Glenn Beck, Geraoldo Rivera and, I would think, other conservatives are trying to assert that Trayvon Martin was responsible for his own death. That either he had it coming because supposedly he was a criminal, or he was wearing a hoodie (which is one step removed from claiming that women brought sexual assault on themselves because of sexy attire.)
Naturally that’s the angle they’d have to take. Because if they blame the gunman, then in the de rigueur discussion of gun control laws which is sure to follow this incident, and which rarely leads anywhere since no one wants to pìšš øff the gun lobby since they’re, y’know, armed, then Beck, Rivera et al risk being portrayed as coming down on the wrong side of this favorite conservative issue. Because you’ll take their guns when you pry them from their cold, dead fingers.
You know…the kind of fingers Trayvon Martin has.
Meanwhile, Kath and I will apparently have to wear our hoodies at our own risk.
PAD
• 
Having grown up in N.GA I grew up very pro-gun and was that way until I watched “Bowling for Colombine”, which changed a lot of my views with some facts. I still think that people should be able to buy guns for hunting and even for personal protection, some people take it way to far and some people have no business having one…like George Zimmerman. The gun lobby people need to get over this whole “gun control leads to taking all our guns” idea before more innocent kids get killed.
The problem, Michael, is not with want of gun control but, rather, a new species of gun law which (with gun lobby support) has been making its appearance, especially in Southern states, with increasing regularity. These “stand your ground” laws relax the traditional requirement which obliges individuals to retreat before resorting to deadly force in a dispute and allow citizens to “stand their ground” in a fight. When these laws are coupled to laws (also increasingly popular) allowing the concealed carry of firearms, the results can be disastrous.
I offer no opinion yet in the Georgia case. Enough is known to say that absence of inquiry would be an outrage, but readers are cautioned against going off half-cocked. There still is too much not known. Any case against the shooter would have to be made beyond reasonable doubt; there is no point in arresting the fellow before a prosecutor decides he can do that.
Our experience in Southwest Florida indicates that, in the face of any combination of concealed-carry and stand-your-ground laws, making a criminal case that will hold water may be very difficult. The solutiuon does not lie in “gun control”; it lies in repealing silly laws. The constitutions of many states allow citizens to carry firearms in defense of themselves AND the state. Some courts, however, have made the mistake of substituting “or” for “and” in their opinions, leading to weaker opinions and looser restrictions. The word, “and,” has a specific meaning — one must be carrying BOTH to defend oneself and the state, since it’s ALWAYS a defense of the state to suppress crime and violence but NEVER a defense of the state to perpetrate crime and violence. A constitutional provision containing “and” requires LAWFUL self-defense, not vigilante justice.
The Constitution of Colorado specifically has in it that citizens may carry guns, but also has the proviso in it that nothing justifies carrying a concealed weapon. This is an important safety device which anyone who grew up in the West recognizes. Anyone can get into a fight, but a fight where there is a concealed weapon is particularly dangerous. You may be carrying with perfectly lawful intent, but as soon as the fists are flying, it’s clear that whoever comes out on top with the gun will win big time, and whoever doesn’t can lose forever. Carrying a weapon concealed gives no one else notice of this danger (that’s why these laws are no good). Add to that “stand your ground,” and you have a prescription for disaster.
We still don’t know exactly what was said in the Martin case immediately before the shooting occurred. But, it is POSSIBLE that things occurred which bring a legitimate claim of self-defense into play, especially where concealed carry and stand-your-ground constitute the underlying law. This has happeneed recently in Florida and is going to happen elsewhere unless these very unwise laws are repealed.
Isee I wrote “Georgia case”; I meant “Florida.”
The problem is that what most people would call silly laws, the NRA would call inviolable assertions of the 2nd Amendment.
Michael,
Citing a work by Michael Moore doesn’t lend credibility to your position.
indeed the only time Michael Moore and Facts exist in the same space and time is when the former is using the latter as a tool of distortion.
There are so many things wrong with this line of attack that I couldn’t even begin to list them here, but as far as I’m concerned, it all comes down to this: even IF somebody is wearing a hooded sweatshirt, and even IF they may be up to no good, what gives anybody the license to simply shoot them?
MSNBC has convicted Zimmerman from the getgo.
Florida is full of the ghetto scum and riff raff from NYC and has becoming a dangerous place to live…..that is if you are white and speak english.
Zimmerman’s subdivision has had burglaries in 8 households in the past 8 months and witness accounts in 7 of the crimes described the suspect or suspects as young black males.
When Zimmerman saw a 6ft+ hooded black individual walking through the community, he asked the guy where he was going and who he was. The kid cussed at him and kept walking….Zimmerman walked back to his car and the punk unloaded on him with his fists, instead of saying who he was and where he was going. If Trayvon would have cooperated, situation over…..everyone has a good night.
The Stand your ground law is a good law except for the criminals…..one of the very few things Jeb Bush did as Governor that I agreed with.
Since the media has painted this kid as the best kid in the world, all his prior bad acts in High School have rightfully been brought out.
Zimmerman was attacked and he defended himself…….no jury in the world could convict because of the abundance of reasonable doubt. The trial would most likely not end in an NOT GUILTY verdict but a hung jury. The Police Chief was just following protocol.
I am a disabled Vet from Operation Desert Storm and my reward was an amputated leg and this law works for me and I have had a concealed carry permit since 1997.
Zimmerman might have said something else to make the kid mad, but Trayvon should have answered the questions and then went home.
Zimmerman might have been a little gung ho protecting his neighborhood, but repealing the law would be stupid. Kind of like banning forks because someone killed someone else with one.
The overwhelming majority of blacks could care less about this case and most of the blacks at the Sanford Fort Mellon park rally were from other doggone states.
This case won’t get far.
“Might have been a little gung ho.”
I think I speak for the majority of people here when I say oh my freaking God.
PAD
“When Zimmerman saw a 6ft+ hooded black individual walking through the community, he asked the guy where he was going and who he was.”
And he had absolutely zero authority to do so. Unless, what, you’re saying that walking while black is a suspicious activity and walking while black means that you deserved to be stopped and hassled by every jáçkášš with a gun who think he has the right to question you?
“The kid cussed at him and kept walking…”
Which he would have had every right to do since walking after dark from the store and back to where you’re staying is not a crime.
“Zimmerman walked back to his car and the punk unloaded on him with his fists, instead of saying who he was and where he was going.”
Bûllšhìŧ. we have only one witness to this version of events and that is Zimmerman. Martin’s girlfriend was on the phone with him (phone records show this at least to be a fact) and paints a different picture. Plus, recent coverage actually showing the area show that the body and the fight wasn’t where Zimmerman’s car was.
“If Trayvon would have cooperated, situation over…..everyone has a good night.”
No, if a gun carrying, over zealous idiot with a history of multiple incidents of anger control issues hadn’t decided that a black youth walking home from the corner store qualified as suspicious and took it upon himself to be Martin’s judge, jury and executioner… Then everyone has a good night.
“The Stand your ground law is a good law except for the criminals…”
You mean like Zimmerman?
“Since the media has painted this kid as the best kid in the world, all his prior bad acts in High School have rightfully been brought out.”
Right… Because once having a bag that had the residue of pot in it means you’re just such a thug… Completely unlike having a history of violent actions behind you like Zimmerman has.
“Zimmerman was attacked and he defended himself…….no jury in the world could convict because of the abundance of reasonable doubt.”
Wrong.
More and more evidence, not rumor or hearsay, but evidence, is making Zimmerman’s story look less and less convincing. You also have the fact that he left his vehicle, followed and approached Martin. He loses the ability to claim self defense in an encounter that he initiated; an encounter he had zero right or authority to engage Martin in. You don’t get to create the dangerous situation and then claim that you were reacting to save yourself from that situation by killing someone.
“Zimmerman might have said something else to make the kid mad, but Trayvon should have answered the questions and then went home.”
Bûllšhìŧ. Martin had zero obligation to stop and answer questions thrown at him by some stranger in the dark on a rainy night. He did nothing wrong. So, again, what justification are you offering other than the justification you started with; walking while black is justification?
You know how Martin would have easily made it home? If Zimmerman hadn’t played his dumb games and then shot a 17 year old boy because of those dumb games.
“Zimmerman might have been a little gung ho protecting his neighborhood”
Good God, man… He was “a little gung ho” that night? Really? He was just “a little gung ho” out there?
Let’s see… He decides that a black kid walking home from the corner store is suspicious looking. He calls 911 and claims that the kid looks like he’s up to no good and on drugs. When the kid commits the crime of continuing to walk away and leave the area, Zimmerman gives chase and swears under his breath, and on a 911 tape, about the how “they” always get away with it and about the “fûçkìņg coons.” He then confronts an unarmed teenager and kills him with his gun.
Yeah… Executing someone for having the temerity to walk back to where he was staying armed with a cell phone, an ice tea and a bag of candy is just so deserving of all of that crap and certainly deserving of getting shot by an idiot with past anger management issues.
“but repealing the law would be stupid. Kind of like banning forks because someone killed someone else with one.”
No, repealing laws in Florida, Texas and almost two dozen states that allow people to excuse murder by claiming self defense and walking away a free man would be the sign of a sane nation.
“The overwhelming majority of blacks could care less about this case and most of the blacks at the Sanford Fort Mellon park rally were from other doggone states.”
Somehow I don’t find your analysis on this all that credible at this point.
“This case won’t get far.”
Far enough and then some actually. Every bit of Zimmerman’s story is getting holes poked in it by new facts. Witnesses to the event do not back what Zimmerman’s defenders claim and the only video evidence we have from shortly after the incidents show a Zimmerman with no bruises, no serious physical injuries at all, no signs of blood on him or in how he’s treated by police and looking quite well. In other words, we see a man with nothing to back the idea that he was getting a beating that should put him in fear for his life.
This will go to court and I’ll lay odds on Zimmerman getting what the homicide investigator wanted him charged with to begin with; he’s going down for manslaughter.
The only person who stood their ground here was the only person under real threat: Martin.
And he ended up dead.
I am a disabled Vet from Operation Desert Storm and my reward was an amputated leg and this law works for me and I have had a concealed carry permit since 1997.
And I have no problem saying that, with this post of yours, I find you to be a disgrace for throwing your service around as some kind of badge to excuse extreme amounts of stupidity.
Well, they can’t go after the law (although someone should) for being too broadly written and poorly written to boot. It was one of Jeb’s darlings and they don’t want to hurt him any so that he can be viable down the road. Plus, any serious debate about the law will bring out the fact that most of the law enforcement groups were against it, most sane groups were against it and it was propped up largely by the NRA. So, no, they’re not going to attack the NRA.
The fun bit is that they could have taken a semi-sane approach to this. Even with the overly broad and stupidly written law, those police officers and that chief screwed up so bad it’s not funny. This never, never, would have been an issue if had reacted to this situation better. You have the shooter on the 911 call saying that the guy is leaving, giving chase and told not to give chase. That right there should have changed the equation. That right there should have moved the situation into doubt as to whether or not it was covered under the “Stand Your Ground” law. You don’t get to claim the need for the use of deadly force if you initiate the contact. That conversation alone should have put the situation into doubt and started an investigation by police. But they have a poorly written law and apparently crap ášš training in how to respond to incidents that might be covered by it.
Personally, I take issue with the people behind the law and its passage, the law itself and the way the police handled it in about equal measure. Fox News and the conservative radio idiots could have easily (and even safely despite their primary fanbase) taken issue with the piss poor handling of the incident by the local police. But it seems that they just can’t help themselves. First Fox News was (after being late to have any substantial coverage of this) spinning it to play up the NRA as the real victim in this. Now the new narrative is that Trayvon Martin is responsible for getting Trayvon Martin shot because he made the mistake of
walking at night while blackwearing a hoodie.They just can’t stop themselves from being stupid. I’d laugh, but the joke stopped being funny a long time ago.
Jerry —
Much has been made of the racial aspect of this case but the thing I’ve noticed from comments online that I find the most disturbing is how a lot of people refuse to view Trayvon Martin as what he really was — a kid, a minor.
Here’s what I think that means:
1) We should all be horrified that a grown man chose to follow a 17 year old in his SUV alone at night and then get out of his car and run after him. Please note — and this goes to why I believe an arrest should have been made at the scene — that running after someone to catch up to them to ask a question or to tell them they dropped their keys is one thing but to RUN AFTER SOMEONE WHO YOU KNOW IS RUNNING AWAY FROM YOU is clearly an aggressive act.
Some people have stated that things might have turned out better if Trayvon had just answered Zimmerman’s questions. Parents in the room, who here would advise their 17 year old kids (male or female) to allow a strange man who followed them in an SUV and then got of the car and gave chase to converse with them? There’s no evidence that Zimmerman identified himself beyond shouting “What are you doing here?” And frankly I wouldn’t want my kid trusting that the unidentified man is a member of neighborhood watch.
I found it astonishing that the Sanford PD would say that Zimmerman was within his rights to do any of those things. Really? Even if it were a 17 year old white girl?
2) Because Trayvon is a minor, I don’t see how he can be held equally or even somewhat culpable for any altercation that Zimmerman clearly started. There’s no question that they only met because Zimmerman followed him. And he had no true authority to do so.
There are 4 objective facts, as I see them.
Zimmerman followed and then chased after Martin
Zimmerman shot and killed Martin
Martin was unarmed
Martin was not in the process of committing any crime when Zimmerman chased him.
Everything else is speculative. Zimmerman claims Martin attacked him. Why should we believe that? The simplest explanations are often the true ones. And the simplest explanation is offered from those four facts with little extrapolation necessary —
Zimmerman followed Martin, chased after him, an altercation of some sort occurred, Zimmerman shot and killed Martin.
I see no self-defense there. If there is, Martin’s the only one who can claim it.
What astounds me about the Sanford PD believing Zimmerman’s story is that if you listen to the 911 call, it’s clear that Zimmerman is agitated and heated (“those áššhølëš always get away”). He then chases after Martin because he fears Martin will get away. This should go to intent to detain Martin against his will. I doubt he was going to ask him to share his Skittles.
Every action Zimmerman describes Martin doing implies someone who is retreating from a fight (seeing if someone is following him, the walking more quickly, then flat out running away).
To buy Zimmerman’s story would involve accepting a complete change in the state of mind of both Zimmerman and Martin, in which Zimmerman retreats — despite clearly wanting to catch Martin — and Martin goes on the attack — despite clearly wanting to escape Zimmerman.
I think what’s most troubling about this case is that it seems to so many reasonable people as cold-blooded murder and yet Zimmerman is chilling on his couch with a beer right now.
Personally, I do think the Stand Your Ground law is a good thing – I think the people applying it right now are complete numbs***s. As reported – the kid was going *away* – and I’ve heard nothing to suggest he was headed towards anyone’s house but his own. While I expect the NRA to continue to stand behind the law itself – I *doubt* they’re going to stand behind this shooter, or the DAs who are poorly applying it. One might even guess that the DAs are trying to interpret it badly to stir up sentiment against it, and support for gun control laws.
Personally, I do think the Stand Your Ground law is a good thing – I think the people applying it right now are complete numbs***s.
The way they are written right now in Florida is that a) the burden of proof on the government is now placed at the crime scene, not the court room, b) the accused can now sue the government for “malicious” prosecution, thus incentivizing non-prosecution c) two people could plausibly claim self defense under stand your ground.
