Re: "Stand your ground" situation in FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eccentricBlue
Just imagine of common sense was more common.... lol. But I agree, the justice system is in no way perfect, however I just don't want to buy into the hysteria on either side. Some people disagree with me and go straight into attack mode, however cooler heads must prevail because 2 wrongs never make a right. Race should not be a factor so I refuse to let that sway my opinion.
But race did play a factor, I remember some recordings of Zimmerman racial profiling the black kid. So if It's not about race, then we kinda have to ask what then?
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
I believe he was giving a description of the suspect to 911. That's not racial profiling. It is obvious after the initial reports that national media outlets pounced on this story because they believed Zimmerman was white. So once again 2 wrongs don't make a right.
Re: "Stand your ground" situation in FL
Quote:
Originally Posted by
EvonRose
But race did play a factor, I remember some recordings of Zimmerman racial profiling the black kid. So if It's not about race, then we kinda have to ask what then?
Arguing with online morons is pointless,they are impervious to reason or fact.
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eccentricBlue
I believe he was giving a description of the suspect to 911. That's not racial profiling. It is obvious after the initial reports that national media outlets pounced on this story because they believed Zimmerman was white. So once again 2 wrongs don't make a right.
When the cops told him to leave him alone he still pursued it...
Tray did not do anything wrong to make it a two to tango situation. Zimmerman is mentally unstable, and it is proven by his doctor he is suffering post traumatic stress. There is only one crazy person, only one thug, and only one killer. That's not Trayvon.
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
lol. I'm not defending Zimmerman, nor am I defending Trayvon. I won't claim to be a doctor, nor will I make baseless attacks because someone doesn't agree with me. I just feel the media trial has ruined any chance of impartiality.
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eccentricBlue
lol. I'm not defending Zimmerman, nor am I defending Trayvon.
But you do claim to know the content of Zimmerman's mind when you say was merely, "giving a description of the suspect." There is no way of knowing that to Zimmerman this was merely a description without the freight of discrimination. It is merely what you surmise. The fact that you use the word "suspect" also plays right into Zimmerman's POV. It is a word that carries it's own freight.
Quote:
I just feel the media trial has ruined any chance of impartiality.
It was the police and the prosecutor whose appearance of partiality nearly lead to a miscarriage of justice; i.e. letting Zimmerman off without a trail. It was this clear injustice that attracted the press and initiated public outcry. As far a the possibility of a fair jury goes, I'm sure there are at least 12 posters right here in this thread who are as unbiased as you.
What is unclear is why the police and the legal system in Florida were so quick to release Zimmerman. Certainly race and SYG play key roles here. A jury will decide Zimmerman's guilt or innocence and my interest in Zimmerman will end there. As of yet (so far as I'm aware) there is no investigation of the police or the prosecutor's office attempting to explain why Zimmerman was so readily released without prospect of a trial or even further questioning.
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
trish
But you do claim to know the content of Zimmerman's mind when you say was merely, "giving a description of the suspect." There is no way of knowing that to Zimmerman this was merely a description without the freight of discrimination. It is merely what you surmise. The fact that you use the word "suspect" also plays right into Zimmerman's POV. It is a word that carries it's own freight.
That sure is one far stretch to try and nail me on a position I've never taken. View it how you want, but calling him a suspect does not prove anybody's POV since he was responding to "suspicious activity". Stating a persons race happens all the time when reporting anything to the authorities, so what you consider racism (or implied racism) doesn't hold much merit.
It was the police and the prosecutor whose appearance of partiality nearly lead to a miscarriage of justice; i.e. letting Zimmerman off without a trail. It was this clear injustice that attracted the press and initiated public outcry. As far a the possibility of a fair jury goes, I'm sure there are at least 12 posters right here in this thread who are as unbiased as you.
What is unclear is why the police and the legal system in Florida were so quick to release Zimmerman. Certainly race and SYG play key roles here. A jury will decide Zimmerman's guilt or innocence and my interest in Zimmerman will end there. As of yet (so far as I'm aware) there is no investigation of the police or the prosecutor's office attempting to explain why Zimmerman was so readily released without prospect of a trial or even further questioning.
The police's error in this case does not change a person's innocence or guilt. Florida has some laxed (sp) firearm laws and right to defend yourself laws which I am not fully familiar with. However if there was clear intent to harm, I doubt he would have been released. Call me old fashioned, but I believe in innocence until proven guilty. (even though I stated earlier that the justice system is not perfect).
