The George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Travesty

[nysprod]

George Zimmerman was in his car when he saw Trayvon Martin walking in a neighborhood where, in his view, he didn't belong. He called 911 to report a "suspicious guy." A 911 dispatcher told Zimmerman not to follow him. Trayvon Martin called a friend and told the friend that someone was following him. Zimmerman then got out of his car and followed Trayvon Martin on foot, eventually getting close enough to make physical contact. Trayvon Martin was scared, and he asked Zimmerman "why are you following me?" The two men then got into an altercation. Trayvon Martin was shot and killed during that altercation by George Zimmerman.

In Florida, the use of deadly force is justified in cases where, to paraphrase, you have fear that your life is threatened. In theory, this applies to when you are attacked, or have a justifiable fear of being attacked.

But what happens when you are the attacker, as George Zimmerman was that night, and then become frightened for your life after putting yourself in a position you never should have been in the first place? Apparently in Florida, killing is then justified.

The travesty is that Trayvon Martin was a black youth who was walking in a white neighborhood, which was enough to make him "suspicious" in the eyes of George Zimmerman. And, there is a high degree of probability that, had George Zimmerman had not followed him and initiated contact, Trayvon Martin would be alive today because Trayvon Martin was trying to get away from George Zimmerman

George Zimmerman is a wannabe cop, whose application was rejected due to a poor credit history. He had no business following and then initiating contact with Trayvon Martin; a 911 dispatcher told him not to. He ignored what the dispatcher told him and decided on his own to take what he considered to be the "law" into his own hands and killed Trayvon Martin.

The undisputed fact in this case is that George Zimmerman would never have feared for his life if he had not done what he was told not to do...he never would have been in "danger" in the first place had he not followed and made contact physical contact with Trayvon Martin.

So in Florida, if you're white, you can follow a black man who you deem to be "suspicious," initiate contact, get "scared," and then kill him.

Apparently.

[SugaSweet]

Zimmerman is Hispanic,or at least he was until the last few weeks in the media.

[SP27]

So in Florida, if you're hispanic, you can follow a black man who you deem to be "suspicious," initiate contact, get assaulted with your head repeatedly slammed into concrete, and then shoot him in self defense.

Apparently.


ftfy


if you spend five minutes listening to the testimony in the court proceedings, how can anyone be surprised he was found not guilty?

[dderek123]

Yeah really. Don't let TV news get your knickers in a twist.

[dderek123]

Read this on another forum. Just copied and pasted his post.

"I present to you the facts. I also included my opinion at the end but you can feel free to ignore that part.

Who:

George Zimmerman: - 29 Years Old - Hispanic Male - Insurance Fraud Investigator - Spearheaded a Neighborhood Watch program after a string of burglaries. - Lives in a gated community in Sanford Florida. - Record of Assaulting a Police Officer


Trayvon Martin: - 17 Years Old. - Black Male. - Student - Suspended from school for Vandalism - Participated in and refereed illegal MMA fights. - Lives in Miami Gardens, Visiting father's France's house in Zimmerman's neighborhood.


Rachel Jeantel - Trayvon's Friend. Originally claimed to be his girlfriend. - Was on the phone with Trayvon during the moments leading up to the shooting. - Originally claimed to be 16. That's why she was not featured before the trial. She is actually 19. - Ms. Jeantel has offered a few variations of events. For simplicity we will use the version she gave during the trial.


Where:
Sanford Florida. Gated community where Zimmerman lives as well as Tracy Martin's fiancé.

When:
February 26, 2012 between 7pm and 8pm. It was raining and getting dark.

What:
-Trayvon was visiting his fathers fiancé.
-Trayvon went to the gas station to get skittles and iced tea.
-Zimmerman notices Martin walking through people's yards.
-Zimmerman calls the non emergency line for the Local PD.
-Zimmerman describes Martin to dispatch and requests a police officer.
-Zimmerman says These Fucking Punks always get away.
-Trayvon notices Zimmerman watching him as tells Jeantel it is a creepy ass cracker.
-Trayvon continues to walk through people'a yards.
-Zimmerman gets out his his car in order to follow Trayvon and see why he is traveling through people's yards.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel "The nigga still following me"
-Trayvon begins to run towards his fathers finances house.
-Zimmerman begins to run in order to keep sight of Trayvon.
-Dispatcher hears wind noise and asks Zimmerman what he is doing.
-Zimmerman states he observing the subject and trying to find an address for the PD to intercept Trayvon.
-Dispatch tells Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that"
-Zimmerman stops and loses sight of Trayvon.
-Zimmerman heads back to his car.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel that he lost Zimmerman and he is right outside his fathers finances house.

*Up until this point Zimmerman's story and Jeantel's testimony match. Now the stories diverge.*

Zimmerman's Version: - As he is walking back to his car Trayvon approaches him and asks, "You got a problem?!" - Zimmerman says "No" - Trayvon says "You do now" - Trayvon attacks Zimmerman and smashes his head into the sidewalk. - Zimmerman draws his weapon while Trayvon is on top and fires into his chest killing him.

Jeantel's Version: (From Trial) - Trayvon is outside his Fathers finances house. - Trayvon suddenly says, "Oh Shit" - Jeantel hears Zimmerman say, "What you doing here?" - Jeantel then says she hears a bump and wet grass sounds and the phone goes out.

My opinion: - Jeantel's version doesn't make sense. If Mr. Martin was already at his Father's finances house then the altercation would have occurred there and not over a hundred yards to the north towards Zimmerman's SUV.
I think what happened was Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman. After all he didn't feel he was doing anything wrong and would've been pissed that a white guy was following him as wanted to teach him a lesson.


I think we had two hot headed individuals that both had opportunities to walk away.
Unfortunately they didn't and one was killed.
I believe that Zimmerman had every right to simply observe Trayvon and call the police.
Unless we can prove that Zimmerman walked up to Trayvon and started a physical confrontation with him then his claim of self defense should be upheld.
Just because Trayvon was annoyed that a (what he thought was) white guy was following him does not give him the right to use any physical force.
It all comes down to who threw the first punch. Based on witness testimony and the layout of the neighborhood I believe that Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman."

[Gillian]

Wasn't the problem that the prosecutor went for murder when manslaughter/culpable homicide would have been a safer bet?

US prosecutors are elected and so look to pander to their electorate, but this isn't the case in the UK or Scotland, for example.

[dderek123]

Wasn't the problem that the prosecutor went for murder when manslaughter/culpable homicide would have been a safer bet?

US prosecutors are elected and so look to pander to their electorate, but this isn't the case in the UK or Scotland, for example.

Yep that was a part of it. Maybe they were trying to pander to the ratings on TV.

[fred41]

here's the link to thread in the political section where this discussion has been ongoing :
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?t=65131

[nysprod]

Wasn't the problem that the prosecutor went for murder when manslaughter/culpable homicide would have been a safer bet?

US prosecutors are elected and so look to pander to their electorate, but this isn't the case in the UK or Scotland, for example.

They went for manslaughter also, where jurors only needed to decide that Mr. Zimmerman put himself in a situation that culminated in Mr. Martin’s death.

Surely, he did that.

But because of Florida’s laws, prosecutors had to persuade jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self-defense, which was impossible because there definitely was a fight between the two men, and Zimmerman had injuries.

[youngblood61]

Tough case, wasn't surprised by the verdict.

[EZWind]

Tough case, wasn't surprised by the verdict.
me too as well...not the least bit
...the operative key words here are Travesty and Florida...the 2 seem to go hand in hand....from the recount fiasco in 2000 to the current governor w/ his voter suppression and anti abortion BS and everything in between....I called it from the git go

[SugaSweet]

The prosecution blew this one plain and simple.Complete ineptitude.

[jennyj23]

If people in the media would let things be and race hustlers like Jesse and Al would have left it alone, this case would have never went to trial. It doesn't help when Obama sticks his nose in things and the justice dept. sends people in to help gin up racial unrest.

[JenniferParisHusband]

WOO HOO! About to put the law degree to some use. No offense to Dderek, who has an excellent post on this, which I've copied part of below. I've edited it for relevance to the actual charge of murder, and the lesser included charge of manslaughter.

Before I do that though, a quick lesson in Criminal Law 101. Should be fairly straight forward, but for some of the foreigners who might be looking at this, I'm kind of trying to get them up to speed.

1) First, charges. Murder has various degrees in US Courts. Murder 1, Murder 2, etc. These vary by state but most Murder charges usually have a mental state of intent to kill. That's pretty much all you really need to know about Murder. Manslaughter is tricky and varies by State, here in the USA. There are two types, voluntary and involuntary. Look, a link!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manslaughter_(United_States_law)

With voluntary, the types of manslaughter, 1) Provocation, is you are the person provoking the altercation, and "accidentally" kill someone. As will be seen below, this doesn't apply as technically Zimmerman didn't provoke this. Imperfect Self Defense. Doens't apply as Florida has Self Defense as a complete defense. And finally, Diminished Capacity. This is usually reserved for people with mental illness or defects.

With involuntary manslaughter, there are only two rellevant types that would apply here. First, Constructive, you need to have a misdemeanor involved. As I'm going to explain below, Zimmerman was not committing any misdemeanors at the time. It seems very hard to believe, but it's actually true. The second type Criminally negligent, you really have to have acted in a way that shows you have no respect for human life, you are acting recklessly and endangering others. This is the only manslaughter type that technically applies. But under Florida law, Criminally neglegent manslaughter doesn't exist. Only Constructive.


2) Defenses - Within each criminal act, there are defenses. Self Defense is obviously the one most people go to. Insanity, duress, and others are included. But each one of these defenses is limited and may only be applied in certain circumstances. There are limits to the amount of force you can use. For example, you may only use the amount of force it takes to get a normal person to stop beating you. If you are weaker, you can pick up a log and clock someone to get the to stop. The problem is, if they've stopped, you can't wail on them with a log until they're dead, that's excessive. Only the force required to provide defense. Remember this, because why Zimmerman is free will make sense later on in this posting. There is also the concept of mitigating circumstances. With regard to manslaughter, yeah the shooting of a gun may not have been meant to kill someone, but can you aim a warning shot while getting beat down? Can you keep from flinching in a way that keeps you from a reflex pulling of the trigger?

The same perfect defense of Self Defense for Murder, works with Manslaughter too, in Florida.

3) The Irrelevant Stuff - Every other lawyer I know, knew Zimmerman was going to get off with an acquittal. It was a no-brainer to most of us. Prosecutors don't count, they think everyone is guilty and should get the chair. Real attorneys, we knew better. Stand Your Ground, that got a lot of hype in the news. It was never mentioned at trial. It was irrelevant and didn't apply. So forget about it, don't let it boil your blood, and don't let the media get you worked up over this. It's irrelevant and has nothing to do with the verdict. In fact, just read the earlier post below, and notice which of the facts were actually relevant. You'll see the ones I removed noted.





"Who:


George Zimmerman: - <Irrelevant Section Omitted> - <Irrelevant Section Omitted>
- Spearheaded a Neighborhood Watch program after a string of burglaries.
- Lives in a gated community in Sanford Florida.
- Record of Assaulting a Police Officer



Trayvon Martin: - <Irrelevant Section Omitted>. - <Irrelevant Section Omitted>
- Suspended from school for Vandalism
- Participated in and refereed illegal MMA fights. <this is highly relevant to the level of defense needed in response.>
- Lives in Miami Gardens, Visiting father's France's house in Zimmerman's neighborhood.



-Rachel Jeantel - Trayvon's Friend. Originally claimed to be his girlfriend. <deceit> -
-Was on the phone with Trayvon during the moments leading up to the shooting. <untrustworthy testimony based on other lies previously told> -
-Originally claimed to be 16. <deciet, can be used to show testimony is untrustworth> That's why she was not featured before the trial. She is actually 19. <Shows character trait of deciet.> -
-Ms. Jeantel has offered a few variations of events. <lack of consistency in statements, shows possible deceit.>
Where:Sanford Florida. Gated community where Zimmerman lives as well as Tracy Martin's fiancé.

When:
February 26, 2012 between 7pm and 8pm. <Irrelevant Section Omitted>

What:
-Trayvon was visiting his fathers fiancé. <relevant only for establishing location, and destination>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>.
-Zimmerman notices Martin walking through people's yards. <relevant to show possible thread, as suspected burglars might be dangerous, and/or armed>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-Trayvon continues to walk through people'a yards. <continues to establish pattern of possible burglar, possibly dangerous.>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-<Irrelevant Section Omitted>
-Zimmerman heads back to his car. <THE MOST IMPORTANT UNDISPUTED PART OF THIS TRIAL. Shows lack of intent to harm Martin by Zimmerman, he gave up, and retreated.>
-Trayvon tells Jeantel that he lost Zimmerman and he is right outside his fathers finances house. <Also important. All Martin had to do was go inside the house. The end, no one gets hurt.>

*Up until this point Zimmerman's story and Jeantel's testimony match. Now the stories diverge.*

Zimmerman's Version:
- As he is walking back to his car Trayvon approaches him and asks, "You got a problem?!" <This shows Martin is the agressor, not Zimmerman.>
- Zimmerman says "No" - Trayvon says "You do now" <relevant for intent on the part of Martin to do harm to Zimmerman.>
- Trayvon attacks Zimmerman and smashes his head into the sidewalk.
- Zimmerman draws his weapon while Trayvon is on top and fires into his chest killing him.