Dunno about you, but ANY of these reasons tells me that this is an incredibly poor law.
I sometimes think the 24-hour news cycle has created a situation in which people are encouraged to say anything. Silence is dead air. Speech sells. It creates controversy.
The most appalling thing about this is that Geraldo says “leave the hoodie at home… unless it’s raining.” It *was* raining the night Trayvon was killed.
Also, Trayvon’s girlfriend claims that he only put the hoodie over his head once he noticed Zimmerman stalking him.
Both of these pieces of information would have been worth knowing before insulting his family and his memory on air.
The stupidity of the statement boggles the mind. There was probably a period where someone wearing a tattoo or a leather jacket was threatening. Times change. Now your boss could be wearing a leather jacket. He’s not in a motorcycle gang. Stereotypes and assumptions no longer based in pop cultural logic are thoroughly idiotic.
It’s simply not reasonable now to presume hoodie = gangster-wannabe. And really, is the idea here that simply putting on a hoodie would change the demeanor of a harmless 17 year old kid who is doing nothing more sinister than walking down the street? It’s not magic. Under the exact same circumstances, Zimmerman would have viewed Senator Obama (who wouldn’t have had secret service detail) as “suspicious.”
This isn’t addressed — mostly because of the enormity of the tragedy — but it’s frustrating that the best case scenario for Trayvon once Zimmerman got involved was that he might have been stopped by the police for walking in his own neighborhood. Zimmerman’s unfounded paranoia allows him to intrude on the freedom of someone who did nothing wrong.
I strongly believe that if you’re going to report someone as suspicious to 911, you should have more than “walking slowly” and “looking around” (neither of which are crimes). Considering that private civilians aren’t trained profilers from “Criminal Minds,” there should actually be some illegal activity going on or something close to it. There’s nothing illegal about walking slowly in a neighborhood. It’s also not conceivable that Zimmerman would know everyone in the neighborhood.
I think Zimmerman’s actions bordered on harassment — especially his belief that he had the authority to follow and pursue people *at night* — and the police should have followed up on the number of his calls and done some research on how many of them bore fruit of some sort.
And presumably a bag of Skittles can now be considered a lethal weapon because, well, they’re delicious.
Taste the rainbow, and then step on one?
Wherever there’s a rainbow, there’s a pot of gold that needs defending.
Apart from the insanity of not seeing anything in the recorded events that would at (the very) least require further investigation is the foundation of the “stand your ground” justification for shooting someone. I had thought even the most gun-happy second gun owners would want to limit situations where a shooting/gunfight was an easy option. (Oddly, I’m reminded of the early SIMPSONS where Homer gets a gun, uses shots to do almost everything, and joins the local NRA — which is horrified at how casually he uses them.) The whole “stand your ground” basis seems to go beyond personal protection (of you, your family, or your property) to somehow making shooting someone preferable to, say, walking away or trying to *avoid* shooting them.
Some folks have said this case will be used to rewrite justifiable shooting laws. I say that’s good: Maybe the standard will be justified as a last resort.
You know at this point I’m thinking Geraldo said this for the simple fact that no one has talked about him in months and he somehow missed Rush Limbaugh proving there is such a thing as bad publicity.
The guy willingly pointed out his own son thinks he’s crazy for saying this. What else could it be at this point other then let’s say something controversial to get my name on people’s lips.
I used to work in a mall where they had explicit instructions on the door saying that once inside all hoodies were to be pulled down from the head, or security would ask them to leave. So I get the stigma, but for Geraldo to say that wearing hoodie pretty much invited Trayvonne’s death is just insane.
The one that really pìššëd me off was Nancy Grace. my Girlfried loves HLN and Dr Drew so we usually just leave it on and catch the repeats.
In any case Nancy had yet to bring up the case even though all the other shows surrounding her were talking in detail.
Then after a one day absence where show focused between that and the Whitney cause of death results, she came back and finally talked about it, if you could call it that.
She got the name of the person she was talking to at first wrong. The questions she asked were so basic it was like this was the first time she was hearing the details. Not the informed questions you might get when a skilled journalist is trying to get the necessary information out to inform her audience.
Her only real guest on the matter is the same lone defender of zimmerman that’s been making the rounds, and he’s spouting of nonsense like saying he was acting suspicious (when we all know that’s code for walking while black)
when she brought on the lawyers to talk about it she kept going on about self defense and never mentioned Stand your Ground which is the whole point because stand your ground allows people to go a step further then mere self defense. It was uninformed, poorly done and just awful, and for someone who has made such a huge deal about victims and why aren’t the police doing more to get bad guys and suspects off the streets. the fact that she handled this story so badly for what appears to be no other reason then the fact that the victim is a young black kid as opposed you a young white girl is absolutely disgusting.
“saying he was acting suspicious (when we all know that’s code for walking while black)”
You know, I’d really like to see the codebook where all of this is laid out, so I can *FINALLY* understand what people are actually saying, instead of assuming that they’re actually speaking English. There was a flap a few months ago about how “Let’s have coffee” is code for “Let’s have sex.” I hadn’t realized Starbucks was a brothel chain, myself.
It’s not “let’s have coffee.” It’s when it’s phrased as a question.
“Would you like to come back to my place for coffee?”
It’s most often an easy code to spot; especially when the person asking is a male under the age of 25. For one thing, most males I know under the age 25 don’t know how to use anything in the kitchen beyond the toaster and the microwave, so coffee may be a little beyond their abilities. As for males in general. pretty much every question a single male might ask a woman (or guy if it floats your boat) basically translates to asking for sex at some point or another.
We’re sad, but we’re easy to understand.
Odd. I never tried that line on a woman. Perhaps I should one day. Still, I find it wrong to assume that someone is using some particular “code word” – not everyone is briefed on these “code words” (and phrases) – and in fact, since they’re not listed in a dictionary, it makes it impossible to be trust what another person is saying, as James Randi has yet to have to pay out for anyone who could prove they were a mind reader.
Really – we should ask ourselves – why do we continue to allow this kind of rampant crime? We claim that lying and fraud are crimes, and yet we then turn around and find all kinds of justifications for it, and even go so far as to claim “Oh, well, that kind of lying is alright.”
There’s actually something kind of admirable about the barcrawler who says “Wanna f***?” At least they’re not spitting on prostitutes for selling sex for money, while turning around and wanting their boyfriends to buy them all kinds of junk before they’ll have sex with them.
We live in a desperately sick culture, that critically needs healing. And claiming that someone else is using these “code words” doesn’t help. Perhaps if a few more people simply said “you are lying”, we’d be much better off.
Meanwhile, I shall continue to be completely confused without access to the codebook. Explaining one particular entry in it does me very little good, as it doesn’t give me access to the rest.
Well, I can’t help you with any of the other codes. I’m over 40 and married. The only codes I frequently have to deal with (a little over 200 or so) all mean “not tonight.”
I sympathize, I do. But this isn’t exactly “lying”, Tara. When it comes to sex and romance, and anything else that has a lot of emotional weight, people rarely spell everything out. You gotta read between the lines.
.
As for society being sick about things like sex, you’ll get no argument from me.
Geraldo Rivera has been, and always shall be, a sensationalist ášš-clown. Furthermore, Nancy Grace is a walking advertisement for duct tape. I support their right to get on national television and speak these ideas. It’s how I know not to take them seriously. That is the true beauty of free speech.
Back to the case.
As someone whose rights many here would like to see infringed upon (gun owner) I have to say that this Zimmerman person and local police need to have their heads examined. Preferably by way of electric can opener.
VULGARITY AHEAD
The sheer dûmb-fûçkërÿ is astounding:
Stalk, harass and shoot a guy for looking around while walking and wearing a hooded sweatshirt. This is an act worthy of the king of Dipshitopia.
Not arresting or prosecuting the aforementioned king is tantamount to telling the people, “Fûçk you, we do what we want. Now pìšš øff, because now we have to go ruin a comic shop owner, raid a health food store and strip search a six-year-old taking a train to Disneyland.”
Yeah. Fûçk you right back.
END VULGARITY
Sorry about that, but it angers me when a murder, and make no mistake, this was a murder, is either justified by the slimmest of margins or ignored on what seems to be a whim.
Since I cannot change what has already occurred I can only hope that everyone involved in what so far looks to me like a poorly attempted cover-up (bear in mind that I don’t have all the facts) or seriously lazy law enforcement gets a fair trial.
Hëll, Mitch, I’m a gun owner and supporter of gun ownership AND a cop. How do you think guys like me feel right now? We get to see the absolute worse case example of gun ownership and police incompetence all in one news media frenzy. You can’t imagine how much a lot of us hate on a professional level what went on down there right now.
I feel for you, Jerry.
Years ago I considered a career in law enforcement and it’s stories like this along with others that would be off topic that make me quite happy with my decision.
I hope you are able to resist the downsides in your career.
I don’t think anyone can claim race isn’t an issue here. If the shooter had been black and the victim had been a white male, the shooter is probably in jail. If the vic was a white female, the shooter is definitely in jail. And Fox would likely be finding ways to subtly connect “black people with power are scary” messages to their Obama narrative. Instead, the narrative is that that šlûŧ Martin was asking for it because of the way he was dressed. Frankly, I’m astounded they haven’t blamed Michelle Obama for it. After all, if she hadn’t been carping about how obesity is bad, Martin wouldn’t have felt like he had to buy Skittles at night because he was obviously too ashamed to purchase them during the day where Michelle Obama might see him. Yes, my friends, Michelle Obama, through her policies, is setting up situations to make gun holders look bad. That manipulative bìŧçh.
Meanwhile right now the poor Skittles company heads are banging their heads against the wall because their candy is associated with a shooting. Although there may be an upside: my understanding is that angry Sanford residents are writing the word “Justice” on empty Skittles bags and mailing them to the local police department. If that becomes a nationwide trend, it could be a serious sales bump.
PAD
All I know right now is that a lot of people seem to believe this is a racial matter. It may very well be… but there just isn’t enough information being made to the public yet for the predominantly thinking people (as opposed to the predominantly feeling people) to be able to come to that conclusion. I’ve read that the shooter is Hispanic… which means that this doesn’t exactly fit the Emmett Till template that so many seem eager to apply to it. But we’ll see.
His being Hispanic dosn’t preclude his being racist. Racists come in all colors and sexists come in both genders.
Sales of Etch A Sketches and shares of its manufacturer’s stock boomed after the Romney campaign’s recent own-goal, so maybe.
It is entirely possible, at this point, that the situation could end up like the Duke Lacrosse Team situation from a couple of years ago… that reality doesn’t fit the template that is being applied to it. We’ll have to wait and see. In the meantime, I sincerely doubt that any of you are actually concerned about the well-being of Mars, Inc.. If they take a hit because their Skittles product is associated with a murder, the Left really won’t mind because its a corporation (and therefore inherently evil) and if they profit from it, well, you can imagine what they’ll say about that.
I haven’t heard a single conservative voice of prominence (Rush, Hannity, Levin or Belling) suggest that Trayvon Martin was responsible for his own death. Most of them are waiting for all the facts to come in before weighing in on it. They have, however, criticized the President for glomming onto the situation (after initially giving the proper response that it was a local issue that doesn’t involve his office) and demagoguing it. Nobody not directly involved with the situation has a clear picture of what happened yet.
Lots of information about this incident has come out over the last 24 hours that further distances it from the template that the Left (including the mainstream media) has been attempting to apply to it. Both of these individuals were members of a minority. Zimmerman apparently tutored inner city black kids. Zimmerman had a broken nose and a gash on the back of his head. It’s looking less and less like Zimmerman shot Martin just because he wore a hoodie at the very least.
I want to make very clear that I am in no way blaming Treyvon Matrin for this tragic situation, but no seems to be willing to acknowledge that Geraldo had a point, even though he presented it in his usual inept manner, further clouding the issue.
Popular culture, especially black culture, has so glorified the “gangsta” lifestyle that you can’t tell a real hardcore gáņgbáņgër from a wannabe (who probably don’t really understand what they are promoting).
It sure seems that, by all accounts, the shooter was a idiot on a power trip, but if you are unwilling to acknowledge that a hoodie has become a symbol (much like pants around your knees, ment to prove you were in prison) of a “gangsta” lifestyle then the situation will never improve. It is human nature to assume a quacking feathered creature is a duck until proven otherwise. Turning this tragedy into a partisan debate helps no one.
So…in other words, the way they were dressed, they were just begging for it, right?
Where have I heard that before?
No, Geraldo does not have a point. He was even quoting as saying (and I paraphase), “Well, maybe if it was raining, the hoodie would be ok.”
It apparently WAS raining. Which means this could’ve been ANYBODY who was murdered in cold blood simply because some jáçkášš could.
Do only black people wear hoodies? No. And guess what else? Blacks aren’t the only ones who are stupid enough to not know what a belt looks like or how to wear one.
So, Fay, are you proposing that we should make a special, if informal, dress code for some minorities now that they have to adhere to if they don’t want some idiot declaring on TV that the way they were dressed meant that they were asking for it?
Maybe blacks should avoid wearing anything that prominently displays the colors blue or red? Hey, that’s how the Bloods and the Crips still identify their members.
Maybe Latinos should avoid wearing anything with a “13” anywhere in the design. Don’t want to have to shoot them because they might be an MS 13 member and not a kid waiting for his school bus.
Might want to extend that bit for Latinos as well. Machetes are popular with MS 13. Better not let any Latinos working for a landscaping company handle a machete while doing contracted work. We wouldn’t want to have to mobilize a tactical unit or have the neighborhood Rambo gun them down for clearing brush from the yard around an abandoned or dilapidated house. Probable shouldn’t let them use one off the job either.
Bandanas need to go right now if you’re black or Latino. Hey, we all know that it’s just them gáņgbáņgërš who wear those things. How is it the fault of the local vigilantly that he didn’t know those girls were just keeping the sun off of their heads and not selling drugs and planning to murder in cold blood someone in the street before shooting them?
And blaze orange or anything that looks like it is out if your a minority. What, you didn’t know? Someone might be justified in killing them because we all know that convicts are dressed up in blaze orange. And, really, is there going to be any doubt that a self appointed neighborhood watch assclown was justified in killing a local college kid because he committed the crime of jogging while black and dressed in a blaze orange top or bottom? Of course not.
Tattoos are out as well. We all know what kind of scum being a minority with lots of tats makes you. Shoot first situation if ever saw one.
And why leave the idea of suspicious possessions to just clothing? Hey, we all know that a black or Latino kid in an expensive car is just asking for trouble. Hey, it must be stolen for them to be in it, right? The very least that they deserve for driving something that’s not used or a piece of junk is to be pulled over and harassed by local cops and self appointed do-gooders.
And, really, why stop with things that you wear or own? We all know what really caused this and we all know what should be done and who will really be at fault (his or her parents) for the next shooting of a black youth. Black parents just need to tell their kids to stay away from neighborhoods that are anywhere from middle income to wealthy. They really don’t need to be driving through places like that and they dámņëd sure shouldn’t be walking through them. I mean, hey, we all know that there’s nothing more suspicious than a black youth walking through a nice neighborhood. To paraphrase Geraldo, you would think the act of walking through such a neighborhood while black would be as much responsible for their death as the shooter would be. Latinos would be exempt from this rule because, well, we all just know that they’re the gardeners in such a neighborhood.
