerman case.  Lake and I were discussing the effect of poverty on resulting criminal activity.  I hate to chide a moderator but please stick to the subject of the thread.

Returning to my original point, prisons are NOT industries (Perhaps I should have said "not meant to be industries".)  We should rethink how punishment for criminal acts is conducted in this country.  I reiterate that poverty is NOT a requirement for any percentage of the population or group of the population. 
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 17, 2013, 09:44:36 PM
^Now there is an angle I had not considered.  Do we have criminal lawyers on MJ?  Valid?  It does back up Ennis' initial statement that the law is what needs to be changed.

Here is the link where I found the info I had hear it on the radio first.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/07/16/media-neglect-that-stand-your-ground-is-centerp/194916
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:51:12 PM
For a realistic look at the jury instructions, read them in their entirety here:

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf
Title: Re: Trayvon Martin Case plus related discussion of Law and Racism
Post by: NotNow on July 17, 2013, 09:52:48 PM
I am not privvy to the facts of that case either.  But it appears to be much more clear cut.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: JeffreyS on July 17, 2013, 10:07:20 PM
NN  the PDF contains the exact verbiage I typed save for it replaces "George Zimmerman" for "the defendant".(pg 12 paragraph 5) Thanks for posting the instructions it is an interesting read. Particularly the part about Manslaughter being a higher standard than just negligence.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: Ocklawaha on July 17, 2013, 10:15:48 PM
Ock, i don't think those who are disappointed need lectures about what they think and what the laws are. My issue revolves around precedence, the message sent and potential of future conflicts generating similar confrontations like this. Because I've been in situations like this growing up, my personal perspective may be a little different. Nevertheless, I hope this case at least leads to a movement that results in the modification of certain laws and legal interpretations. No one should die from a confrontation generated from being followed in the dark by an armed stranger.

Sorry you got your feathers ruffled, simply expressing an opinion that those that want to try this over, and over, and over, and over again, need to move on. Jessie Jackson made a great point tonight when he spoke of change with dignity, speaking directly to the isolated incidents of violence and rioting. There are indeed messages in the precedence.  Attacking someone could prove to be fatal - DON'T DO IT! The guy that kills you might walk away from court as a free man - Which isn't going to help you if your the dead guy.

You completely missed the point of the OJ reference, precedence? Should White women fear for their lives because a Black man many considered guilty was on the loose in LA? NO. Because 'considered guilty' is without standing, OJ was innocent. Likewise Black citizens have nothing to fear from 'White Hispanics' (if they could find one).

This trial was turned into a circus within a couple of days when the media advertised Zimmerman into a new race - 'A White-Hispanic Man.' At that point this whole sorry case devolved into a rebroadcast of every 'White on Black crime' stereotypical story, ever told.

Had both men been Black, Hispanic or White chances are we would have never heard a thing about it only 100 miles up the road. Turn it into a race crime, rather then a cluster F**k with a bad ending and you have people calling for Zimmerman's execution.

OPINION. Do I like the Stand Your Ground Law? I can see where it might be useful in a burglary, robbery, rape or attempted murder where the victim has a weapon. I can also see where it will have a lot of grey area that needs to be tended to.
Title: Re: Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
Post by: thelakelander on July 17, 2013, 10:40:34 PM
Ock....I was just being real by offering a common viewpoint typically overlooked by the mainstream.  In pages 1-45 of this thread, many of us hav