Jeantel's Version: (From Trial) <Bear in mind that the witness has already been shown to lie about facts, herself, and her relationship to the Martin. Her entire testimony is untrustworthy, and might as well be discarded. Read what is below, but then ignore it, and realize you only have the undisputed facts above, and then the Zimmeran variance, which has factual support, and for all intents will be treated as fact, since there is nothing trustworthy to dispute it.>
- <Irrelevant Section Omitted>
- <Irrelevant Section Omitted>
- Jeantel hears Zimmerman say, "What you doing here?" <untrustworth, cannot be relied upon.>
- <Irrelevant Section Omitted>


Nothing else mattered. Look, it sounds horrible to say this, but you have to look at it without lives being involved. Like numbers or two bricks with conflicting stories.

The part where Zimmerman follows Martin. Doesn't matter. I can in any of the 50 US States and the United Kingdom (I'm working on my Solicitor's License there, we just covered this) I can get out of my car and follow you 2 inches away from you at any time, and as long as I have a right to be in that place, I can follow you anywhere. No joke. So Zimmerman getting out of the car and following? Irrelevant. If someone is following you, you call the cops. Or you go somewhere they can't follow you, like inside your father's fiance's house, or knock on a neighbors door and ask them to call the cops or let you in. That's all you have to do.

I can follow you and ask you all kinds of questions. You don't have to answer them unless I can identify myself as law enforcement, and provide proof of that. Even then, you don't have to answer any questions without legal representation present, as long as you make that wish known to the law enforcement official. Martin didn't want to answer any questions, great, walk inside the house, give him the finger and say "when you get a badge, you know where I'll be." Done, easy, and no one dies.


I'm going to ignore my usual disdain for NYSPRod, because he actually does bring up something important below



They went for manslaughter also, where jurors only needed to decide that Mr. Zimmerman put himself in a situation that culminated in Mr. Martin’s death. <See the Manslaughter definition above, remove everything that is irrelevant from the facts, and then you realize that manslaughter wasn't going to happen either. >

Surely, he did that. <No He didn't. Not by any legal standard.>

But because of Florida’s laws, prosecutors had to persuade jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Zimmerman did not act in self-defense, <That's pretty much the law in every state, not just Florida.> which was impossible because there definitely was a fight between the two men, and Zimmerman had injuries. <Again no, because there are levels of defense that you may use.>


Here's the part that is going to mess with your head. Under the law, if you pick a fight with Mike Tyson, first, you're a really stupid person. But also, you are going to get your ass handed to you. Even if you pick the fight, deliver the first blow, if you are getting creamed by Tyson, you are allowed the right under the law to retreat. Yeah, you'll be suffering in a hospital, and have permanent injuries, but you'll live to tell the tale. Assault? Probably not, because in most jurisdictions, when Tyson joins in, you both have consented to fight. If Tyson won't let you retreat, run away to mommy and lick your wounds like the pussy you are, then he's on the hook for assault. Because you are no longer of consent.

So, Martin and Zimmerman. It doesn't matter who threw the first punch. At this point, they are fighting. Martin could have ran, could have stayed and took a beating, and Zimmerman would have a second assault charge and probably conviction. But he didn't. Martin fought back. Consent given, it's go time, and Zimmerman is going to get the beatdown of his pudgy little lifetime.

But wait.

When Zimmerman is on his back, on the ground, there is no ability to retreat. Consent to fight is no longer possible, as the ability to retreat is gone. Martin by being on top of him and pressing him to the ground is at this point, converted under the law, to the agressor and committing assault. At this point, since Zimmerman lacks the capacity to consent to the fight, and is helpless in his current state, he has options at law for defense.

Is there something nearby he can use as a weapon, other than the gun? No. There is some debate as to whether Martin was going for the weapon. If true, Zimmerman is now looking at being on the wrong end of deadly force being used against him with his own weapon. He is absolutely entitled to use "Like Force" meaning he can use deadly force for his own defense.

Ok, let's say Martin didn't go for the weapon at Zimmerman's hip. Instead, he's still getting beaten, and the only thing that happens is he reaches for the gun. That beadown is still happening, he is still only using the force necessary, to preserve his safety by pulling, and pointing the weapon.

The Outcome:
Murder? There was no intent provable. Zimmerman was walking back to his car. Nothing was ever shown that he systematically planned to follow and shoot him, and there was nothing ever shown that proved Zimmerman had intent to shoot him before the fight broke out, and the need for defense was presented.

Manslaughter: Negligence wasn't at issue, and isn't part of the Florida Law. Only Constructive Manslaughter applied in this matter, and Zimmerman had not committed a misdemeanor (or felony for that matter) at the time the gun was drawn.


So regardless of what you think of the outcome, the truth is that the Court, the Jury, and the legal system worked exactly as it should, and this is the correct outcome, despite the tragic and senseless loss of life that could have been prevented had two cooler heads prevailed, and things didn't spiral out of control.

I feel for Martin's parents, and am sorry for their loss. But again, the system worked as it should.

[bluesoul]

If people in the media would let things be and race hustlers like Jesse and Al would have left it alone, this case would have never went to trial. It doesn't help when Obama sticks his nose in things and the justice dept. sends people in to help gin up racial unrest.

well, the naacp have a petition to have the department of justice launch a civil rights investigation on the case- so it's not over yet

http://i.imgur.com/C9zvEJm.png

[TSPornFan]

Zimmerman should had been guilty of manslaughter.

Zimmerman's story doesn't make sense. Zimmerman is much bigger than Martin. Zimmerman is over 100 pounds bigger than Martin. He was the stronger person so I highly doubt Martin was able to put Zimmerman on the ground.

Secondly, there is no way that Zimmerman's head was banged into concrete. His head injuries would had been much worse. His injuries were pretty minor. None of his injuries were life threating.

Thirdly, let's look at Martin's point of view. There is a stranger following him. He is a young teenage who used common sense and tried to run away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman ran after Martin. Again let's look at this from Martin's point of view. What would a teenage think when a stranger is following and running after them? He clearly thought he was in danger.

Look at the facts.
http://thegrio.com/2012/03/19/trayvon-martin-15-facts-you-need-to-know-about-teen-shot-in-sanford-florida/

[bluesoul]

Thirdly, let's look at Martin's point of view. There is a stranger following him.

you've got it wrong. zimmerman wasn't following him. he was sitting in his car, noticed martin- martin noticed him, walked around then ran. zimmerman ran after him- was told not to do that, said "okay, i'll go back to the front and wait for the cops and tell them where he ran to" hang up and ran into martin.

[fred41]

WOO HOO! About to put the law degree to some use.
Hi JPH, could you post this in the other thread also. Wish you had posted this in that thread awhile ago...lol. You will notice that you'd be one of the very few people with a criminal law degree that post in the political section.

This is an emotional case...you will find that some people won't argue the actual definition of the law with you...they will argue according to what they think the law should be....or believe it is. They don't realize that most of them would never have been picked as jurors in this case because of their preconceived notions.
Good luck in your career counselor. BTW...are you a practicing criminal lawyer?

[TSPornFan]

you've got it wrong. zimmerman wasn't following him. he was sitting in his car, noticed martin- martin noticed him, walked around then ran. zimmerman ran after him- was told not to do that, said "okay, i'll go back to the front and wait for the cops and tell them where he ran to" hang up and ran into martin.

You've contracted yourself in the bold print.

Zimmerman was following him. He was following Martin by driving in his SUV. Martin noticed this and eventually ran when Zimmerman continued to follow him in the SUV. Zimmerman continues following Martin by running after Martin.

[danthepoetman]

I just fell on this one...
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/969907_531583060230545_758286606_n.jpg

[Silcc69]

I just fell on this one...
https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc3/969907_531583060230545_758286606_n.jpg


Black folks don't have 2nd amendment rights.

[DCGuy343]

Black folks don't have 2nd amendment rights.


:iagree:

Black people are also not treated the same as others.

[Quiet Reflections]

the really messed up thing is no matter whether he is guilty or not the only people that will care about this case next week will be the ones trying to sell something. That is just the world we live in.

[robertlouis]

Only in America would hispanic be described as a race.

I know hundreds of Spanish people, most of them white. :confused:

[robertlouis]

Wasn't the problem that the prosecutor went for murder when manslaughter/culpable homicide would have been a safer bet?

US prosecutors are elected and so look to pander to their electorate, but this isn't the case in the UK or Scotland, for example.


Excellent point. And in Scotland there is still recourse to the not proven verdict as well, which would have been appropriate in this case.

[youngblood61]

me too as well...not the least bit
...the operative key words here are Travesty and Florida...the 2 seem to go hand in hand....from the recount fiasco in 2000 to the current governor w/ his voter suppression and anti abortion BS and everything in between....I called it from the git go:iagree: 100%!

[notdrunk]

Black folks don't have 2nd amendment rights.

Actually, you need to learn some basics about Florida's stand-your-ground law. In Florida, you can claim self-defense and/or immunity under the stand-your-ground law. Zimmerman's lawyer(s) argued that he should be found not guilty because he was defending himself from an attack. They didn't claim that his self-defense falls under their state's stand-your-ground law. Under Florida's stand-your-ground law, the statute grants a defendant immunity from criminal prosecution. During a pretrial hearing, a Judge decides if the defendant is granted immunity. Zimmerman waived that hearing. The trial was about plain o' self-defense.

Marissa was sentenced to 20 years because the shooting didn't fall under the stand-your-ground law and she had a crappy lawyer. She left to get a firearm to fire those warning shots. Under the law, she wasn't in imminent danger because she left the threat.

[bluesoul]

You've contracted yourself in the bold print.


do you mean contradicted?

also, i disagree with your series of events. that's not what was presented in court, which might be the reason you think zimmerman is guilty

[buttslinger]

WOO HOO! About to put the law degree to some use.
So regardless of what you think of the outcome, the truth is that the Court, the Jury, and the legal system worked exactly as it should, and this is the correct outcome, despite the tragic and senseless loss of life that could have been prevented had two cooler heads prevailed, and things didn't spiral out of control.


If Zimmerman had been found guilty by the jury, then the system would have worked just as well.

[dderek123]

WOO HOO! About to put the law degree to some use.

Wicked post man.

[nysprod]

If a white guy ventured into a black neighborhood and a black man followed and confronted him on the basis he thought the guy was there to commit a crime, and there had been a fight which resulted in the white guy being killed, does anyone have any doubt at all the outcome of a trail would be the exact opposite of what happened in the Zimmerman case?

[Ben in LA]

If a white guy ventured into a black neighborhood and a black man followed and confronted him on the basis he thought the guy was there to commit a crime, and there had been a fight which resulted in the white guy being killed, does anyone have any doubt at all the outcome of a trail would be the exact opposite of what happened in the Zimmerman case?

I had the same question.

[FrankBurns]

Isn't Zimmerman Hispanic? This has nothing to do with white vs black, the race card is played far to often for far to many things. With the evidence that was presented there was no other verdict possible, the state of Florida over charged him instead of going for a lesser charge from the beginning. At the same time i was surprised at a straight "not guilty" i was expecting a hung jury.

[Ben]

Isn't Zimmerman Hispanic? This has nothing to do with white vs black, the race card is played far to often for far to many things. With the evidence that was presented there was no other verdict possible, the state of Florida over charged him instead of going for a lesser charge from the beginning. At the same time i was surprised at a straight "not guilty" i was expecting a hung jury.

His father is white. And his mom: Hispanic....

[DCGuy343]

Black folks don't have 2nd amendment rights.


I had the same question.

Not a chance of that, I am afraid that the country is taking steps back rather than moving forward.

- Look at what is going on in multiple states around the abortion issue (several are sneaking in changes with various gimmicks).

- Voting rights amendment being basically nullified (watch all of those same states make it harder to vote)

- We are headed back to these times it seems.....

Medgar Evers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medgar_Evers)

Emmett Till - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till)

[nysprod]

Isn't Zimmerman Hispanic? This has nothing to do with white vs black, the race card is played far to often for far to many things. With the evidence that was presented there was no other verdict possible, the state of Florida over charged him instead of going for a lesser charge from the beginning. At the same time i was surprised at a straight "not guilty" i was expecting a hung jury.

He's half Peruvian, half white.

[natina]

Hispanics are European

they have spanish ancestry



The problem arises because people refer to

hispanics as "the 4th race" when in fact they are a hybrid of the three fundamental races.

But the point with language is that words mean what people mean by them and not a textbook or scientific definition. And in that sense, most people see enough commonality among enough hispanics for the word to have common currency.