Or we could, you know, not be that fûçkìņg stupid.
Geraldo had no point. Wearing a hoodie does not make one a “gangsta” or look like one and no amount of bs by a hack journalist is going to make that a reality. Maybe we should be looking at the simple facts of the case where an idiot decided to conclude that a black male walking at night was suspicious, decided to chase him despite the dispatcher telling him not to and then caught and killed him.
There is no style of dress involved in that at all and to try and spin it to say otherwise is asinine.
I need more coffee today. Too typo prone without my standard 32 oz infusion.
I can see that you’re clearly an expert in “popular culture, especially black culture.” Do please tell us more. I crave your insight.
Popular culture, especially black culture, has so glorified the “gangsta” lifestyle that you can’t tell a real hardcore gáņgbáņgër from a wannabe (who probably don’t really understand what they are promoting).
Here’s a wacky idea. It doesn’t matter if someone is a hardcore gáņgbáņgër or a wannabe. If he’s walking along carrying an ice tea and Skittles and minding his own business, how about you don’t freaking kill him.
PAD
Popular culture, especially black culture, has so glorified the “gangsta” lifestyle that you can’t tell a real hardcore gáņgbáņgër from a wannabe (who probably don’t really understand what they are promoting).
Sooooo, in other words, stop dressing like Black People and we won’t shoot you? How dare young black men wear clothes that make them look like young black men!
I know a young man who got frisked by the cops for the suspicious activity of talking on a cell phone in the parking lot of his apartment complex.
Despite Peter’s flip comment, let’s face it, he and my sister are in next to NO danger of getting shot for the crime of wearing hoodies.
Limbaugh, Pat Robertson, Geraldo Rivera, and so on… they are all doing their best out øûŧ-çømplëŧëlÿ-fûçkìņg-šŧûpìd one another at a dizzying pace.
And the rest of us suffer for it.
This intrigues me. Let’s assume, for a moment, that Limbaugh (whose audience size dwarfs the other two you mentioned) was actually being “completely fûçkìņg stupid.” How does that make you suffer? Limbaugh is a guy who talks on the radio. He can be switched off. (In other words, you don’t have to listen to him.) He doesn’t have the power to do anything to you the way that, say, an elected official or an unelected government bureaucrat does. So what’s the deal?
The rest of us suffer for it (IMO) because as you said “whose audience size dwarfs the other two you mentioned”.
I don’t listen to Limbaugh. (though I have heard his show before, so I can respond to what he’s said in the past) But his large audience size does, and they not only listen to him, they BELIEVE everything he says is the truth.
Not only do they listen to and believe what he says, they revel in it, proudly calling themselves ditto heads.
We all suffer when large chunks of our populace blindly follow anyone who leads them astray with lies.
So basically the “rest of you” don’t suffer then because you don’t listen to him and don’t have to listen to him. Thanks for that response. The rest of what you said was ignorant so I’ll ignore it.
America has an unfortunate habit of defining racism as acknowledging racism. Thus we never address the issues.
Superman wears a hoodie on the cover of Earth 1. There are Incredible Hulk hoodies sold to kids. Everyone in Portland wears a hoodie. It’s only considered “gangster” for one specific group to do it.
Let’s take a step back and ask how the we wound up with a society in which the guy with the gun who is following someone can label a guy suspicious for his hoodie. And there’s no evidence it was because of the hoodie but because he “looked suspicious.”
If you see a white person in a hoodie and think Fred Armisen from Portlandia and if you see a black person in a hoodie, you think gangster, that’s racist.
I’ve got a hoodie that says “Chicago Police Department” on it, with a big ol’ badge. And you know, there’s nothing more scary than a 61 year-old white guy with a Chicago Police Department hoodie. It’s been a while since I’ve been to Florida.
***(Said in Sheila Broflovski voice)***
Dear god, Mike, you’re such a gangsta!
Right ON!
From everything I’ve read, the police botched the investigation from the get-go. Whether this was from incompetence or racism (or both), I’ve no idea. At least one of the two applies, though. One of the witnesses said a police officer tried to correct her statement as to which of the two called for help. That incident, by itself, shows either incompetence or racism on the part of the police.
.
Also, why hasn’t Zimmerman been arrested? As one of the legislators who wrote the “stand your ground” law said, Zimmerman doesn’t have any protection under that law, because he pursued Trayvon Martin. Jerry, I know you don’t live in Florida, but in general terms, if Smith shoots Jones, wouldn’t the police arrest Smith, pending a determination as to whether he acted within his legal rights? Just because there’s a stand your ground law in place, don’t the police need to investigate whether the shooter was the one standing his ground? Especially given that the shooter stated, on a recorded 911 call, that he was pursuing the other person?
.
One of Zimmerman’s friends suggested Trayvon Martin was responsible for his death because he didn’t explain to Zimmerman what he was doing in that neighborhood. Bûllšhìŧ. We don’t know what, if anything, the two said to each other, but Trayvon was under no obligation to tell Zimmerman anything. Zimmerman wasn’t a uniformed police officer, just some guy. A bigger and older guy who was following him. From Trayvon’s point of view, Zimmerman might have seemed to be acting suspiciously. When I was 17, I’d have been wary of some bigger and older stranger asking questions of me. I think we all would have been.
.
I’m pretty sure there’s no legal requirement for anyone to answer a uniformed police officer’s questions, either. Yeah, if you’re pulled over, you have to show the officer your license if he or she asks for it, but I don’t think you’re obligated to say a word. But whether that’s the case or not, neither Trayvon Martin nor anyone else whom George Zimmerman might have encountered that night was under any obligation to tell Zimmerman anything.
.
Regarding Geraldo, I don’t have cable, and until recently didn’t know he was still around. I saw his comments online yesterday (or maybe it was only a portion of a larger segment; I don’t recall his mentioning the rain in the segment I saw). Based on what I saw, however, I’m willing to cut him some slack. I got the impression he was speaking as a concerned parent of a son who also wears hoodies, one who is worried that his son might be unfairly targeted because of the negative connotation associated with that article of clothing (he specifically mentioned how CCTV of various crimes often show the criminal wearing a hoodie). He also put the blame squarely where it belongs: on Zimmerman. I believe he even called Zimmerman a “nut.” I don’t think Geraldo was saying Trayvon got what he deserved; I think he was asking if Zimmerman– who bears all the responsibility for what happened– jumped to conclusions about Trayvon’s intentions because of the negative association the hoodie has gotten.
.
On the other hand, from what I read about what Beck said, apparently Beck did try to paint Trayvon as the guilty party, with nothing to indicate his words might have been misconstrued.
.
Like I said, I don’t have cable, so I’ve no idea whether Geraldo generally makes outrageous statements, like Beck or others often do. In this case, however, based on the clip I saw, I think he had the best of intentions in raising his concerns. He probably just didn’t phrase his comments very well.
.
I also saw a clip online where Sean Hannity wondered if it all might have been a tragic misunderstanding. Trayvon thought Zimmerman was up to no good, so he ran from him; Zimmerman thought Trayvon was up to no good, so he chased after him. At best, I think that was wishful thinking on Hannity’s part. Those of you who are gun owners, I’m going to assume that if you shot someone you thought was a threat to you and discovered he was an unarmed kid, you’d be shocked, horrified, mortified, and would be asking yourself “what have I done?” And that you’d express those emotions to the police. Maybe Zimmerman was and is feeling those emotions, but I didn’t get that impression from anything I’ve read about the case.
.
No reasonable person can claim that Trayvon Martin did anything wrong. Nor was he in the wrong because of his choice of clothing, whatever the actual intent behind Geraldo’s comments. He was a kid coming back from a store, minding his own business. If he was looking around, as Zimmerman claimed in the 911 call, so what? Maybe the houses were a mix of architectural styles and he was admiring, say, a Tudor. Or maybe he liked to climb trees, and was sizing up a particular tree. “Looking around” isn’t a crime, and I doubt Zimmerman was trained (as I imagine actual police officers would be) to differentiate between someone admiring the view and someone who’s “scoping the neighborhood.”
.
Also, no reasonable person can refute the following: Zimmerman should be arrested (and tried if there’s sufficient evidence to warrant going to court; which I think there is). Likewise, the actions of the police department should be thoroughly investigated, and if any of the officers were incompetent or acted illegally, they should receive the appropriate punishment. Also, Florida’s (and other states’) “stand your ground” law needs to be re-examined. At a minimum, the legislators should be making sure any aspects of the law that are vague are clarified. No responsible, law-abiding gun owner should have a problem with that. If anything, he or she would want to make sure someone who is irresponsible and/or not a law-abiding individual isn’t able to hide behind the “stand your ground” law.
.
Rick
I expect the Martin family to sue the Sanford PD. Mostly because I fear that their actions so botched the investigation that any competent defense attorney could get Zimmerman acquitted, which would be a disaster for the community if not the nation.
(Even with OJ, his acquittal didn’t negate the fact that Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman were murdered. He just claimed that he didn’t do it. Zimmerman’s self defense is especially odious because if it stands it implies that Trayvon caused his own death.)
I can’t imagine any parent not wanting to bring hëll to a police department that let them go sick with worry for THREE DAYS while their son was in the morgue as a John Doe. They didn’t bother to canvass the neighborhood, leading to a bias that Trayvon clearly didn’t belong there (even if it might be a logical assumption that if he’s on the grounds of the neighborhood, he might live in or be visiting someone in the neighborhood). And they had the kid’s cell phone. Forest Gump could ID a body if he had the cell phone.
It looks like Zimmerman thinks he did nothing wrong — from observing Trayvon to following him to killing him. This arrogance combined with his demonstrated paranoia won’t end well. Heck, he probably has a *legitimate* reason to be paranoid now. And he still has a gun. God help any black person who looks at him the wrong way.
As I’ve said on Michael Davis’ blog, if the story we’ve been given matches reality then I hope they try and execute George Zimmerman. That said, I also think we all need to cool down and wait until more facts are released. There’s an account of an eyewitness who “saw the whole thing” that may have led the police to not bring Zimmerman in.
.
http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/state/witness-martin-attacked-zimmerman-03232012
.
I don’t know the veracity of the account, but neither does anyone else right now. Other things that have been stated include that the reports of Martin being a scrawny kid outweighed by Zimmerman by 100 pounds were based on his state ID that was issued at least three years ago. It’s been said that Martin was closer to 6’2″ at the time of his death, 180lbs and a football player. Is it true? Is it a lie made up by a redneck blowhard? I don’t know, and I’d hazard a guess that no one else here does either.
.
I don’t know if anyone else but me is bringing up the media trial of Richard Jewell, but it’s instructive. That man acted in a heroic manner, and was first lauded appropriately for it for four days until someone leaked his name as a “person of interest.” Suddenly he was labelled “the Unabubba” and we were told that he fit the profile of a “lone bomber.” One Georgia paper even compared him to Wayne “the Atlanta Child Killer” Williams. Jewell suffered under these accusations for about three months, until the FBI finally parted from their procedure of saying “we can neither confirm nor deny” and cleared the guy.
.
It’s more than a stretch to say Zimmerman acted heroically in this case, but it’s not a stretch to say that media has already convicted the guy. If some startling evidence is revealed that exonerates Zimmerman, pride is going to make it harder for his accusers to admit they were wrong. If more evidence turns up to dámņ the guy, pride is going to make it harder for all three of his defenders to admit they were wrong.
.
The worst part is that we all have our narratives that we’re determined to make fit this case, the facts be dámņëd. My side of the aisle is determined to hang the guy because he makes us responsible concealed carry license holders look bad. The Brady Campaign is determined to tie this to not just Stand Your Ground, but the Castle Doctrine and CCW (they’ve already termed us who lawfully carry as “Concealed Carry Killers”)as well. Al Sharpton, and progressives in general seem determined to make this fit their narrative of America as a fundamentally racist place. Soon “Trayvon Martin” will translate into “Racial lightning rod” or “the Reason We Need to Get Rid of Guns.” His name will mean anything but, “kid who was murdered.”
.
And what happens if the evidence presented to a grand jury causes them to return a no-bill? What happens if a jury of his peers, seeing the full evidence, acquits Zimmerman? In the time between an acquittal and the public seeing the full evidence, will we see a race riot? The premature passing of judgment certainly makes it a possibility.
.
Please, let us wait until we have all the facts before we sharpen our knives.
I think there’s two options, based on the evidence:
1) Zimmerman lied completely at the scene and actually chased Martin down, confronted in, which resulted in an altercation and Zimmerman shooting Martin dead.
2) Zimmerman told the truth: Martin did in fact attack Zimmerman from behind. However, this would have been after Zimmerman, failing to identify himself as a non-lunatic, followed Martin in his car at night, then got out of his car and chased after Martin when Martin was already running. Zimmerman might have returned to his car to wait for the police but Martin — being a scared kid — had no way of knowing that. All he knows is that despite every effort to shake the guy, he still came after him. So, he made a hail mary stand to try to incapacitate enough so that he could safely get home. Again, he’s a kid having to make a decision in the moment he never should have had to make.
I don’t see either option does not place the fault squarely with Zimmerman. The first is cold-blooded murder. The second is a result of reckless behavior on Zimmerman’s part, against police advice.
Martin was unarmed with no history of violence or other forms of criminal behavior. It’s not likely he was trying to mug or car jack Zimmerman.
Zimmerman’s own statement makes no mention of Martin outright confronting Zimmerman in an aggressive manner. He doesn’t say that he approached Martin politely and Martin defiantly attacked him for no reason.
Chief Lee’s statement also differs from Zimmerman’s: Lee implied that Zimmerman asked him if he lived in the neighborhood and Martin attacked him. Zimmerman does not say that he ever confronted Martin but that Martin attacked him without provocation.
Anyway, nothing happens if Zimmerman had not chosen to find a kid walking home from the store “suspicious.” Or if Zimmerman had simply waited for the police to arrive. Or had not chased after Martin.
You would *think* other conservatives would toe this line, Peter? Any conservatives in particular besides the two you mentioned (and that’s granting you the shaky notion that Geraldo is some sort of bellwether of conservative thought)? Two National Review writers have weighed in against Zimmerman, as has a Human Events writer. Rick Santorum criticized Zimmerman. But wait, they’re conservatives! Why are they taking a different view than the one you presume they’d have to take? Maybe you should’ve read up on what conservatives are saying on this topic before assuming they’d be on the other end from where you are. (They are on the opposite end from you in one respect, anyhow: they’re not making dámņ fools of themselves.)
-Rue Klux McClanahan
Ive been following this case and much of what I think have already been said here. But here’s some more ideas about it;
.
-The cops didnt retrieve the murder weapon for forensic analysis. Zimmermann walked away from the scene carrying the literally smoking gun after the cops arrived. As far as I know, every time a weapon is used, even by a cop, it has to be analyzed. It is like that here and thousand of hours of films and cop shows say it is there in the USA too. George Zimmermann was not tested for substance abuse wich is also pretty much customary. The corpse of the kid was. I’ve also read he had a record, one that include domestic violence in wich he also accused women on two different episodes of starting the violence. As much of a moron the shooter was, the real systemic failure here is the cops deciding what’s what on spot and not collecting evidence to let the DA decide if he presses charges.
