Social Question

Mama_Cakes's avatar

Thoughts on the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman verdict?

Asked by Mama_Cakes (9828points) July 13th, 2013

I haven’t followed the trial. For those of you who have, what do think?

Was justice served?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

330 Answers

marinelife's avatar

I think that boy would not have died if Zimmerman had not followed him and confronted him. I believe Zimmerman should be held accountable for his death.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

No, A guy was told to stay in the car, he didn’t, he got out with a gun and a kid is dead. Justice. Yeah.

SuperMouse's avatar

I believe that it Trayvon Martin had been Caucasian he would still be alive. George Zimmerman was an over zealous, racist, police officer wannabe who murdered that boy in cold blood. I am thoroughly disgusted.

Imadethisupwithnoforethought's avatar

I am so excited. Apparently, whenever I am bored, I can go to the south, shoot a Black kid, and I won’t get in trouble. YAY people who make america suck. You win today

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

I’m just hoping the riots aren’t too bad.

DominicX's avatar

Meh. It’s true when I first heard about the case, I was more certain of his guilt. I do believe that Zimmerman instigated the event and I do think that he was overzealous with a gun and was probably looking for an excuse to use it. That said, the evidence does seem to show that Zimmerman was in more peril than Martin was that night. It’s the voice screaming in the 9/11 call that would do it for me. If they could prove beyond a doubt that it was Zimmerman on that call, then I’d be 100% behind this verdict. But I’m not. I’m 85% behind it.

And yeah, cue the riots. Although to be honest, I think a lot of people’s ideas on the case have changed…

chyna's avatar

If Nancy Grace would shut the hell up, there might not be any riots. She is stirring it up. What horrible journalism from HLN.

ETpro's avatar

Right verdict. Murder 2 was overcharging. The bottom line was the state failed to prove beyond a reasonably doubt that murder or even manslaughter applied to what happened. We were left to guess what each individual actually did, and who threw the first punch. We had to guess who was screaming for help. We had to guess whether Zimmerman’s injuries were sufficient to make him fear great bodily harm or death. You don’t send someone to prison for 25 years to life on guesswork.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@chyna Nancy Grace is a self serving idiot. She won’t shut up.

ETpro's avatar

@DominicX The burden of proof lies with the prosecution, not the defense. The state had to prove that it was Martin screaming for help in the 911 tape. They did not.

josie's avatar

In order to get a conviction of 2nd degree murder, the state has to prove three facts of the event beyond a reasonable doubt.

They didn’t do it.

I am 100% with @ETpro. The State over charged, probably in order to court political favor.

The good news is, the jury system is not corrupted by political pressure.
The bad news is, a kid is dead, and people need to relax a bit.

chyna's avatar

@ETpro The so called “experts” on the voice recognition were not allowed to testify. The defense said it was one person, the prosecutors expert said it was the other.

PhiNotPi's avatar

I think that the jury reached the right decision based on the evidence presented. The prosecution didn’t have a strong enough case to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

Mama_Cakes's avatar

Maybe, I could convince my partner to move to Canada.

OneBadApple's avatar

We all have a moral obligation to respect each other…..at least until the other person shows that they don’t deserve it.

Picture this scenario instead:

“Hey, are you the asshole cracker that I think you are ? Why are you following me?”

“My name is George, and I’m a neighborhood watch guy. We’ve had a SHITLOAD of break-ins around here. We’re pretty fuckin’ tired of it….and I am armed. You don’t look familiar to me.”

“Yeah, I’m from Miami…..just visiting. Went for some snacks….”

“OK man. Sorry. Enjoy your night.”

“OK…..maybe you’re not just some asshole cracker”

“HA HA…...yeah, maybe I’m not….”

Instead, Trayvon decides to play the street-thug, ain’t-gonna-take-any-shit role, pounces on Zimmerman, and ends up dead.

Both of them made ill-advised moves. But Zimmerman had the bloodied face and enough head wounds to get away with his short-sighted stupidity…

jca's avatar

I don’t believe it. It’s nuts. He should be accountable for something. I can see why black people get mad.

I think that whatever Zimmerman ends up doing, he should watch his back because he will get it from somebody, somewhere. He’ll be crying like a little bitch saying he’s scared for his life, you watch.

harangutan's avatar

I agree with @DominicX @ETpro and @OneBadApple.

I love how the media can get so many people to instantly say a man is guilty when they don’t have all of the evidence. (sarcasm)

Mama_Cakes's avatar

Response from my Canadian cousin:

I think the joke is on everybody else for thinking Florida would do the sane thing.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@Mama_Cakes Yeah, I feel the same way.

elbanditoroso's avatar

Martin is still dead, and another guilty white man is free.

Blondesjon's avatar

Nobody is ready to comment on the fact that once you allow a trial to become media driven any real justice goes straight out the window?

Kardamom's avatar

George Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. He shouldn’t have followed Trayvon Martin, but because he did (for whatever reason, maybe some other young punks in hoodies vandalized his neighborhood), I do believe that Trayvon got pissed off at the “cracker” and started to beat Zimmerman’s head on the concrete when they came into contact (I don’t think that Zimmerman beat his own head or bloodied his own nose). In that case, I believe that Zimmerman was afraid for his life and pulled out his gun, simply to get the beating to stop. He should have followed the advice of the 911 operator, not to follow the suspect (Trayvon Martin) but he didn’t because he had seen similar looking fellows in his neighborhood committing crimes.

It would be nice if all of us were in a truly color blind/costume blind society, but we are not.

Everyone is told to be aware of their surroundings, and that includes being aware of people who seem suspicious. If women weren’t suspicious of certain types of men on the street, there would probably be a lot more rapes, yes? We are told to be on the look out, to be aware, but as soon as we voice our awareness, we are accused of racism, or worse.

It’s Zimmerman’s fault that he created this whole situation, but once it got out of hand, I think that most people would have done what he did. He probably should have gotten manslaughter, because he created the situation, but I don’t think that he set out on that night to kill a young black man.

The whole thing sucks.

filmfann's avatar

Zimmerman should be in jail for being criminally stupid. The only up side to this is getting to watch Nancy Grace’s head explode.

CWOTUS's avatar

It was the correct verdict given the evidence presented.

I still prefer the Scottish verdict of “Not Proven” instead of an apparent free pass with “Not Guilty”. I think Zimmerman had the capability to have prevented this from even getting started, and he’ll probably pay – internally, with the guilt that can’t be absolved by a jury – for the rest of his life for that. But he shouldn’t have to go to prison just because he initiated a confrontation that turned violent (when it wasn’t violent because of his action).

It was a terrible, awful incident, but he did fire in self defense, I believe. The state never proved otherwise.

josie's avatar

Our system of criminal justice requires that people evaluate the evidence and make an objective (not subjective) conclusion based on the evidence and standards of law.
That is what happened.
If you do not like it, get busy changing the standards of evidence and the principle of Western Jurisprudence.

tomathon's avatar

Of course justice has been served. “Justice is about the process, not about the outcome.”—-legal expert. The evidence just wasn’t there to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Mama_Cakes's avatar

The U.S. is so polarized. I hate that. Toronto, Canada is the biggest multicultural city in the world. One of the reasons why I love my country.

Buttonstc's avatar

I wasn’t expecting a 2nd degree murder conviction because they really did overcharge. I don’t believe that Zimmerman was out to shoot someone that night.

But I’m shocked as hell that he wasn’t convicted of manslaughter (considering that, but for his stupidity in ignoring instructions NOT to follow, nobody would have been either injured or killed)

Isn’t that what a manslaughter verdict is for? A murder charge requires intent but manslaughter does not?

They’re talking about how Zimmerman will not really be free because he will have to go into hiding. I say good. He deserves a lot more but at least his life is irrevocably changed for the worst. I have no sympathy for him whatsoever.

Blackberry's avatar

I forgot this even happened until I saw it on TV at work today, but I do agree that when this initially came up in the news, it seemed Zimmerman was 100% at fault, but now that is not so, although I still do think Zimmerman was a guy waiting for an opportunity to get into some action.

WestRiverrat's avatar

The prosecution did not prove its case. Therefore Zimmerman is not guilty.

Zimmerman is still subject to whatever penalties a civil court might impose for wrongful death.

Just like OJ Simpson was not criminally guilty but still got successfully sued in civil court for wrongful death for his ex wifes murder.

Katniss's avatar

That poor kid, and his poor family. I’m disgusted. I really am.
How were there no African American jurors?
And why were the lawyers, on both sides, all smiles during the press conference after the verdict was read?
Why wasn’t all the evidence presented during the trial?

harangutan's avatar

All will be forgotten in the morning when everyone wakes up and they find out some actor from Glee died tonight. If you don’t believe me, check you Facebook feed in the morning.

Blackberry's avatar

@harangutan I didn’t know Glee was that popular for people to care.

woodcutter's avatar

911 operators are not the police. They have no authority to tell me or you what to do. Zimmerman was in a place he had a legal right to be. So hating on him for not getting back into his car fast enough is BS. Had he followed Martin all the way to his dads place and got into a fight there, then Zimmerman would have been in deep shit..Two idiots in a chance encounter and it goes bad. The exact same thing happened in Fla a few days after these two squared off where the black shooter comes out of his house with a loaded gun to confront a white guy playing basketball across the street with his daughter and he kills him. Never even went to trial. This one shouldn’t have either. It shouldn’t make a bit of difference who the people involved are or what they look like. But in this case there was so much political pressure for some reason to try this. Something even Nancy Grace will have a problem trying to justify. But then again look who she is.

Martin was involved in thefts in the area in question. The evidence was suppressed by the school board so as not to give the black students involved a criminal record while in school so they elected to keep mum about it all. That was wrong. Martin was caught red handed with wedding bands and other misc woman’s jewelry not belonging to him as well as tools of the trade, when his backpack was searched to find a magic marker he was using to deface school property. He was caught in closed circuit cameras vandalizing and the stolen property was found by accident. He was doing it. Didn’t mean he should have paid with his life over it but Given what he was already into in his young life…it was a matter of time.

bring the hate

woodcutter's avatar

OJ Simpson was still filthy rich even after the acquittal in criminal court..There was still something left for the Goldmans to get. Even though Mr Goldman allowed this to destroy him regardless. Empty victory if ever there was one.

How much treasure / assets does George Zimmerman have? A safe bet he is close to bankrupt now.

Pachy's avatar

The emotional part of me – the part that hates the “stand your ground” law, and hates the undeniable racial aspects of the case, and hates that Z didn’t follow instructions to stay in his car, and yes, even, at the most basal level, hates his looks and demeanor but most of all hates that a young man is dead because of a frigging gun that shouldn’t have been on the hip of a wannabe cop – craved a guilty verdict (though I always felt manslaughter was a more emotionally, if not legally, appropriate charge).

The rational part of me, however, was never convinced by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt that Z acted out of anything but self defense. And while I don’t like the decision, I wasn’t surprised by it. I think the jury made the only one it could based on the evidence.

trailsillustrated's avatar

Why does a KID deserve death for being a vandal and a petty thief- sad all around.

woodcutter's avatar

@trailsillustratedWhy does a KID deserve death for being a vandal and a petty thief- sad all around.

That seems like a baiting kind of all or nothing statement right there’
wasn’t sure if you knew that or not

ragingloli's avatar

I hope the riots will be massive.

augustlan's avatar

I was hoping for a manslaughter conviction.

tom_g's avatar

My Florida friends are now terrified. They are now going to have to carry and prepare to shoot first to defend themselves.

johnpowell's avatar

@tom_g :: Are they scared of riots or scared of mini-zimmermans?

tom_g's avatar

^^ zimms

bkcunningham's avatar

You don’t put people on trial and prosecute them based on your emotions. Justice was served. The evidence and facts were not there to convict Zimmerman.

jca's avatar

I would be scared of mini-Zims too. Gung-ho, wanna be cops who just patrol, follow based on color (Zim referred to Martin on the phone as a “fucking coon”). I am sad that Zim walks free but glad that, as someone said above, his life is changed forever as he will always have to watch his back. He does appear like a smug fuck, but I have to say I am also glad that he’s probably broker than broke now. Still does not bring back Martin’s life, and I am really not surprised that black people get upset at this bullshit because to me, I’d be uspet too.

ragingloli's avatar

@bkcunningham
Zimmerman stalked Trayvon like a predator stalks his prey, and then killed him.
None of these facts are in dispute.
And self defence has not been demonstrated.
A cold blooded murderer walks free, and it is a disgrace to justice.

johnpowell's avatar

Riddle me this. Say Trevon was your mom or sister. She is walking home after a long day at work and some car follows her and she notices. Then they guy gets out and approaches her. Should she just stand still while her panties are ripped off? Or should she fight back?

bkcunningham's avatar

@ragingloli, self defense was demonstrated. The facts you say were not in dispute were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Zimmerman was found not guilty. You wanting to convict him based on whatever your racial motivation is isn’t going to change the facts that were put into evidence.