So, they become a de facto race.


hispanic's have origin from spain


hispanic's are a mix with white,native american,african

The Eyes of Nye - Race


YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCDcl9s9Vh4&feature=channel)

YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzGM1nv_oow&feature=channel)

YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EyeNi6qsfs&feature=channel)

Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey (Part 1 of 13)
YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OV6A8oGtPc4&feature=related)

White skin appeared just 20,000 to 50,000 years ago, as dark-skinned humans migrated to colder climes and lost much of their melanin pigment.

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/feb/20-things-skin


see there is no biological basis for the idea of a white or black or asian


Race is an old concept that should probably be discarded. It was

created by people who had a very limited knowledge of their world. If you

look at any genetic map (mitochondrial or Y chromosome DNA), you can

see there is no biological basis for the idea of a white or black or asian

race.

Here's a map

http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/journey/

"I was able to trace the family trees of several prominent people

everyone regardless if you are white ,Spanish ,Mexican or Asian

can traced there origins back to two Ethiopians ,a man and a women.


these two Ethiopians are everyones ancestors


http://www.africandna.com/tests.aspx
http://www.africandna.com/tests.aspx

http://www.africandna.com/

http://www.africandna.com/history.aspx

http://www.africandna.com/history.aspx
http://www.africandna.com/tests.aspx


Henry Louis “Skip” Gates, Jr., (born September 16, 1950) is an American literary critic, educator, scholar, writer, editor, and public intellectual.



Only in America would Hispanic be described as a race.

I know hundreds of Spanish people, most of them white. :confused:

[EZWind]

If people in the media would let things be and race hustlers like Jesse and Al would have left it alone, this case would have never went to trial. It doesn't help when Obama sticks his nose in things and the justice dept. sends people in to help gin up racial unrest.

....if Jesse and Al had let things be, there wouldn't even have been a case to not go to trial. Sharpton got involved, not on his own as a "hustler", but at the behest of the grieving parents whose son had just been murdered and the Sanford cops had let the admitted killer (whose father was a judge) go scott free w/out even an arrest. Had it been your teenage son whose life had been snuffed out, you would be grateful for some "hustlers" to step in and demand justice.

[robertlouis]

He's half Peruvian, half white.

....and all twat.

[buttslinger]

Maybe a pussy who fears for his life fighting a skinny black kid shouldn't be in law enforcement. Maybe he should mind his own business.

[natina]

I believe Zimmerman tried to do an MMA take down of Trayvon Martin

(zimmerman took MMA)
but Trayvon manged to flip Zimmerman over and beat him up.

did Trayvon have grass stains or cement dust on his back?

I hope one day we find out the truth.
I already know zimmeran is a lying pack of shit!

if you are Hispanic you have Spanish ancestry and are therefore European.
you were rejected as being white because your religion was different then the white Pilgrims who cam here.
you most likely had catholic upbringing

[TSPornFan]

I believe Zimmerman tried to do an MMA take down of Trayvon Martin

(zimmerman took MMA)
but Trayvon manged to flip Zimmerman over and beat him up.

did Trayvon have grass stains or cement dust on his back?

I hope one day we find out the truth.
I already know zimmeran is a lying pack of shit!

if you are Hispanic you have Spanish ancestry and are therefore European.
you were rejected as being white because your religion was different then the white Pilgrims who cam here.
you most likely had catholic upbringing

I don't believe Trayvon flipped Zimmerman over. I believe Zimmerman slipped and fell. Zimmerman weights 250 punds and Trayvon weighted 140 pounds. Trayvon was a skinny kid and I doubt he could had body slammed Zimmerman.

[natina]

both zimmerman and Trayvon learned MMA but zimmerman was not good at it.

the trainer said that in court but i do not know if thats true but its looks like zimmerman is weak when it comes to fighting cause a very skinny kid got the best of him.

zimmerman is a brand new pussy and pussy's get fucked!

just wait until the civil trial when they take all his money like they did OJ SIMPSON

I am very small and many women who I was in college with are small but we had JUDO for P.E. and we use to flip and slam many big guys.


you have to use leverage and physics and not so much muscle. when you use good technique it look so effortless and sweat.
judo is called the "GENTLE WAY"

[bobvela]

I had the same question.

You clearly didn't pay much attention to the trial or the testimony or evidence presented there.

I've been a court watcher for years... this case had many very unique aspects (ending with the jury asking a question about a question... but never asking the final question prior to the verdict (what a way to make lawyers on both sides panic)... one of them... was the fact that not only was witness after witness for the prosecution more supportive of the narrative presented by the defense than that of the prosecution... but it was the state... NOT the defense that kept trying to introduce elements of reasonable doubt throughout the trial.

The roles of the prosecution and defense are generally well understood... in this case they were reversed and the defense proved self-defense while the state just skipped around (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Sg3je0H48O8#t=88s).

Years from now... law students will look back at this case as an example of an incompetent prosecution trying to push a case that never should have been brought to trial in the first place.

[natina]

The Zimmerman Jury Told Young Black Men What We Already Knew (http://gawker.com/the-zimmerman-jury-told-young-black-men-what-we-already-770650992)

Tonight a Florida man’s acquittal for hunting and killing a black teenager who was armed with only a bag of candy serves as a Rorschach test for the American public. For conservatives, it’s a triumph of permissive gun laws and a victory over the liberal media, which had been unfairly rooting for the dead kid all along. For liberals, it's a tragic and glaring example of the gaps that plague our criminal justice system. For people of color, it’s a vivid reminder that we must always be deferential to white people, or face the very real chance of getting killed.
When I was junior in college in Virginia, my then-girlfriend and I decided one night to meet up for a quick snack while studying for midterms. We bought some sandwiches at a 24-hour deli and, rather than waste time going to either of our homes, which were in opposite directions, we decided to eat in her car in a parking lot near a fancy hotel off-campus. We were listening to music and laughing about something when I saw a security guard’s headlights in the rear view mirror, and I stopped laughing as I watched him—a white man in his mid-40s—walk up to my girlfriend’s door and ask her to step out of the car. “Uh, OK,” she said, clearly as confused as I was about what we’d done to warrant his attention.
He walked her away from her car toward his, but they were close enough that I could hear their conversation. He asked her her name, a slight southern lilt lengthening his vowels. She told him. Then he said, “Are you OK? “
“What do you mean?” she said.
“Are you safe right now?” he asked again.
My girlfriend was white. I am not.
I leapt out of the car and screamed, “What the hell did you just ask her?” I wanted to see if he had the resolve to say it again, to me this time.
The security guard turned to face me. “It’s standard procedure, sir,” he said. “I was going to ask you if you were alright, too.”
“I think you’re lying,” I said.
“You can think what you’d like,” he said, a smile creeping up his face. “We can also call the police right now and sort this all out, because y’all aren’t supposed to be here and this is private property.”
I wanted to hit him in his fucking face. I wanted to take his flashlight from his belt and smash his teeth out, giving him a real reason to call the cops, a reason besides the crime of eating a sandwich in a parking lot.
But I was a 20-year-old brown kid in Virginia. It was late. I was with a white girl. I felt embarrassed, and the thought of being surrounded by more inquisitive white men with pepper spray and tasers and handcuffs and guns only made my face hotter. And so I apologized. “I’m sorry,” I said. “We didn’t know this was private property.”
“Well, now you know,” he said.
My girlfriend drove me home, where I stewed for hours and promised myself I’d report the guard in the morning. When I woke, however, I realized I didn’t have the guard’s name, nor did I even know what to report—it’s not against any rules to ask a white woman if the black man in the car with her is attacking her. It’s not against any rules to humiliate someone in a darkened parking lot in front of the person they love. It may, however, be against the rules to eat food in the parking lot in the first place. I never reported it. I think about it to this day.
It is a complicated thing to be young, black, and male in America. Not only are you well aware that many people are afraid of you—you can see them clutching their purses or stiffening in their subway seats when you sit across from them—you must also remain conscious of the fact that people expect you to be apologetic for their fear. It’s your job to be remorseful about the fact that your very nature makes them uncomfortable, like a pilot having to apologize to a fearful flyer for being in the sky.
If you’re a black man and you don’t remain vigilant of and obsequious to white people’s panic in your presence—if you, say, punch a man (http://gawker.com/racist-goldman-sachs-employee-gets-punched-in-face-bla-769148234) who accosts you during dinner with your girlfriend and screams “Nigger!” in your face, or if you, say, punch a man (http://gawker.com/will-george-zimmerman-get-away-with-murder-757850043) who is following you without cause in the dark with a handgun at his side—then you must be prepared to be arrested, be beaten, be shot through the heart and lung and die on the way home to watch a basketball game with your family. And after you are dead, other blacks should be prepared for people to say you are a vicious thug who deserved it. You smoked weed, for instance, and got in some fights at school (like I did)—obviously you had it coming. You were a ticking time bomb, and sooner or later someone was going to have to put you down.


http://gawker.com/the-zimmerman-jury-told-young-black-men-what-we-already-770650992

[natina]

Zimmerman verdict in Martin case shows justice’s flaws



Did the system work? Was justice served? We like to think of those questions as identical. After all, the point of a criminal justice system is to dispense justice. But with the acquittal of George Zimmerman (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/zimmerman-trial-jurors-request-clarification-on-manslaughter-instructions/2013/07/13/3a26dbbe-ec0c-11e2-aa9f-c03a72e2d342_story.html) on charges of murdering Trayvon Martin, the system worked, yet justice fell short. This outcome is simultaneously sad but healthy — sad because a 17-year-old boy is dead and his killer walks free; healthy because the verdict seems justified as a matter of law.
There is an important place for emotion in criminal proceedings, both for mercy and for outrage. But the system cannot function if it consistently elevates emotion over rules.
Both sides, naturally, see the Zimmerman verdict through the lens of their own preconceptions. “This will confirm for many that the only problem with the New South is it occupies the same time and space as the Old South,” said NAACP President Benjamin Jealous (http://www.thetowntalk.com/viewart/20130714/NEWS01/130714008/NAACP-wants-federal-charges-brought-against-Zimmerman), invoking the memory of 14-year-old Emmett Till, who was killed in 1955 after supposedly flirting with a white woman and whose murderers were acquitted. “Old South justice,” thundered Jesse Jackson (http://www.freep.com/article/20130714/NEWS07/307140110/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-verdict).
This comparison is unfair. No doubt race played a role in Martin’s death. Zimmerman likely would not have called the police about a white teenager — even a white teenager wearing a hoodie — walking back from a 7-Eleven.
But there is no evidence that race played a role in Zimmerman’s acquittal. If anything, the racial undertones worked against Zimmerman, increasing public pressure on prosecutors to bring the most serious — and, in hindsight, the most difficult to support — charges against him.
Contrast the Zimmerman trial with that of Till’s murderers. The courtroom was segregated. No hotel would rent rooms to black observers. The local sheriff welcomed black spectators to the courtroom with what was described as a cheerful use of the vilest racial epithet. The New South is not perfect, but it is not the Old.
The overreaction from the left is mirrored by the overreaction from the right, and without the excuse of being swept away by emotion over a child’s unnecessary death. Conservative Roger L. Simon lamented (http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2013/07/13/obama-big-loser-in-zimmerman-trial/) on PJ Media that Zimmerman “will never live a normal life” and described the prosecution as “quite literally, the first American Stalinist ‘show trial.’ ”
That is, quite literally, deranged. Of course no decent person responsible for killing an unarmed teenager could “live a normal life.” And the entire point of “show trials” was that the outcome, unlike Zimmerman’s acquittal, was foreordained.
Which brings us back to the uncomfortable divide between the criminal justice system and justice itself. One way to understand that gap is to think of the episode as a video. The criminal justice system zooms in, and properly so, on one short segment, a snapshot in the larger narrative.
Whatever preceded the fight between the two men, the central question, as a matter of criminal law, was precisely what occurred in the immediate moments before Zimmerman fired the fatal shot. Zimmerman instigated the tragic chain of events, but legally that was not relevant. To convict Zimmerman of second-degree murder (http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-convicted-murder-manslaughter/story?id=19598422#.UeMYaqzgdVA), prosecutors had to prove that he did something that he knew was “reasonably certain” to kill or seriously injure and acted with “ill will, hatred, spite or an evil intent.” Even for the lesser charge of manslaughter, they had to rebut his claim of self-defense, showing that he could not “reasonably believe” shooting Martin was “necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm.”
Justice takes the longer time frame. Zimmerman may not be legally responsible for Martin’s death but he remains morally culpable.
Another way to understand the divide is through the prism of legal rules, which may serve the broader ends of justice but produce unjust results in the short run. Thus the exclusionary rule for illegally seized evidence, meaning that some criminals go free because the constable has blundered.
Likewise, the law’s requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal convictions presumes tolerance for a certain amount of unjust results. We accept the bargain, in Blackstone’s formulation (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/68589/Sir-William-Blackstone/68589suppinfo/Supplemental-Information), that it is “better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer.”
Zimmerman’s acquittal is not the end of this sad story. Because of the lower burden of proof, a civil lawsuit by Martin’s family would have a better chance of success. A federal prosecution on civil rights charges would be a mistake; the state trial failed to show adequate evidence of racial animus to sustain such a case.
In the end, society must accept that there is not always a perfect fit between a criminal justice system and justice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ruth-marcus-zimmerman-verdict-in-martin-case-shows-justices-flaws/2013/07/14/7f7eae6a-ecc7-11e2-a1f9-ea873b7e0424_story.html

[SuzySnappz]

http://gawker.com/the-zimmerman-jury-told-young-black-men-what-we-already-770650992

I have to respect the decision of the jurors based on the evidence in this case. But one good thing to come out of reading the link Natina posted was running across this heartwarming story on the same page: http://gawker.com/racist-goldman-sachs-employee-gets-punched-in-face-bla-769148234

[JenniferParisHusband]

A lot of replies since I posted, let me cherry pick a few to comment on....