.
-If a big (100pounds over) stranger pursues your kid you expect him to treat that guy as a threat. Even if Treyton Marting attacked Zimmermann, he would only be standing his f*cking ground against what he perceived as a criminal threat. Gun carrying and SyG advocates discourse should be siding with the dead kid and lamenting he wasnt carrying a piece. A hoodie AND a gun… the gangs had it right from the beggining. (baDabing)
.
I was told the Police actually got his gun, even though the “legend” says they didn’t. The rest of it – lack of forensic examination of the shooter, lack of substance test, disregard of the recorded conversations that show he pursued – are all very strange, I agree.
.
And yes, the self-defense laws here seem to aply to Trayvon Martin, not Zimmermann. But here is what I find reprehensible of many conservatives: they have ideals, but somehow their ideals apply only to them, or to people they identify with.
.
They want religion in public, but only their religion, they don’t want no stinking Mosques. They want “respectable” middle-class white people to carry a gun, but do they want poor blacks to carry guns? What about a mob of Occupy Wall Street folks with guns? They want small government to back off their economic freedoms, but they’re okay with “small” government attacking other people’s sexual freedoms.
.
It’s all very half-assed, and it’s hard not to think sometimes that Conservatives are really interested only in promoting the wellfare of their own tribe.
The idiots in the Florida Legislature were told by EVERY Law Enforcement Dept. in their State that this was a bad idea that would result in this exact situation. Now that the worse has happened, do you think they might rethink their idiocy?
It’s rhetorical, of course not, they’re Republicans, they never rethink disastrous policies (see: the deregulation of Wall Street and invading Middle East countries)
The Department of Unintended Consequences is populated by liberals, for the most part. They own that organization. I’m waiting to find out exactly why Zimmerman wasn’t arrested immediately. I’ll condemn Zimmerman with passion and verve if it comes out that he shot this young man on sight, without provocation or being threatened. If it turns out that it was an accidental shooting (“The gun just went off.”) then I’ll condemn him as an incompetent gun owner. Until then, I’m not making hay out of it and I suggest the people here do the same.
Oh, I have no doubt I can match you two to one for every thing you believe liberal policies have done with the dire consequences of Conservative policies. I also have no doubt that the consequences you think have been a result of Liberal policies not that at all. I would hazard to guess for instance, that you believe the housing bubble and economic collapse was caused by Fannie May (not true), when it was the result of the repeal of Glass/Stegel and the complete lack of regulation of Wall street by Greenspan and the Bush Administration.
So you agree that we should probably be waiting for all the facts to come in on the Martin shooting. Good.
In my home province of Saskatchewan, Canada, we don’t even call them hoodies–we call them, for some unknown reason, “bunny hugs.” I don’t mean to trivialize or in any way make light of a tragic and probably criminal shooting, but I still have to do a double-take whenever “hoodie” is used. One of the cultural results of calling a hooded sweatshirt a “bunny-hug” is that it really isn’t a piece of clothing associated with gangs anymore.
So many people, some here and many more elsewhere, gleefully bending the killing of Trayvon Martin into a springboard for their political agendas.
At least here many of those that wear their political agendas with such self-satisfaction seem to care about fixing that which is obviously broken with some degree of reason.
I fear that group will remain a minority.
To make a correction, Glenn Beck has not blamed Trayvon Martin. He’s repeatedly called Zimmerman a bad man, a racist, and condemned him. He was reporting (and tearing apart) Geraldo’s hoodie comments.
He called it, “the worst thing he’s heard”. He compared it to blaming the rape victim for the way they dressed.
And since Geraldo isn’t a conservative, I think your “and other conservative” line is off. All the conservatives seem to be condemning this, and if anything their only defense is of the “stand your ground law” and that the actions of zimmerman aren’t protected (or shouldn’t be) under that law.
It would be interesting if, instead of hoodies, brown dusters became mass fashion, especially in legal-to-carry states.
It would be interesting if, instead of hoodies, brown dusters became mass fashion, especially in legal-to-carry states.
(That’s a hint.)
So now the New Black Panther Party has issued a bounty for the “capture” of George Zimmerman. No word on whether the NFL will suspend them.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46847033/ns/local_news-anchorage_ak/t/trayvon-martin-case-new-black-panthers-offer-bounty-capture-george-zimmerman/
Perhaps the Black Panther guys could find Zimmerman, corner him, ask questions of him, and then shoot him. And when the police came, the Black Panthers could say Zimmerman was acting suspiciously and had threatened them. And they were just exercising their Stand Your Ground rights.
.
That way, the police couldn’t lay a hand on them, correct?
If the city didn’t want vigilante justice against Zimmerman, then perhaps they should’ve done something about the vigilante justice Zimmerman perpetuated against Martin in the first place.
I should add, because I forgot to include it, that my above post is in reference to something stated in the article that Malcolm posted.
This entire thing has turned from a tragedy to a farce and it’s distressing to see otherwise rational people doing their dámņëdëšŧ to suck whatever political gain they can out of the death of a kid. I was given a version of the story that I quickly condemned on facebook and now I find that some very major elements of the story were simply made up. I still believe that the truth would put Zimmerman in the wrong but it’s obvious that we need to get the whole story out before organizing the lynch mob.
When the dust clears there will probably be some brief soul searching from people who will then go right ahead and act exactly the same way the next time the opportunity comes to paint their political opponents in the most negative way possible.
Regarding Peter’s post…Geraldo is a conservative? Who knew? And Beck seems to be on the record as having spoken out against Zimmerman but I’ll leave that to others with stronger stomachs to investigate (I have trouble listening to Beck for more than 3 minutes without realizing there is something else I’d rather do, like cleaning my room or trying to find Current TV on my cable). I DO believe he thinks other conservatives are trying to blame Trayvon for his own death, so there’s that.
Of course, the rest of the post depends on the idea that this epidemic of victim blaming is to be expected, since blaming a gunman would inevitably (in their minds) lad to gun control. So it will be very very hard to find examples of conservatives blaming gunmen for their crimes. It will be well nigh impossible, one should imagine. Whether it’s Gabby Giffords being shot or Malik Nadal Hasan’s rampage, one must expect to find lockstep refusal on the part of conservatives to place the blame on the killers and would be killers.
It seems to me this post if rife with assumptions that perhaps should have been better thought out.
“Geraldo is a conservative? Who knew?”
Well, Geraldo certainly isn’t a conservative, but the others around him when he was yapping were. When he first shoved his foot in his mouth, he was on Fox & Friends and the morning hosts all agreed with him. He then went on O’Reilly to “clarify” his comments (i.e. to double down) and again got more agreement than he got being told that he was ten pounds of manure in a five pound bag.
But, no, Geraldo is no conservative. Geraldo is nothing more than he what he has been for the past 30 years; he’s a tabloid shock “journalist” with delusions of credibility and a all out moron.
It’s not every gunman some Conservatives get behind, Bill. It’s the one that killed a black teen when acting as a vigilante, and invocked a bad law that was promoted by the NRA to get away clean and smelling like roses.
.
The incident MAY lead to stricter gun control for the simple fact that the killer got away with murder by invocking a law sponsored by the pro-gun lobby. It’s not unreasonable that they’d pray for new facts to come to light to help exonerate Zimmerman.
.
Also, some Conservatives identify with Zimmerman, because they love the idea of a self-made individualist gunmen that goes on his own to fight evil and protect the neighbourhood. Hëll, at some level even I like the idea, the difference is that I also realize the idea doesn’t work outside of comic books.
.
But I said SOME Conservatives. I know that a lot of them aren’t so disconnected from reality and common human decency.
Just as I would never dream of suggesting that ALL liberals were salivating at the idea that a white conservative gun nut shot a defenseless black kid in cold blood as he begged for mercy and the racist cops were only too happy to cover it up. Just some of them, who are no doubt grieving the fact that Zimmerman is now being called a Hispanic registered democrat. Now, does that matter? Not at all…which makes one curious at why the New York Times went through the trouble of describing him as a “white Hispanic”. I’m genuinely curious as to how and why that call was made.
“It seems to me this post if rife with assumptions that perhaps should have been better thought out.”
.
Bingo, Bill! A tragedy happens and as usual people here and elsewhere want to use it to promote their own agenda.
.
That Beck was blaming the victim is easily refuted, as is the new idea that Geraldo Rivera is a conservative. But why bother with facts when you feel you already know the story?
.
I do know that Richard Lowry, a man who among other things fills in for Sean Hannity, had a column in the past week with the headline, “This time Al Sharpton is right!”. Yep, he’s blaming the victim alright.
.
I watched Bill O’Reilly last night and basically he spent his time reminding both sides that unless they were an eyewitness to what happened, they have no way of knowing what actually happened. How dare he blame the victim in that way!
.
The story line never changes. The names just change. If you look at the vile, inflammatory things Jesse Jackson has said, toss in that Spike Lee made Zimmerman’s address publicly known, have members of Congress say that Trayvon was “murdered” and have the media referring to Zimmerman as a “WHITE Hispanic”…and you have the perfect stew for poisoning this country, as if this were still 1965 or 1986 or 1996..as if nothing has changed.
.
But WHITE Hispanic is the topper. Because if Zimmerman were simply referred to as an Hispanic, there would still be anger, but then he wouldn’t represent the “oppressors”, the “system”, etc. You have to make sure you insert white in there to rile people up and make it totally about race.
.
Excuse me, the WHITE African-American President is on TV right now talking about how his son if he had one would have looked like Trayvon.
Well, this has been an interesting day for new developments on this incident. We get Fox News, Michelle Malkin, Dana Loesch and others on the right flogging a picture of Trayvon Martin shirtless with sagging pants and giving the finger to the camera as proof of, well, I’m not sure of what. Of course, when you actually see the photo it really looks nothing like Trayvon Martin. And then, low and behold, it turns out that it’s not actually him in the photo that these idiots have helped to spread all over the web, but I guess all young black kids just look alike to these guys.
We’ve got one of George Zimmerman’s friends/defenders, Joe Oliver, running around in interviews telling everyone that George didn’t say “coon” on the 911 tape. No, he said “goon” and goon is a term of endearment. Riiiiight. Zimmerman was speaking in endearing terms about a suspicious black kid walking through the neighborhood and swearing about the fact that he was leaving the area and called him “goon.” Does Joe Oliver think we’re all as stupid as he is? Oliver also told an outright lie when he said that “there are witness accounts to verify that” Trayvon was the aggressor, and that “from the accounts that I’ve heard, it was Trayvon that threw the first punch that knocked George down and broke his nose.” The only account we have that says Trayvon Martin made the first physical contact is Zimmerman’s.
And that’s the other fun bit coming out today. The supposedly big game changer that, oddly, a lot of the right-wing media seem to be running with almost gleefully. It was Trayvon Martin, so they’re pushing, that threw the first punch. Am I the only one who doesn’t really see any great relevance in this when looked at in context?
Here are some of the facts that we know that lead up to the moment of the shooting –
Zimmerman saw Martin walking through the neighborhood and decided to call 911 because Martin was
walking while black after sunsetlooking suspicious and engaged in such criminal actions as looking around as he walked through the neighborhood.We hear Zimmerman curse on the 911 call, we hear what does sound amazingly like a racial slur and then Zimmerman complains because Martin is engaged in such horrible criminal activity as continuing on about his business and thus leaving the area.
We hear Zimmerman give chase. We hear the 911 dispatcher ask if he is doing so and, when told that he is, we hear the dispatcher tell Zimmerman not to do that. Zimmerman does so anyhow.
So does anyone really think that Martin might have been out of place punching a stranger who was stalking him, chased him and may have cornered or tried to detain him without cause or the authority to do so and likely not doing so in a calm manner? Hëll, in places I grew up in you were told to hurt someone and run if a weird stranger tried to pull that on you and, if you couldn’t easily flee from a quick shot to their face or groin, hurt them really badly and then run. That was called surviving.
But even if it went down at all like that, does it even matter? Does it matter if Martin punched him first in the context of what we know from the 911 calls? Zimmerman followed Martin. He left his vehicle to follow Martin. He was told not to follow Martin. He at some point got into close enough physical proximity to Martin to make physical contact. By the act of the pursuit and engagement of Martin, Zimmerman initiated contact with Martin and thus initiated the event itself. That in and of itself invalidates any protection he might have under the “Stand Your Ground” law. You don’t get to start contact of this nature with someone and then claim that you were in fear for your life and shoot them.
And I love this “revelation” by the right today that Zimmerman is Hispanic/half Hispanic and that “the left” was trying to hide this from us. Do these people really believe we’re all as stupid as they are? MSNBC – MS-FREAKING-NBC – was reporting that last week. You don’t tilt much more left in the mainstream media than much of the MSNBC lineup does these days and they were mentioning it. So what “left” or MSM was hiding it? And, again, does it matter in the way that the voices on the right say it does? Hey, I know some people see minorities as a giant group that all fit into the one category, but some of the nastiest racial hatred I’ve encountered professionally and personally has been between some Hispanics and blacks and directed at each other. The fact that Zimmerman has some Hispanic blood in him doesn’t exactly clear him from the possibility of racist attitudes towards blacks.
And all of this garbage from the last two days seems designed to make Zimmerman look like a good guy and to make Martin look like a thug. It’s actually kind of amazing and more than a little sickening to watch. A teenage boy is walking home from the local convenience store minding his own business. He’s unarmed. An idiot sees him, chases him down, maybe engages in a struggle with him and shoots him dead. So who does the Fox News people, Michelle Malkins, Dana Loeschs and others on the right try to smear in this case? The dead teenager.
I can’t even say that these guys are a bad joke anymore. They’ve grown too sick and disgusting to be even a little bit funny.
So does anyone really think that Martin might have been out of place punching a stranger who was stalking him, chased him and may have cornered or tried to detain him without cause or the authority to do so and likely not doing so in a calm manner
Nope.
I think the major flaw of Stand Your Ground laws is that they focus the analysis on solely one person. Do a “two body” analysis using a Stand Your Ground law. If both parties are justified according to the law, yet the armed party ends up killing the unarmed party and faces no legal penalty THEN IT’s AN UNBELIEVABLY BAD LAW.
Yes. Put yourself in Martin’s shoes. You’re a teenager, walking alone, and you’re approached by a big, strange, angry guy in a car, at night, and interrogated. The guy is not a policeman.
.
And you’re supposed to take this calmly? If it were me, I’d be scared and pìššëd øff.
.
I also fail to see the relevance of Zimmerman being part Latino (something I’ve known since Day One, it was on wikipedia). Or having black friends. Or whatever.
.
But I suppose Conservatives get to attack a straw man version of what they think Liberals are saying. That a black-hating KKK member executed a black kid without a struggle and then got a pat on the back by white policemen.
.
No, we never thought Zimmerman was a KKK member. And few assumed that there was no struggle. That Zimmmerman wasn’t a Neo-Nazi and that there was a struggle do NOT in any way, shape, or form, make this incident less horrific and unfair, this silly law less stupid, and the way the police behaved less incompetent.
Yes. Put yourself in Martin’s shoes. You’re a teenager, walking alone, and you’re approached by a big, strange, angry guy in a car, at night, and interrogated. The guy is not a policeman.
.