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
trish
What is unclear is why the police and the legal system in Florida were so quick to release Zimmerman. Certainly race and SYG play key roles here. A jury will decide Zimmerman's guilt or innocence and my interest in Zimmerman will end there. As of yet (so far as I'm aware) there is no investigation of the police or the prosecutor's office attempting to explain why Zimmerman was so readily released without prospect of a trial or even further questioning.
Trish, I think that information was released when Angela Corey, the 'new' prosecutor, who brought the murder charges against Zimmerman discussed and released all of that information. The lead detective of the Sanford P.D. wanted to arrest Zimmerman, but the original or local prosecutors office over-ruled the detective and Sanford P.D.
Considering the Sanford P.D. wanted to arrest Zimmerman the night of the shooting, I think they've gotten a bad wrap. They got Zimmerman to talk and not 'lawyer up'. He talked in the interrogation room and on videotape at the crime scene the next morning. He talked for hours. All of that will be valuable evidence at the trial. It's not just the detectives notes of what he said, it's Zimmerman himself, in his own voice on video.
IMO, it's the original prosecutors fault for not arresting Zimmerman that night, or the next morning after that videotaped interview. I might understand waiting for the toxicology results to come back on Trayvon. I wouldn't have if I was the prosecutor, but I might understand that. But, once those results came back clean, Zimmerman should have been arrested and forced to tell his story to a judge and jury.
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stavros
Trial by media is common here, but I don't know of accused in criminal trials being given an opportunity to tell their story on tv before the trial begins. Reportage tends to take place in the newspapers before any proceedings have begun when even the more lurid papers such as Murdoch's Sun, will use words like 'allegedly' and 'according to police sources' when referring to someone under questioning -even if it turns out later they are innocent. More serious is the way that the press in a desperate attempt to get readers can stray over the boundaries; two tabloids, the Mirror and the Daily Mail were this week found guilty of contempt of court for publishing a story about a man already found guilty of murder, whose trial for abduction of another young woman was halted because of the prejudicial content of the articles -the papers will be fined at a later date, the report on it is here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...ld?INTCMP=SRCH
Another example is that the judge in a trial of people accused of rioting in the UK last year, used his powers to stop the BBC from broadcasting two documentaries this week on the riots in case they prejudiced the outcome in court, the report on that is here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/j...?newsfeed=true
The Courts take prejudice very seriously here, even if the media tries to get round it with as much sensational coverage as they can before the trial, and often to bad effect, too many innocent people have had their lives ruined by the outrageous needs of the press for lurid stories. Note that this only applies to England and Wales, as Scotland has its own legal system.
In the US, the courts don't have any such power over the media. The courts can order the police, the lawyers, and the person accused of the crime to not discuss certain things, but the media has free reign.
And, since the media can't be forced to identify their source, those parties can leak the information, anyway. As long as they cover their tracks, there isn't much the court can do. You can suspect one side of the leak, but in a case like this, who's to say the media didn't plant a microphone or a camera? If there's money to be made, we've seen they are willing to hack into phones and e-mail accounts.
The system in England and Wales is certainly better for those who were wrongfully accused of a crime. I'm sure the Duke Lacrosse Team would agree .
Re: 17yr old black kid shot and killed for walking in white suburbia?
The system in England and Wales is certainly better for those who were wrongfully accused of a crime
That is debatable -before a trial, the press can report as much sensational detail as they can, some go as far to the edge as they can, and in the process ruin the reputations of innocent people who have been wrongly accused and may not even be charged. In Bristol a few years ago, the landlord of a house in which a young woman was murdered was effectively accused by the tabloids of being the murderer -he had been questioned by police and the press leapt on his 'eccentric' appearance -he had fluffy blueish hair, had been a teacher of English at the nearby and prestigious Clifton College -but eventually he was not charged by the police and the press were exposed as over-zealous and the man sued them, and received substantial damages. The Leveson Enquiry currently taking place is investigating the various methods the press use to access information for their stories -bribing the police to access private data, using private detectives to hack into phones and computers -yes, once a trial begins the coverage has to report it to the letter, which is why when you look back innocence looks betrayed, and that doesn't cover those convicted who spent years in prison for crimes they did not commit -we may have laws preventing the kind of media coverage we have seen with Zimmerman over there, but our system is far from ideal.