@johnpowell, I’d hope she’d have a weapon and would know how to use it. Thank God Florida has a stand your ground law that allows my mom or my sister to defend herself as her panties are being ripped off, as you say. This wasn’t a rape case. Totally different.

johnpowell's avatar

Actually, it is similar. It is stalking where there was a reasonable threat you would be harmed. But your answer is GUNS FOR ALL so I give up. I will go read some NRA literature and try to better understand your nonsense.

bkcunningham's avatar

I don’t see the value or the point in you trying to insult me, @johnpowell. There isn’t much gained in life with that, IMHO.

jca's avatar

My question is this: Was Zimmerman’s safety at risk when he was in his car? When he was in his car and the boy was on the street? When the 911 operator told him to stay in his car? Did he need self defense at that time?

ragingloli's avatar

“You wanting to convict him based on whatever your racial motivation is”
And I suppose you do not think that is an insult, huh.

trailsillustrated's avatar

@woodcutter I guess it’s a nothing statement. I guess. It’s just sad that’s all.

bkcunningham's avatar

I think some of the big “beyond a reasonable doubt” questions for the jurors, @jca, came into play with the cell phone conversation that Trayvon Martin was having with his girlfriend.

Also, while Zimmerman was on the phone with 911 there was a significant time period that Martin was not seen by Zimmerman (he told that to the 911 operator) and then apparently Martin came back onto the scene while Zimmerman was still in his truck. Why didn’t he go into Brandy Green’s townhouse? Why did he come back to confront Zimmerman?

annabee's avatar

The core of what makes stalking illegal is when someone pursues with an intention to instill fear or injury, which is what the prosecutors attempted to prove Zimmerman was guilty of doing. Since they failed to prove it, it means Trayvon’s reaction was not justifiable (trayvon’s pre-emptive strike was unjust). It means Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman just because Z asked him some questions. Even if Z insulted him, an assault would not be justifiable (freedom of speech).

I just typed in “liberals trayvon” in to google and I came up with this as the first link This about sums up the problems with some of the comments floating around directed at this case.

johnpowell's avatar

answers.yahoo.com is your supporting evidence? I have a broken rib and laughing hurts. I will accept the pain and laugh from the belly.

bkcunningham's avatar

@ragingloli, I didn’t mean you specifically. I apologize if that insulted you.

jca's avatar

@bkcunningham: I don’t understand your statement or question about Martin confronting Zim. Zim was the one who got out of his vehicle, so to me, whatever happened beyond that was Zim’s instigating.

annabee's avatar

@johnpowell

Who said anything about evidence? I just said it sums up the problems with the comments. I don’t see you denying them, so I guess you agree.

johnpowell's avatar

I don’t argue with stupid. Goodbye..

annabee's avatar

Thought so. cya.

tom_g's avatar

I just typed in “bring your cat to a picnic” in to google and I came up with this as the first link. This about sums up the problems with some of the comments floating around directed at this case and how they relate to cats and picnics.

bkcunningham's avatar

@jca, because he was a community watch volunteer and asked someone why they were walking around his neighborhood he was the instigator?

tom_g's avatar

^ Thanks! :) :) <3

jca's avatar

@bkcunningham: After being told specifically that he should stay in his car by 911? The police were called and asking someone why they were there (if that’s necessary) is the job of the police. Neighborhood Watch’s job is to report. He reported. Job over.

bkcunningham's avatar

Why didn’t Martin go into his father’s girlfriend’s house? Why did he come back to Zimmerman’s truck? If he had just gone into the townhouse…

jca's avatar

Even if Martin came back to Zim’s truck, Zim was safer in his truck with the windows up, (against a boy or man if you want to call him a man armed with Skittles) than he was on the street, so he should have just stayed in the truck (again, as specified by 911).

bkcunningham's avatar

@jca, are you saying that Martin was dangerous?

syz's avatar

I expected it because of lack of hard evidence. But that doesn’t mean that something evil didn’t happen that day.

(And WTF, Florida?)

chyna's avatar

@bkcunningham Zimmerman had no way of knowing if Martin was dangerous. Why not stay in the truck to be on the safe side?

jca's avatar

@bkcunningham: What @chyna said. Apparently Zimmerman thought Martin was “something” if he felt a need to call the cops on him. Again, he was safe and sound in his car against something he knew nothing of. Why get out of the vehicle? Why, especially if he knew the cops were on the way and why if 911 told him not to?

hearkat's avatar

I believe that if the wanna-be hero was not armed that night, he would not have pursued. He picked a fight because he knew he couldn’t lose.

I can not say whether the choice to pursue would have been different if the kid in the hoodie had lighter skin, but I do believe that the rest of the incident would have transpired differently, as he probably would have called out and asked who the kid was and what he was doing there.

I believe that the teenaged victim was creeped out and frightened by being followed by a strange man, and that he was “standing his ground” and defending himself. I know that he did not deserve to die.

GoldieAV16's avatar

Just as Sandy Hook should have lead to a discussion on guns in America, this should lead to a discussion of self defense and in particular stand your ground laws in America. And I expect that to happen when pigs fly.

This was not Zimmerman’s first arrest for assault. He has had two prior arrests for assault, one against an ex-girlfriend, and one against a plain clothes officer. One charge was dropped, one was reduced to a misdemeanor, with probation and anger management classes mandated. I guess it doesn’t hurt having a dad who is a magistrate judge, heh heh. But those two weren’t his fault, either. He was actually the victim in both of those prior arrests, too.

People are saying Zimmerman will need to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life, but I think that’s backwards. It’s the neighbors who will need to be watching their backs. GZ carries a gun, and he is not afraid to use it against those he perceives mean him harm. By his own attorney’s admission that now means everyone.

GoldieAV16's avatar

@hearkat I agree with you. He carried a gun to a fist fight.

Paradox25's avatar

I’d never felt that it was a murder case, and Martin was actually an aggressive kid that Zimmerman likely had to shoot once the incident blew up in his face. I still feel that Zimmerman provoked the incident and that most of this could have been avoided. I was thinking manslaughter, but I guess it was not to be.

LuckyGuy's avatar

<—- Counting the minutes until the first home electronics store is smashed and looted to ‘protest the verdict’.

syz's avatar

^ Shame on you.

woodcutter's avatar

@LuckyGuy The whole country especially the news media is waiting for some kind of violence to erupt somewhere. Everyone here is too. Why is this? It’s because it happens. It has happened in the past. Shame on the idjits for hoping his happens. Why would someone hope for more violence? And to what end? The disgruntled usually burn and loot their own areas and make lives even more miserable.

LuckyGuy's avatar

It’s just a sad fact. Please. I hope I am wrong but if I had to bet…
It reminds of the riots following the OJ acquittal. Oh wait, maybe I have that wrong.

If I were a GEICO or Progressive Insurance stockholder I’d be thinking about selling.

LuckyGuy's avatar

I was not too far off. There is now a FB page for called Riot for Tr——von. (letters edited by me). The police are already monitoring it.

(30 years from now….sitting on my rocking chair talking to my great grandchild… “I remember the white race riots after the OJ Simpson acquittal for murdering Nicole and whats his name… We tore up the local Barnes and Noble and ran off with copies of Grisham’s The Pelican Brief.)

flip86's avatar

I wasn’t surprised at all. It took so long to bring him up on charges in the first place. That was a huge indicator for the outcome. I told my girlfriend about 2 hours before the verdict that he’d be found not guilty.

woodcutter's avatar

At the last minute the prosecution asks for the jury to consider the lesser charge of manslaughter. After two weeks of testimony the jury is supposed to switch gears and reconsider different charges? Thats asking too much, these people aren’t lawyers. The case was weak from the get go. Prosecution was trying to have it both ways. Jurors know when they are being fucked with and jurors have been known to punish lawyers for doing that.

WestRiverrat's avatar

The rush to arrest and try Zimmerman may have hurt the case against him. As long as he was not indicted the police and prosecutors could take their time to build a convincing case against him, once he was indicted they had to rush and make the evidence they had fit the charges as best they could.

There is no statute of limitations on murder, but there are laws against double jeopardy. Florida can no longer try GZ for this incident. Even if they find irrefutable proof that GZ did intend to kill Martin when he got out of the car.

One thing a lot of you are ignoring, GZ was out of the car before he was told not to get out of the car.

bossob's avatar

@tomathon wrote: :Of course justice has been served. “Justice is about the process, not about the outcome.”—-legal expert. The evidence just wasn’t there to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.” I think that objectively sums it up, regardless of my emotions about the results.

Early on last year, the Martin family and civil rights leaders kept saying that they just wanted the legal process to proceed, and to let the jury decide. Done and done.

As a white male, I’m having trouble understanding the racial arguments. If Z had been found guilty, would there be no racial arguments to pursue?

ucme's avatar

Give a fuck-up a gun & shit happens.
The outcome was inevitable, given the evidence available.

hearkat's avatar

@bossob: As for the incident itself, the speculation is whether the killer “profiled” the victim, and whether he might have chosen different actions if the victims skin had been a lighter color.

As for the judicial aspect of racial inequality: “In the Stand Your Ground states, when white shooters kill black victims, 34 percent of the resulting homicides are deemed justifiable, while only 3 percent of deaths are ruled justifiable when the shooter is black and the victim is white.”
– from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-hemenway-phd/stand-your-ground_b_2119322.html

woodcutter's avatar

@WestRiverrat I was one of the…two who stated all along that it was a non argument that the majority here supported. ...You tell someone to not follow after the fact? How would anyone be able to follow direction like that?

DominicX's avatar

@bossob To me, it seemed like the racial argument played more of a part in why Zimmerman wasn’t arrested at first. If a black 29-year-old had shot a “suspicious-looking” blond-haired blue-eyed white 17-year-old, he probably would’ve been arrested on the spot. At least that was the argument.

As far as I’m concerned, race caused Zimmerman to assume Martin was up to no good (i.e. profiling), but after that, race shouldn’t have played a factor.

hearkat's avatar

@woodcutter and @WestRiverrat – Upon being advised not to pursue, he could have stopped and gone back to his car.

woodcutter's avatar

@hearkat From what has been discovered he did attempt to do just that but like what has already noted, 911 are not cops and have no legal authority to tell anyone anything. Zimmerman was in a place he had a right to be. I want to see this part of the lamenting stop from now on. To use that same line of thinking, he could be villified for not staying home that day. Where does it end?

woodcutter's avatar

Everybody who has a Fluther account profiles other people at different times in their lives. There are two kinds here. The ones who acknowledge doing this and those who lie about not doing it. Its part of human nature..

SuperMouse's avatar

From what I saw of the trial on television it looked as though the prosecutors did a lousy job proving the case. One thing I heard during closing arguments did resonate though. One guy spoke of a seventeen year old boy being followed by a stranger, first the stranger followed in a car, then on foot. That had to have been frightening to Trayvon. I think most 17 year old’s would puff up and try to be intimidating to cover their fear. Whether anyone likes the lamenting or not, if Zimmerman had done as he was told (not ordered as has been pointed out since a 911 operator has no authority to order citizens to do anything) and stayed in his car Martin would more than likely still be alive.

I am dismayed that Martin’s troubles at school and personal issues are brought up seemingly to justify Zimmerman’s behavior. I think it could be argued that many, many 17 year-old boys make bad choices and experiment with drugs and other types of rebellion. Most grow up, mature, straighten themselves out, and become contributing members in this society. None of Martins infractions justify Zimmerman’s behavior. The boy did not deserve to die and just because he had troubles in the past does not mean he was looking for trouble that night. Bringing up crap like that reminds me of bringing a rape victim’s sexual history up in a courtroom, it is irrelevant and just plain wrong.

@woodcutter I’ll buy your premise that everyone engages in profiling at one point or another during their lifetime. I would also agree that doing so is innate. Where it starts to get dicey is when that profiling results in murder. I also think this innate and instinctual profiling is a pretty good argument against “stand your ground” laws and conceal and carry laws. If not gotten away with all together, at least examining these laws and all of the reprecussions they may have is certainly a necessity. We do react from the most ancient part of our brains in certain situations and that makes being armed all that much more dangerous in those situations. Without that weapon George Zimmerman could have profiled to his heart’s content and no one would have been the wiser. With that weapon Zimmernan’s profiling resulted in the death of a boy.

@DominicX, the profiling was the first domino to fall, without the situation more than likely would not have amounted to anything else.

woodcutter's avatar

The profiling did not lead to murder here. The constant face pummeling lead to an unfortunate self defense action that lead to the death of the attacker. Following someone and closely watching them is not a good cause of that is it?

SuperMouse's avatar

@woodcutter a valid argument can absolutely be made that profiling led directly to the murder of Trayvon Martin. If George Zimmerman had not been so positive that the young African American man walking through his neighborhood was up to no good, he never would have followed him, gotten out of his car, or been involved in the altercation that ended Martin’s life.

harangutan's avatar

Is “creepy-ass cracker” a description or profiling? Just wondering.

I’m also wondering when the definition of a 17 year old became that of a young boy or kid. All the 17 year old males I’ve known in my life have been called young men. Isn’t that what they are? They are steps away from adulthood.