And you’re supposed to take this calmly? If it were me, I’d be scared and pìššëd øff.
Don’t we teach kids to stand up to creepy stalker types?
The real racism in this situation: If Trayvon had been a white teenager, no one would’ve been saying he should have calmly talked to the creepy stalker guy. And just imagine if the creepy stalker guy had been black.
Or how about how some are pushing the ‘revelation’ that because the kid was suspended from school for an empty bag that carried marijuana that he is *obviously* a bad kid?
Really? People are still pathetic enough to claim this of pot-smokers?
The coverup is always just as bad if not worse than the crime. And here we find that far too many people want to throw a magician’s curtain in front of this and make it disappear.
IMO, as soon as Zimmerman disobeyed the 911 dispatcher, the Stand Your Ground law no longer applied. Not only that, but Zimmerman’s actions (along with some of his comments) come across as entirely premeditated, that his entire goal was to kill this kid, and he was looking for any excuse to do so.
Yes, some of this stuff makes me angry all over again. Trayvon smoked pot. Trayvon threw the first punch. Who cares? George Zimmerman still had no point approaching and interrogating a 17-year old kid for walking around, even if it comes to light that in his private life Trayvon was a devil-worshipper.
.
Now, the past I’m interested in is Zimmerman’s. He is the shooter. He is the guy that initiated the contact. And he is a guy accused of domestic violence and charged with resisting arrest with violence. He may not be a racist, but would it be a reach to say this guy has anger issues?
And now Fox News gets even dumber…
http://www.mediaite.com/online/hooded-sweatshirt-mysteriously-vanishes-from-fox-news-online-store/
I’m hearing this occurred in a gated community. Since you’re a cop, Jerry, can you tell me if that changes the nature of the encounter from a legal standpoint? I’m not trying to be snarky, I’m legitimately curious.
.
.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager
.
Apparently Martin did throw the first punch, that’s not the problem or question. The problem is if he was on top of Zimmerman and hitting him, and slamming his head into the ground. Yes, Zimmerman certainly should not have followed him, but if he was incapacitated and getting wailed on, his use of lethal force is more justified. Please note the operative word is “more” in that sentence.
.
The pot pipe should not figure into the equation. However it and the fact Martin was once caught with a bag full of women’s jewelry might if the prosecution pulls the monumentally stupid move of inserting the moral character of Martin. This point will depend to a large degree on the competency of the DA.
.
I bring this up again, to say we need to quit rushing to judgment. We keep getting outraged that police haven’t done one thing or another, but we all we know is that they didn’t arrest Zimmerman. It’s my understanding that police don’t comment on ongoing investigations. By demanding they tell us what they’re doing, we’re jeopardizing any case they might have against Zimmerman.
Yes, Zimmerman certainly should not have followed him,
This, this, a thousand times this.
Deadly force would not have been necessary if Zimmerman wasn’t looking for the excuse to use such force in the first place.
None of the rest of it matters at all.
The problem is if he was on top of Zimmerman and hitting him, and slamming his head into the ground. Yes, Zimmerman certainly should not have followed him, but if he was incapacitated and getting wailed on, his use of lethal force is more justified.
I think I should note that Zimmerman did not go to the hospital afterwards for examination for a concussion. I believe police really, really encourage folks to go down for at least observation–isn’t that right, Jerry? That would argue against being in fear of ones life or incapacitated. (Unless Zimmerman defined “in fear of his life” as “getting his ášš handed to him in a fight.”).
Of course, that could ALSO mean Zimmerman might have grounds for a suit against the Sanford police for not taking care of a potential concussion victim….heaven knows the Sanford PD hasn’t covered itself in glory with this case.
Roger,
You can suggest that someone go seek medical assistance, but you can’t force them to. However, even in Florida they would have been able to order it as a part of an investigation. They simply chose not to pursue such an investigation it seems.
“I’m hearing this occurred in a gated community. Since you’re a cop, Jerry, can you tell me if that changes the nature of the encounter from a legal standpoint? I’m not trying to be snarky, I’m legitimately curious.”
Hëll if I know. Not my state and even way back when it was (mid 90s to 2000) I wasn’t doing anything that required me to know the local laws to that degree. We had a gated community pop up near where I lived here in Virginia before I bought my present home. Because of where it was located, a lot of kids cut through there and none to my knowledge got arrested for it. We certainly didn’t see any kids get shot for walking while armed with snack foods.
“Yes, Zimmerman certainly should not have followed him, but if he was incapacitated and getting wailed on, his use of lethal force is more justified. Please note the operative word is “more” in that sentence.”
No, he’s not more justified.
“I bring this up again, to say we need to quit rushing to judgment. We keep getting outraged that police haven’t done one thing or another, but we all we know is that they didn’t arrest Zimmerman.”
That’s really just about all we need to know to see an issue with this. We know from the 911 tapes that Zimmerman pursued Martin despite the dispatcher telling him not to do so. The simple concept that Zimmerman initiated the event negates him being protected by the Stand Your Ground” law. We know that Martin was unarmed. With these two facts, you treat the case a lot differently than they did.
So now Geraldo’s pulling a “Limbaugh” and “apologizing”:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/27/geraldo-rivera-apology-trayvon-martin-hoodie_n_1382814.html
Not that he’s backing away from his original sentiment about hoodies, but apparently he just thinks that he could have been eloquent in expressing that wearing certain clothing is an understandable invitation to someone coming up and blowing you away. Yeah, he’s still got a ways to go in completing that psychology degree.
Interesting…
Trayvon Martin Investigator Wanted Manslaughter Charge
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-investigator-wanted-charge-george-zimmerman-manslaughter/story?id=16011674#.T3IwuDGPWSo
I was fortunate enough to never be mugged during my fifteen years in New York. However, I knew people who were. It often happened at gunpoint but they all survived after handing over their money.
I mention this because Zimmerman’s version of events in which Trayvon attacks him without provocation lacks an obvious element — motive. Why would he do this? For kicks? If he just wanted his money or his car, he could have just taken it and left. And Zimmerman has not described Martin demanding anything of the sort.
So, why would Martin attack a stranger if it wasn’t a robbery? Removing profit as a motive, then the only other possibility is anger. Martin doesn’t know Zimmerman. All that’s left is that Martin feared for his life and was attempting to disable a threat. If I felt I’d been stalked and followed by a strange man who was armed, I’d probably go for the gun, as well.
The evidence seems to point toward Martin fearing for his life because of reckless actions on Zimmerman’s part. He chose to follow Martin in his SUV and then to chase him after being advised not to do so. I don’t see how responsibility for the actions stemming from that decision can shift from Zimmerman.
If Martin did not believe his life was in danger, then we’d have to believe that Martin was unstable that Zimmerman’s behavior set him off to the point he wanted to violently assault Zimmerman — possibly even kill him.
And that brings us to my original point — if you remove fear for your life, what can possibly enrage someone enough that they would assault you to the point of death?
Sometimes the motive for something like this is nothing more than self-delusion on the part of the perpetrator. Martin’s social networking comments clearly demonstrate that he was immersed in the “gangsta” culture, in which the implicit motto “I won’t be dissed” is maintained. At this point, I still don’t think anyone not directly involved can make a call on this story (that includes Obama). One thing, however, is becoming clearer and clearer… Zimmerman (5’9”) wasn’t a white, rightwing vigilante-type and Martin (6’3”) wasn’t clean and pure as the wind-driven snow. There is physical evidence that Zimmerman was physically assaulted. The simple fact that Martin wouldn’t have been able to break Zimmerman’s nose and gash his head AFTER being shot in the chest would seem to indicate that Zimmerman waited before drawing and firing his weapon.
Martin’s social networking comments clearly demonstrate that he was immersed in the “gangsta” culture,
Really?????
Ah, no.
I think the bigger question is if Martin allegedly attacked Zimmerman, why didn’t he say so at the time this story broke instead of waiting until public sentiment was against him? It does seem like trying to smear the victim to me. You don’t have to be an angel to be a victim in this case; simply being unarmed and getting shot should be enough to do that.
I think the bigger question is if Martin allegedly attacked Zimmerman, why didn’t he say so at the time this story broke instead of waiting until public sentiment was against him?
Actually, it was there at the beginning. Though the details did change as time went on….
Sometimes the motive for something like this is nothing more than self-delusion on the part of the perpetrator. Martin’s social networking comments clearly demonstrate that he was immersed in the “gangsta” culture, in which the implicit motto “I won’t be dissed” is maintained
**********
SER: “Gangsta” culture is popular among blacks and whites. If Facebook had exited in 1991 when I was 17, would I be deemed a “gangster” because my page had references to “Godfather” and “GoodFellas”?
If Zimmerman’s story only makes sense due to a belief that a teen with no history of violence would attempt to beat a man to death, then that story has holes.
And, as a matter of law, any injuries that Zimmerman suffered is evidence only of a physical altercation between Martin and him. There is no witness as yet to who started the altercation.
The evidence we have: An angry Zimmerman on a 9/11 call pursued Martin. An altercation took place. Zimmerman shot Martin.
If Zimmerman has a bloody nose, that by itself does not justify the shooting. There are rape victims who manage to do some damage to their assailants. That doesn’t mean they started it.
***********
Zimmerman (5’9”) wasn’t a white, rightwing vigilante-type and Martin (6’3”) wasn’t clean and pure as the wind-driven snow.
***************
SER: No, Martin wasn’t Theo Huxtable. He was a teenager.
He doesn’t have to be perfect for it to be a crime to shoot him.
I can only speak for my own experience but I was taller than some of my teachers when I was 17. I still viewed them as authority figures (same as I would any adult). I wouldn’t pick a fight with a grown-up.
Just saw this article on CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/27/justice/florida-teen-shooting-witnesses/index.html
Has some interesting details from witnesses and what the police know. One thing that I found interesting – Zimmerman did pursue Martin but lost him. (The 911 Dispatcher did not order him not to pursue Martin. The Dispatcher said that, “you don’t have to do that.”) While he was walking back to his SUV, Martin approached Zimmerman and after a verbal exchange, punched him in the face. I have no idea how factual that account is, but it definitely puts a different slant on it, if true.
The only thing I will say is that it would be nice to tone down the mob mentality. This is an unmitigated tragedy, but the facts are extremely sketchy. An interesting statement in the CNN piece is that the situation is “more complicated” as more becomes known, which sounds to me like what they are saying is “as more becomes known, it’s obvious that our previous reporting on this subject doesn’t have too much resemblance to reality.”
With every bit of news that comes out it becomes obvious that the initial story–the one that got us all riled up–was incomplete. Now, none of the details might matter, one may well argue, though it then demands the question of why these unimportant and, as it turns out, inaccurate facts were included at the beginning. being as they don’t matter and all.
One thing we should ALL be able to agree on is that a lot of folks should shut their yaps and/or do at least some minimal research before they make the situation worse. I would advise Spike Lee to stick to doing whatever it is he does best, instead of tweeting the hime address of mr Zimmerman for his thousands of followers to see and possibly take action on. Especially when it’s the address of an elderly couple with zero point zero connection to the Zimmerman who did the shooting. Jáçkášš. I hope he is paid well to hack out that OLDBOY remake, lawyers can be expensive.
And wait now you’re telling me the 9/11 dispatcher did NOT order him not to pursue? So even the dubious legal issue of “if a dispatcher gives you an order you have to follow it” does not apply? OK, is there one decent source out there that actually has all the, if you’ll pardon the expression, facts, as they are currently known? I’m even hearing from some that Zimmerman was handcuffed and taken to the station, which is in direct contrast to what I was initially told, which was something like “They thanked him and took him to Chuck E Cheeze.” But is it true? And does anyone in charge care?
And wait now you’re telling me the 9/11 dispatcher did NOT order him not to pursue?
Oh, it’s not a legal order. It’s just very good advice, designed to protect against bad things from happening (like, say, preventing an unarmed person 70 yard from his residence from getting shot).
I believe, legally, it’s an important fact because it may establish recklessness on the part of Zimmerman.
“And wait now you’re telling me the 9/11 dispatcher did NOT order him not to pursue?”
Bill, that 911 tape was one of the first to be released and played just about everywhere. Are you saying that you haven’t heard it yet?
Here –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aVwPqXc-bk
This also goes to further show what a complete f’n moron Geraldo was for his hoodie comment. Geraldo said that if it wasn’t raining you should keep the hoodie at home. At the begining of this 911 tape, you hear Zimmerman say that it’s raining.
Bill, the 911 Dispatcher did not order Zimmerman to not pursue Martin. It’s clear on the tape and reported in this story that she told him, “You don’t have to do that,” when Zimmerman said that he was going to pursue.
From the City Manager’s statement on the case:
If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be
considered in this investigation?
Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you
following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do
that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be
required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and
was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by
Trayvon.
Bill, the 911 Dispatcher did not order Zimmerman to not pursue Martin. It’s clear on the tape and reported in this story that she told him, “You don’t have to do that,” when Zimmerman said that he was going to pursue.
And regardless of how the dispatcher worded it, Zimmerman chose to become a vigilante.
No police officer will tell you to pursue in that situation, because you are not a police officer. You are not to put yourself in a situation where something like this could happen.
But apparently common sense isn’t used in Florida, and that Stand Your Ground only begins once you pull the trigger.
“Zimmerman did pursue Martin but lost him. (The 911 Dispatcher did not order him not to pursue Martin. The Dispatcher said that, “you don’t have to do that.”) “
Which is not new information. That tape was one of the first to be released and, when you listen to it in full context, the meaning is pretty clear.
“While he was walking back to his SUV, Martin approached Zimmerman and after a verbal exchange, punched him in the face. I have no idea how factual that account is, but it definitely puts a different slant on it, if true.”
Sorry, but… no. The only “witness” revealed so far to have given that account to police is Zimmerman himself. In the meantime, phone records indicate that Martin’s girlfriend’s story of being on the phone with him until just before the shooting is accurate. Her version of events is that Martin was scared, Martin was trying to leave (an account backed by the facts we have on the 911 tapes) and that it was Zimmerman who engaged Martin and demanded to know what he was doing.
Despite the best attempts of some to depict Martin as some thuggish gansta wannabe, he has no record of violent criminal acts. On the other hand, Zimmerman does have documented acts of criminal violence in his past and was made to take anger management classes (which are about the most useless bûllšhìŧ pc crap ever devised to fleece money from the state and individuals.)
We also still have a 911 tape where the word “coon” is used to describe Martin as well as others where Zimmerman sounds rather aggressive and upset that Martin is leaving the area.
And, if anything, this witnesses story seems to back the idea that Martin was not the aggressor here.
Witnesses
Mary Cutcher was in her kitchen making coffee that night with her roommate, Selma Mora Lamilla. The window was open, she said.
“We heard a whining. Not like a crying, boohoo, but like a whining, someone in distress, and then the gunshot,” she said.
They looked out the window but saw nothing. It was dark.
They ran out the sliding glass door, and within seconds, they saw Zimmerman.
“Zimmerman was standing over the body with — basically straddling the body with his hands on Trayvon’s back,” Cutcher said. “And it didn’t seem to me that he was trying to help him in any way. I didn’t hear any struggle prior to the gunshot.
“And I feel like it was Trayvon Martin that was crying out, because the minute that the gunshot went off, the whining stopped.”
The two women said they could not see whether Zimmerman was bruised or hurt. It was too dark.