Hi JPH, could you post this in the other thread also. Wish you had posted this in that thread awhile ago...lol. You will notice that you'd be one of the very few people with a criminal law degree that post in the political section.

This is an emotional case...you will find that some people won't argue the actual definition of the law with you...they will argue according to what they think the law should be....or believe it is. They don't realize that most of them would never have been picked as jurors in this case because of their preconceived notions.

Good luck in your career counselor. BTW...are you a practicing criminal lawyer?


I did criminal law when I was getting the first law degree. I went back for a second law degree that was more focussed on international law and contracts. I don't practice in Criminal Law anymore, too hard to get your clients to pay when they're behind bars.

Yeah, emotions tend to run pretty close to the surface when it comes to something like this. It's hard for most people to be dispassionate about it. Most people though don't follow the trials that closely either and pick and choose their facts, and don't get the instructions on the proper application of the laws to those facts. Best rule of thumb for anyone looking at a trial like this, as it is with anything else in life, always take a step back, look at all the pieces calmly and rationally, and make an informed decision.



Black folks don't have 2nd amendment rights.


Slightly incorrect. Black folks don't have money to spend on a good defense. Poverty, not whether you are white, black, asian, hispanic, or even martian, is the key factor that prevents most innocent people from being found not guilty. And I don't know enough about that woman's case to say whether she is or innocent. But money is the one thing that separates victory in court from defeat. OJ Simpson (I know, I know don't go there), Ray Lewis, they got away with it. They also had money. Just saying.



Marissa was sentenced to 20 years because the shooting didn't fall under the stand-your-ground law and she had a crappy lawyer. She left to get a firearm to fire those warning shots. Under the law, she wasn't in imminent danger because she left the threat.


Like I said above, I don't know enough about this case to make an informed judgment, but that is a correct application of the law. Defense has to be imminent threat of harm. It's why someone like Sylvia Boots, even though the shooting was accidental in that case, couldn't claim self-defense. Sylvia went back to her car to get the weapon, as I remember her case. The threat wasn't imminent there either, even if it had been building for months. If this Marissa went to go get a gun, then she should have stayed where she was, as she had retreated from danger and called the cops. There was no need at that point to go back and fire warning shots, unless it was in defense of others, in which case she would have had to be using "like force" and they would have had to have been under threat of imminent danger. I'm going to guess that there wasn't.



If Zimmerman had been found guilty by the jury, then the system would have worked just as well.

Not by the facts I saw. Then there would have been two victims, one from a gun, and one from a revenge verdict. What would you have based guilt on? Seriously, please look at the facts again. Re-read the application of the law that I posted. Where is the guilt? Are you saying self-defense should be abbolished? A boy died, and that is a tragedy, a horrible tragedy. And Zimmerman is going to be haunted by that for the rest of his life. He is going to replay his mistakes in his head as long as he lives. His life as he knows it, over. Let's see how many friends he has after this. Let's see how easy he's going to have it at work, if he can even find a job. I worked with a kid named Michael Fay once. He was found guilty of a crime in a S.E. Asian country and was caned three times. He left after a week at the blockbuster video we worked at, too many people asking him if we had copies of "Citizen Kane" and "Empire Strikes Back." Trust me, people are going to make Zimmerman pay for what he did. His life is ruined. He will suffer. He may not get the needle, and he may not be in an 8x12 cell, but putting him in jail when the facts don't call for it. That makes him a victim too. And then there is the Civil Suit. That one, the Martin family will win, and I will enjoy the result immensely.



....and all twat.

Amen! Completely agree!!! (he was referring to Zimmerman there.)



Maybe a pussy who fears for his life fighting a skinny black kid shouldn't be in law enforcement. Maybe he should mind his own business.


Agreed, although neighborhood watch doesn't really count as "law-enforcement." That's a few dozen notches below rent-a-cop, and even mall-cop.




Years from now... law students will look back at this case as an example of an incompetent prosecution trying to push a case that never should have been brought to trial in the first place.

Worse than that. Most people forget that it took massive public protests and pressure from the State and Federal Government to get this to trial. Initially, they weren't going to prosecute him at all. The Prosecution knew from the start that the facts it had, gave them no chance at winning.

[Ben in LA]

You clearly didn't pay much attention to the trial or the testimony or evidence presented there.

I've been a court watcher for years... this case had many very unique aspects (ending with the jury asking a question about a question... but never asking the final question prior to the verdict (what a way to make lawyers on both sides panic)... one of them... was the fact that not only was witness after witness for the prosecution more supportive of the narrative presented by the defense than that of the prosecution... but it was the state... NOT the defense that kept trying to introduce elements of reasonable doubt throughout the trial.

The roles of the prosecution and defense are generally well understood... in this case they were reversed and the defense proved self-defense while the state just skipped around (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Sg3je0H48O8#t=88s).

Years from now... law students will look back at this case as an example of an incompetent prosecution trying to push a case that never should have been brought to trial in the first place.
AS THE PICTURE SAYS...if everything was the same, EXCEPT the races of Zimmerman and Martin were switched, do you REALLY believe the same outcome would have occurred?

Obviously you do; others don't.

[youngblood61]

If a white guy ventured into a black neighborhood and a black man followed and confronted him on the basis he thought the guy was there to commit a crime, and there had been a fight which resulted in the white guy being killed, does anyone have any doubt at all the outcome of a trail would be the exact opposite of what happened in the Zimmerman case?No Doubt!!!!

[nysprod]

The way the laws are written in Fla. now, you can follow someone you don't like, actually chase them down and confront them. even after you've spoken to a 911 dispatcher who's told you to do the exact opposite...and if then an altercation occurs and the pursuer kills the pursued, it's self defense.

So the thing that needs to be done is for the laws to be re-written because common sense should dictate that once you hunt down and confront, all bets regarding self defense should now be off.

Not that I think they're going to be changing these laws any time soon, or at least until a white guy, or a half-peruvian half white guy, is killed by a black man.

Trayvon Martin was dead as soon as George Zimmerman decided to hunt him down and confront him because if he would have killed George Zimmerman in the altercation, he would have been convicted and sent to jail for the rest of his life anyway.

So he had no chance.

[youngblood61]

The way the laws are written in Fla. now, you can follow someone you don't like, actually chase them down and confront them. even after you've spoken to a 911 dispatcher who's told you to do the exact opposite...and if then an altercation occurs and the pursuer kills the pursued, it's self defense.

So the thing that needs to be done is for the laws to be re-written because common sense should dictate that once you hunt down and confront, all bets regarding self defense should now be off.

Not that I think they're going to be changing these laws any time soon, or at least until a white guy, or a half-peruvian half white guy, is killed by a black man.You said the magic word common sense. Do you think anybody in Fla. has that?

[nysprod]

You can always depend on lawyers and politicians to write laws that defeat common sense...I mean, think about it from a common sense standpoint; how can you hunt down and confront a total stranger, get into an altercation with them that results in their death, and then win a not guilty verdict?

Only when politicians and lawyers have written the laws so as to allow that to happen.

And that's why I'd rather have a sister in a whore house than a brother who's a lawyer. Hell, I'd rather have a brother who's a transsexual prostitute working the streets than a sister who's a lawyer.

[Prospero]

I find myself in full agreement with NYSPROD's last few posts.

[nysprod]

There at least is some hopeful news regarding the case...according to the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/us/justice-department-to-restart-hate-crime-investigation-in-trayvon-martins-death.html?ref=us), the Justice Department is presently determining if George Zimmerman can be prosecuted under federal hate crime laws, although it's far from certain that he can be.

So there now is some reason to feel positive, but we'll see.

[buttslinger]

As much as I respect JenniferParis'Husband....some Prosecuting Attys must have seen something to put Zimmerman on trial, and the fact that it was a circus on every TV channel did come into play I think.

Here's my take, without the Police, and the Media, and six ladies in a jurybox.

An 8 year old black kid is allowed to run home crying with his tail between his legs, but a 17 year old is not. No way in Hell did Martin intend to kill Zimmerman, if Zimmerman had no gun, he would have ended up with a headache, and hopefully with an understanding that intimidating a guy in his own neighborhood who is doing absolutely nothing wrong is inviting trouble.

And if the jurybox had six males in their twenties, the Defense would have plead out to a lesser charge. On Day One.

[bluesoul]

yesterday in los angeles, people were protesting outside the cnn building because of the outcome of this case. so- why are people protesting 1 day later? and why to cnn? so they can be put on tv? if so- why then @ midnight?

[runningdownthatdream]

You can always depend on lawyers and politicians to write laws that defeat common sense...I mean, think about it from a common sense standpoint; how can you hunt down and confront a total stranger, get into an altercation with them that results in their death, and then win a not guilty verdict?

Only when politicians and lawyers have written the laws so as to allow that to happen.

And that's why I'd rather have a sister in a whore house than a brother who's a lawyer. Hell, I'd rather have a brother who's a transsexual prostitute working the streets than a sister who's a lawyer.


Indeed. And let's also remember that lawyers and judges all share the same background from an educational and institutional perspective. They think alike, share the same biases, prejudices, and are bigoted in the same ways. They can't help it - that's how they were trained. It's astounding the way seemingly irrelevant things in a persons' life will hold some significant meaning in a the courtroom. So you watch MMA? Well then you must have a violent nature - huge leaps of logic are taken with no factual evidence to support the conclusion and on this a conviction or acquittal is based.

Common sense is taken into account BUT the 'common sense' shared by those in the legal profession is different than the 'common sense' shared by those outside of it. It's amazing to watch the way judges and lawyers will deliberately work to influence the way the jury thinks and ultimately to get those jurors to throw away their common sense and replace it with lawyer-sense. So watching MMA becomes a negative trait, smoking weed becomes a negative trait, etc. Even though some of those jurors no doubt engage in those activities themselves!

[GroobySteven]

I'm not reading through this thread as I'm sure it's brpought some of the dickwads our of the closet saying Martin got what he deserved.
I'll leave it here for another 48-72 hrs to be debated and then moved to the politics section. My vacation is too precious to waste on this.

[Prospero]

enjoy your hols seanchai

[nysprod]

As much as I respect JenniferParis'Husband....some Prosecuting Attys must have seen something to put Zimmerman on trial, and the fact that it was a circus on every TV channel did come into play I think.



JenniferparisHusband is an asswipe...he could give a fuck that a 17 would never have been killed if George Zimmerman had not followed and confronted him. He's all about "look at me, I'm a lawyer, aren't I wonderful and smart?"

Prosecutors didn't want to bring a case against Zimmerman originally, obviously because they knew that as the laws were written, winning a conviction was next to impossible.

[runround04]

The court system aquitted him, he should be left alone, but no, Obama needs to stick his stupid face into it now. The lives of TWO people are not the direct concearn of the President. He has more pressing matters to attend to. Economy, terror, sending Jet fighters to Egypt that will fall into the wrong hands.


Whats more important, Zimmerman and his pistol or a jet fighter with missiles and bombs?

Oh, and Treyvon was a criminal up to no good, lets hope someone like him doesnt show up in your neighborhood....

[yodajazz]

you've got it wrong. zimmerman wasn't following him. he was sitting in his car, noticed martin- martin noticed him, walked around then ran. zimmerman ran after him- was told not to do that, said "okay, i'll go back to the front and wait for the cops and tell them where he ran to" hang up and ran into martin.

You believe Zimmerman's story. To me it makes no sense. The friend on the phone with Martin, had some key points. However the defense was able to distract from the essence of her testimony, by keeping her on the stand for hours, and making her angry, etc. Apparently there was some sort of verbal exchange between Martin and Zimmerman. Martin was under no duty to retreat, the stand your ground law really applied to him.

[bluesoul]

Whats more important, Zimmerman and his pistol or a jet fighter with missiles and bombs?


hrm... is that a trick question?

[african1]

All I have to say about this charade is that:

Thank Heavens for that in America we have a Justice System based on Jurisprudence, not founded on Ochlocracy.
People who are mad about the ruling may consider other locations. Visiting few "gore" websites will surely leave them thankful that mobe rule is felonious and tenuous in the US and most of the West.

[african1]

case in point



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/330947.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/330947.stm)

[mrwaxler]

I hope some one kills Zimmerboy

[yodajazz]

The court system aquitted him, he should be left alone, but no, Obama needs to stick his stupid face into it now. The lives of TWO people are not the direct concearn of the President. He has more pressing matters to attend to. Economy, terror, sending Jet fighters to Egypt that will fall into the wrong hands.