I don’t know many people who would punch, then pound a man’s head on the concrete if someone was following them. They would probably find the nearest place of safety or call 911 if they felt threatened.

woodcutter's avatar

@harangutan Well, there’s the 50 million dollar question. Why, oh why, couldn’t T. Martin have just taken off and left the area quickly? Still be alive more than likely. If he was so worried about Zimmerman why stick around and confront him?

ragingloli's avatar

Because a true warrior does not run from a fight. Only cowardly p’taks flee like dogs.

woodcutter's avatar

Martin, a true warrior? Interesting

SuperMouse's avatar

@harangutan I believe there is a giant chasm between 17 and manhood. Anyone who has ever known a 17 year-old boy would probably attest to that. Whether we refer to Trayvon Martin as a young man or a boy, he is still dead. I also think that “creepy ass cracker” is inappropriate. I think that we are being less than honest with ourselves we are trying to believe that Trayvon was not terrified of the man following him. I believe he was frightened, full of adrenaline, and prepared to defend himself against the man who had been following him.

@woodcutter no one is saying that Zimmerman needed to turn around a leave, just that he should have stayed in the car rather than pursuing him on foot. If he hadn’t had a gun, more than likely his ass would have stayed in that seat. Also, how do we know that Martin was not trying to head home and avoid confrontation when Zimmerman was following him? The truth is we don’t but it serves your narrative and suits your profile quite well to believe he wasn’t.

woodcutter's avatar

@SuperMouse Shoulda coulda woulda. I’m betting that in hindsight Zimmerman wished he had never left the house that day. But upon walking around the area he was in ,there was no way to predict that Martin was going to do what he did. It would be like demanding why you left the gate open after the horse got out. Or even bothering to close it for that matter. This was Zimmerman’s neighborhood. His stomping grounds. His home. Why should he have to do anything that looks like leaving? It wasn’t so much that Martin was black as much as he was from someplace other than that area and deemed at the time to be looking suspicious. Thats what a neighborhood watch actually does- they watch out for people who don’t live there. If Martin had been a more mature man instead of an exuberant 17 yr old, he in all likelihood would have been wiser to get clear of an area instead of go after the guy because he was questioning him. It makes no sense why he didn’t just get out. Young people make stupid choices and they die often by these decisions. Thats why they are considered a bigger liability by everyone not to mention the insurance industry. Martin fucked up and threw his life away trying to be a badass in someone elses home.

woodcutter's avatar

not sure what happened right there^^

SuperMouse's avatar

Martin fucked up and threw his life away trying to be a badass in someone elses home.

That has to be the single most mind blowing thing I have ever read on Fluther – and I have read this entire thread. In our society the onus of behaving as an adult and making adult choices is you know, on the adult. In this case George Zimmerman was (chronologically anyway) the adult.

Mama_Cakes's avatar

@woodcutter Were you there? Hiding in the bushes?

woodcutter's avatar

@Mama_Cakes “Were you there? Hiding in the bushes”?

Nope. I watched as much as the trial as I could. Did you?

augustlan's avatar

Neighborhood Watch people are never supposed to follow anyone. He should never have been following him at all.

woodcutter's avatar

@SuperMouse We all know and have known for years is… that a teenager sometimes does not get to hide behind the fact he has not reached their 18th birthday. C’mon.
Do we need to really visit the case history in this country of minors being charged as adults? From some things we’ve seen on this thread and others elsewhere, folks believe that there isn’t a way that someone months shy of their 18th birthday could ever be violent enough to be charged as such.

please

woodcutter's avatar

None of these excuses given for for Martins savage attack excuses the deeds. Confronting someone about their presence or actions is not an invitation for a beating….even if they are black. The lawyers could not make that fact go away because there is no legal way do do it.

SuperMouse's avatar

@woodcutter so if George Zimmerman was so terrified of this man who was so close to his 18th birthday and capable of doing him so much harm, why did he get out of the car and follow him?! Your argument holds no water. He would have been perfectly safe and Trayvon Martin would still be alive if the grown up in this equation had done what he was asked to do and followed the neighborhood watch guidelines. He had spoken to the dispatcher. He had shared his profiling suspicions. Zimmerman made the choice to get out of the car and confront Martin. He could have stayed in his car and avoided any contact with this thug he found so frightening. Somehow I find it very difficult to believe that the over zealous failed police officer who spoke to Martin was respectful in his queries of the this almost 18 year-old who he believed was out to cause trouble and hurt him. If we are going to take guesses here, I think it is pretty safe to guess that Zimmerman used his best intimidating police officer attitude to try to frighten Martin, this wasn’t just a neighborly chat that caused a “savage attack.”

You seem to be attempting to blame Trayvon Martin for George Zimmerman’s behavior, and that is outrageous.

woodcutter's avatar

@SuperMouse There is a big hole in your perceived time line there. Listening to the evidence play out, the early minutes of the two being aware of each other, there was no perceived danger. Why? because at that time the two were just scoping each other out. Looking at each other. You are trying to use a desperate prosecution argument that there was mortal fear from the get go. I honestly have no idea how that came to be.

Did it not suddenly turn ugly when Martin closed in on Zim? Who could have foreseen that?

Are you saying right here, that anyone who questions a black man should automatically expect combat? That idea seems prejudiced against all level headed black people. No, it’s not a fighting offense to try to find out what anyone is doing. It may be some unwritten law of the street but that is as close as it gets.

chyna's avatar

@woodcutter Did Travon Martin not have the same right as Zimmerman to “Stand his ground”?
Someone was following him. He didn’t know if the man was going to rob him or kill him. Turns out the man was going to kill him.

SuperMouse's avatar

@woodcutter really? Where on earth would you get the idea that I am saying anyone who questions a black man should expect combat? What an incredibly ridiculous way to interpret my pointing out that a 17 year-old who had been followed by a stranger then approached by the stranger at night, in a neighborhood he was visiting, was more than likely afraid of that stranger and pumped up with adrenaline. IRL are you a pundit for Fox News? Do you work for Glenn Beck? Because that is professional grade spin you got right there. Ludicrous, inane, and silly, but professional grade still.

I am done engaging with you on this. I just hope and pray for the safety of any strangers crossing your path whose behavior you don’t approve of.

woodcutter's avatar

@SuperMouse You’re angry.You are being unfair. Maybe it is a good thing you take your own advise with a time out.

SuperMouse's avatar

@woodcutter LOL, right. Thanks for the sage advice.~ FYI, willful ignorance, racism, and blaming the victim are all quite infuriating.

^^Face palm^^

woodcutter's avatar

Honestly…has anyone actually seen the trial….at all? Or are we just parroting the pundits commentary for this. I’m assuming we all saw the trial. Thats what I’m going with.

tomathon's avatar

If some stranger walks over to me at night with the intention of asking for the time, do I have the right to break his face because I don’t why he is approaching me? After all, he might want to rob or kill me.

Someone needs to swing his arm at you first before you can block the attack with your hand, right? You cannot defend until you’re about to be attacked. You don’t have to wait for the punch to land on your face, or wait until a bullet hits you, but you need to wait until there is some sort of violent attempt. Walking over to someone is not an attempt at causing violence.

chyna's avatar

@tomathon No one but Zimmerman knows if he attacked first. And I bet he wouldn’t admit it if he did.

tomathon's avatar

Well then you have nothing to talk about. Those who are pointing blame have to prove their point, not the other way around.

woodcutter's avatar

Travon Martin. He must have been really rattled some creepy -ass cracka was watching him. So afraid ,that who does he call with his phone?.....a female friend. Why? If he was truly concerned we should be curious why he didn’t call the police. Thats what I would have done. Either he wasn’t afraid at all and saw no need to talk to the cops or….he didn’t want the police to come around at all. The speculations are flying all around. He could have easily kept going and been free of the whole thing. Again thats what I would as well as any rational person who had concerns would have done without even thinking long about it.. The guy wanted to escalate the situation. He was as responsible for his situation as anyone.

chyna's avatar

@tomathon I’m not blaming anyone. I’m saying we don’t know what happened. Although @woodcutter seems to think he knows what everyone was doing and thinking at the time this went down.

tomathon's avatar

Chyna, you can look at history as a frame of reference. The history of Trayvon tells you that this man was not afraid of anything. He assaulted others before, he was involved in street fights, and he texted about how great the street fights were. Why would he be a afraid of a short overweight guy? He is a tall, athletic football player who has fighting experience. His brother asked him to teach him how to fight.

Now consider Trayvon’s school suspensions, the vandalism, the theft, the drugs, and you have yourself a real bad-ass.

woodcutter's avatar

There has been no disputing the history of Martin’s social and fighting problems. Even if Zimmerman had no way of knowing this for sure at first. It seems that his instincts were spot on. A person is not a racist or a racial profiler just because they get it right. It’s just the method used to come to that conclusion that bothers some people. But guess what. We all do it to some degree. There are some who don’t like to admit they do, but its a normal protective measure that’s been used since… forever. Zimmerman called the police early on. Not trying to set up some kind of showdown.

tom_g's avatar

Those that are tirelessly supporting Zimmerman – how does it physically and emotionally feel to spend considerable amount of effort supporting an act that resulted in a dead human being?

woodcutter's avatar

And WTF is this shit all about? http://finance.yahoo.com/news/zimmerman-prosecutor-angela-corey-criminally-120000903.html

or this? http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/Zimmerman-Prosecutor-Angela-Corey-Fires-Whistleblower.

This smacks of an over zealous prosecutor needing a slam dink heading into a re-election campaign. This whole trial was greased. I hope she does time.

bkcunningham's avatar

Does anyone here have community watch in their neighborhood? We do. Our community watch isn’t volunteers. They are paid and most of them are retired, thus making them senior citizens. But I’m just curious if people understand what the job is all about in an area like Sanford or ay area with high crime and where people are trying to take back their neighborhoods.

Have you ever called the police? Have you ever witnessed a serious crime? Of course if you have you know that hindsight is 20/20 and you may not act in the manner you think you would when you are blowing smoke on the Internet or at a party with a group of your peers.

Everyone is trying to make it so black and white (no pun intended) when there are many, many shades of gray in this story.

woodcutter's avatar

@tom_g Who here are you accusing of being glad someone was killed? This whole circus has been ginned up by Obama, Sharpton, and Jackson and Co. since day one to divide the country for political means. It should never had gone to trial and probably would not have gone to trail if the people involved were different. This was all about race. Can’t we all just acknowledge this?

Really that is a fuckin low blow man….even for you. Lay off the soy already.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham the folks who are insisting that Trayvon Martin brought about his own murder are talking in terms that are just as black and white as those who are arguing that Zimmerman has some culpability.

I have called the police. I have witnessed and been victimized by crime. I also know that when one goes looking for trouble as Mr. Zimmerman did that night, one is bound to find it or create it if they don’t. By insisting on getting out of that car and trailing Martin on foot, Zimmerman created it all right.

bkcunningham's avatar

@SuperMouse, what exactly do you mean that Zimmerman was looking for trouble?

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham I mean that if he was trying to avoid trouble he would have stayed in the car as he was advised. He got out of the car and insisted on following on foot. Looking. For. Trouble.

woodcutter's avatar

Punching people is wrong and there isn’t anyone who will sit there and let their face be destroyed because they dared to be nosy. There comes a time…even if the person supposedly initiating the situation gets beaten and submits, that the guy doing the beating has a responsibility to use measured force. Yes even if a person feels slighted in their mind they they don’t get to do anything they want after the other guy quits. If there is a pin down situation the fight is over. To keep it going ”‘cause your on a roll” switches the roles legally. Travon Martin did not have to do what he did to escape that situation, again…how many people watched the trial?

There is no defensible legal definition of trouble or intention to make it, that is based on not staying in a car. I thought we were using what is legal. It’s clear that emotion is attempting to rule here and that is exactly what the nations premiere race baiters were trying to accomplish with this from the beginning..You got played.

The jury was not. That is why this went the way it did.

bkcunningham's avatar

I don’t understand what looking for trouble means. Do you think he went looking for a black man to shoot? Do you think he went looking for a fight? Did he go looking to argue with someone? Do you think he got out of the car to harass or injure or argue?

Do you mean you think he intentionally got out of his truck to fight or argue or shoot someone?

bkcunningham's avatar

Also, I’m just wondering if you have community watch people where you live.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham as I said, there was no reason for him to get out of the car. When he got out of the car he was looking for trouble. I think he should have stayed in the car and waited for the police to arrive as he was advised to do. There is no clearer way to put it. I think when he got out of the car he knew he was pursuing a young man and there was the potential for a confrontation with said young man. I think he was looking to play the police officer and rid his neighborhood of a punk he saw as a threat. I do think he probably got out of the car to harass and argue at the very least – of course that is just speculation on my part. I don’t think this can be called a high crime neighborhood, but it had been plagued with robberies and the neighborhood watch was started at Zimmermen’s behest. Therefore he knew as well as anyone what was happening there, so he has no excuse for getting out except that he wanted to play vigilante.

I live in a community with a neighborhood watch now and several other communities where I have lived have had neighborhood watches as well. Not a single neighborhood watch member in any community where I have lived has ever murdered a young man walking home from the store with Skittles and an Arizona tea. Not a one – and I have lived in some dicey areas.