“Selma asked him three times, ‘what’s going on over there?’ ” Cutcher said. “He looks back and doesn’t say anything. She asks him again, ‘everything OK? What’s going on?’ Same thing: looked at us, looked back. Finally, the third time, he said, ‘just call the police.’ “
Also, Joe Oliver, Zimmerman’s most public defender, did an interview last night where he was made to look rather dumb (much like the interviewer actually.) He’s been talking about how Zimmerman cried for days after this incident, but he admitted last night that he had not seen Zimmerman since about two weeks before the shooting took place. He also admitted to only just recently being able to talk to Zimmerman on the phone and backtracked a bit on just how close they are and how well he really knows Zimmerman. His best answer for why he thinks Zimmerman is innocent and martin was a viscous little thug who attacked Zimmerman? He has a gut feeling on the situation backed by zero facts.
This by the way is the same guy saying that Zimmerman said “goon” on the 911 tape and that goon is a term of endearment.
So right now I’m still looking at the facts we’ve had and the facts we’re getting and it still looks like an over aggressive idiot shot and killed an unarmed teenager who was doing nothing more than walking through a neighborhood that the over aggressive idiot decided he didn’t have the right to walk through. And the over aggressive idiot then got away with murder based on an incredibly stupid law.
That’s not what was in the CNN story that I linked to. I don’t know where you’re getting your facts, but they don’t line up with what’s being reported at this time. I think my wisdowm still stands – back off the mob mentality and the rush to judgement. However, if you still want to fly off the handle and decide this case before we know what’s what, feel free. I’m sure you’ll be quick to admit it IF you are ultimately proven wrong. /sarcasm
Bill, that 911 tape was one of the first to be released and played just about everywhere. Are you saying that you haven’t heard it yet?
I assumed with all the people telling me that the dispatcher ordered him not to pursue that the dispatcher had, in fact, ordered him not to pursue. I was so busy questioning whether that order had the force of law it did not occur to me to check to see if there even was an order.
I’m just…agog at this point. It’s like all sense of shame is vanishing. Zimmerman is, by my reckoning, most likely an idiot. There is no real evidence that he was, in the words of one of our elected congressmen, hunting Trayvon down like a dog or executing him just for being black. I mean, if I were going to kill people because of their color I think I would probably not call the cops to let them know i was about to do it. But maybe he really is that racist and that stupid. I’m willing to let the facts come out on that. But apparently political leaders and celebrities are perfectly A-Ok with fomenting an atmosphere where elderly heart patients are chased out of their homes by twittering twits and high school kids feel justified flash mobbing drug stores during school hours.
And hey–if you really believe that we live in a society where it’s common for black kids to be hunted and killed by “white Hispanics” “for profit” and the cops are cool with that, hëll, why not break the law? And if a few old people accidentally get harassed, well, blah blah white privilege blah.
I defended the president for his statement when Gingrich got all fake outrage about it but it’s now time for some stronger words. Hëll, if he would just denounce frauds like Sharpton and Jackson he’s go a long way toward securing my second vote for his presidency.
No, only idiots said Zimmerman had hunted Trayvon down only because he was black and got a pat on the back from the police. That is oversimplification of the case.
.
Zimmerman wasn’t a KKK member. He was a gang-ho neightbourhood watchman with anger issues that pursued a unarmed kid.
.
The behaviour of the police seemed strange, and they still did a lot of dumb things, but they never patted him on the back, few people said they did. It seems like most of the blame should be laid on the DA’s office for the failure to arrest Zimmerman. I knew for days now that they had handcuffed Zimmerman and took his gun.
.
And good golly! In Zimmerman’s own version of events, he is painted in the most favorable manner possible, and Trayvon in the worst. Who would have thought! Gosh!
.
I mean, Bill, Tim Butler, you guys are too intelligent to swallow Zimmerman’s whole story just because it’s more palatable to conservatives. It is his own self-interest, after all. Just like some of the rabble-rousers on the other side should know better too.
Tim, that is in the article you link to. As a matter of fact, I directly quoted from the article you linked to.
I have to ask, Rene–where did I give the impression that I swallowed Zimmerman’s whole story just because it’s more palatable to conservatives? because if there is one thing I am not in favor of it’s registered Democrats with guns walking the streets at night with only their , um, wits between me and a bullet.
I’m pretty sure I have NOT expressed an opinion that would indicate I think Zimmerman should walk free from this. I merely suggest we wait for all the facts and I have expressed disgust at how some are using this tragedy for their own gain, reality be dámņëd. If that is suddenly a conservative position, well, yay conservatism. But in truth I think too much of my liberal friends to assume they must feel otherwise.
But it’s a reflection of the hyper partisanship of the times that any doubt expressed toward the ever changing official narrative must mean complete capitulation to the opposing view.
“And hey–if you really believe that we live in a society where it’s common for black kids to be hunted and killed by “white Hispanics” “for profit” and the cops are cool with that, hëll, why not break the law? And if a few old people accidentally get harassed, well, blah blah white privilege blah.”
Okay, who in the said anything about hunting black kids “for profit” here? I sure didn’t and the first I’ve seen of it is in your post.
There are multiple factors here that indicate that race may well have played a part in this. But even taking race away from it, there’s enough here that it stinks to high heaven; not the least of the stink being things like “Stand Your Ground” laws. We know that the lead homicide investigator didn’t buy Zimmerman’s story and wanted to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter (which would have at least initiated a real investigation at the time VS the bûllšhìŧ that went down.)
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-investigator-wanted-charge-george-zimmerman-manslaughter/story?id=16011674#.T3NPK2EgfSF
We also know that this isn’t the first unarmed dead body that we’ve gotten via this ridiculous law.
The facts that we have at this point –
Zimmerman has made repeated calls to 911 to report suspicious people; mostly blacks.
Martin was walking back from the store armed with nothing but a bag of candy and a can of tea.
Zimmerman decided that this made Martin suspicious.
Zimmerman told the 911 dispatcher that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Toxicology says his system was clean.
Zimmerman also told the dispatcher that Martin was leaving the area and began to pursue.
Zimmerman cursed that “they” always get away with it. Get away with what buy the way? Walking through a neighborhood on the way home from a store? That’s a crime in Zimmerman’s world?
Zimmerman uttered a racial slur that’s on the 911 tape. The best defense anyone has of this is to claim he actually said “goon” and that was a term of endearment or that some people in some parts of the country (i.e. not Florida) call each other a çøøņášš. Yeah, some Cajuns do. Zimmerman isn’t Cajun and even among Cajuns it’s questionable as to whether it’s an insult or not.
Zimmerman gave chase.
There’s no 911 tape for the moments just before the shooting.
Of the two involved, Martin and Zimmerman, only one has a history of criminal violence.
Martin’s girlfriend was on the phone with him when Zimmerman confronted Martin. This much we know from the phone records. Her version of events is in direct conflict to Zimmerman’s. These two people, Martin’s girlfriend and Zimmerman, are the only two witnesses we have to their actual encounter just before, but not including when, the gun was fired.
Given all we have to look at so far of what happened before the actual shooting, Zimmerman’s version of events seems the least likely.
The homicide investigator, again, looked at the crime scene and the situation and doubted the story Zimmerman gave and wanted to pursue manslaughter charges and a full investigation.
We’ve so far seen nothing, nothing, in the way of medical or photographic evidence to support the story of the injuries to Zimmerman or at least their severity. And, even if we get some, we will not really know if they were a result of Martin attacking Zimmerman or Zimmerman attacking Martin because the local law enforcement decided he stood his ground and let him go about his merry way.
Martin’s body was treated as a John Doe for three days. The police had his cell phone, a phone full of programmed numbers and names, and apparently didn’t do the simple investigating on that that we do at my department when we just have a cell phone as found property. There is no excuse</I. for having his family in the dark for that long if they had that cell phone.
I've got news for you, that stink s to high heaven so far even without the racial slur involved or Zimmerman’s history of calling 911 to report blacks suspiciously walking through a neighborhood.
If I shoot someone in the line of duty, even with 100 eyewitnesses telling everyone that the guy was crazy, armed and shooting at me first I’m getting investigated by my department and the shooting by an outside agency. And that’s a good thing. Anyone else in these parts shoots someone, there’s going to be a full investigation in the matter.
The fact that you can kill someone in Florida and, so long as you kill the only other possible living witness, your victim, to the event, claim that you were justified because you were in fear for your life is insane. But, at the very least, that’s what we appear to have here.
Would I like to be wrong about a police agency fûçkìņg up that bad? Would I like to be wrong about a lot of how this looks to me? Yeah, despite Tim Butler being an áššhølë above, I would. But looking at every single thing we’ve seen so far, it just looks more and more like Zimmerman got away with murder that night because of an insanely stupid state law and a poor job done by the local justice system.
“So right now I’m still looking at the facts we’ve had and the facts we’re getting and it still looks like an over aggressive idiot shot and killed an unarmed teenager who was doing nothing more than walking through a neighborhood that the over aggressive idiot decided he didn’t have the right to walk through. And the over aggressive idiot then got away with murder based on an incredibly stupid law.”
Nothing like that was in the article I linked to, Jerry. You’re playing REALLY fast and loose with the facts. But like I said, you can if you want. You might be right. But right now, you’re just a member of the mob.
Oh, I’m sorry, Tim. I didn’t realize that, instead of treating some parts of the fairly short article you linked to as additional information to what we already have for the conversation, your rules for the discussion seem to be that we can only work off of and discuss what’s discussed in articles you link to alone and go by the picture it paints without adding the additional facts in that are already known from other news sources.
We’ll all have to keep that in mind next time.
Actually, Jerry, I misremembered the quote from Jesse Jackson–he din;t say Blacks were hunted for profit, only that “Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business.” though that’s a distinction without much difference. One could even argue the logic of the point and make some arguments for it, though a less hysterical approach might yield more results (but, alas, fewer soundbites). Saying that in the context of an interview about Trayvon Martin is…well, that’s our Jesse.
I am not arguing with any of the reactions from people here. It does not bother me overly if someone says Zimmerman should get the death penalty, since it is pretty unlikely the poster will be in any position to influence that. What makes Jackson, Sharpton, Spike Lee, numerous racists of all colors, Geraldo (King of the Conservatives!), and whoever the nitwit in congress is who just advocated arresting Zimmerman “for his own good” so bad is that they ARE in some position to calm things down or inflame them and they are doing what I guess I should have expected them to do. We’ll see how badly this all ends up. maybe things will calm down, no thanks to them. maybe there will be other innocent people killed and many of the people who egged it on will shake their heads sadly and wonder how it came to this.
I’m willing to wait until all the facts come out (especially having been burned with false reports earlier) before calling for Zimmerman’s head, but these media gadflys deserve condemnation now.
Jerry,
I thought that entering this conversation was going to be a mistake. It started out horribly and went downhill from there. But I thought that with more and more facts emerging that contradicted the original narrative, posting the article on CNN might help saner heads prevail. I see that I grossly underestimated the rationality of a mob once it gets really ginned up. (Or I overestimated my ability to reason with a mob. Probably a combination of the two.)
So, unlike a lot of people here. I will admit that I made a mistake. It was a mistake for me to comment in this thread and attempt to point out the very real possibility that all the folks here demanding the head of Zimmerman could very well be completely wrong. Or maybe not. There’s no way to know at this point, and anyone who claims otherwise is just being foolish.
well, that’s our Jesse.
You want him? You can have him! 🙂
Jackson said that there is a mistaken assumption in some corners of America that all racial problems went away with the election of President Obama. “There was this feeling that we were kind of beyond racism,” he said. “That’s not true. His victory has triggered tremendous backlash.”
He added: “Blacks are under attack.” African American families are facing record home foreclosures and unemployment. Their children are burdened with student loan debt. States, particularly conservative ones, are passing voter laws that leaders know will disenfranchise blacks and other minorities. Meanwhile, the nation’s prisons are brimming with black faces, he said, and their numbers that suggest that the legal system is quicker to send blacks to prison than whites.
Jackson said gunfire in America continues to be a problem for all Americans — not just blacks. Why, he asked, isn’t America outraged, that far more people die of gun violence in one year in America than the number of soldiers killed in the wars waged in Iraq and Afghanistan?
“Our disparities are great,” he said. “Targeting, arresting, convicting blacks and ultimately killing us is big business.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-trayvon-martin-case-jesse-jackson-20120323,0,2131299.story
Okay, Jackson is an idiot who can’t say something sane without then driving into nut territory. Fine. I’m not quoting him. I’m not quoting that clown Sharpton or congratulating that idiot Spike Lee for pulling tricks out of the Michelle Malkin playbook. I think that the New Black Panthers and their shenanigans are pathetic. Some of the MSNBC hosts have been practically moronic this last week. And I still think that Fox News, Michelle Malkin, Dana Loesch and others are just as bad if not worse in some regards.
But I don’t care about them.
There are facts that we do have that will not change. The 911 tapes won’t change. The fact that Zimmerman left his car to pursue Martin will not change. The fact that Zimmerman did that and thus placed himself into danger that he wasn’t in acting to nullify any sane claim of him using stand your ground will not change. the fact that Sanford, Fla., Investigator Chris Serino was instructed to not press charges against Zimmerman because the state attorney’s office but still filed an affidavit on Feb. 26, the night that Martin was shot and killed by Zimmerman, that stated he was unconvinced Zimmerman’s version of events won’t change. Various other things will not change.
Yes, some new things may come out and add to what we know, but it would be a hëll of a trick to see anything so huge that it 180s the things we’ve seen so far.
And, yes, I’ve heard the 911 tape where Zimmerman says a word that sounds amazingly like “coon” when referencing Martin. That won’t change either.
No, Tim, entering this conversation wasn’t a mistake. Deciding to be an ášš with people because they disagreed with you despite the fact that they were being civil with you (at least until you started acting like an ášš) was your mistake. You started to act like an ášš about two posts in and continued the trend to your last post.
But feel free to pretend otherwise and pretend that you’re the wise, calm and sane voice of reason standing against the mindless mob. Your fantasy life and your welcome to it.
Jerry, Your analysis of this is pretty thorough and accurate usual. You are right that many facts won’t change. What also won’t change is the argument presented as obvious fact to start the thread – that conservatives are all “blaming the victim” to avoid a conversation about gun control – is specious at best, bûllšhìŧ at worst.
.
What also won’t change is that people are determined to turn this into a polarizing, political issue rather than the tragedy that it is.
.
Zimmerman is a “White Hispanic”? Really? Of course, because if he was just labeled as a Hispanic, the race hustlers from Jesse to the White House would have to simply comment on a tragedy, rather than identifying the shooter as being emblematic of The Man.
What also won’t change is the argument presented as obvious fact to start the thread – that conservatives are all “blaming the victim” to avoid a conversation about gun control – is specious at best, bûllšhìŧ at worst.
Not all conservatives. But it’s not specious to point out that there are quite a few people who actually are blaming the victim. THAT I would could bûllšhìŧ.
And as I’ve said here and elsewhere – Geraldo is no conservative; he’s an idiot. Not all conservatives are blaming the victim, but some have thrown some odd slants out there on this. And certainly many liberals are covering themselves in stupidity here; Jackson chief among them and a few MSNBC hosts (I’m looking at you Lawrence) following close behind him. And, yeah, whoever thought up and whoever approved the printing of a story describing Zimmerman as a “White Hispanic” needs to be flogged for their stupidity.