Whats more important, Zimmerman and his pistol or a jet fighter with missiles and bombs?

Oh, and Treyvon was a criminal up to no good, lets hope someone like him doesnt show up in your neighborhood....

This is exactly why this case is important to me. I walk to the store at night often. it is my way of exercise. I am concerned that I could be identified as a potential criminal purely because of my race. I have a son, who is autistic. We are proud of him for being able to walk to the store and shop. Should we try to lock him up in the house, because he is Black?

And by the way, we have no idea of Zimmeramn's high school record, and aspects of his history were excluded, from trial evidence. Trayvon Martin was on trial, for being killed. Apparently, being black is evidence of some sort of crime.

[DCGuy343]

The way the laws are written in Fla. now, you can follow someone you don't like, actually chase them down and confront them. even after you've spoken to a 911 dispatcher who's told you to do the exact opposite...and if then an altercation occurs and the pursuer kills the pursued, it's self defense.

So the thing that needs to be done is for the laws to be re-written because common sense should dictate that once you hunt down and confront, all bets regarding self defense should now be off.

Not that I think they're going to be changing these laws any time soon, or at least until a white guy, or a half-peruvian half white guy, is killed by a black man.

Trayvon Martin was dead as soon as George Zimmerman decided to hunt him down and confront him because if he would have killed George Zimmerman in the altercation, he would have been convicted and sent to jail for the rest of his life anyway.

So he had no chance.

:iagree:

Its not just Florida laws, the bigger issue is that most laws that are in place are not treating everyone equally and fairly.

[underdawg]

A suggestion. Why not have juries made up of lawyers/attorneys who are knowledgeable about law instead of common folk who are in many instances ill-equipped, not nearly educated enough, or simply want to get back to their lives and jobs, to unravel all the testimony of a trial like this one. Too simple? Yeah, maybe. They would probably deadlock on every trial.

[yodajazz]

All I have to say about this charade is that:

Thank Heavens for that in America we have a Justice System based on Jurisprudence, not founded on Ochlocracy.
People who are mad about the ruling may consider other locations. Visiting few "gore" websites will surely leave them thankful that mobe rule is felonious and tenuous in the US and most of the West.

Yes the US justice is better than mob rule. However, injustices can slip through the system, and people have a right to care about injustice. Lots of people were upset about the OJ Simpson verdict. He did not go back to his normal life when he was acquitted. He had been in movies, television commercials, etc.

[trish]

A suggestion. Why not have juries made up of lawyers/attorneys who are knowledgeable about law instead of common folk who are in many instances ill-equipped, not nearly educated enough, or simply want to get back to their lives and jobs, to unravel all the testimony of a trial like this one. Too simple? Yeah, maybe. They would probably deadlock on every trial.
We're entitled to a trial by our "peers". That's why the initial pool is usually chosen at random from voter registration lists. Of the lawyers attempt to sculpt the jury from that unformed clay to meet their needs.

[trish]

No we don't have mob rule. Thanks to "concealed carry" and "stand your ground" we now live in the wild wild west. Weren't those wonderful times?

[BBaggins06]

No we don't have mob rule. Thanks to "concealed carry" and "stand your ground" we now live in the wild wild west. Weren't those wonderful times?

Uh, Chicago had no concealed carry law until two weeks ago and that never stopped us from leading the nation in shooting deaths ...

[cameron47]

I live in Florida and you don't know the truth as the media doesn't tell the whole story. George Zimmerman is half white and half Hispanic....so he is not a white man. Secondly, Trayvon was no angel as he had a police record at 17 yrs. old...he had been thrown out of school twice, a drug user and was on drugs the night of the altercation. It's sad this happened but most people in Florida who know the whole story believe Mr. Zimmerman is not guilty.

[african1]

No we don't have mob rule. Thanks to "concealed carry" and "stand your ground" we now live in the wild wild west. Weren't those wonderful times?

Nature is not fair. Evolution was never fair. Some people are built stronger than others. You cannot expect a 5 foot tall woman or man to be able to protect themselves against a 6 foot 10" attacker or a mob attack.

Unless you are Bloomberg and can afford your own security detail, to level the playing field, we need the 2nd amendment, the concealed carry and stand your ground laws.

[african1]

I live in Florida and you don't know the truth as the media doesn't tell the whole story. George Zimmerman is half white and half Hispanic....so he is not a white man. Secondly, Trayvon was no angel as he had a police record at 17 yrs. old...he had been thrown out of school twice, a drug user and was on drugs the night of the altercation. It's sad this happened but most people in Florida who know the whole story believe Mr. Zimmerman is not guilty.

trust me they know. People are just acting dumb because of hidden agendas. Pictures of victim were photoshoped and respectable pictures of GZ were never used but rather his mugshots from 8 years ago.

[african1]

Uh, Chicago had no concealed carry law until two weeks ago and that never stopped us from leading the nation in shooting deaths ...

Of course. we must protect the poor criminals by blocking law-abiding citizens from owning and carrying arms.

[CORVETTEDUDE]

Our system in the United States of America, however flawed, is far better than that anywhere else. Were it not, we wouldn't have thousands of people trying to come here, both legally and illegally.

[african1]

Our system in the United States of America, however flawed, is far better than that anywhere else. Were it not, we wouldn't have thousands of people trying to come here, both legally and illegally.

...because it was drafted by the smartest, wisest and most well-read political thinkers to ever roam this earth. Those Framers were something else.

[trish]

Uh, Chicago had no concealed carry law until two weeks ago and that never stopped us from leading the nation in shooting deaths ...
Chicago also a huge metropolitan that is a hop, skip and a jump away from Wisconsin and Iowa. The borders are gun permeable.

[trish]

Nature is not fair. Evolution was never fair. Some people are built stronger than others. You cannot expect a 5 foot tall woman or man to be able to protect themselves against a 6 foot 10" attacker or a mob attack.

Unless you are Bloomberg and can afford your own security detail, to level the playing field, we need the 2nd amendment, the concealed carry and stand your ground laws.
So when was the last time you actually needed a gun to protect yourself? Did you know that in the U.S. on July 4 and seven year old was shot and killed by an asshole who pulled out his concealed gun and fired it into the sky in celebration? A gun in your home is more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting or used by family member to commit suicide then actually employed in protecting the family. Guns don't reduce risk of harm, they increase it.

[african1]

So when was the last time you actually needed a gun to protect yourself?

Thank God I never had to but these guys had to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBYSau64LOc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MPMG3hWmMk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COZm7uCCjHM

[trish]

Most people never need to ever defend themselves with a firearm. Yeah if you scour the world wide web you can find examples where guns were so used. You can also find examples of idiots accidentally shooting themselves, their children, their neighbors and other examples where idiots escalated a conflict unnecessarily into a gun fight by pulling out their concealed guns.

What's with the concealed shit anyway? Why not have the balls to carry in the open? Oh yeah, the bad guys will see whose carrying and pick them off first. Fantasy based reason is not reason at all...it's fantasy.

[african1]

So when was the last time you actually needed a gun to protect yourself? Did you know that in the U.S. on July 4 and seven year old was shot and killed by an asshole who pulled out his concealed gun and fired it into the sky in celebration? A gun in your home is more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting or used by family member to commit suicide then actually employed in protecting the family. Guns don't reduce risk of harm, they increase it.

Further you cannot change the laws based on few accidents by the low IQ. Accidental discharges do happen and it is unfortunate. The worst accidents are the one caused by police officers themselves.
A better way to avoid this is the requirement to complete a training course before letting a person acquire a weapon.

Weapon safety rules are very simple. These are the commandments of every responsible gun owner. They are:

1) Treat every weapon as if it were loaded.
2) Never point a weapon at anything you do not intend to shoot.
3) Keep you finger straight and off the trigger until you are ready to fire.
4) Keep weapon on safe until you intend to fire.

These are easy to remember and live by.

[trish]

It's not a few. It's thousands. And accidents don't just happen to the low IQ, though I admit it takes a pretty low IQ to decide to carry a gun to begin with. Police officers have accidents all the time. Trained veterans. I know the rules, I used to hunt with my father and my brothers. All hunters know the rules. Yet Cheney shot his friend in the face. An acquaintance of mine mistook his father for a turkey. These people are necessarily of low IQ. It only takes acting like idiot once.

http://accidentalgunshots.tumblr.com/

[african1]

Most people never need to ever defend themselves with a firearm. Yeah if you scour the world wide web you can find examples where guns were so used. You can also find examples of idiots accidentally shooting themselves, their children, their neighbors and other examples where idiots escalated a conflict unnecessarily into a gun fight by pulling out their concealed guns.

What's with the concealed shit anyway? Why not have the balls to carry in the open? Oh yeah, the bad guys will see whose carrying and pick them off first. Fantasy based reason is not reason at all...it's fantasy.

One last point I may add, people who seek to outlaw guns and try to repeal the 2nd amendment (which is a severe impossibility) could just move to a country where guns are already illegal. Americans need not to travel far as Mexico prohibits its citizens from owning a firearm. Needless to say, undoubtedly the situation down there would've been much different if they had a 2nd amendment. But alas, things like this do happen every day to our neighbors:

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

[trish]

No one is seeking to repeal the 2nd Amendment. That argument is called misdirection. Just some commonsense restrictions would be nice and perfectly constitutional. Once again, why concealed?

You're just going to ignore that dead seven year old kid aren't you?

[african1]

It's not a few. It's thousands. And accidents don't just happen to the low IQ, though I admit it takes a pretty low IQ to decide to carry a gun to begin with. Police officers have accidents all the time. Trained veterans. I know the rules, I used to hunt with my father and my brothers. All hunters know the rules. Yet Cheney shot his friend in the face. An acquaintance of mine mistook his father for a turkey. These people are necessarily of low IQ. It only takes acting like idiot once.

http://accidentalgunshots.tumblr.com/

HAHAHA...If you believe Cheney's incident was an accident, then you must be the one with the low IQ. Knowing the man, nothing Cheney does is by accident.




http://cvillewords.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/bcover66.jpg

[african1]

No one is seeking to repeal the 2nd Amendment. That argument is called misdirection. Just some commonsense restrictions would be nice and perfectly constitutional. Once again, why concealed?

You're just going to ignore that dead seven year old kid aren't you?

I won't ignore him. But if you think I will be moved by your logical fallacy using the appeal to emotion then my dear! you are sorely mistaken.

[be2378]

100s of people are murdered every weekend in the states and nobody knows there names.

[trish]

Or sure, a life is only an emotional appeal. You conservatives tell us all the time how sacred life is, unless its taken by a firearm...than it's less than a statistic. Here's the statistic.

Accidental firearm deaths accounted for 851 funerals. It may seem a small number considering the total deaths for the year exceeded 2.5 million, but if your family member was among them it would have been a tragic loss. (From http://www.policymic.com/articles/21002/gun-control-debate-6-chilling-facts-about-guns-in-the-u-s ).

[african1]

100s of people are murdered every weekend in the states and nobody knows there names.

Those are killed by gangs (many on the street of Chicago and DC which had a long term ban on guns to no avail). Outlawing guns will not stop those murders. Criminals do not abide by the law.

[african1]

Or sure, a life is only an emotional appeal. You conservatives tell us all the time how sacred life is, unless its taken by a firearm...than it's less than a statistic. Here's the statistic.

Accidental firearm deaths accounted for 851 funerals. It may seem a small number considering the total deaths for the year exceeded 2.5 million, but if your family member was among them it would have been a tragic loss. (From http://www.policymic.com/articles/21002/gun-control-debate-6-chilling-facts-about-guns-in-the-u-s ).

So your plan is repealing the 2nd amendment.

[trish]

Again, no one wants to outlaw guns. Stick to the point. Making guns harder to get in Wisconsin and Iowa may indeed diminish the murder rate in Chicago. How about, closing the gun show loophole? Why make it so easy to buy guns and ammunition over the internet?

[trish]

So your plan is repealing the 2nd amendment.
No, I'm now saying for the second time. I am a hunter. I not for repealing the 2nd Amendment. I don't know anyone who is.

[african1]

Again, no one wants to outlaw guns. Stick to the point. Making guns harder to get in Wisconsin and Iowa may indeed diminish the murder rate in Chicago. How about, closing the gun show loophole? Why make it so easy to buy guns and ammunition over the internet?

Did you try to buy a gun online? Do you know how hard it is?

[african1]

No, I'm now saying for the second time. I am a hunter. I not for repealing the 2nd Amendment. I don't know anyone who is.

So why you keep attacking guns and gun owners trying to limit their freedoms and the way they can use their weapons?

[african1]

Did you try to buy a gun online? Do you know how hard it is?

Federal law and interstate commerce statutes apply then. I doubt anyone wants to deal with that unless they really have to.

[trish]

It would be silly to attack guns, they're inanimate objects. Putting restrictions on firearms is not attacking gun owners. That's like saying traffic laws are an attack on cars and car owners. The point of gun laws is to reduce risk to gun owners and the general populace.