Here’s what this thread has taught me. It has taught me that there are people who are going to see Zimmerman as a hero for murdering a teenaged boy. No matter what they have to say to themselves or anyone else in order to be able to cling to this belief, they will cling to it. No one will say anything to change their minds – especially now that a botched prosecution has failed to bring justice for this young man’s family.

woodcutter's avatar

I think this conversation has reached a stalemate. It, from the beginning has been the proponents of 2nd degree murder that it’s all Zimmermans fault for not staying in his car. REALLY ? Do I have that right? We are going to round and round all week if that is your best argument. How many other national neighborhood watch orgs have a situation where a suspicious person tries to beat the hell out of someone in the watch?
Just because someone volunteers to look after his community does not mean they have to forfeit any of their rights to self defense or “stay in a car or else” to escape any kind of liability. Any more than the next guy has to.

bkcunningham's avatar

@SuperMouse, you are right. Some people had their minds made up at the beginning of this horrible event and nothing will ever change their minds. Not the facts, not all the evidence that can ever be produced regarding the facts, not a trial in a court of law by a jury of Zimmerman’s peers. Nothing will make them stop holding tight to their made-up scenarios and beliefs. Some people are just too closed minded and have some sort of tunnel vision that is very, very hard for me to understand. It is frustrating. There’s no discussing it with them.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham you have described a vocal minority in this thread quite well. Thank you.

harangutan's avatar

lol. Funny. I imagined the majority when I read @bkcunningham‘s statement.

tom_g's avatar

@woodcutter: ”@tom_g Who here are you accusing of being glad someone was killed?”

Nobody.

Did your browser malfunction? I said nothing of the sort. Odd.

You do seem a bit worked up though, which would partially answer my question. Thanks.

woodcutter's avatar

@harangutan I guess I am their vocal minority. LOL. Because I bring the opposing view to the situation they want me to go away…hence that “vocal” descriptor. I can live with that.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham no thanks, you expressed it perfectly in your statement about the vocal minority and I’ll stick with that.

woodcutter's avatar

@tom_gThose that are tirelessly supporting Zimmerman – how does it physically and emotionally feel to spend considerable amount of effort supporting an act that resulted in a dead human being?”

supporting an act that resulted in a dead human being?”_

How else could that be interpreted?
And how could any browser change anything one way or the other?

And…was I correct about the soy?

bkcunningham's avatar

@woodcutter, I know you, like @harangutan, are intelligent enough to know what I meant.

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham sweetie, it is clear that you were intelligent enough to know what and who I was speaking of. Thanks again for rephrasing it so well.

tom_g's avatar

@woodcutter – Are you an ESL student, or are intentionally being confused for the drama of it?

Maybe you just need to read it one more time?

@tom_g: ”Those that are tirelessly supporting Zimmerman – how does it physically and emotionally feel to spend considerable amount of effort supporting an act that resulted in a dead human being?”

woodcutter's avatar

And just for the record, I don’t support either two of the people involved. It should have been understood from my text, I was supporting the law. It was stated many times. Thats what I was going by. The “vocal majority” seemed to be on the side of emotion. I agree, there is usually a big divide amongst people who do that.

woodcutter's avatar

@tom_g I support an act of self defence. If someone dies in that process then it awful. Thats what this case was about and why there was an acquittal. Making it all about racial tensions is how you were trying this all in your head.

bkcunningham's avatar

I’ve played this game with you before, @SuperMouse. I know you are, but what am I. yawn

@woodcutter, it has interested me from the beginning how people picked sides before knowing any facts. Why does that happen? Does a lack of understanding about the importance of the rule of law play a role in the ease with which the media can get a portion of the public so hyped up on misinformation?

SuperMouse's avatar

@bkcunningham honey, you started the remarks about intelligence. If acting like a five year-old bores you so why are you so insistent on doing it?

Who are you to say that just because people disagree with you they don’t have all the facts?

woodcutter's avatar

@bkcunningham In the beginning I didn’t know who to blame. With the media intentionally…as well as the prosecutor, hiding exculpatory evidence started me in a direction here. I don’t want bad gun owners to go unchecked. I was ready to hang Zimmerman for this until the facts trickled out. Thats what we are supposed to do.

OneBadApple's avatar

Very interesting discussion, people. At least two facts are and will remain forever indisputable:

- While George Zimmerman used poor (and maybe stupid) judgment in getting out of his truck, this was not illegal. Questioning Trayvon was not illegal, and he was licensed to carry a firearm, so that was not illegal. Trayvon chose to assault Zimmerman, and this WAS illegal.

- The jury (which received very high praise from both the prosecution AND defense teams, as well as from every legal analyst which I read or heard on TV) unanimously found Zimmerman ‘Not Guilty’. So from last night on, anyone who refers to Trayvon as “murdered” is wrong. Why ? Because the jury SAID you are wrong.

And to hang a sign on everyone who thought the trial was fair as “considering Zimmerman a hero” is insulting, and shallow, immature thinking by someone who has not really been giving this case the attention that it deserves….

bkcunningham's avatar

@woodcutter, if you get a chance, read through this. It is fascinating. At least you were willing to educate yourself and learn. Look at how many of the original commenters are saying exactly the same thing now as they were before the grand jury met and even charged Zimmerman. I think it shows some people make up their minds and refuse to listen or look at facts.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@OneBadApple Neither of your putative “facts” is indisputable. As I have noted in a previous discussion here, Florida’s stalking law is extremely broad. Notably, it contains no restrictions based on motive or duration. Given that Martin was walking home and not doing anything illegal, it is quite possible that Zimmerman’s decision to follow him based on no evidence counts. We can call this a flaw with the Florida stalking statute if we want, but it remains the case that Martin—had he been the victor of the fight that ensued—could very well have presented a good case that he was acting in self-defense. Consider his perspective, after all, which we know from messages he sent friends. He was being followed by someone he considered to be suspicious. This person was chasing him and may have tried to confront him when he was doing nothing illegal. It does not strike me as at all strange that someone might get defensive in a situation like that, and Florida’s very liberal self-defense laws mean that his actions very well have not been illegal.

Second, you are equivocating on the word “guilty.” A jury verdict only shows that someone is not guilty in the eyes of the law. It does not mean that the defendant did not do what they were accused of doing or that they bear no moral guilt for their actions. Otherwise, we’d have to say that the jury finding OJ Simpson not guilty was proof that he really didn’t murder his wife and was morally blameless. As such, it is straightforwardly false to declare that anyone who says Martin was murdered is wrong merely because the jury found Zimmerman not guilty. Maybe they’re wrong. Maybe they’re not. But the jury verdict only decides Zimmerman’s criminal culpability. It says nothing about his civil culpability or his moral culpability.

Note: I am not here saying what I think about the case. I am only demonstrating that neither of your putative “facts” is indisputable. There are a lot of gray areas in this case, and nobody’s case is improved by ignoring them.

OneBadApple's avatar

@SavoirFaire Thanks for your comments.

While my thoughts are based purely on the laws as they are, yours seem to be more about the laws as they should be, or could be interpreted.

Trayvon took a chance on the ‘law of the streets’, and lost. Zimmerman showed up in court and let the U.S. justice system judge what he did, and won.

It’s really not that complicated…

chyna's avatar

@OneBadApple Trayvon Martin didn’t have the chance to show up in court. He lost his life.

OneBadApple's avatar

Yes, I think we all get that. But being dead does not prove that you were right….

chyna's avatar

Nor does it prove you were wrong.

OneBadApple's avatar

Correct.

So nothing is proven. And that’s what the jury went with….

Imadethisupwithnoforethought's avatar

Wait, Too long didn’t read… I can still shoot black kids in Florida whenever I feel like it right?

johnpowell's avatar

@Imadethisupwithnoforethought :: Pretty much. Just make sure the witnesses are dead. The best part is that people now think that this is alright.

And it is pretty safe to assume Zimmerman will shoot you for no reason. So turn it around and shoot him first. If you are black it is safe to assume he will shoot you since, well, history.

But I doubt the the trial would go your way.. Assuming that you are black.

woodcutter's avatar

Nobody has had the cheerios to dare compare the two cases here. But I sure would like to discuss.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@OneBadApple My first comment is about the law as it is right now. Martin’s actions could very easily be construed as legal self-defense under current Florida law. We’ll just never hear that case made because he’s dead. My second comment isn’t about the law at all. It is about the difference between thinking someone is legally guilty, and thinking they are morally guilty. Your equivocation arises out of your false assertion that being legally not guilty makes one morally not guilty (this being the logical force of your claim that the jury’s decision makes all claims of Martin being murdered erroneous).

@woodcutter It seems rather presumptuous to say that no one will dare compare the cases before you’ve even asked anyone to do so. Given the details available from your link, the cases look very similar to me. My opinion of Dooley’s actions is similar to my opinion of Zimmerman’s action, though perhaps not exactly the same given that the situations were not identical. How about starting a question and seeing how many people answer before stating that nobody would dare?

johnpowell's avatar

@woodcutter :: Doesn’t that article prove my point? Or are one of us reading it wrong?

And it is DasilyKos..You would denounce your source if I had posted it.

SuperMouse's avatar

@johnpowell pretty sure it proves your point. If the article alone doesn’t, how about the fact that Dooley was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to eight years in prison? Though he was released on bond pending an appeal.

woodcutter's avatar

@SavoirFaire I can’t start a question like that here for obvious reasons.

And you know it. I don’t do the my source is fairer than your source thing. That thinking is unfairly assuming things one way or another. that’s how too many pissing fights get started here because some people think they have the sophistication to read me. You do it.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@bkcunningham Didn’t Corey choose to bypass the grand jury?

SavoirFaire's avatar

@woodcutter It wouldn’t break any of the rules to ask the question. If you refuse to do so, it just proves that you’re the one who doesn’t have “the cheerios.”

Also, I didn’t say a word about your source. Was that part supposed to be aimed at @johnpowell?

augustlan's avatar

@bkcunningham I’ve lived in several neighborhood watch areas, some in nice safe neighborhoods and some in high-crime areas. No neighborhood watch person in any of those areas would ever carry a gun in the first place, nor would they follow someone around on foot.

I once called the police when I saw someone in my very nice, safe neighborhood flash a gun outside. I kept an eye on him (at a distance and from my car) so I could tell the police where he was.

bkcunningham's avatar

Yes, @WestRiverrat. She bypassed the grand jury and charged him in a hearsay affidavit.

bkcunningham's avatar

Because he got out of the car he is guilty. Is that how you are thinking? The case and evidence stops right there on the spot because Zimmerman got out of his vehicle.

OneBadApple's avatar

@SaviorFaire Yes, Martin’s actions cannot be defended because he is dead. But he is dead only due to the violent actions which HE CHOSE to pursue.

And from all that I watched or read, the jury was never given instructions to consider legal “shades of gray”, or what might be “morally illegal”. Christ, you can’t swing a dead cat today without hitting someone who is doing something “morally illegal”.

Sixteen months ago, many people (rightfully) took to the streets to demand that Zimmerman be arrested and tried in a court of law. And so he has been.

People got what they asked for, but some are now asking for….what ? That Zimmerman be tried in “shades of gray” court ? Or “morality” court…??

mattbrowne's avatar

Vigilante groups make only sense in defunct countries in which the authorities can’t maintain law and order. Vigilante groups are always just a suboptimal solution because the volunteers lack the formal training to behave properly in difficult situation. If vigilante groups with amateur patrols are tolerated in Florida, we have to expect that something like this is bound to happen. Zimmerman is not a trained police officer.

GoldieAV16's avatar

Typos aside, this is a worthwhile take on the verdict…and the current state of affairs regarding racial justice in America. The Trayvon Martin story is only remarkable in that it garnered so much national attention. And that is the problem.

bkcunningham's avatar

This is so powerful and so well written it needs to be shared.

Uncomfortable Truth: The State Of Evidence in the George Zimmerman Prosecution
Posted on July 11, 2013 by bmaz
I have said this from the get go: In the case of State of Florida v. George Zimmerman, under the actual facts of the case from the State of Florida’s own disclosure, as opposed to hype from Benjamin Crump and his public relations team, who have self interest from representation of family members in a civil damages case, not to mention well meaning, even if uninformed, mass and liberal media, there has never been a good factual rebuttal to George Zimmerman’s own account of self defense. You know why? Because there is not any compelling rebuttal within the facts as adduced in the investigation and entered in the record at trial. And the presumption of innocence and burden of proof in the American criminal justice system still mean something.

Yes, I know what I am saying runs counter to the popular meme and what people emotionally feel and want to hear. But everything I have noted from the start of this case has been borne out in the trial evidence and resulting posture as the case heads to closing arguments and to the jury for deliberation.

Did you know that powerful local mayoral office politicians involved themselves, by meeting with only the victim’s family and their attorneys, in an improper ex-parte manner, to go over the most critical evidence during the early stages of the investigation and before said Martin family members’ statements were relied on to file charges? I bet you did not, but that has been the testimony in the trial record.

Did any of you see the young female neighborhood homeowner, Olivia Bertalan, that testified Wednesday as to the crime spree that was ongoing in her and Zimmerman’s neighborhood, Retreat at Twin Lakes, including the home invasion where she and her child were victims of one or more home invaders, and who was effusive in her praise for the concern of the neighborhood watch program and George Zimmerman? Did you know that, thanks in part to the actions of Zimmerman and his wife, the juvenile suspect was caught and sentenced as an adult by this same judge, Debra Nelson, to five years in prison? Probably not is my guess. But that, too, is the evidence.