But I could care less about all of them (other than to make fun of them or the odd fallout from some of their comments.)
I’m reacting to the overall issue. It’s easy to get lost in the race issue here because, even without the involvement of Sharpton, Jackson and the NBP, because of Zimmerman’s comments on the 911 tapes and his history of calling is “suspicious” black people, but the thing I hate the most here is these kinds of laws.
Yes, by all means people should be able to defend themselves when they are threatened. But we’re seeing laws that go way over the line as to what we excuse as “self defense.”
In Texas, you can be judge, jury and executioner for two people burglarizing a home that no one is in and it’s fine by Texas law and Texas Juries. But the last time I looked, the penalty and/or fine for such an act of burglary does not include the death penalty. In Florida, this “Stand Your Ground” law has been used to let off the hook others who “felt threatened” by unarmed people that they felt the need to shoot and kill.
And that’s an aspect of these laws that make situation like this infuriating to me. Despite the comments of people like Bill O’reilly and Bernie Goldberg declaring that this is no different than the shooting that took place over the Saint Patrick’s Day weekend or other shootings not reported to this degree other than the portrayed skin color of the shooters, they’re wrong; they are dead wrong. In each and every case O’Reilly brought up the other night and in the cases that the two of them discussed (I think) Monday night, there’s a huge, glaring difference. In each of the cases they pointed to, there’s either a suspect in custody already or the police are looking for the suspects.
In this case, we know who the shooter is, we know that there are at least some serious questions about what happened and we know that the shooter walked away from this without serious investigation despite the recommendations of the homicide investigator. We don’t even have any good, solid information on Zimmerman’s supposed injuries or the condition of his clothing that night because the police didn’t follow the path of at least investigating this better. Had they done that, they would have had the authority to have the injuries looked at in detail; the kind of detail that would have given them an idea of how credible his story was based on how the injuries may have been inflicted. They could have checked Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol but didn’t.
And the really šhìŧŧÿ thing is that, because someone above the homicide investigator’s pay grade decided that this was self-defense and that Stand Your Ground applied, we will never know fully what happened that night. We cannot collect evidence from that night that should have been collected now that more than a month has passed. We can never collect the evidence that should have been collected and analyzed in the days immediately following that night because none of it exists anymore.
So, yeah, people should have the right to defend themselves no matter what state they live in. But burglary is not punishable by the death penalty. Someone “looking suspicious” is in no way shape or form close to punishable by anything, let alone the death penalty. We should not have laws on the books written so poorly or so open to interpretation that people on the street can be judge, jury and executioner of a death sentence for such things and laws like “Stand Your Ground” make that possible.
And yeah, as I said above, there’s at least a strong appearance of a racial element to this. I hope I’m wrong about much of this. I fear that I’m not.
And ref you Facebook link (since I’m having log in issues at the moment) – Yeah, Lawrence is a jáçkášš X10. I’ve said that plenty enough before. I even referenced somewhere above that the interviewer came out of that looking as bad or worse than the interviewee.
I’d like to take a step back for a moment.
My understanding is that the majority of outrage* over Trayvon Martin’s shooting stems from the following facts:
1) Someone shot and killed another person and his *own* claim of self-defense was enough to avoid an arrest. Prior to Stand Your Ground, self-defense was an affirmative defense. Meaning you’d be arrested and would have to justify your actions most likely at a trial — unless there was an eye witness showing that you were attacked *first* or that the person you shot was breaking into your home at the time and so on. There was no such evidence here.
2) The claim of self-defense against someone who was unarmed and not in the process of committing a crime was deemed believable by the police after little investigation — not even an ID of the victim.
3) The 911 calls that show Zimmerman summing up the unarmed teenager as “suspicious” for dubious reasons. He’s “walking slowly” and “looking around.” Most reasonable people can’t find anything suspicious about Trayvon’s actions. It concerns them because it’s something they or their own kids might do. That’s enough to generate a 911 call and to be followed by a neighborhood watch volunteer?
4) Zimmerman had multiple opportunities to avoid the situation: He was a neighborhood watch volunteer but he was armed and he followed a suspect, both of which are against neighborhood watch rules. He followed a suspect after being advised against it by the 911 dispatcher. He followed a suspect even though technically the suspect fleeing the scene would qualify as a *success* for neighborhood watch: The suspicious person knows that someone has spotted him so he’s leaving. It seems hard for a lot of us to accept that there is no accountability for these decisions that led in part to someone’s death.
5) The only evidence of a self-defense is that Zimmerman shows signs of having been in a fight. That can’t be good enough. If I were to chase after you with a gun and you fought back and I shoot you, any injuries you gave me during the struggle can’t possibly justify self-defense? It makes no sense.
The only additional evidence that came out is Zimmerman’s version of events — none of which is corroborated by witnesses (again, the fight is but not who started the fight).
Dear NRA Members,
Better watch out. Geraldo says your hoodie will be just as responsible as the killers out there who may feel threatened by your presence and shoot thus shoot you 7 various Fox News talking heads agreed with him. After all, you’re a “gangsta” if you like them.
NRA Concealed Carry Hooded Sweatshirt
http://www.nrastore.com/nrastore/ProductDetail.aspx?c=11&p=CO+635&ct=e
Sleep tight.
DOn’t take this as definitive, but, here’s something I ran across on another board:
What’s reasonable is not determined in the mind of the accused. It’s an objective standard. Otherwise, the insertion of the word into the statute would be superfluous.
Two, it’s not crucial to prove that Zimmerman is lying. Trayvon was unarmed and outweighed. When someone unarmed and outweighed is shot during a fist fight, even if the fight was instigated by the victim, the norm in Florida is to label that an “impulsive overreaction to a victim’s attack,” and to charge the defendant with manslaughter. See Dorsey v. State, 74 So.3d 521 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 2011) (where defendant’s use of a gun to kill an unarmed attacker was determined to be an impulsive overreaction to a victim’s attack, even though defendant was confronted by multiple men, one of whom punched him in the face several times while pinning him against a vehicle); Poole v. State, 30 So.3d 696, 698–99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (where defendant stabbed the unarmed victim once after the victim had lunged at him in a confined R.V., the evidence showed an impulsive overr
Roger —
I think this is why we’re seeing what a Martin family attorney referred to as “defense shopping” by Zimmerman’s associates. Joe Oliver said that Zimmerman claims Trayvon “reached for his gun” — though I’m not sure how he could have done that if he’s holding him down and punching him.
Another potential hole in Zimmerman’s story is that it requires us to believe a kid would beat the crap out of an adult not that far away from where he’s staying with his father.
I often say that simplest explanations work best. What’s simpler? The clearly angry guy (“áššhølëš always get away”) pursues a kid he thinks is “up to no good.” An altercation occurs and he shoots him. Or he suddenly abandons the chase and a kid attacks him for no reason and with such ferocity, he fears for his life?
Joe Oliver said that Zimmerman claims Trayvon “reached for his gun”
Just from that, I’d judge Zimmerman to be an idiot. Aside from the fact that MARTIN could conceivably be in fear for his life if he saw the gun, any competent gun owner knows you don’t get close enough to allow the other person to get at your gun. That’s the whole point of having a ranged weapon.
This is the same Joe Oliver who admitted last night that he hasn’t seen Zimmerman since before the incident took place and only spoken to him only once just recently on the phone. I find his credibility less than spectacular.
Something has been bugging me about the supposed details of police report and discussing this today pegged a part of it. A part of the “evidence” in Zimmerman’s defense is that his back was wet. Wasn’t it raining?
Even more interesting.
“A police surveillance video taken the night that Trayvon Martin was shot dead shows no blood or bruises on George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch captain who says he shot Martin after he was punched in the nose, knocked down and had his head slammed into the ground.”
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/trayvon-martin-case-exclusive-surveillance-video-george-zimmerman/story?id=16022897#.T3OvljGPWSo
Very nice clean up by the EMTs.
Good dry cleaning service, too.
Could be dámņìņg. I’d also like to know where the wounds on Trayvon were.
What wounds are you looking for, Bill, other than the gunshot wound which was reported to have been in the chest?
Wounds to the hands, maybe skin under the fingernails.
Not dámņìņg yet, but interesting. I’m not as interested in the visual cues about blood that some have discussed. It was raining and blood would be even harder to see on that jacket than it might normally be. I can’t even agree with the analysis that the shirt is showing no blood because he could have had it zipped up before and only unzipped by police when they did a pat down on him before placing him in the car.
There are other issues here though.
I’ve seen broken noses. I’ve even broken a few. That does not look like a broken nose. Even when viewed on the biggest screen I could get, I see no signs of swelling or bruising on or around the nose. It’s hard to see for sure due to the stubble on his head and the fact that the stubble is dark black, but I don’t see signs of bruising, swelling or bleeding on the back of his head.
He may well have some level of injuries where we’ve been told that he did, but nothing to the level that one would expect to back the claim of a beating that had one fearing for his life. There’s also a thing here that bugs me that is related to blood.
Again, I looked at this on a large screen. I’ve looked at this several times. Neither officer handling Zimmerman is wearing protective gloves. And I’m not talking about big, black heavy-duty cop gloves here. I’m talking about nice, universal protection medical grade gloves. You do not handle someone with blood on them, slightly cleaned up or not, with bare hands.
That’s a major no-no. That’s a breach of not only common sense, but in most departments these days it’s a breach of departmental policy. Most departments have it in writing in their policy manuals that you do not handle blood tainted items or people without using universal protection of some level. It’s a basic safety issue and a liability issue. Neither officer is doing that. That means that either both officers are morons or Zimmerman’s wounds have been greatly exaggerated this last week. And, again, that may be something that would impact on whether or not he was justified in making a claim of life or death self-defense.
It also looks odd that someone who was supposedly beaten that badly, supposedly given a broken nose and had his head bashed into the ground repeatedly enough to cause serious injury and bleeding, is moving that well. Not only is he not aided in getting out of the back of that car in a pair of cuffs, but he does it quickly and with apparent ease. Even professional fighters show degraded movement and coordination when their nose is broken and their head has been pounded on and Zimmerman is not a professional fighter with years of toughening up and learning to function under such injuries. Either his normal day to day agility and reflexes are cat-like or he’s, again, not hurt to the degree that would justify the claims being made of a thrashing that had him in fear for his life.
Again, it’s not dámņìņg, but it’s very, very interesting.
If you’re going by that mug shot that the media has been using to depict Zimmerman in assessing his broken nose, I feel I should point out that said mug shot is from 2005.
The video in question doesn’t give us a very good look at Zimmerman. Broken noses don’t always result in bloody noses, so it’s not a good indicator of the validity of his injuries. We’ll have to wait and see what else gets released.
Wounds to the hands, maybe skin under the fingernails.
Detective tang has it right–hard to see how an un-gloved kid punching someone so hard he breaks his nose doesn’t gt a few skinned knuckles in the process.
The chest wound will also either show evidence of powder burns and the appropriate trajectory for someone who is on top of someone…or they won’t. This puts Zimmerman in a bad position since the evidence could be consistent with his story and STILL not clear him but if it is shown he has lied, well, game over.
Jerry, is the mug shot from the incident available–I think most of the pictures I’ve seen of Zimmerman (and Trayvon for that matter) are much older than the incident.
Ladies and gentlemen, a big hand please for the comedy stylings of Darin Wagner.
A link to a video, people discussing what’s on the video, analysis of why the video does or doesn’t mean anything and you jump in and post about how the six year old mugshot doesn’t mean anything here. Just couldn’t stop yourself from having your standard troll, knee-jerk response and, as you once bragged about, ignoring facts and links and just plowing ahead with your stupidity. At least you tried to recover a bit after that, but still…
Your mamma must be so proud.
I’m sure it’s out there somewhere, Bill. Their local paper’s website may post them online like ours does or, barring that, I’m sure that one side of the legal actions in this could just FOIA it and present it as evidence to bolster their claim of what did or didn’t go down.
If it’s already floating around though, I haven’t seen it.
At this point, it wouldn’t surprise me if the lack of availability of a mug shot would be due to not bothering to take one, as well.
As for wounds on Martin, we’ll never know because of how badly the police there screwed this up. But it looks more and more likely (unless, you know, video evidence isn’t good enough for you) that such wounds may not exist on Martin because they probably never existed on Zimmerman.
“that such wounds may not exist on Martin because they probably never existed on Zimmerman.”
Oh, I would expect at least a few and I have no doubt that some minor ones were created that night. If Zimmerman tried to detain Martin, there would likely be a scuffle. If Zimmerman flashed his gun, there would definitely be a scuffle since I would tend to believe that Martin would then fear for his life and fight since flight via foot power doesn’t give you much of an advantage in outrunning bullets.
I’ve not discounted the idea of a fight going down that night at all for exactly those reasons. The thing that I questioned before and even more so now is the legitimacy of Zimmerman’s claim and the claim of his defenders that he was legitimately in fear for his life due to the beating he was receiving and whether or not it warranted killing Martin. There’s also the little question of who started it and, especially after the comments by Zimmerman’s father. Zimmerman’s version of events just keeps looking less and less likely.
If I were Zimmerman, I’d tell my dad to shut up.
His statements were embarrassing..
Not to mention what Zimmerman claimed Martin said in their confrontation. How could he say that with a straight face? And how could the police relay them to Martin’s parents with a straight face???
After thinking about it, I still think if there’s any lack of blood on the T-shirt, that’s dámņìņg. He was supposedly ID’ed by witnesses because that T-shirt is visible.
Based on the incident alone, it could be said that Zimmerman wasn’t a bad man, just a short-tempered, reckless one that made a big mistake.
.
But the outrageous stories clearly designed to cast him in the best possible light and cast Trayvon in the worst possible light stinks of calculation, of design. His Dads’s story stops short of painting Trayvon as a psychopath that makes ridiculous movie-villain threats.
.
Zimmerman’s defenders, here is a suggestion to make the story even better. What if Trayvon said something like “I will kill you, you bášŧárd. Shoot me or I will kill you. C’mon, shoot me! Shoot me or I will kill you, your father, your girlfriend, and your dog. And I’m gonna rape them all too, even the dog.” And then Zimmerman shoot, what more could he have done?
Ladies and gentlemen, a big hand please for the comedy stylings of Jerry Chandler… who can be relied upon to always take the path of least resistance in order to avoid ideas he would rather not address. Your offspring will say “He was a prophet.”
“Ladies and gentlemen, a big hand please for the comedy stylings of Jerry Chandler… who can be relied upon to always take the path of least resistance in order to avoid ideas he would rather not address.”
Be a neat trick for me to avoid ideas you presented since I actually addressed the issue of there not being a great deal of blood before you even posted your bits of stupidity. You may have also noticed that Zimmerman’s defenders in the media stated that he was bleeding from both a broken nose and from the back of his head where he was supposedly getting his head repeatedly bashed into the ground. All discussed and addressed by myself and others before you posted your little bits of inanity.
But, hey, don’t worry about looking like an idiot with reading comprehension problems. No one here expects anything more than that from you anyhow.
Back to ignoring your ignorant troll posts now.
If I were Zimmerman, I’d tell my dad to shut up.