[african1]

Making guns harder to get in Wisconsin and Iowa may indeed diminish the murder rate in Chicago.

With millions of firearms on the black market, I doubt it.

[african1]

It would be silly to attack guns, they're inanimate objects. Putting restrictions on firearms is not attacking gun owners. That's like saying traffic laws are an attack on cars and car owners. The point of gun laws is to reduce risk to gun owners and the general populace.

so what kind of laws you ought to see passing?

[trish]

I already mentioned gun show loopholes. Close 'em.

[buttslinger]

The people wrongly shot by guns far exceeds the people rightly shot by guns.

If you say Zimmerman is innocent, then you have to say Travon would have been innocent if he wrestled the gun away and shot Zimmerman. Self Defense.

[be2378]

Those are killed by gangs (many on the street of Chicago and DC which had a long term ban on guns to no avail). Outlawing guns will not stop those murders. Criminals do not abide by the law.

So because those people are so called bad people its ok. Some of them are kids under 17. Who were innocent. Like the girl who was killed who sang for the president. I guess she was really in the wrong place in the wrong time.

[youngblood61]

It's like drugs,a war the goverment can't win.

[runningdownthatdream]

Our system in the United States of America, however flawed, is far better than that anywhere else. Were it not, we wouldn't have thousands of people trying to come here, both legally and illegally.

And you know this because you have clearly studied other judicial systems and come to this conclusion via empirical evidence, right?

It's not my intent to demean your opinion, just trying to make a point.

[natina]

I can just print my gun and amuntion

I can print an AR15 OR A 1000 MAGIZINE

the plans where available online

http://defdist.org/

PRINTABLE 3D GUN Creator Cody Wilson Meets With Alex Jones. The SYSTEM is SCARED - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yeh6K7vPCOU)

EXCLUSIVE: 3D Gun Completed, Printable Firearm Shoots Real Bullets - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZvrUlOVp5U)



Again, no one wants to outlaw guns. Stick to the point. Making guns harder to get in Wisconsin and Iowa may indeed diminish the murder rate in Chicago. How about, closing the gun show loophole? Why make it so easy to buy guns and ammunition over the internet?

[finultimo]

obviously the solution is to establish the compulsory carrying of firearms for the entire population. is very simple: if your you shoot me therefore I will shoot to you, the two we die and the problem this resolved, without trial without jury, law of the jungle ...

[xuto]

the media is at fault for these tv shows that they grab and ride for no reason. the media is to blame for always bringing up the race card. i know within a week they will find another tragic accident in this country and start all over again. sad but true.

[maddygirl]

Only thing I can add is I think we can all agree that it's sad someone as young as Travyon was killed. 17 years old and dead. I don't blame his parents for being angry, and I don't blame Zimmerman either. I can't because I wasn't there.

[african1]

I already mentioned gun show loopholes. Close 'em.

It is obvious from your previous comments that you want more gun restrictions. The problem is that once the GOV starts nipping at people's rights, there is no stopping them. One by one they will take them all. Though you may confess to being a gun enthusiast (due to your hunting past) but statements like: "A gun in your home is more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting or used by family member to commit suicide than actually employed in protecting the family." lean more towards gun control and complete firearm ownership banning than towards a more regulated right.

[Jimmy W]

thank you MaddyGirl. THANK YOU

[Jimmy W]

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Mars
Posts: 269


http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/images/icons/icon1.gif Re: The George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin Travesty
Only thing I can add is I think we can all agree that it's sad someone as young as Travyon was killed. 17 years old and dead. I don't blame his parents for being angry, and I don't blame Zimmerman either. I can't because I wasn't there.



THANK YOU MADDY GIRL

[dderek123]

http://i.imgur.com/zBK96lw.png

[Dino Velvet]

I hope some one kills Zimmerboy

I commend your honesty in admitting that writing it in plain English too.

[nysprod]

I don't blame Zimmerman either. I can't because I wasn't there.



I'll blame Zimmerman for you then...and I wasn't there either.

[trish]

It is obvious from your previous comments that you want more gun restrictions. The problem is that once the GOV starts nipping at people's rights, there is no stopping them. One by one they will take them all.
Oh the ol' slippery slope argument. That's a hoary, if fallacious one. Let the government deny you the right to carry nitroglycerin and next they won't let you have a water pistol. Give me a break. Oh wait, the Texas legislature allows you to carry firearms into their chambers, but not water guns, water balloons, or overripe fruit. How fucked up is that?


Though you may confess to being a gun enthusiast (due to your hunting past) I didn't confess anything. I volunteered that I was hunter; that's not the same thing as a gun enthusiast. Enthusiasm over a hard, steel rolled barrel that shoots projectiles into soft pliant flesh is something you may or may not experience. I certainly don't.


but statements like: "A gun in your home is more likely to be involved in an accidental shooting or used by family member to commit suicide than actually employed in protecting the family." lean more towards gun control and complete firearm ownership banning than towards a more regulated right.It's a statement of fact. If the only solution you can see is banning guns, then maybe you're on the wrong side of the argument. I'm merely suggesting that even though it's your right to keep a firearm at home, it nevertheless increases your family's risk of injury and death.

[be2378]

I don't know why people are pissed the Hispanic got off. The white guy wasn't on trial. The Hispanic got off with all white women the jury. What's the problem? If it was old white guys on the jury, then sure.

[maddygirl]

I'll blame Zimmerman for you then...and I wasn't there either.
Go ahead, you can, doesn't mean you're right or know the situation first hand. If it was life or death and he shot him I don't blame him..

[nysprod]

Go ahead, you can, doesn't mean you're right or know the situation first hand. If it was life or death and he shot him I don't blame him..

What, they cut off your frontal cortex too?

[maddygirl]

What, they cut off your frontal cortex too?
Hilarious. Almost as funny as the racist, stupid thread you created the other day mocking the Koreans who died in a plane crash. If anyone is lacking brain capacity, it's you, dumb fuck.

[nysprod]

Hilarious. Almost as funny as the racist, stupid thread you created the other day mocking the Koreans who died in a plane crash. If anyone is lacking brain capacity, it's you, dumb fuck.

The thread was about the stupidity of the TV newscasters who were dumb enough to say the names...Zimmerman chased and confronted Martin for no other reason than he was a young black kid...and it's only the idiot laws in Fla that allow self defense in cases where someone acts as an agresor that allowed him to get away with it.

[maddygirl]

The thread was about the stupidity of the TV newscasters who were dumb enough to say the names...Zimmerman chased and confronted Martin for no other reason than he was a young black kid...and it's only the idiot laws in Fla that allow self defense in cases where someone acts as an agresor that allowed him to get away with it.
Were you there? Do you KNOW that was the ONLY reason? No. So you can speculate all day as to what exactly happened, but you don't know. If Martin attacked him, he WASN'T the aggresor, he was defending himself..

[nysprod]

Ok, you know what, I was wrong to make that crack to Maddygirl, and I apologize.

I am a bit emotional over what happened in this case, but that's no excuse for inappropriate comments.

None the less, it was wrong, and I'm sorry I said it.

[natina]

a 17 year old teenager died becomes a Spanish heritage male wanted to be a cop and assumed Martin was a criminal up to no good when he belonged in that community.

Traayvon had a right to stand his ground
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/11/opinion/francis-zimmerman-trial

The question that has not surfaced in the courtroom -- the elephant in the room -- is this: Did Martin fear for his life after being followed and confronted by a stranger while going to the store to buy candy and a soft drink? Was he, Martin, justified in standing his ground and defending himself when this stranger, an apparent stalker, approached him in a threatening manner?
Zimmerman didn't identify himself and never said he was part of the neighborhood watch group.
Think about it: We're told over and over that if Zimmerman was afraid of Martin, according to Florida law, he had the right to put a bullet in the chamber of his concealed handgun, get out of his car after being told not to by the 911 dispatcher and follow and confront Martin and shoot him to death.
At the same time, we are told that Martin, who had far greater reason to fear Zimmerman, practically and for reasons of American history, did not have the right to confront his stalker, stand his ground and defend himself, including by using his fists.

I don't know why people are pissed the Hispanic got off. The white guy wasn't on trial. The Hispanic got off with all white women the jury. What's the problem? If it was old white guys on the jury, then sure.

[runningdownthatdream]

Can you imagine what might have happened to this black kid had another out of work loser looking to protect 'his' neighbourhood seen him chasing after a white man's car?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/temar-boggs-jocelyn-rojas_n_3597825.html?ir=Good+News

[fred41]

Can you imagine what might have happened to this black kid had another out of work loser looking to protect 'his' neighbourhood seen him chasing after a white man's car?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/temar-boggs-jocelyn-rojas_n_3597825.html?ir=Good+News

Heard about that over the weekend. Kid probably saved that little girl's life. He's a hero.




...on another note. The way the article is written - It just seems odd that the cops couldn't find a guy with a maroon car with round taillights, and wearing green shoes, green pants and a red-and-white striped shirt. He reportedly walked with a limp.
Yet he's still on the loose.


lol..(yeah yeah...I know - he changed clothes ...and you don't see the limp while he's driving his maroon car...but still.)

[natina]

BREAKING NEWS ! a few things

NY Daily News' Powerful Trayvon Martin Front Page (PHOTO)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/15/ny-daily-news-trayvon-martin_n_3597797.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular


Justice Department To Review George Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin Case
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/14/justice-department-george-zimmerman_n_3595835.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1243409/thumbs/o-NYDN-570.jpg?7

[Johnny.Blaze]

Read this on another forum. Just copied and pasted his post.

"I present to you the facts. I also included my opinion at the end but you can feel free to ignore that part.

Who:

George Zimmerman: - 29 Years Old - Hispanic Male - Insurance Fraud Investigator - Spearheaded a Neighborhood Watch program after a string of burglaries. - Lives in a gated community in Sanford Florida. - Record of Assaulting a Police Officer


Trayvon Martin: - 17 Years Old. - Black Male. - Student - Suspended from school for Vandalism - Participated in and refereed illegal MMA fights. - Lives in Miami Gardens, Visiting father's France's house in Zimmerman's neighborhood.


Rachel Jeantel - Trayvon's Friend. Originally claimed to be his girlfriend. - Was on the phone with Trayvon during the moments leading up to the shooting. - Originally claimed to be 16. That's why she was not featured before the trial. She is actually 19. - Ms. Jeantel has offered a few variations of events. For simplicity we will use the version she gave during the trial.


Where:
Sanford Florida. Gated community where Zimmerman lives as well as Tracy Martin's fiancé.

When:
February 26, 2012 between 7pm and 8pm. It was raining and getting dark.

What:
-Trayvon was visiting his fathers fiancé.
-Trayvon went to the gas station to get skittles and iced tea.
-Zimmerman notices Martin walking through people's yards.
-Zimmerman calls the non emergency line for the Local PD.
-Zimmerman describes Martin to dispatch and requests a police officer.
-Zimmerman says These Fucking Punks always get away.
-Trayvon notices Zimmerman watching him as tells Jeantel it is a creepy ass cracker.
-Trayvon continues to walk through people'a yards.
-Zimmerman gets out his his car in order to follow Trayvon and see why he is traveling through people's yards.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel "The nigga still following me"
-Trayvon begins to run towards his fathers finances house.
-Zimmerman begins to run in order to keep sight of Trayvon.
-Dispatcher hears wind noise and asks Zimmerman what he is doing.
-Zimmerman states he observing the subject and trying to find an address for the PD to intercept Trayvon.
-Dispatch tells Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that"
-Zimmerman stops and loses sight of Trayvon.
-Zimmerman heads back to his car.
-Trayvon tells Jeantel that he lost Zimmerman and he is right outside his fathers finances house.

*Up until this point Zimmerman's story and Jeantel's testimony match. Now the stories diverge.*

Zimmerman's Version: - As he is walking back to his car Trayvon approaches him and asks, "You got a problem?!" - Zimmerman says "No" - Trayvon says "You do now" - Trayvon attacks Zimmerman and smashes his head into the sidewalk. - Zimmerman draws his weapon while Trayvon is on top and fires into his chest killing him.

Jeantel's Version: (From Trial) - Trayvon is outside his Fathers finances house. - Trayvon suddenly says, "Oh Shit" - Jeantel hears Zimmerman say, "What you doing here?" - Jeantel then says she hears a bump and wet grass sounds and the phone goes out.

My opinion: - Jeantel's version doesn't make sense. If Mr. Martin was already at his Father's finances house then the altercation would have occurred there and not over a hundred yards to the north towards Zimmerman's SUV.
I think what happened was Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman. After all he didn't feel he was doing anything wrong and would've been pissed that a white guy was following him as wanted to teach him a lesson.


I think we had two hot headed individuals that both had opportunities to walk away.
Unfortunately they didn't and one was killed.
I believe that Zimmerman had every right to simply observe Trayvon and call the police.
Unless we can prove that Zimmerman walked up to Trayvon and started a physical confrontation with him then his claim of self defense should be upheld.
Just because Trayvon was annoyed that a (what he thought was) white guy was following him does not give him the right to use any physical force.
It all comes down to who threw the first punch. Based on witness testimony and the layout of the neighborhood I believe that Trayvon doubled back and went looking for Zimmerman."