Did any of you see the other neighbors, of all races, in Retreat at Twin Lakes who testified on Zimmerman’s behalf about the the facts of the case, that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor on top of Zimmerman when the shooting occurred, and the crime afflicting the neighborhood and the need for the neighborhood watch program? My guess is you did not. But that, too, is part of the evidence in the trial record.

Did any of you see the parade of witnesses that laid the foundation for the fact Trayvon Martin was the aggressor in the actual critical physical encounter between him and Zimmerman, and was on top of Zimmerman, and beating Zimmerman, both moments before, and at the time of, the key gun shot? And supported by both the case detectives and one of the foremost expert pathologists, Dr. Vincent di Maio, in the world? My guess is you did not. But that, too, is in the trial record as hard evidence.

Yes, all of those facts are exactly what was testified to in open court. Most of the witnesses were literally the state’s own witnesses, including the two main case detectives, Detective Chris Serino and Detective Doris Singleton. Did you know that the state’s own veteran case detectives, Serino and Singleton, testified they believed George Zimmerman and thought his version of the facts consistent and credible? My guess is you don’t know that. Yet all of that is exactly what the sworn testimony has been in open court.

Did you know that the state, by and through Angela Corey, relentlessly engaged in Brady violations with regard to discovery and evidence disclosure and that, as a result, discovery and depositions thereon have been ongoing even during the trial, all to the detriment to, and prejudice of, Defendant Zimmerman? My guess is you did not, but that too is part of the record.

In spite of all of the above, the political, and cravenly so, prosecution may still tug on enough emotional and falsely racial heartstrings to wrongfully convict Zimmerman. Almost surely there will be no conviction of the always wrongfully charged 2nd degree murder charge; but the possibly of a flawed compromise verdict to a lesser included charge of manslaughter, battery, or other lesser included offense, is very real. If so, it will, despite all the emotions of this case, be a tragedy of justice.

No matter what you think of George Zimmerman personally, the rule of law should militate in favor of an acquittal. Yes, if the burden of proof in the American criminal justice system is truly “beyond a reasonable doubt”, and if there really exists a common law right to “self defense”, then acquittal is exactly what the verdict should be, and must be.

I have no affinity for George Zimmerman. Frankly he strikes me as a hapless dope. Under no circumstances do I support George Zimmerman, or anybody else, wandering around with concealed carry, locked and loaded, firearms on neighborhood patrol (even though he was not on patrol, but only on his way to Target for family shopping). It is a tragic event waiting to happen and nowhere close to what the founders had in mind with regard to the Second Amendment. But my, and your, beliefs are not the law of the land either in Florida or anywhere else in the United States under District of Columbia v. Heller. And that is the law of the land, both for the Zimmerman case at bar, and and all others elsewhere.

We shall see how willing to follow the law the jury will be, and what their verdict is. But this case is not now, and NEVER has been, about what has been pitched and portrayed in the media. Never. It is not about racial prejudice and profiling (and the DOJ Civil Rights Division so found), and it is not about murder. It is about a tragic and unnecessary death, but one that is not a felony crime, despite all the sturm and drang.

State of Florida v. Zimmerman is a straight up traditional self defense case. It has never been pled as a Stand Your Ground defense case, irrespective of all the press coverage, attention and attribution to Stand Your Ground. It’s never been Stand Your Ground, and certainly is not now that the evidence is all in on the trial record. It is a straight self defense justification defense, one that would be pretty much the same under the law of any state in the union including that which you are in, and that I am in, now (so don’t blame “Florida law”).

There is nothing whatsoever unique in the self defense posture that has been effected in this case. Nothing. And it is, whether it is comfortable or not, a compelling self defense case. Actually, let us be honest: It is not comfortable. Not even close. But no matter how uncomfortable it is to say, Zimmerman needs to walk, because the self defense case is strong. The burden of proof in the instructions to the jury will read that not only is there a general presumption of innocence afforded Zimmerman but, moreover, the state must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did NOT act in self defense. Under the facts as adduced in the trial record that ought be, by all rights, an impossible burden for the jury to get past, whether on the pending count of 2nd degree depraved murder or any possible lesser included charge given to the jury.

The facts, the rule of law, and the constitutional burdens of proof compel an acquittal. Uncomfortable to hear; yes, it is. Necessary for an acquittal to occur; also, yes it is.

woodcutter's avatar

What I have been trying to get out. ^^^ Thank you.

Against the tide here. The tide of, Begrudgingly, self defense is ok…if you must. But its never ok if you have to do it with a gun.

Defending yourself against someone who is clearly too strong for you to defend against?... then keep quiet, take your licks and pray he doesn’t cripple or kill you. Let’s keep guns out of the self defense business. Resorting to the use of a gun is unfair if the attacker has none.

DominicX's avatar

For once I think I actually agree with @bkcunningham and @woodcutter on something. The extent to which this case has been blown way beyond what it actually was is absolutely astonishing. People so badly wanted it to be something it wasn’t. And now that the jury correctly decided that it wasn’t, people are angry and they still won’t let it go.

bkcunningham's avatar

“At bottom, this is one more way of insisting that the individual no longer matters. It’s a way of claiming that what matters is the group an individual belongs to. In this instance, skin color defines the group.

“The primacy of the group over the individual is the true devastating operation in America.”

The quotes from your link are pretty deep. Something to ponder and consider, @woodcutter. Thanks for the link. I’m going to read more from Mr. Rappoport.

CWOTUS's avatar

@bkcunningham thanks for that post. That pretty much sums it up: there is no absolution for George Zimmerman in all of this: he did dumb things; he attempted to operate “above his pay grade” and maybe he was a “failed cop wannabe”. And if he hadn’t done those things, then the altercation would not have occurred – and the police may or may not have shown up in response to his original call – and the whole scene would have played out differently. (We can also observe that if Trayvon Martin had acted differently then the situation would have resolved otherwise, too, but he’s already paid the ultimate price for his mistakes.)

But Zimmerman wasn’t “guilty” of the crime(s) charged.

Unfortunately our legal system doesn’t permit the jury to second-guess him (in the way that we’re doing here in Fluther) and let everyone know what a dickhead he was for starting all of this, and for allowing himself to be in close enough contact with Martin that made his physical disadvantages a potentially life-threatening liability for him, and then for shooting him. “No, Mr. Zimmerman, you aren’t not guilty of Murder 2 or Manslaughter, as charged. But you’re a dickhead, you shouldn’t be walking around unsupervised, and you’d better keep a good distance between you and anyone else you decide to speak to in any but the most loving terms.”

We can’t do that. All the jury could do was weigh the charges, evaluate the evidence, apply the jury instructions and come up with a not guilty verdict.

We don’t live in a binary world, but legal decisions are binary. It’s one of the flaws of our system, and we just have to live with that. “Not Guilty” is still the correct verdict, even for dickheads.

And the law truly is an ass.

woodcutter's avatar

The people who orchestrated this whole dog and pony show are sitting back right now…watching the country do exactly what they wanted them to do. Because they know the country is ignorant surfing the wave of political correctness to do their dirty work for them….Watch.

Mama_Cakes's avatar

Just thought of something. Zimmerman had better watch his ass. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone tries to take him out.

woodcutter's avatar

and that would prove what? two wrongs make a right

Response moderated (Personal Attack)
ragingloli's avatar

It would be poetic justice. A vigilante taken out by a vigilante.

harangutan's avatar

so much hate. people make me sick

Mama_Cakes's avatar

I don’t see anywhere in my post where I said that it would prove anything and that it was okay.

You need to chill.

WestRiverrat's avatar

“Just thought of something. Zimmerman had better watch his ass. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone tries to take him out”

They better do it quick before GZ gets his gun back.

woodcutter's avatar

He probably has it back already. So get over it people. If I have mine and someone tries to wear out his fists on my head its not going to end well for the guy. Having a firearm handy does not mean you are bound by any reasoning that allows an attacker some form of grace before he is stopped. None of us have to endure abuse that any reasonable person would deem as cruel or dangerous. You don’t get any medals in life for taking abuse like that.
Zimmerman will be wise to invest in a plate carrier for a while.

Response moderated
Response moderated
Response moderated
harangutan's avatar

when I mentioned hate and people making me sick I was referring to the name calling. Are you saying I’m the one who needs to chill? lol.

woodcutter's avatar

All this whispering is making me wet

bkcunningham's avatar

What? I didn’t hear you? Speak up. All this whispering is making you what?

Mama_Cakes's avatar

Confused the two avatars.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@OneBadApple First of all, there’s no such thing as “moral illegality.” When someone says that someone is morally guilty, despite not being morally guilty, it means that they believe someone has done something morally wrong even if they have been vindicated in the eyes of the law. Furthermore, the question of whether or not one can swing a dead cat without hitting someone who has done—or is currently doing—something morally wrong is quite separate from the question of whether or not this particular action of Zimmerman’s was morally wrong.

Second, It seems mistaken to me to say that Martin is dead only because he chose to defend himself against a potential threat who was following him. There are many ways that his death could have been avoided. Zimmerman could have decided not to follow Martin, realizing that there’s nothing suspicious about walking home at 7 pm. Alternatively, he could have followed the 911 dispatcher’s recommendation not to follow Martin and waited for a police officer to arrive. He was not legally obligated to take the dispatcher’s advice, of course, but doing so would have prevented Martin’s death. (The odd thing is, Zimmerman thought Martin was about to do something illegal, not that he already had done so. When Martin started running, then, Zimmerman should have assumed that he had already foiled whatever crime Martin might have been planning to commit. There is no justification for pursuing someone who is running away after not committing a crime.) It seems odd to me that so many people—including people lauding Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense—seem to think the proper course of action for Martin was to not defend himself.

Third, what people want now varies from person to person. Some want the DOJ to pursue federal charges against Zimmerman. Others just want to bring light to what they see as injustice. None of them seem to want any of the straw man goals you ask about, though I rather think you already knew that. Your question, though, is irrelevant. The question asked here is not about should be done next, but whether or not justice was served. Assuming we do not have a ludicrously thin notion of justice on which anything legal is just (which would be to commit the legalistic fallacy), that is a question which cannot be answered by simply pointing to the verdict. Show trials and kangaroo courts have verdicts, but that does not mean they are just.

In any case, the purpose of my original comment was to point out that you were overstating your case. You have not responded to that point, choosing instead to branch out into other topics, so I take it you either have nothing to say in response to my original point or have come to realize that you were mistaken.

OneBadApple's avatar

@SavoirFaire I’m not sure that someone can have a “mistaken” opinion about something. Anyway, I just re-read your posts, and will be damned if I can clearly determine what your original point was. I’m a fairly simple guy, so don’t do well dissecting overly-long text, loaded with vague ideas and circular logic.

I stand by my original statements:

- Zimmerman was a stupid cowboy who has probably watched too many Clint Eastwood movies but was, in fact, afraid for his life.

- Trayvon Martin should have just kept on walking.

And most of the legal minds which have been interviewed since Saturday night are FAR closer in agreement with my thoughts than to whatever it is you are trying to say….

bea2345's avatar

We have a similar problem here. If you are a young, black, male, the police will profile you – in fact, our prisons are full of young black males. Not that they are all innocent – by no means. I find it impossible to believe Zimmerman’s version of events.

woodcutter's avatar

Who here think Zim just punched himself in the face multiple times and gave himself a back injury before the cops got there?

Imadethisupwithnoforethought's avatar

^Me. It is what I would do if I just shot an unarmed black kid.

mattbrowne's avatar

The “stand your ground” law in Florida is a disgrace for a more than 200-year-old democracy. I find it incredible how a majority of voters can support such an irresponsible law. Even James Bond’s license to kill is subject to more restrictions and he’s a trained special agent. But in Florida an insurance underwriter has the legal right to kill other people based on subjective feelings of a threat.

Here’s my suggestion to influential US civil rights activists: Organize a large-scale tourism boycott of Florida. This is doable.

jca's avatar

I still always go back to why didn’t Zim just stay in his vehicle. Even if he got out of his vehicle to call the cops or to look at the address or whatever, why not get back into it and if he really felt a need, he could have sat and watched Martin from the safety of the driver’s seat. He knew the cops were on the way. Yes, he had a right to be on the street (or sidewalk) but why, if Martin was so scary, big talk and black (sarcasm) why not just sit and wait?

Also, he said he had his gun behind him in the holster when he confronted Martin. If he was on his back getting the shit beaten out of him by Martin, slammed against the concrete as he claimed, how could he reach underneath himself to get the gun out of the holster? More likely scenario he had the gun out of the holster when he went up to Martin on the street.

I am glad that Zim is now so afraid for his life that he is in hiding. Maybe he and Casey Anthony, the other Florida resident who is also afraid to come out of hiding, will somehow find love in each other and stay in hiding together, happily ever after. Jokes aside, Zim being in hiding and his life forever altered is a tiny bit of justice in this case.

woodcutter's avatar

Its actually not all that difficult to draw from a holster. Even laying down, All it takes is one quick roll to the side to make the draw. Takes about one second. As long as the muzzle of the weapon just clears the top of the holster there is no need to do a full extension of the arm to aim. Just get the thing out, rotate it up and press trigger. With the attacker right on top there is almost no way to miss. The shrill piped prosecutor was trying to make this seem impossible to women he assumed were not knowledgeable of the subject. Like, instead his weapon therefore had to be out and presented before anything started. And what about their point of Zim having TWO WHOLE FLASHLIGHTS. (2) of them! O.M.G! Its a low light situation and the thought of anyone wanting a flashlight, let alone two, has to be a reason to be suspicious of his motives. Again attempting to bullshit an all female jury. How chauvinistic. Not a new trick. If Zim would not have had even one flashlight, they would have been saying he was being irresponsible for not having enough light therefor insinuating a safety hazard. These are good indicators that a lawyer is swimming in their own shit.

tomathon's avatar

Bid deal, so Z won’t be able to live in Florida. Zimmerman is going to be a multi-millionaire soon after his lawyers are done suing NBC for defamation.

woodcutter's avatar

He will probably need to have his brother or others handle all of this fame profits to protect it from lawsuits. GZ in the second person maybe.