Apparently his brother is out there tonight also making an ášš of the family.
Jerry, the part where I said “The video in question doesn’t give us a very good look at Zimmerman. Broken noses don’t always result in bloody noses, so it’s not a good indicator of the validity of his injuries.” was the part where I put forth ideas you weren’t interested in addressing. Instead, you went after a misplaced comment about the mugshot from 2005… because that was easier for you to troll with. Also, the part where I said “We’ll have to wait and see what else gets released.” wasn’t stupidity, it was the opposite of stupidity.
So, if the New Black Panthers or someone else just went ahead and killed Zimmerman (either with or without the help of Spike Lee or Roseanne Barr), would you guys have a feeling of satisfaction at this point or would you feel such a conclusion would compound the tragedy?
Killing Zimmerman would only compound the tragedy, of course.
.
Not because I think Zimmerman is an admirable human being (the more they try to defend him with phony stories, the more I despise him), but because that would indicate the complete breakdown of the American justice system in Florida.
.
But that’s my problem with the Stand Your Ground absurdity. It allows for would-be vigilantes to go unpunished and then we can have another round of vigilante activity to deal with the original vigilante. Nice, the greatest country in the world returning to Old West anarchy.
“Jerry, the part where I said “The video in question doesn’t give us a very good look at Zimmerman. Broken noses don’t always result in bloody noses, so it’s not a good indicator of the validity of his injuries.” was the part where I put forth ideas you weren’t interested in addressing.”
Nope, wrong again, Darin! Already addressed the lack of blood visible there, discussed how it wasn’t as dámņìņg as some of Zimmerman’s critics claimed the lack of visible blood was and discussed other issues about the video (which is quite clear enough to see valuable visual information despite your sad cries to the contrary) that are more relevant towards dispelling the idea that Zimmerman was beaten and bloodied by Martin at the scene of Zimmerman’s crime. Hëll, I and others here had even already addressed the New Black Panthers before you ever got around to bringing them up and I condemned them.
So, please, keep digging your hole, denying reality, pretending that you have a brain and generally making yourself look even dumber than you normally do. The comedy value you provide is absolutely bronze (you really have to work harder and be smarter to earn a silver or a gold.)
(You know, he’s not quite as annoying when you decide to just accept him for the comedy value that he provides. Granted, as troll comedy goes he’s no Mike Leung, but then few trolls can be. Sadly, we were spoiled by Mike’s comedy value and as a result all other trolls (like Darin) and their feeble attempts at trolling just look so sad by comparison.)
Based on the incident alone, it could be said that Zimmerman wasn’t a bad man, just a short-tempered, reckless one that made a big mistake.
**********
SER: I was inclined to believe this, as well. I thought there should be consequences for his actions, but I didn’t consider him evil.
***********
.
But the outrageous stories clearly designed to cast him in the best possible light and cast Trayvon in the worst possible light stinks of calculation, of design. His Dads’s story stops short of painting Trayvon as a psychopath that makes ridiculous movie-villain threats.
********
SER: Yeah, and that’s where I find myself having to fight my disgust. A horrible accident is one thing. A premeditated assault of a kid’s reputation and the damage it does to his family is quite another.
Also, if Zimmerman wants to tell his story, he should tell his story. He already has the luxury of being the only one who gets to tell his side. Trayvon is dead. Using multiple surrogates who weren’t present to basically repeat his version is absurd. For instance, it shouldn’t be a news break to have his father speak after Joe Oliver and Zimmerman’s attorney said the same thing, provided from the same source.
I would like to know what his *exact* statement was the night of the shooting. I’m less interested in an account that he’s had a month to vet with the consultation of a lawyer and his judge father. Trayvon saying “You’re going to die” is a very convenient statement that would justify lethal force. But no one else heard it. And it requires us to believe that Trayvon would kill someone in the same neighborhood where his father lives.
The following might clarify things:
http://bcclist.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-path.jpg
The path are conjectures, but the shooting scene, the truck and the home seem to be pretty solid.
And who is standing up for this young, male teen? Oh, I’m sorry..gasoline instead of a gun was used and the teen doesn’t look like our President’s fictitious son, so I guess he doesn’t matter to the media or the usual race hucksters, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A CRIME CLEARLY MOTIVATED BY RACE:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2110078/Boy-13-doused-gasoline-set-alight-racially-motivated-attack-Kansas-City.html
Who is standing up for him? From a reading of the article it looks like the local community and, more importantly, the local police. The police are investigating it and looking to arrest the culprits, place them into the local justice system and see that they are put on trial and justice is done.
Not quite the same as cutting the shooter loose shortly after a murder and then expressing zero intention of doing anything about it (until the nation erupted in outrage) because the shooter “stood his ground.”
I wish the monsters that put this kid on fire were placed in jail, and hopefully executed. And if the world were perfect, they would share a cell with Zimmerman.
.
When we’re talking violent deaths, I want ALL cases to be investigated, and the murderers punished. It doesn’t matter to me the races of the involved, or how the punishments would play politically.
.
Punish them all.
You know, I could crack jokes that the white kid that was burned should not have worn whatever piece of clothing he was wearing that provocked the attack. Or that he must have made death threats against the attackers and they just stood their ground and we shouldn’t rush to judgment.
.
But I won’t. It’s not my style to make excuses for scum or to make light of the victim of such violent, senseless acts
.
I want both Zimmerman and these kids that burned him to pay, and pay dearly for what they’ve done.
I’ve mentioned this to Jerome and I may well be very wrong but I think it’s wise to hold judgment on this story until more facts come in. An awful lot of claims regarding racial harassment turn out to have been perpetrated by the supposed victim; we’ve seen many of these played out in the media. When I hear about a kid being burned the first thing I question is whether he was pulling some jáçkášš stunt and it went wrong. Of course, I want to see this fully investigated. I sort of hope I’m right though.
And if half the stories about the way this child was treated in school are true there needs to be some heads rolling.
Would this story get more attention if a black kid were said to have been set on fire? Most likely. Would I be catching 11 kinds of holy hëll for even the suggestion that it’s a fake crime? Most assuredly.
We could also play this ‘gotcha’ game with every incident that happen from here until the end of time.
Geraldo was right!
I saw on TV the other night, there was this little kid, Kenny McCormick, in some town in Colorado. He wears a hoodie EVERY DAY, never taking it off or even putting the hood down. I heard that he got killed by some bášŧárdš. And this tragedy could happen again (and again, and again, and again…) if something’s not done about it. Maybe the officials of the town (South Park! That’s the name!) will pass a law against hoodies….
Zimmerman’s family and defenders need to shut up with the “details” that George supposedly told them. The more they speak, the worse his case looks. Some of the “details” they’re giving are in direct conflict with basic facts that are already out there.
At this point, it seems that they’re going to take every opportunity to double down on the notion that Zimmerman was simply trying to save himself and that he’s the only victim here, and that Martin apparently deserved to die.
It’s thoroughly disgusting, but so typical.
Trayvon Martin’s body showed no signs of struggle: funeral director
Richard Kurtz said George Zimmerman’s story of a vicious fight just didn’t ‘add up’
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/trayvon-martin-body-showed-signs-struggle-funeral-director-article-1.1053321
It’s clear now that Trayvon Martin was some kind of superhuman teenage psychopath. Capable of beating an adult man much bigger than himself and not even getting bruises on his own body.
.
It must be some kind of special drug these gangsta black kids are using. Or maybe it was the hoodie that gave him superpowers.
Yeah, what’s griping me was that this sloppiness and indifference to the truth on the part of the PD was so casual and so…so…casual. It took a pretty dámņ unambiguous case AND a monthlong push by Sharpton to get ANY movement.
You really have to assume that this was SOP in many other cases. And that justice was a matter of doing the least amount of effort possible.
George Zimmerman lost job as party security guard for being too aggressive, ex-co-worker says
Zimmerman at center of firestorm for fatally shooting unarmed teen Trayvon Martin last month
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/george-zimmerman-lost-job-party-security-guard-aggressive-ex-co-worker-article-1.1053223
And we’re supposed to believe Trayvon Martin, who has no history of violence, is a 17-year old psychopath that attacks people and makes death threats for no reason. While Zimmerman has a ample, documented history of violence.
.
The more I learn about it, the more it stinks.
Holy crap! I knew this guy’s father. Not close friends type of knew him or close enough to really comment on anything beyond his work character and personality, but I worked on and off around Zimmerman’s father. Robert J. Zimmerman was up until about six years ago a full-time magistrate (which is not a judge despite some of the rumors from earlier in the week) for the Supreme Court of Virginia.
I never connected the name because I actually know a few other Zimmerman families in this area not related to this family so it didn’t stand out as an unusual name to me. But, dámņ, sometimes the “small world” phenomena is just freaky weird.
One of the depressing things about all this is that I can’t escape the conclusion that American society is a lot more racist than I thought it was. And when we think racism, we shouldn’t necessarily think of hatred. Racism is often more subtle.
.
I get this feeling that many people think Trayvon, as a black teenager, owed respect and deference to Zimmerman. It’s what Phillip S. is saying above, for instance. Yet, they wouldn’t want their own white teenage son to stop at night and politely talk to a strange man stalking them from his car.
.
But the difference is that Trayvon was black. And apparently that trumps his being a minor. At the heart of this issue is the idea of racial hierarchy. That blacks should have “proper respect” for whites. And that whites have some sort of natural authority.
.
You can have black friends, you can even tutor black kids like Zimmerman did, but they still should report to you and call you sir, if you meet them in a desert street at night. It’s Trayvon’s fault, for not being polite to his superior.
It has definitely been an eye opener. For example, who knew that all a hispanic has to do to be considered white is to kill a black kid?
Who would have guessed that NBC news would deliberately edit audio footage to make the hispan…um, white guy sound as racist as possible? (if you missed it they were caught turning THIS: Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
Into THIS:
Zimmerman “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”
Wow, just…just wow. When this is all said and done I hope Zimmerman does some jail time, since I suspect, even given the bogus crap like the above, he deserves it. But so many others will have shamed themselves, some expected, some…well, at this point I should probably just make “expect it” my default.
Like I said on Facebook; this is just weird as hëll. NBC and MSNBC had been playing the full clip unedited since day one (as had CNN and others and you can find it on Youtube.) It literally makes zero sense for the Today show to try and do that as a con job or to play games since their own news programming was playing the clip that would show that they messed with it for the Today segment.
It IS baffling. It’s not so much the mendacity, it;s the STUPID mendacity that makes me shake my head in wonder. This will be touted as evidence og media bias until doomsday (“World Ends; Women and Minorities Hardest Hit”)
And is there any doubt in the end they will simply plead ignorance? “It just did not occur to us that anyone would interpret our editing that way and we apologize to anyone so foolish that that they misread our intent”. That sort of apology. and hey, maybe they live in such a cocoon it might be true.
Bill, did you ever see a movie called HOMBRE? One of those great revisionist westerns from the 1960s, starring Paul Newman? There is an hispanic character in it that is very clear about the racial hierarchy in the Old West. He says he is closer to the white man, to “white civilization” than those dirty savages, the Indians.
.
And he looked and sounded and had a name that sounded a lot more hispanic than Zimmerman, by the way.
.
You gotta admit there is something about this whole incident that strikes a deep chord in many people. To a few Conservatives, Zimmerman is the white man defending his neighbourhood from the black barbarians, gun in hand. He might be a little “gung ho” according to our friend Phillip S. and others, but he can’t be a bad guy. I think, deep down, it’s a view that is more xenophobic than racist.
.
And the irony is that NBC didn’t need to do anything but report the story, it’s already racially incendiary and very dámņìņg of certain Conservative positions, Stand Your Ground laws are coming under attack in many states. They’ve done bad journalism for nothing.
Oh, and just something I forgot to add. What looks very dámņìņg to me is that the right-wing narrative of a white knight defending the neighbourhood from a black barbarian is so powerful that it even cancels the narrative that is a lot closer to reality: an adult man shot a KID under suspicious circunstances and got away with it.
What looks very dámņìņg to me is that the right-wing narrative of a white knight defending the neighbourhood from a black barbarian is so powerful
Yeah, so powerful that any fact won’t change their mind (as is common in human nature).
It’s so disheartening that there this strong impulse to demonize the victim. If you ever go into the local papers, there are thousands of people who are absolutely convinced Martin was a thug and a gáņgbáņgër who deserved to be shot.
This goes way beyond bias and there should be a severe backlash:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/nbc-launches-internal-investigation-of-misleadingly-edited-zimmerman-911-call/
Yeah, and like I said to Bill – This is just freaking bizarre. MSNBC, CNN, NPR and some of the network news broadcasts have all played the unedited clip on the air repeatedly since day one. Hëll, on the two nights where I listen to MSNBC (XM while working) I heard the unedited, full call played by hosts about 15 times. And you can find the thing on Youtube, so it’s not like the full call is some hard to find/hear piece of the story.
Whatever the hëll went through the mind of the people putting that Today segment together is beyond me. Besides, there is a 911 call where Zimmerman curses about Martin leaving and utters the word “coon.” Between that and Zimmerman’s history of calling 911 just to report black people walking through the neighborhood, it wouldn’t have been a lot of work on their part to suggest at least some racial issues with Zimmerman.
And, seriously, Hannity is going to try and call someone out for distorting something? Hannity? That’s like Charlie Manson claiming a mugger is a danger to society. If nothing else, Today should have been smart enough to see how often Hannity, Beck and other get caught out bending the facts and how easy it is to catch something like that in today’s electronic media age.
But then…
“Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so.”
Douglas Adams
Its Not George Zimmerman Screaming For Help on 911 Tape, Audio Experts Tell Orlando Sentinel
http://www.mediaite.com/online/its-not-george-zimmerman-screaming-for-help-on-911-tape-audio-experts-tell-orlando-sentinel/
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jon-stewart-goes-after-spike-lee-tweet-even-with-right-address-sending-lynch-mob-is-bad-mistake/
Gawd, that was stupid of Lee. He shouldn’t stoop to the level of the Zimmermans.
I would not go so far as to equate the two but it certainly was stupid, mean, and potentially tragic (lie too much of twitter, IMO). Kudos to the McClains for being classy in accepting Lee’s apology (and some of his money, which is only fair). And hey, kudos to Spike lee; he was an idiot but unlike most idiots when called on the carpet for his idiocy, he issued a genuinely contrite apology, not the usual “Sorry to anyone who might have been offended” crap that makes up 90% of most public acts of contrition. Lee deserves all the knocks he will get but let’s acknowledge his good behavior as well, if we want to see more of it.
Since the Spike Lee apology, apparently Rosanne Barr tweeted up the correct Zimmerman address, deleted it, then threatened to tweet it again.
I guess the only difference here is that people are probably more surprised by the fact that Rosanne is still around at all. In checking Twitter, I was certainly surprised to find she has nearly 120k followers.
She’s running for president! She might get the Green Party nod, if they have lost their minds.
Rosanne Barr makes Trump look like a serious candidate for President.
Hëll, Rosanne Barr makes Pat Paulsen look like he was a serious candidate for President.
Pat Paulsen for President ’88
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZUEgLNJ6tg
Pat Paulsen Editorials (Smothers Brothers Comedy Hr,1967/68)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4kWLUnorTU&feature=fvst
(For the people who have no clue.)