You perfectly said it best. I fully agree with this. I wish people would just except the verdict and go on with their lives. I don't feel race had anything to do with this. If anyone in this case was being racist. It was Martin by calling Zimmermen a "white ass cracker" I'm still amazed that Jeantel had the audacity to say in court that "White Ass Cracker" wasn't a racial term.

[natina]

TRAYVON MARTIN CALLED zimmerman A "NIGGA" too.

so how is that racism?






If anyone in this case was being racist. It was Martin by calling Zimmermen a "white ass cracker" I'm still amazed that Jeantel had the audacity to say in court that "White Ass Cracker" wasn't a racial term.

[maddygirl]

TRAYVON MARTIN CALLED zimmerman A "NIGGA" too.

so how is that racism?
So, by your definition, if Zimmerman called Travyon a "black ass nigga" then called him a "cracker" it would cancel out the racism.

[Johnny.Blaze]

TRAYVON MARTIN CALLED zimmerman A "NIGGA" too.

so how is that racism?

In the world of Ghetto slang. Nigga does not mean the same thing as Nigger.
And honestly I've never heard a black man call what he thinks is a white dude "Nigga"

So Martin called Zimmermen a "white ass cracker" And also a "Nigga"?
Seems odd...

[Johnny.Blaze]

Cracker should now be referred to as the "C-word"

[bobvela]

I already mentioned gun show loopholes. Close 'em.

The 'gun show' loopholes you mention... are really the 'private sales' 'loophole'.

Any person or business that routinely sells firearms must be a federally licensed dealer (aka FFL) and has certain paperwork requirements (ATF form 4473) which involve background checks of the buyer. Even at a gun show an FFL is still required to have the buyer fill out the 4473 and have it called into the NICS for a background check.

A person who is not in the business of routinely selling firearms is free to go to the gun show and sell their arms with a handshake if they like (depending on state laws). The same also goes for any transaction they might conduct in their living room, a parking lot or virtually anywhere else within the state that both are a resident of.

To call it the 'gun show' loophole once again demonstrates your ignorance of the issue as it applies to *all* private sales. Of course your ignorance is shown doubly so when you say 'gun show loopholes' (plural). I'm very familiar with the laws regarding firearms at the state & federal level... and would love to hear what other loopholes you think exist at gun shows other than the lack of a background check for private sales (which still does not absolve the seller of liability).

[broncofan]

Cracker should now be referred to as the "C-word"
I think that's a really lame idea.

[Johnny.Blaze]

I think that's a really lame idea.

If you actually thought I was serious then Wow !!! :shrug

[broncofan]

If you actually thought I was serious then Wow !!! :shrug
Hey, not trying to start a flamewar. I know where you're going with that and while I recognize all slurs are bad, they don't all carry with them the same force. To me it's not an arbitrary thing that people are hesitant to say the n word even when quoting someone.

[natina]

it was in the court transcripts that martin used both the c-word and a variation of the n word to describe zimmerman stalking him.

but martin used the word nigga and not the actual n-word which is a form of that word



In the world of Ghetto slang. Nigga does not mean the same thing as Nigger.
And honestly I've never heard a black man call what he thinks is a white dude "Nigga"

So Martin called Zimmermen a "white ass cracker" And also a "Nigga"?
Seems odd...

[african1]

Oh the ol' slippery slope argument.

Trust me Trish, time and again we see that slippery slope happening.

For instance, Diane confessed to an outright ban herself, stating that if she could get 51% vote she would ban every gun in America (except the ones used by the body guards protecting her family of course)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRblw29I14U




The Texas legislature allows you to carry firearms into their chambers...

I bet you there will be no mass shooting happening in that place since the weirdos and criminals know they can be stopped and killed by CCW armed law-abiding citizens.


I didn't confess anything. I volunteered that I was hunter; that's not the same thing as a gun enthusiast.

gun enthusiast or not, I hope that you know that the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting.




Enthusiasm over a hard, steel rolled barrel that shoots projectiles into soft pliant flesh is something you may or may not experience.

O Trish! for a minute there I thought you were salaciously thinking about my hard meat during the act of deflowering the deflowerable.


I'm merely suggesting that even though it's your right to keep a firearm at home, it nevertheless increases your family's risk of injury and death.

Yet that right should never be trampled upon by any entity: Foreign or domestic.

[nysprod]

Just as an exercise, have a look at the 2nd amendment and briefly answer the following question (Hint...it can be answered in 1 sentence):

Why did the framers write the 2nd amendment?

[broncofan]

Why did the framers write the 2nd amendment?
LSD. The founders were on an acid trip and thought it would be funny if they combined the right to bear arms with important rights like free speech, the requirement of a grand jury indictment in criminal cases, protection against self-incrimination, prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. I can tell you for sure when they were done tripping their balls off they regretted it. Little did they know their little prank would be used as a justification by rednecks for small-mindedness, insecurity, and lethal hostility towards their neighbors.

[african1]

Just as an exercise, have a look at the 2nd amendment and briefly answer the following question (Hint...it can be answered in 1 sentence):

Why did the framers write the 2nd amendment?


...because all governments, democratic or not, like the king the Framers had to deal with, like Germany in which the National Socialists won the Federal elections during the 1930s, can become tyrannical.

[nysprod]

...because all governments, democratic or not, like the king the Framers had to deal with, like Germany in which the National Socialists won the Federal elections during the 1930s, can become tyrannical.

Incorrect...please try again.

[broncofan]

Ah yes, the national socialists. Every time I look back at that chapter of history I always say, "if only the Jews had guns". Actually not really.

[african1]

Incorrect...please try again.

ok enlighten me...

[african1]

Ah yes, the national socialists. Every time I look back at that chapter of history I always say, "if only the Jews had guns". Actually not really.

and if only the Mexicans did.

[nysprod]

ok enlighten me...

Here is the 2nd amendment...please read it and try to answer the question again:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

[Prospero]

NYSprod... quit being so aggressive to people

[Ben in LA]

Cracker should now be referred to as the "C-word"


I think that's a really lame idea.
The "C-word" is already "CUNT"...as in Ann Coulter.

[dderek123]

I am a bit emotional over what happened in this case, but that's no excuse for inappropriate comments.



http://images.wikia.com/brutallegend/images/8/8c/You_Don't_Say.jpg

[BBaggins06]

Chicago also a huge metropolitan that is a hop, skip and a jump away from Wisconsin and Iowa. The borders are gun permeable.

I'm just saying that our lack of concealed carry laws hasn't stopped us from having hundreds of murders every year. It's not as simple as your post suggested. Plus with all the restrictions in the CC law, only about a dozen people will be permitted carry a firearm in about 0.05% of the state. That's only a slight exaggeration ;)

Btw, I don't think the Wild West was as wild as you think it was ...

[BBaggins06]

It's not a few. It's thousands. And accidents don't just happen to the low IQ, though I admit it takes a pretty low IQ to decide to carry a gun to begin with. Police officers have accidents all the time. Trained veterans. I know the rules, I used to hunt with my father and my brothers. All hunters know the rules. Yet Cheney shot his friend in the face. An acquaintance of mine mistook his father for a turkey. These people are necessarily of low IQ. It only takes acting like idiot once.

http://accidentalgunshots.tumblr.com/

Now that is just wrong Trish and you know it. You're better than that. If you seriously believe what you wrote here, then I lost much of the respect I had for you. Sweeping generalities like should be beneath you ...

[trish]

The 'gun show' loopholes you mention... are really the 'private sales' 'loophole'.

Any person or business that routinely sells firearms must be a federally licensed dealer (aka FFL) and has certain paperwork requirements (ATF form 4473) which involve background checks of the buyer. Even at a gun show an FFL is still required to have the buyer fill out the 4473 and have it called into the NICS for a background check.

A person who is not in the business of routinely selling firearms is free to go to the gun show and sell their arms with a handshake if they like (depending on state laws). The same also goes for any transaction they might conduct in their living room, a parking lot or virtually anywhere else within the state that both are a resident of.

To call it the 'gun show' loophole once again demonstrates your ignorance of the issue as it applies to *all* private sales. Of course your ignorance is shown doubly so when you say 'gun show loopholes' (plural). I'm very familiar with the laws regarding firearms at the state & federal level... and would love to hear what other loopholes you think exist at gun shows other than the lack of a background check for private sales (which still does not absolve the seller of liability).
Thank you Bob for pointing out the "gun show loophole" is really a special case of the more general "private firearm sales loophole." If you don't mind I'll continue to use the shorter and more common vernacular when referring to this issue.

Given the intransigence of the NRA and gun "enthusiasts," I won't be proposing anything else today. I'm not optimistic that we can make even this small revision to our current laws. You know, slippery slope and all. Close the gun show loophole and soon the government will want to take away your right to duel.
No! Don't tell me! I'm ignorant again?! They already have?! And now they've taken away that freedom, they're going after the gun show loophole?! Damn that slippery slope.

[BBaggins06]

So your plan is repealing the 2nd amendment.

That's typical conservative rhetoric where any common sense regulation is tantamount to revocation of the 2nd amendment. There are no absolutes in the law. The truth and ideal is necessarily somewhere in the middle.

[BBaggins06]

Federal law and interstate commerce statutes apply then. I doubt anyone wants to deal with that unless they really have to.

Replying to your own post is kinda like talking to yourself ;) or the voices in your head ...

[BBaggins06]

I don't know why people are pissed the Hispanic got off. The white guy wasn't on trial. The Hispanic got off with all white women the jury. What's the problem? If it was old white guys on the jury, then sure.

Try again. One of the jurors was from Chicago and was (and always will be) Hispanic. Again, why bring the jurors' race into it?

[trish]

Now that is just wrong Trish and you know it. You're better than that. If you seriously believe what you wrote here, then I lost much of the respect I had for you. Sweeping generalities like should be beneath you ...


(trish)It's not a few. It's thousands. And accidents don't just happen to the low IQ, though I admit it takes a pretty low IQ to decide to carry a gun to begin with. Sweeping generality, made in mocking response to an idiotic claim. My bad.


(trish)Police officers have accidents all the time. Trained veterans. True statement (if by "all the time" one means "almost daily". Just peruse the link provided in that post. Almost every day a gun expert is involved in an firearm accident. I certainly would rather hunt with people who have had some training, but training is not the panacea against accidents the believers claim it to be. Even the trained get distracted, hurried or fooled by unusual circumstances.

[BBaggins06]

...because all governments, democratic or not, like the king the Framers had to deal with, like Germany in which the National Socialists won the Federal elections during the 1930s, can become tyrannical.

Lol

Godwin's Law - it was just a matter of time ... You lose

[BBaggins06]

Sweeping generality, made in mocking response to an idiotic claim. My bad.

True statement (if by "all the time" one means "almost daily". Just peruse the link provided in that post. Almost every day a gun expert is involved in an firearm accident. I certainly would rather hunt with people who have had some training, but training is not the panacea against accidents the believers claim it to be. Even the trained get distracted, hurried or fooled by unusual circumstances.

Everything you said would have been fine without the ad hominem argument on anyone wishing to get a concealed carry permit ... It was just so out of character for you, very surprising ...

[trish]

Thumbs up for calling the foul.

[african1]

Replying to your own post is kinda like talking to yourself ;) or the voices in your head ...

I may understand why you got yourself confused. Hence some tips to break it down so even you can understand:

Go back to page 9, then read my posts and Trish's posts very very slowly (very big emphasis on slowly here), Note: taking notes may help you in this process, then repeat this methodology (n times) until you feel confident that you know I wasn't talking to myself. Probably it would be hard for you to come to such conclusion. In such case, you're just going to have to believe this assertion par value.

[african1]

Lol

Godwin's Law - it was just a matter of time ... You lose

A lively discussion is definitely beyond your mental faculties.

A picture may help




http://www.davidcogswell.com/HeadBlast/BushFace.jpg

[buttslinger]

If you bring Bush into this you better consult Murphy's Law!
(this should give Prospero grey hairs!!! ha ha)

[african1]

If you bring Bush into this you better consult Murphy's Law!
(this should give Prospero grey hairs!!! ha ha)

lol...what's up with all these laws in this AM. :hide-1:

[buttslinger]

I shouldn't have posted that bush picture

[Queens Guy]

Stephen A. Smith, on ESPN, which normally discusses sports, agreeing with me that the media did not report what was actually happening in the court room. He was initially very angry with the verdict, but then looked for himself to see what the testimony actually was, and now understands the verdict based on the evidence that was submitted in court.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67WhBlXssUA

[buttslinger]

Stephen A. Smith, on ESPN, which normally discusses sports, agreeing with me that the media did not report what was actually happening in the court room. He was initially very angry with the verdict, but then looked for himself to see what the testimony actually was, and now understands the verdict based on the evidence that was submitted in court.