GoldieAV16's avatar

@woodcutter says “With the attacker right on top there is almost no way to miss.”

Which makes it all the more strange that Zimmerman claims to not have known that he even hit Martin, let alone killed him. But GZ holstering the gun after the shot would also indicate that he was not being truthful in those claims. He knew he shot him; he knew he killed him.

I have no idea why an innocent man would lie about so many details surrounding this event. I am surprised that the jurors did not take into account that the story was riddled with inconsistencies and lies, and find that suspicious. Or maybe they did, and just decided that in following the rule of the law it was not relevant that GZ is a chronic liar, but that doesn’t make him a murderer. Just a victim.

woodcutter's avatar

@GoldieAV16 We need to remember in a fight, everything is moving so fast it becomes a blur. Almost always there will be inconsistencies when trying to recount all the action of events. It is perfectly reasonable for a shooter to not see his shot take effect when they are so close QCB. (Close Quarter Battle). Its a tiny hole. I imagine when TM stopped hitting him Zim may have had an idea he hit him somewhere. TM didn’t die instantly. He took some time to expire. I’m not sure what you mean about the re holstering thing. In conceal carry class it is instructed to do that after the threat appears neutralized. Its a bad idea to be walking around with weapon in hand as the cops arrive, A very bad idea. Really did you see the testimony?

GoldieAV16's avatar

Yes. I watched almost every minute of that trial live, I am embarrassed to say.

If he didn’t know that he hit him, didn’t know that he was dead, and never threw a single punch, how exactly did he conclude that Martin was neutralized?

Given what we know about how well George paid attention in class (forgot about Stand Your Ground being discussed in his justice class, and forgot all the rules of Neighborhood Watch – which he was head of) I don’t really fully expect him to have retained anything from a concealed carry class. Maybe that’s unfair.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@GoldieAV16 was Zimmerman on neighborhood watch when he had his encounter with Martin? Stand your ground was never used as a defense in this case, so it has no bearing other than to cloud the issue.

GoldieAV16's avatar

@WestRiverrat No, he was not on patrol that night.

Stand your ground was introduced to the jurors in their instructions about right to self defense, read aloud by the judge and given to each juror in writing. It was also used by Juror B37 in her explanation of what justified GZ’s use of deadly force.

GoldieAV16's avatar

Reuters just released this article, which includes a statement from Juror B37 on Stand Your Ground, as well as the excerpt that included it in the jury instructions.

annabee's avatar

Let me see if I understand this correctly. If I see someone I don’t know in my private community, and I have a gun, I should just stay put until the cops come while this unknown individual has a free time frame to potentially rob, rape, assault, or kill someone? It would be irresponsible for me to follow him and confront him if necessary in order to prevent damage to the community? Is this what is being said?

If you would have seen the boston bomber plant a large backpack like that in a crowded street, would you call the cops and wait for them to come or would you realize that they won’t make it in time, so you have to stop it yourself?

Why not consider the fact that if Zimmerman didn’t follow the unknown individual (Trayvon) then that unknown individual could have turned some community member into another victim. A victim that would be apart of a large list of victims in the history of crime in that community.

ragingloli's avatar

After this verdict, you can stalk anyone you deem “suspicious”, antagonise him until he is forced to defend himself against you, and then you can just pop him in the head, after all of which you walk scot free.

woodcutter's avatar

@annabee “If you would have seen the boston bomber plant a large backpack like that in a crowded street, would you call the cops and wait for them to come or would you realize that they won’t make it in time, so you have to stop it yourself?”

Yes apparently leave things be especially if the suspected bomb planter might look like a black guy. That would be racist~

woodcutter's avatar

@GoldieAV16 A person is assumed to neutralized when all aggressive actions from them has ceased. That does not necessarily mean they be dead. A person can also be considered neutralized if they stop being a threat. This can include them leaving. It should be apparent to anyone if someone has stopped or are they continuing their attack. I find it hard to imagine Zim actually wanted the guy to die. Just to stop punching. Even the interviewed juror admitted that Martin contributed to his own death from this. If he had just avoided the guy instead of going where he did. Trayvon broke the law, and Zim did not break any. It’s the law we seem to be at odds with.

And yes its unfair of you to draw any conclusion as to someones concealed class retention abilities because of an unfortunate encounter neither of the two men saw coming. And lets be clear, Just because TM was a few months short of being 18 does not mean he gets to be hidden in with all the preschoolers. Not this time. There have been people younger than he was who were tried as adults because of the seriousness of the charges against them. Just because someone is young is no reason to think they cannot mess someone up badly.

When BHO made that comment that Trayvon would look like a son of his, which image of him was he referring to…the 12 year old one we all were shown at first or….the most recent image of the dope smoking sagger flipping the bird? I think he should have meant the recent one given BHO’s past.

Dutchess_III's avatar

@annabee Are you profiling? It was a kid walking in a neighborhood. Why the assumption that that he’s up to no good?

annabee's avatar

No, it was a kid walking in a white gated community.

Historic criminals of the community were black.

Statistical significance on a national level shows a disproportionate amount of crime among blacks, even more so among teenagers.

Likewise, if you look at illegal immigrants, the statistical significance on a national level shows a disproportionate amount of illegal immigrants among hispanics.

SuperMouse's avatar

@Dutchess_III in other words, yes @annabee is profiling.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Yep. She’s profiling. But I agree. We just need to shot every black kid we see.

What makes you think only white people lived in that community @annabee? Zimmerman was Hispanic. According to your logic he didn’t belong there either.

SuperMouse's avatar

@Dutchess_III actually, only about half of the people who live in the neighborhood are white.

Dutchess_III's avatar

That would have been my guess too @SuperMouse. That’s about the average demographics.

harangutan's avatar

What is a person supposed to say when a neighborhood has a history of break-ins and the majority of people committing these crimes are black? “I notice someone acting suspicious, but I can’t describe what he looks like because you all are going to call me racist.”. Is this how it is supposed to be from now on? Give me a break.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Also @annabee, illegal immigrants have a disproportionate amount of people who are willing to work their ass off and do things that white people won’t do.

@harangutan He wasn’t DOING anything! He wasn’t acting suspicious. He wasn’t skulking, he wasn’t hiding behind houses and bushes. He was walking along the street. Are we just supposed to ignore people who just are walking along? Yes. We are.

harangutan's avatar

@Dutchess_III How do you know he wasn’t acting suspicious? Were you there? I was once walking along minding my own business taking a shortcut through someone’s property when I was a teen. An old man came out and pointed a gun at me. Know what I didn’t do? Hit him in the nose and smash his head on the ground. I ran as fast as I could.

annabee's avatar

@Dutchess_III

Mostly white, not all white. Again, statistical significance. Demographics of neighborhood

Zimmerman is a white-hispanic. His dad is a well known judge.

“Also @annabee, illegal immigrants have a disproportionate amount of people who are willing to work their ass off and do things that white people won’t do.”

Actually, most illegal immigrants come here for welfare, not work. Welfare statistics of illegal immigrants

tomathon's avatar

Uh, have you guys ever seen the list of nobel laureates? They’re mostly Jews and Germanic people coupled with other various types of whites. Not asian, not black, not hispanic.

Have you ever seen the list of medalist winners for running? They’re most black champions, not white, not hispanic, not asian.

There are always exceptions, but if you think these stats don’t tell you something, then you’re not seeing or don’t want to see.

SuperMouse's avatar

@Dutchess_III I looked it up, those are the actual demographics. Oh and yes he was doing something, he was being a black young man. Unfortunately, that was all he needed to be doing.

@harangutan I guarantee you that if it was my six foot 15 year-old son, wearing the exact same clothes and hoodie, with his lily white skin and blond curly hair, walking through the neighborhood at the exact same time of night, doing exactly what Martin was doing, Zimmerman would not have considered it at all suspicious.

SuperMouse's avatar

@annabee it says right there in the study that you linked that the disproportionate numbers of immigrants on welfare are not due to their unwillingness to work. What a ludicrous, seemingly racist, xenophobic conclusion you have drawn.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@Dutchess_III I thought he was hugging the back walls of the buildings because of the rain. Martin was not on the street, and depending on the vegetation possibly wouldn’t have been visible from a vehicle for long. The sidewalk he was on ran behind the buildings.

annabee's avatar

@SuperMouse

You’re mixing up statistics with opinions. The statistics show that they’re are sitting on welfare, and not working. That tells me everything I need to know. They’re not coming here for work.

ragingloli's avatar

What @annabee‘s “statistics” conveniently left out, expectedly, considering the “source”, is the unemployment rate of immigrants.
Unemployment rates of immigrants are actually lower than those of “natives”, e.g. immigrant blacks/latinos/asians have lower rates than native blacks/latinos/asians (with the exception, ironically, of white immigrants. Their unemployment rate is actually higher than those of white natives).
However, immigrants are paid considerably less than natives, explaining the higher use of welfare.
But of course, mentioning all this does not serve the xenophobic narrative.

SuperMouse's avatar

@annabee did you read anything else? How about the part where they are unable to find decent work because of lower levels of education? Would you say that an out of work middle manager who is receiving unemployment and assistance from the state is only doing so because he doesn’t want to work? Or does he get the @annabee benefit of the doubt because he is white?

I am not confusing anything, it is perfectly clear that your opinion is racist and xenophobic. Your statements tell us all we need to know.

ragingloli's avatar

@annabee
Using welfare does not mean that they are unemployed. Of course, trying to claim otherwise is a consistent and predictable tactic of right wingers.

tomathon's avatar

She’s talking about illegal immigrants, @ragingloli

@SuperMouse

You’re discussing something entirely different. The only relevant point is they’re illegal and on welfare. The reasons why is entirely different from the point at hand. We can speculate all day on the reasons why.

Again raginignloli, She’s talking about illegals.

WestRiverrat's avatar

What do illegal aliens have to do with Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman?

SuperMouse's avatar

@tomathon, @annabee speculated on the reason why when she wrote “The statistics show that they’re are sitting on welfare, and not working. That tells me everything I need to know. They’re not coming here for work.” My answer was in response to her speculation.

annabee's avatar

@WestRiverrat

@Dutchess_III said “Also @annabee, illegal immigrants have a disproportionate amount of people who are willing to work their ass off and do things that white people won’t do.”

I disagree and gave her stats. Apparently, whenever you give evidence that doesn’t support their own personal opinions and it makes them uncomfortable, it is one big racist conspiracy. Just like this trial, you can give all the evidence you want, it makes people uncomfortable, so it is one big racist conspiracy.

SuperMouse's avatar

@annabee did you bother to look at the statistics @ragingloli provided? You know, the ones that completely contradict your theory about immigrants being unemployed because they all they are here to do is collect welfare? Apparently whenever you are given evidence that doesn’t support your personal opinions and makes you uncomfortable, you just ignore it.

annabee's avatar

Why would he give me statistics on immigrants when we’re discussing illegal immigrants?

He didn’t contradict anything because it is apples and oranges.

SuperMouse's avatar

@annabee keep up with the willful ignorance and outsized arrogance, it will really take you places. ~

ragingloli's avatar

@annabee
The statistics i gave you cover both legal and illegal immigrants.
http://www.bls.gov/ces/cesfaq.htm#scope8

harangutan's avatar

@SuperMouse It’s sad that you can guarantee something when you don’t even know a person. Aren’t you now doing the same thing you are claiming Mr. Zimmerman did? I’m not taking either side of this tragic event, what has me upset is that so many people are quick to condemn a man when they weren’t even at the scene of the incident. None of us were there and none of us know the two people involved.

annabee's avatar

@ragingloli

uh…Did you read what you sent me?

Are undocumented immigrants counted in the surveys?

“It is likely that the CES survey includes at least some undocumented immigrants. However, the establishment survey is not designed to identify the legal status of workers. Therefore, it is not possible to determine how many are counted in the survey.”

“the household survey does include questions which identify the foreign and native born, but it does not include questions about the legal status of the foreign born.”

…......

Dutchess_III's avatar

@annabee I wasn’t referring to numbers when I said the illegals are willing to do the dirty jobs that whites won’t do. I was referring to my own personal experience.

OneBadApple's avatar

@SuperMouse You are correct, Zimmerman probably wouldn’t spend time and effort to approach your son, but it has little to do with racism, and would be mostly due to recent historical evidence. As long as you brought up statistics, call it “statistical probability” if you like….

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/03/justice/florida-teen-shooting-burglaries

http://the-american-journal.com/zimmerman-neighbors-fear-black-youth/

You will note that one (BLACK…oh my !) woman who was interviewed is also tired of the “mostly young black kids” breaking into homes, or stealing things from different property.