I'm pretty sure every black person in the USA understands the verdict and is angry.
My friends and I grew up as long-hared pot smoking looking guys, and we had a few years there where cops were not always the good guys.
As a white person, I see racism as only one of fifty problems in the US,
and there are plenty of times I think some black people have tunnel vision when it comes to race, and that's part of the problem.
The only reason Travon Martin got shot was because he ran into fuckin George Zimmerman. Those are the facts.

[natina]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=602640&stc=1&d=1374039439

[african1]

I'm pretty sure every black person in the USA understands the verdict and is angry.
My friends and I grew up as long-hared pot smoking looking guys, and we had a few years there where cops were not always the good guys.
As a white person, I see racism as only one of fifty problems in the US,
and there are plenty of times I think some black people have tunnel vision when it comes to race, and that's part of the problem.
The only reason Travon Martin got shot was because he ran into fuckin George Zimmerman. Those are the facts.

It's a fact that black people are trying to milk the situation to their advantage. On the other hand, racial profiling is exercised by cops everywhere in this country. It is a sad fact, but the anger should NOT be directed at Zimmerman. As based on the evidence presented: Racial profiling was never part of this case.

Maybe instead of demonstrations against GZ and demonstrations to limit gun laws, people should demonstrate against racial profiling used by Police. Just few weeks ago, the blogosphere was ripe of complaints against LAPD's brutality in the case of Officer Dorner. If you'll remember they have shot two old Hispanic women without identifying their target. Why don't people leave GZ alone and try to change the way certain police departments treat Citizens.

Zimmerman has no power over people's lives, the police do however and most of the time they can mess up someone's future.

[yodajazz]

I don't know why people are pissed the Hispanic got off. The white guy wasn't on trial. The Hispanic got off with all white women the jury. What's the problem? If it was old white guys on the jury, then sure.

One thing the women may not have had much empathy for Black people. Someone told me of an interview with a juror, who said that she did not understand some of Martin's friend he was talking to on the phone, Rachel's language. There was a strategic effort to damage her credibility, before she even testified, then the defense badgered her enough to distract attention from her story in the court room. But her testimony was the only other first hand version. I think the fact that she told of Martin's "cracker" statement showed that she was willing to speak the truth. Apparently people don't understand how, Black teens talk to one another.

Martin had far less rights than Zimmerman. Martin had a toxology report, which was used against him, but Zimmerman didn't get one, the night of the death, and his drug history was excluded from court evidence, I believe, as were other historical things like his legal history. Martin's school history was used, but what was Zimmerman's school record? Was he ever suspended? Martin had no duty to retreat home, specifically because of "Stand your ground", yet this is much more often mentioned as a right of Zimmerman. Martin's phone records were used, but not Zimmerman's, outside of the 9-11 calls. I thought some expert said that voices had a 'unique print', yet evidence from experts hired by the prosecution were excluded. Whereas Zimmerman, did not have to be cross examined, the only counter-version, was subject of a five hour cross examination. So the only major way to point Zimmerman's inconsistencies, was in closing arguments. I not sure how much this was even laid out, by prosecution. It would have been my main focus, if I was.

Sympathy and empathy are related. I was told the the woman juror, who was interviewed said she felt sorry for Zimmerman. She didnt understand the prosecutions main wittness. My observer said that she did not sound very bright, although I think her husband is a lawyer.

[Ben in LA]

He was white until this incident; only then did he become "Hispanic". Chances are Zimmerman never checked "Other" on a form asking for his race or ethnonym.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hispanic

[Dino Velvet]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/attachment.php?attachmentid=602640&stc=1&d=1374039439

As I said in another thread, you are one confused self-loathing White man, natina. Does Zimmerman remind you of you? Is that really why you want him dead? How ironic would it have been for you to be one of the victims of that flash mob robbery attack right by you last night?

[natina]

at my home and in the neighborhood we have armed security response

well before the police even show up. there are a few celebritys that stay near me

[dderek123]

http://i.imgur.com/8tFCFCI.jpg

[trish]

:sleep:sleep:sleep:sleep:sleep

[Ben]

Finally, the conversation about race in America we need

African Americans have waited patiently for a president to speak the truth about the racism we experience. At last, we heard it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/20/conversation-race-america

[Ben]

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense:

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xatvt1VlRDY)

[desireejones]

Zimmerman Gets Back Gun Used to Kill Trayvon Martin - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdKs0f4oxus)

[desireejones]

here is a few more good ones

having black friends but still biased

playing the Friendship Card: White Lies, White Denial and the Reality of Racism...

I swear, if I hear one more transparently racist person insist they aren’t racist because they have black friends, I am going to shoot them. But not because I’m violent. I’m not violent. And this I know because I have friends who are pacifists.
Yes, this is a joke, but seriously, it’s getting just about that stupid, ....

http://www.timwise.org/2012/04/playing-the-friendship-card-white-lies-white-denial-and-the-reality-of-racism/

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense...


http://whitelikememovie.org

To help us make sense of the Zimmerman verdict and the conversations surrounding it, we looked to Tim Wise for some answers. Here he reacts to the assertions made by defenders of Zimmerman suggesting he couldn't possibly be influenced by race because he has black friends, dated an African American girl and mentored black children.

For more discussion of the Zimmerman verdict, check out MEF's blog: http://www.mediaed.org/blog/?p=2661

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xatvt1VlRDY)

Piers Morgan destroys Robert Zimmerman 2013
Piers Morgan destroys Robert Zimmerman 2013 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X72UwJXG-zM)


Trayvon Martin & Zimmerman Attorneys Trash Robert Zimmerman Racist Tweets. CNN - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpWaovXEZ-Q)


this is important because george zimmerman made racist remarks at work against blacks,mexicans and arabs.

there is also some other evidence of zimmermans racial bias/bigotry

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense...


http://whitelikememovie.org

To help us make sense of the Zimmerman verdict and the conversations surrounding it, we looked to Tim Wise for some answers. Here he reacts to the assertions made by defenders of Zimmerman suggesting he couldn't possibly be influenced by race because he has black friends, dated an African American girl and mentored black children.

For more discussion of the Zimmerman verdict, check out MEF's blog: http://www.mediaed.org/blog/?p=2661

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xatvt1VlRDY)




http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2013/08/16/white_like_me_movie_with_tim_wise_should_be_seen_b y_all_especially_white.html


White People Support Academic Meritocracy When It Benefits Them, Study Suggests

Do white people only support traditional definitions of meritocracy when it benefits them? A new study suggests so.

University of Miami professor Frank L. Samson looked at the idea of meritocracy through the lens of admissions standards in the University of California system. He found that white participants changed their ideas of what was meritocratic based on what benefitted white, as opposed to Asian-American, applicants.

After learning whites made up a majority of students at a school, half of the study's participants were asked to evaluate the importance of academic achievement when they were assessing university applicants. The participants related that universities should place high value on an applicant's standardized test scores and class rank.

Other study participants were told that Asian-Americans are disproportionately admitted to the school. These participants related that less weight should be placed on an applicant's academics.

The study concludes that, “the shift to an Asian American plurality provoked a reaction that caused white evaluators to create an altered standard when weighing the academic merits of college applicants.”

These results come at a time when affirmative action -- designed to further the opportunities of groups that have been historically discriminated against -- is being hotly debated. Some opponents of the practice argue that admissions should simply be based on concrete, meritocratic standards. However, as the study reveals, what is considered meritocratic to some may simply be based on what benefits the group with whom they most identify.

Minority groups are expected to become a majority of America's population by 2042, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. As the study notes, this demographic shift may force universities to learn how to guard “against pressures from the dominant group reacting to a perceived drop from their dominant group position.”

The study, "Altering Public University Admission Standards to Preserve White Group Position in the United States: Results from a Laboratory Experiment," was published in the Comparative Education Review.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/whites-support-meritocracy-academics-study_n_3750312.html?ir=Black+Voices&ref=topbar




Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense:

Tim Wise Responds to the "Some-of-my-best-friends-are black" Defense - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xatvt1VlRDY)

[95racer]

Video title should read 'Zimmerman got back his gun he used to defend himself and stop the attack from Trayvon". He has the right to get his firearm back and it seemed to work good to me. Hopefully he never has to use it again.

[trish]

He never did have to use it. That's the tragedy.

[yodajazz]

Video title should read 'Zimmerman got back his gun he used to defend himself and stop the attack from Trayvon". He has the right to get his firearm back and it seemed to work good to me. Hopefully he never has to use it again.

Here is a story of someone, who was followed by a vehicle as a teenager.

by some sick guy in a blue car. (true story). the first thing in my mind when I was being followed was (I don't want this guy to know where I live), I still have that clear memory of it. so what did I do? I grabbed the biggest rock I could find and when he came around again slowly I threw it at his window and smashed it. he raced off and I ran home. this is a true story. I remember my heart was racing. my point here is when I hear the attorneys say travon should have gone home, that's totally wrong. you must be in some ones shoes to know the fear of that. travon had rights to act or feel a certain way. and the prosecutors did a horrible job of bringing that point across.


Another comment from the same article:

I had the same experience. I was young..maybe 16 or 17. I did not go home either.. I walked into a store and called my parents. Who called police and they all met me there. About 10 years later, as a young Private Investigator, I was taught/trained.. that if I ever felt uncomfortable or felt I was being folloewed.. to drive to the nearest Police Dept.not our office, not home or to anyone connected to me. Never allow anyone to observe or know where you live or where you friends/family lives either. Period. I agree completely.

It was reasonable for Trayvonn to feel fear at being followed. Not only was he followed in a vehicle, but also on foot, after he made an attempt to lose Zimmerman. And Martin had no legal obligation to keep running. I still wonder if Zimmerman ever identified himself to Martin. But even if he did, how would Martin know that he was telling the truth. But even if Zimmerman did say he was a neighborhood watch person, others have committed crimes, by identifying themselves as in some official capacity, which was a lie. I once had a person pull a gun on me, claiming to be a parole officer. I was in a locked vehicle and he was outside with the gun to the window, telling me to get out of it. I just froze, and he left after a police car pulled up in the lot, without saying a word.

Why is it against Neighborhood watch rules to carry a gun, while performing duties? Hopefully Zimmerman won't continue to follow people around, especially while carrying his gun. Hopefully he wont identify someone as a criminal based solely on looks. Lots of people walk while carrying things in their hands, especially those coming from a store.

[Stavros]

I am going to be rude and suggest every American's ass is a piece of American history, but that this doesn't mean every American should put theirs up for auction. There are times when one wonders what passes for moral decency in modern society, it is absent here.

Extracts from the article:

George Zimmerman has listed the gun with which he killed Trayvon Martin in 2012 for auction, touting it as “your opportunity to own a piece of American history”...
Zimmerman listed “the firearm that was used to defend my life and end the brutal attack from Trayvon Martin” on GunBroker.com on Thursday, with bidding scheduled to begin at 11am EDT on Thursday.
He wrote in the item description that it had recently been returned to him by the Department of Justice and was fully functional....

Zimmerman wrote that he was “proud to announce” that a portion of the proceeds raised would be used to “fight BLM [Black Lives Matter] violence against Law Enforcement officers” as well as ending the career of Angela Corey, his prosecutor – “and Hillary Clinton’s anti-firearm rhetoric”.
He signed off “your friend, George M. Zimmerman” and “Si vis pacem, para bellum” – the Latin adage, “If you want peace, prepare for war”.

Full article here-
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-gun-auction

[trish]

Thanks for the link, Stavros. 'Just lost my appetite for breakfast this morning.

[fred41]

It's hard to imagine, at this point in time, that he can make himself into a bigger douchebag than he already is...but I'm sure he'll continue to raise the bar to new heights.

The audacity is somewhat astounding (regardless on where you stand on the verdict)...
...but after a while, you run into so many douchebags in life that you just become a little numb.


I wish he would just spontaneously combust already.

[martin48]

Even sadder is that people bid

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/05/13/bids-george-zimmerman-gun-auction-top-50m/84319096/

[broncofan]

Even sadder is that people bid

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2016/05/13/bids-george-zimmerman-gun-auction-top-50m/84319096/
I interpret the article differently than you. I believe the people bidding were against the sale and so bid the item up to really large amounts with no intention of buying it. I think they were derailing the auction.

[fred41]

I interpret the article differently than you. I believe the people bidding were against the sale and so bid the item up to really large amounts with no intention of buying it. I think they were derailing the auction.

LOL....Wait, wait, wait!!!....was this the dead giveaway?: The top bidder at one point used the screen name “Racist McShootface.”:grin::grin::grin:



...I agree.

[Stavros]

A depressing thought is that Zimmerman engages in these publicity stunts because he thinks he is important and that the US ought to be reminded of this 'fact'. Now his attempt to sell the gun has failed, one wonders if at a later stage, this year or next, he will concoct another stunt to re-insert himself into the public consciousness.

[natina]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face

[natina]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?99678-guy-with-Racist-tattoos-punches-George-Zimmerman-in-the-face

[trish]

George should be featured in your thread titled, "what a ASS."