THEY are more to blame than anyone regarding what happened that night to Trayvon Martin, but are mostly still just creeping around, doing what they do, while George Zimmerman endures the scorn of all the politically correct, armchair “social lawyers” we are all so lucky to have “defending the innocent” in this country.

And just to be clear, many black friends in my life have been and continue to be like brothers and sisters to me. But Trayvon Martin and his bag of burglary tools would not have been one of them.

As the article said, it is the “elephant in the room” which nobody wants to talk about…..

Dutchess_III's avatar

What “bag of burglery tools” are you referring to @OneBadApple? I have broken into a lot of locked houses with my skittles!

annabee's avatar

@Dutchess_III wrote “illegal immigrants have a disproportionate amount of people who are willing to work”

Didn’t look that way, but thanks for clearing that up.

Dutchess_III's avatar

^^^^^ In my personal experience it is true.

SuperMouse's avatar

@annabee undocumented immigrants can’t receive food stamps or other welfare benefits. That makes your argument that they are here for the cushy benefits completely ridiculous.

@harangutan no, believing that there is no way he would have followed my Aryan boy is not me doing what Zimmerman did, it is looking at the reality of race in our country today.

@OneBadApple the old “I have lots of black friends” argument. Pardon me, of course you are perfectly objective.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Some of my best friends are black! Of course, they’re my students and I work in a jail. :)

tomathon's avatar

@SuperMouse

Sure they can. The study tells you one of the ways they do it. There are other ways that the study doesn’t cover.

From the source:

“Illegal immigrants generally receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children.”

“the U.S.-born children of immigrants (including those born to illegal immigrants) are automatically awarded American citizenship and are therefore eligible for all welfare programs at birth.”

“they are using a stolen or otherwise acquired SSN. ”

Dutchess_III's avatar

^^^ What @tomathon is saying is true.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Ha ha! Just read this on facebook “You mean to tell me black people are mad at white people because of something a Mexican did?”

SuperMouse's avatar

@tomathon ok true enough. I still have a really hard time believing @annabee‘s premise that most come here with the plan not to work and to soak off the system.

tomathon's avatar

@SuperMouse

Suppose their plan was to come here to work. Does it change the fact that so many immigrants are still on welfare? No, it doesn’t. Therefore, it is not entirely illogical to conclude that immigrants are here for welfare.

Actions speak louder then words, right? There intention might have been good (to come here and work) but the practical fact remains, they’re immigrants on welfare.

harangutan's avatar

@SuperMouse The neighborhood had a problem with burglaries that were committed by black men. George Zimmerman is not a racist for reporting a suspicious person who fits the description of people who have been terrorizing that neighborhood. He may have been wrong about the reason why Trayvon was there, but he was only looking out for his neighborhood as many others have in the past. There is no evidence of racism. None.

We are all allowed to walk up to someone we don’t know and ask them a question. There’s nothing illegal about that. What’s illegal is punching someone in the nose and bashing their head on the ground for asking a question. If Zimmerman had his gun out before he was punched, don’t you think young, sweet frail Trayvon would have ran as fast as he could since all he had on himself was Skittles for protection? If it had been your son, don’t you think he would have ran as soon as he saw a gun? Why would Zimmerman intentionally shoot Trayvon when he knew the police would be there any minute?

SuperMouse's avatar

@tomathon, @annabee‘s assertion is that the only reason people come here is to receive benefits. Just because they have trouble finding work or are forced to work as unskilled laborers and are forced to rely on benefits to deed their kids, does not mean they only came for the welfare benefits. Sure the practical fact remains they are on welfare. It is not a fact that the welfare is the only reason they came.

@harangutan Zimmerman was profiling Martin plain and simple. Argue against it all you want, try to convince people otherwise, but our own statements assert that he profiled Martin solely on the basis of his race. That is racism. He should never have gotten out of the car. He did it to be a vigilante.

tomathon's avatar

Right, but annabee is judging the actions of the immigrants (welfare use), not their struggles, not their intentions.That is all I’m saying.

WestRiverrat's avatar

@SuperMouse I have to disagree, George Zimmerman wasn’t sure of Trayvon’s race when the dispatcher first asked for it.

OneBadApple's avatar

@Dutchess III I did not say that Trayvon Martin was carrying his burglary tools on the night he was shot. But if you bothered to study some of the historical background of this case (which many of you apparently have not….what a surprise), you would know that Trayvon Martin was arrested in Miami in the early morning hours while carrying a bag of tools which were, let’s just say…..not useful in automobile mechanics).

And yes, MANY of my black friends are just as unhappy with all of this “street-thug”, break-in behavior as the rest of us are (one of them is Kirk Douglas, master guitarist for The Roots !.....but that’s a discussion for another day) .

Anyway, don’t blame me. I’m not just making this stuff up. You can look any of it up on multiple information sites…...if you can be bothered with the facts…

harangutan's avatar

@SuperMouse I am amazed at how sure you think you are when you weren’t even there. I’m not condemning a man for actions I did not see, you are. And @WestRiverrat is right. There is no evidence of racism.

At least eight burglaries were reported within Twin Lakes in the 14 months prior to the Trayvon Martin shooting, according to the Sanford Police Department. Yet in a series of interviews, Twin Lakes residents said dozens of reports of attempted break-ins and would-be burglars casing homes had created an atmosphere of growing fear in the neighborhood. In several of the incidents, witnesses identified the suspects to police as young black men.source So I suppose all those witnesses are racist.

Dutchess_III's avatar

No need for sarcasm @OneBadApple and no need to blow things completely out of proportion. I have read about his “history,” and it is completely irrelevant. You’re referring to an incident that had happened in 2011 a year before he got shot. He would have been 15 or 16 years old. He was searched because he was accused of writing on a school door. They went through his back pack, looking for a graffiti marker. The tool (singular…not plural and certainly not a bag full of tools) that was found in his back pack and was called a “burglary tool” by the school police investigator was a screwdriver. Let’s just say…useful in automobile mechanics and in many other things. He did not have his “burglary tool” with him on the night Zimmerman shot him. He had nothing on him.

OneBadApple's avatar

And @SuperMouse So let’s see here….You don’t know me or know anything at all about me, but you just go ahead and publicly throw me in with that bag of people who “claim” to have “many black friends”, just because it seems contrary to that when I present an opinion which is more than just about skittles and iced tea.

Isn’t that kind of PROFILING and STEREOTYPING somebody whom you know nothing about ??

That is what is called IRONY, right there….

Dutchess_III's avatar

@OneBadApple Did you read my response to your claim that he was arrested ”carrying a bag of tools which were, let’s just say…..not useful in automobile mechanics).” Why did you exaggerate that small incident so badly?

I dated a black guy off and on for 9 years. I get the award!!!!

jca's avatar

I can assure you that if you say to a black person “I’m not racist because I have a lot of black friends” they will laugh you off the island.

SuperMouse's avatar

@WestRiverrat and @harangutan I have been doing some searching and I can’t find anything about Zimmerman saying he doesn’t know Martin’s race. All I could find is that in his previous 911 calls Zimmerman didn’t share the race of the person he suspected until he was asked. Can you help me find a source saying he didn’t know Marin’s race?

@OneBadApple it is your own insistence that race had nothing to do with this situation that causes me to paint you with that brush. I am PROFILING and STEREOTYPING based on what you said.

OneBadApple's avatar

@Dutchess III I did not “exaggerate” anything, except not remembering that we was caught and questioned in daylight, not at night. I ALSO forgot that stolen jewelry was recovered from his bag, which he claimed he was “holding for a friend” (wow, talk about your stereotypical bullshit statements).

Here’s the story….

http://www.rightsidenews.com/2013071432888/editorial/us-opinion-and-editorial/trayvon-martin-burglary-tools-and-pcp-style-drug-cocktails.html

Next, you’re going to say that this had nothing to do with the night that he was killed, and you would of course be correct.

All I’m saying is, if you choose to behave like a gangsta, and present yourself like a gangsta, then try to pound the shit out of anyone who looks at you like you might be a gangsta, sooner or later it is going to catch up to you….

OneBadApple's avatar

@SuperMouse When did I “insist that race had nothing to do with it ” ? Race had EVERYTHING to do with it, and that is a real shame.

The root cause of this whole thing were the (mostly) young black kids who broke into or home-invaded all of those poor homeowners at the ‘Retreat at Twin Lakes’, frightening them half to death (8 times in 14 months !) and to this day making them fall asleep every night just a little more worried (while at the same time knocking the shit out of their already-depressed home values).

Trayvon Martin was staying with relatives in the community, and had to be aware that these things were occurring regularly. So when approached by the neighborhood watch guy, he should have understood the reason for it, and NOT tried to pound the hell out of him over it.

But no, he had to play the ‘street thug’ role, and paid for it with his life….

jca's avatar

@OneBadApple: In the link you provided, they confirm what @Dutchess_III said: the “burglary tool” was a screwdriver.

Also, @OneBadApple, according to what @GoldieAV16 said, Zim was not on patrol that night.

OneBadApple's avatar

@jca Yeah, maybe you’re right. A high school knapsack containing a screwdriver and several pieces of jewelry identified as having been stolen. Probably just a coincidence.

Although it may not have been Zimmerman’s shift, he was the Neighborhood Watch Captain, and seeing a person unknown to the community walking in the dark, IN THE RAIN, might have caused a closer look, regardless of whose shift it was that night.

Also, evidence has shown that although the 7–11 store was less than a mile away, Trayvon’s walk for some reason took 45 minutes, which is about twice what a walking trip like that should take. But yeah, he probably just wanted to be alone with his thoughts. Admire the nice houses…..

In the dark. In the rain…

OneBadApple's avatar

@jca Thanks for that link, and I am in general agreement with it. Most of those reported things are irrelevant toward the terrible event that happened that night. To be fair, they only point out that Trayvon was not just the sweet-faced little scamp in the photos which are shown on TV over and over (in fact, those photos are a couple of years old, and distort for the public what Trayvon looked like in Feb 2012).

Listen, trust me on this, I try VERY hard to respect and have faith in everyone I meet, and probably have more love for most black people I know than for many of the white people. But until people will stop being afraid to discuss some of the genuine root causes of these tragedies for fear of being labeled “racist”, they will continue to occur forever.

If all of these people who are screaming in the streets would apply that energy toward learning why a disproportionate number of serious crimes are committed by young black men, or why so many windows have outside bars over them in many predominantly black neighborhoods in this country, then maybe we will all get somewhere. Until that occurs, many white people will always point to these facts as “proof” that black people are somehow inferior.

People who look down their idealistic noses and imply racism every time someone questions why this has to be is, in my opinion, just part of the problem….

Dutchess_III's avatar

You exaggerated in many ways. You said he had a “bag of tools….” one screw drive does not a bag of tools make. Exaggeration 1.

He had jewelry, yes. There was never any evidence that it was stolen: From Wiki: ”...but no evidence ever surfaced to indicate that the jewelry was stolen.” Exaggeration 2.

All 17 year old boys play tough. That’s what they do. Exaggeraton #3.

So, do you have a more recent picture of Trayvon, @OneBadApple? Are you going to roll out that discredited picture?

OneBadApple's avatar

My “bag of tools” comment was just a general memory of the incident, and was only a close figure of speech indicating that an incident with probable theft occurred, the exact details of which were not really important, and weren’t worth researching the specifics just to make a point. And if you think that carrying a screwdriver and women’s jewelry around which is being “held for a friend” (who was never identified), doesn’t smell strongly of theft, well….you are a real humanitarian.

All 17-year-old boys do play a little rough sometimes. But I sincerely hope that the ones you know don’t commonly smash people in the face, then pound their heads into concrete every time they are asked a fair question….

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, “General Memory,” in your case, is much closer to “making stuff up” than it is “facts.” The fact is, none of your allegations are correct. You don’t know if your assumptions are correct, but you’re presenting them as though they are fact. …if you can be bothered with the facts…

The kid felt threatened. He fought back.

You are racist @OneBadApple. I don’t care how many black friends you have, you’re racist.

woodcutter's avatar

One handy thing I have silently observed reading these is… If you call yourself a progressive or identify as one, more or less, You will have the amazing ability to see into a persons soul and make amazing deductions if one is a racist. So cool. You can pull it all off without doing any research or any firsthand experience. Without even knowing the person you are classifying. This seems like a breakthrough in human sociology never before seen.

Something this great should have an appropriate meme. I’m out of ideas because it’s way out of my pay grade for sure but I definitely want in on the ground floor of this.

jca's avatar

I think we’re all going to have to agree to disagree. This case and trial is one where opinions are so divided, like other “hot topics” that people get emotional about. Each side vehemently advocates for their opinions, their logic, and both sides will probably never see eye to eye on it. There have been huge debates on the news, in the media, on social networks such as this and FB. It goes round and round, and the whole thing was very unfortunate.

OneBadApple's avatar

Coincidentally, this letter was published in today’s edition of the NY Daily News, sent in by Marie Villanueva, of Hollis, Queens.

Verbatim:

“You have to stop printing racist comments to sell newspapers. I am black. The black community might help itself by not putting on a pedestal those punk entertainers, by not being the group that commits the most crimes, by not being racist itself, but by admiring blacks like Dr. Ben Carson who made something of themselves. Why don’t you make a big deal about black-on-black crimes ? You should be ashamed”.

I don’t know specifically what the paper printed to make her mad, but I can guess. I have no idea who Dr. Ben Carson is either. But just like me, it sounds like Ms. Villanueva is pretty tired of the street-thug types who lower the quality of life for everyone, while at the same time soiling the image of the countless very fine African Americans that we are privileged to have as citizens of our country.

But also like me, Ms. Villanueva must also somehow be a “racist”.

But WAIT !!.....She is BLACK !!.....So…....OH, it’s all so CONFUSING….

Dutchess_III's avatar

Dr. Ben Carson is awesome. I first read about him about 5 years ago. Finally got to see the movie about a month ago.

jca's avatar

Let’s let it go, as there will never be a conclusion to this – it is what it is and we are all going in circles and going to turn into butter.

Dutchess_III's avatar

AHM!! That was racist @jca!

jca's avatar

@Dutchess_III: LOL! You’re dating yourself! :)

Dutchess_III's avatar

Yes, I’m dating myself! :) I grew up in that terribly Politically Incorrect world!

jca's avatar

@Dutchess_III: My grandmother used to read me that book when I was little, and I wish I still had it, because it’s very rare (due to the politically incorrectness) and it’s worth boo-koo bucks!

Dutchess_III's avatar

:) Tigers ran fast, didn’t they! Or did Sambo run around the tigers. I forget.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I just looked on Amazon…the Little Golden Books are $80 to $120! I will keep my eyes open at garage sales!

Dutchess_III's avatar

Wow Try $300+....

woodcutter's avatar

Wait! BUTTER? oh fuck me did we just get another fuckin Paula Deen anti black butter goad?

We so so god damned close:(

Dutchess_III's avatar

No! It was Little Black Sambo! And the tigers!

ragingloli's avatar

Some sort of jungle book ripoff?

Dutchess_III's avatar

No. It’s been a looong time since I read it. I just remember Sambo had an umbrella and he got tigers to run around and around in a circle around him. They ran so fast and for so long they turned into butter. His Mom made pancakes out of the butter. It’s a cautionary tale against greed and vanity.

It was written in 1899 (well, could have been a Jungle Book Rip off…) There was a pancake place that used Little Black Sambo as its icon…..yeah, it was called Sambos!

This is interesting…apparently the name ‘Sambo’ came from combining the nick names of the founders, Sam (Sam Battistone) and Bo (Newell Bohnett). The word sure became a derogatory term for black people, though.

As a kid, I never saw any racisim, just the message. But…as a kid I probably wouldn’t have recognized racism anyway, if that was just part of the world.

ragingloli's avatar

I only remember a scifi movie, called Gayniggers from outer Space

ragingloli's avatar

Plot Synopsis:
The film follows a group of intergalactic homosexual black men from the planet Anus, who discover the presence of female creatures on planet Earth. Using rayguns, they proceed to eliminate females one by one from Earth, eliciting gratitude from the previously oppressed male population.Before leaving the planet, they leave behind a “Gay Ambassador” to educate the Earthlings about their new way of life.

Dutchess_III's avatar

So how they reproduce?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Damnit! You make me laugh, then I am aghast at myself!!

Dutchess_III's avatar

VERY relevant, @SuperMouse. Thank you.

jca's avatar

Great video @SuperMouse. I shared on FB.

Paradox25's avatar

@mattbrowne You really don’t like stand your ground laws obviously. I’m not sure what to think about the issue. Obviously people with bad intentions will take advantage of such a law. However, as a person who’s gone through life where I’ve been confronted several times it would be a nice thought to know that I could defend myself without ramifications. In the end I still feel that you’re correct about those laws being ridiculous, however, there’s still that giant but in my mind concerning self-defense.

Perhaps the Zimmerman case in a way supports your criticisms of stand your ground laws. I don’t recall this law being a consideration in the case, and Zimmerman was still acquitted without the need to use it. I brought the latter point up because I still really believe that Zimmerman likely had to defend his own life, though I’m not entirely sure that Zimmerman was an angel in all of this either. My opinions about the case did lean more towards siding with George after watching the trial, and what the media portrayed isn’t what apparently occured according to the details of the case.

woodcutter's avatar

This case was tried by the media or the serious attempt was made and I still am astounded by the number of people who forgot their reasoning and bought it hook line and sinker. Way before the case was really tried. This must feel incredibly…..something, to them.

The prosecution knew this was going to be an impossible uphill fight, child abuse….really? and truth be told would never had gone to trial if not from all the political pressure brought to bear by attempting using the media to their advantage. Clearer heads prevailed when this rouse became apparent. I would not be shocked to hear that the jurors have had death threats leveled at them. If blacks want their “dangerous” stereotype to go away, they need to stop this from occurring. Random white people being beaten in the name of Trayvon? Really?

Mama_Cakes's avatar

My partner’s cousin just put up this shit and said that he couldn’t agree with “Uncle Ted” more.

Nugent is a nutcase.

ETpro's avatar

@woodcutter We agree so seldom let’s pop the cork on some champagne and celebrate when agreement rolls around. You are spot on.

woodcutter's avatar

@Mama_Cakes Thanks for that link on Terrible Ted. His views are exactly right on without all the politically correct hypocrisy happening here in our country. Being PC means you are forming your viewpoints on emotion experienced at the time and then too embarrassed to change back to reality after all the real facts come in.
I can’t believe that, still in this day and age ,there are still bleaters that concur that it should be fine for black people to unload on whites, or those who look white, every now and then, and hurt them badly with no repercussions just because they sometimes feel disenfranchised and its the natural thing to do. There are cheer leaders for this behavior as a badly beaten person lay on the ground just for being white. If people want to do something about their situation then do whats right ,not take the path of least resistance that involves the least amount of thought to get instant gratification at the expense of someone who resembles someone they think they hate.

Martin was caught red-handed with stolen property by the police who buried these facts in order to make the crime stats involving black teens in that area look better.. He was a known multiple drug abuser and he liked to hurt people for fun. Does that sound like a person you would enjoy living near you? I’d pick George Zimmerman for one of my neighbors, not the likes of the criminal Trayvon Martin. All Ted Nugent was saying was the painful truth without all the PC bullcrap that fogs over some people’s minds.

woodcutter's avatar

@ETpro Thanks for that but champagne is too strong for a lightweight like me. Lets just get some Arizona iced tea in aluminum cans. I can drink that stuff all day and save the big cans for recycling later ;)

ETpro's avatar

@woodcutter I’ll drink to that.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@OneBadApple My apologies for the delayed response:

“I’m not sure that someone can have a ‘mistaken’ opinion about something.”

Of course one can. If Jim is of the opinion that all potatoes are purple, he is mistaken. Therefore, he has a mistaken opinion. The notion that calling something an opinion makes it immune to criticism is simply asinine.

“Anyway, I just re-read your posts, and will be damned if I can clearly determine what your original point was.”

My point was stated quite clearly: you said that your position was indisputably true, but I say it is quite disputable. The fact that we are 320 answers deep on this discussion and no one seems to have changed their mind seems to support my position rather clearly.

“I’m a fairly simple guy, so don’t do well dissecting overly-long text”

This is a complicated issue, and complicated issues cannot be properly addressed using only a couple sentences. If you don’t think you’re smart enough to have the conversation, don’t join it in the first place. But I doubt you really believe this. I think the above is just a copout so that you don’t have to answer my objections.

“loaded with vague ideas and circular logic.”

Another copout. Show me what was vague or circular. If you can’t, then I’ll have to assume this was nothing but an ad hominem argument.

I stand by my original statements:
- Zimmerman was a stupid cowboy who has probably watched too many Clint Eastwood movies but was, in fact, afraid for his life.
- Trayvon Martin should have just kept on walking.

The irony here is that these aren’t your original statements. What you said originally, and what I took issue with, were the following claims:

(1) While George Zimmerman used poor (and maybe stupid) judgment in getting out of his truck, this was not illegal. Questioning Trayvon was not illegal, and he was licensed to carry a firearm, so that was not illegal. Trayvon chose to assault Zimmerman, and this WAS illegal.

(2) The jury (which received very high praise from both the prosecution AND defense teams, as well as from every legal analyst which I read or heard on TV) unanimously found Zimmerman ‘Not Guilty’. So from last night on, anyone who refers to Trayvon as “murdered” is wrong. Why ? Because the jury SAID you are wrong.

These might be true, but they are certainly not indisputable. Because of the nature of Florida’s stalking law and self-defense law, it very well might have been illegal for Zimmerman to get out of his car and chase Martin and it very well might have been legal for Martin to attack Zimmerman (since Florida allows people to strike first when they feel threatened, which includes when they think they are being stalked). Like I said before: maybe this is a problem with Florida state law. Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it is right. But it remains the case that your first claim is disputable.

The second claim is disputable as well. In fact, I think it’s just plain mistaken. Juries are not infallible. OJ Simpson was acquitted, but it doesn’t mean he isn’t a murderer. It just means that he is not guilty in the eyes of the law. Those are different things, as anyone who understands the difference between illegality and immorality should realize.

Do I think the jury did the right thing given the charges filed and the laws in place? Yes, I do. I’ve said this over and over again. Zimmerman was clearly overcharged, and the prosecution did not make out a sufficient case for murder in the second degree. It does not follow from this, however, that Zimmerman did nothing wrong—even if you think that Martin was a bad kid. Moreover, it is simply foolish to pretend that there is no argument to be made on the other side. Just because you may not have a taste for it does not mean there is not a discussion to be had here.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Is it my imagination or are people writing the LONGEST dissertations EVER on Fluther in the last week?

OneBadApple's avatar

@SaviorFaire Sorry, but I think you are mistaken, no matter what color you think the potatoes are….

WestRiverrat's avatar

@SavoirFaire Sorry to tell you, but there are purple potatoes.

ETpro's avatar

@WestRiverrat You need to reread @SavoirFaire‘s post. Sorry I didn’t see that before it was too late for you to edit.

woodcutter's avatar

@ETpro I think @WestRiverrat response was as much fact as a rebut to a novel on a q&a site.

woodcutter's avatar

@SavoirFaire “Because of the nature of Florida’s stalking law and self-defense law, it very well might have been illegal for Zimmerman to get out of his car and chase Martin.

Big stretch. And when did this “chase scenario” materialize? I will guess it materialized out of a need to make Trayvon Martin a locked in victim here to be used to hang the defendant. Anything goes when stuff gets artificially racially charged I suppose.

First off It would be helpful to know your definition of chase. Because out of all the evidence presented ,were there any indicators there was a real chase? Because it was dark, raining, and there was a relatively out of shape guy on a cell phone. I don’t see the applicable dynamics of a serious chase going on there. Do you?....really? A 17 year old six foot plus tall football player in prime shape is being reeled in by anyone? Said no one ever. Even thinking outside the box that just is unbelievable by anyone. So we have established that Martin was over qualified to taunt the shit out of Zimmerman by running circles around him indefinitely. Martin didn’t want to run because he didn’t need to.. What is believable is that, Martin liked to fight and was really good at it. So be it, not a crime to be good at MMA fighting but,even if there was some form of legitimate fear on the part of Martin , the self defense angle is forfeited when there is force used that is over and beyond what is needed to turn back an attack, which never came here. The self defense is over when your attacker is capitulating or has been put in a position when the threat is over. Thats not to say that this threshold can be exceeded out of emotion because then the defender is wrong. There is no punitive clause in a real self defense act. You don’t get to mercilessly hammer the piss out of someone after they want to quit and still expect the sympathy of jurors. That is what Martin seemed to be doing. What was his plan? Was it to hammer Zimmerman into brain dead coma to make it stick? You don’t get to do that and still run into the bosom of self defense.

ETpro's avatar

@woodcutter OK. You need to reread @SavoirFaire‘s color of potatoes paragraph too. You both are WAY off base, talking about things that have nothing to do with the color or potatoes, but in your zeal, claiming that a false statement about potato color was made when it clearly was not. Reread it and admit your error on that one point, or you prove you aren’t even interested in facts, just your agenda.

OneBadApple's avatar

Well, as soon as this guy said “if you’re not smart enough to have the conversation”, I proceeded to read the rest of his “evidence” as a courtesy, since he (for some reason) feels that lots of thin, meandering paragraphs will always prove (or even make) a point. I re-read all of his previous “evidence” a month ago, but damned if I’ll waste more time doing it again (so, see ?.....I’m getting smarter already ).

Hey, maybe I’m “not smart enough”. But I have enough intelligence to know and appreciate the value of relative brevity when trying to make a point.

I am a Vietnam combat veteran, so have witnessed and know first-hand all about young people unnecessarily losing their lives and never getting to see 21, and then suffering the anguish of nobody ever being held accountable for it.

I don’t need or have any interest in being lectured by some pompous, overly-verbose egghead telling me how things are, in some pathetic effort to make me “smarter”.....

woodcutter's avatar

I had no idea this question way up there,^^ was about potatoes. If we are going to delve into the abstract then at least say it on the front end. Otherwise the feeling we are having a discussion with an impaired person and all bets are off.

potatoes

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther