In Sanford, Florida, murder is not a crime as long as the victim is African American - Page 9

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jmacq1 

So when the prosecutor declines to make an arrest due to lack of evidence due to the utter and complete incompetence of the Sanford police force, what then?

 

I can see some riots in Florida, but while people seem to be paying attention, the level of OUTRAGE just doesn't seem to be there for nationwide violence.  Making matters worse (and hearkening back to that constant news cycle mentioned earlier) people who seemed sympathetic to the Martins and their side of the case are now just getting "sick of hearing about it" (though in their defense they still tend to follow that up with "just arrest the guy already.")

 

I predict that's how this will get buried...people are already getting "sick of it" which gives the news outlets all the excuse they need to lessen coverage until it just quietly goes away.

Whatever happens though, Zimmerman's life is basically finished.  Good luck trying to find a job that'll hire someone who caused a national outrage, and whose name is now associated with racists and other "unfortunates."  I'd love for this man to be put behind bar, but it isn't like he's going to live an ideal life if he somehow manages to escape a conviction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ska Oreo 

Whatever happens though, Zimmerman's life is basically finished.  Good luck trying to find a job that'll hire someone who caused a national outrage, and whose name is now associated with racists and other "unfortunates."  I'd love for this man to be put behind bar, but it isn't like he's going to live an ideal life if he somehow manages to escape a conviction.

Have no doubt, there are plenty of people that will be willing to hire Zimmerman because of his status. Check through the comments of any post that uses Facebook commenting. There are plenty of business owners among his defenders.

That said, yeah, he's probably going to want to move out of Sanford.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTRan 

 

 I really question whether it was just simple 'incompetence' on the part of the Sanford PD.

From some of the material that I've been reading, it really seems more like 'willful incompetence'...which, IMO, is light-years worse.

Yes, that too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

I think there'll be some serious violence if an arrest isn't made.

It's already started.  

If he's not arrested, set your clocks back to the 60s.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

It's already started.  

 

If he's not arrested, set your clocks back to the 60s.

So with guns in every household (mine included) this could be a lot worse. I was a kid when MLK was murdered and I remember some local rioting. We all holed up in my grandmothers house. My dad and uncle were armed and just watching the front and back doors for a couple of nights. I wasn't aware at the time what was going on of course. You have to worry about the gun toting extremists certainly but what I find more worrisome are the folks that will tend to look the other way when bad shit goes down. And it will. And they will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather 

I'm sorry to go back to you again - well, not "sorry" but reluctant - but what kills me about you choosing THIS point in time to jump and start down this "everyone here is prejudging this man!" path is that it comes immediately in the wake of this self-aggrandising website that paints HIM as the victim. Like, this passive-aggressive sniping about the "CHUD groupthink" is nothing new for you - you've parlayed this hard done-by newbie angle into your schtick since you arrived here. But striking up a snarky one-line retort NOW? When this guy who, regardless of what happened, took a young life and should probably be showing a little humility about it, launches a "I'm the VICTIM! My life is RUINED! Give me money so that I can still eat!" plea? That just seems like you're thinking along the same lines, and that this guy's plight outweighs the dead teenager whose killing has yet to be justified.

I don't know what happened. Every two days a story pops up about how this or that was altered before being aired to the public, execs are being fired, first it's Zimmerman in the tape, then it's Martin, then it's neither. Then Zimmerman is free of injury, then he's not. Then they're using four-year-old photos and altering them to make the kid look younger, whiter and more innocent.

If anybody thinks they have a strong case, why is all this goofy Marx brothers bullshit happening on both sides? Zimmerman's a racist, no he's not, yes he is, no he's not, well, yes he is, but not in the way we thought, we presented it wrong and people jumped to conclusions but it turns out it was the right conclusion. Trayvon was trespassing, no he wasn't, yes he was, no he wasn't, Skittles, iced tea, he's a picture of him when he was 11.

It's a fucking hubbub circus of jackoffery, and out of that people come up with this wildly speculative idea that Zimmerman set out that day thinking "I'm gonna shoot me some niggers". 

Does it suck the kid's dead? Absolutely. Absolutely, with 100% certainty, that is a tragedy. 

Am I willing to lay all the blame on one dude just because the other one isn't in the equation anymore? Not at all. Zimmerman could be the biggest idiot in the world, and from the look of it, he's certainly vying for the title. HOWEVER, that doesn't mean his rights go out the window, or that he is automatically a cold-blooded murderer. I'm not a cop or a lawyer, and so far as I know, neither is anybody else here, and this sort of internet circle jerk is half the problem in a case like this. 

Yes, internet circle jerking is AT LEAST as much of the problem as the police letting the admitted perpetrator of a homicide go and allegedly manipulating witness statements.

Call me ignorant or judgmental if you must.  I am a lawyer, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the fact that when there is a recording of you explaining how you are stalking an unarmed person over the protests of emergency personnel just before you shoot them to death, you lose all benefit of the doubt from me.  The prosecution still has to prove its case, but you're pretty much a murderer in my book forever.  The good news is that anyone can avoid the extremely harsh punishment of my thinking you're shit in 2 easy steps.

1)  Do not stalk and shoot unarmed people

2) "Ceeeeeeel-UH-BRATE! GOOD TIMES!  COME ON!!!  DUH NUH NUH, NUH NAH NAH BUH DUH!"

As I have said, I don't know that Zimmerman is a murderer.  But there is something wrong with what he did, and you HAVE to blame him because the kid already paid the ultimate price... and we don't even know if he did anything wrong.  We do know that Zimmerman did something wrong, something that should be illegal; whether it is in Florida right now or not.  He should be in jail.  I don't care if Trayvon Martin punched the shit out of him.  If you're not an officer of the law, are carrying a gun, instigate a confrontation with an unarmed kid, and that kid winds up dead-- guess what?  You're to blame, and you need to do time.

It's easy to get caught up in and confused by all the contradictory information flying around the 24-hour news cycle, but here are a handful of incontrovertible facts:

1) Trayvon Martin was walking home from the store.

2) Against the advice of the police dispatcher and in violation of the rules of the neighborhood watch with which he claimed to be affiliated, George Zimmerman was armed and in pursuit of Martin after judging him to be "suspicious".

3) The last verified account (from Zimmerman's 911 call) indicates Martin was running away while Zimmerman pursued.

4) An altercation occurred.

5) George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

Everything else is either unsubstantiated or just rank speculation.

Based on those facts - which clearly indicate Zimmerman was the aggressor - I still don't understand why he has yet to be arrested. Logic dictates that if the police - or now the state's attorney - had solid evidence one way or the other, this thing wouldn't be getting dragged out.

And if they don't have solid evidence that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, why the fuck is he not in custody?

If Trayvon Martin turned around to confront the guy who'd been pursuing him, isn't that the literal definition of "standing your ground"? In this case, Florida's wacky cowboy law would have protected Martin's right to defend himself first before the altercation had escalated to the point where Zimmerman would have presumably been protected under the law.

Ultimately, what this comes down to is "equal protection under the (Stand Your Ground) law".

Quote:

Originally Posted by TCD 

And if they don't have solid evidence that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, why the fuck is he not in custody?

From what I understand of this extremely screwed-up law, once you claim you're standing your ground, they have to prove that it wasn't self-defense.  It's the equivalent of shouting "Parlay!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

If Trayvon Martin turned around to confront the guy who'd been pursuing him, isn't that the literal definition of "standing your ground"? In this case, Florida's wacky cowboy law would have protected Martin's right to defend himself first before the altercation had escalated to the point where Zimmerman would have presumably been protected under the law.

That's what I thought but since Florida is the new Wild West, whoever is left standing automatically wins.

The Florida court system

Florida justice

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

As I have said, I don't know that Zimmerman is a murderer.  But there is something wrong with what he did, and you HAVE to blame him because the kid already paid the ultimate price... and we don't even know if he did anything wrong.  We do know that Zimmerman did something wrong, something that should be illegal; whether it is in Florida right now or not.  He should be in jail.  I don't care if Trayvon Martin punched the shit out of him.  If you're not an officer of the law, are carrying a gun, instigate a confrontation with an unarmed kid, and that kid winds up dead-- guess what?  You're to blame, and you need to do time.

This is part of the problem too. It's your personal opinion that it should be illegal, but it's not. It's my personal opinion that abortion should be illegal, but it's not. That doesn't mean I can start levying punishments on women who have abortions because of my own personal view of what the law should be. 

Zimmerman had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. If your neighborhood has been on the receiving end of a swath of burglaries, would you think "I'm going to leave my concealed weapon at home while I go investigate this person I've never seen before who is staring at houses in the dark"? You can't judge intent. You also can't up the charges because of the way something turned out. People aren't crying for him to be tagged with "carrying a concealed weapon in violation of Neighborhood Watch policy while tailing someone". They're calling for MURDER, and that's a hell of a lot more serious, and carries a lot more potential penalties. 

What are you saying, exactly? That, assuming reports are correct, Zimmerman should have lay there and let Martin potentially do him serious physical harm, even kill him, because "he started it"? Or that they should ignore certain paragraphs of the law because someone ended up dead? People are simultaneously bitching that parts of the law were ignored, and then calling for other parts of the law to BE ignored. It's mindboggling. 

And now Zimmerman's lawyers have quit because they've "lost contact with him."  Apparently he hasn't returned their calls since Sunday.

It's screwed up. I hate that expressing any doubts whatsoever means you're ON ZIMMERMAN'S SIDE and you are a RACIST. I absolutely agree the entire thing was botched in terms of arrests and investigations. It just seems like it has been painted even uglier than it is because of clueless people who have to have something to fight for. I wasn't there. I don't know Zimmerman, or Martin, or the cops involved. I didn't see or hear or otherwise witness what they saw that day, or what led them to react the way they did. 

People watch too much Law & Order. Ice-T doesn't show up in his leather jacket, say "you're goin' down, kidkiller", and throw Zimmerman in the back of the squad car while he's at family dinner. There isn't a score that plays, there isn't a DUM-DUM sound effect when they nail the guy and close the case. There's protocol, there are laws in place, there are things that don't make the official statement and things that DO make the statement that shouldn't have. 

I just don't presume I'm informed enough to do the professionals' jobs for them when I'm sitting in an office chair 1,000 miles away from where this shit happened. There are alarming aspects to the case. I just think nailing them all to Zimmerman's forehead and shoving him out into the teeming masses is sensationalism. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

And now Zimmerman's lawyers have quit because they've "lost contact with him."  Apparently he hasn't returned their calls since Sunday.

Off to Midian!

 Zimmerman goes rogue.

This guy seems real level-headed. Definitely the kind of person you'd want creeping around your neighborhood at night with a gun, protecting you from "suspicious" people.

He's on the run looking for the one-armed man who really killed Trevon Martin. Duh!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

Zimmerman had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. If your neighborhood has been on the receiving end of a swath of burglaries, would you think "I'm going to leave my concealed weapon at home while I go investigate this person I've never seen before who is staring at houses in the dark"? You can't judge intent.

Yes, you can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris You also can't up the charges because of the way something turned out.

You absolutely can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris  People aren't crying for him to be tagged with "carrying a concealed weapon in violation of Neighborhood Watch policy while tailing someone". They're calling for MURDER, and that's a hell of a lot more serious, and carries a lot more potential penalties. 

People aren't crying for a gun charge because there was a homicide.  Not all homicides are murders, but then most of them don't come equipped with a recording of the killer initiating a confrontation with an unarmed stranger.  Also you seem to be arguing as if Zimmerman had been tried and acquitted of the crime.  The reasonable doubt standard only applies to convictions, not arrests, and it's the fact that there hasn't even been an arrest that has people so incensed.  And that's without getting into the thousands upon thousands of murder convictions have been obtained over the years with less evidence than the tape alone provides.

I honestly don't know what you're arguing for if not an absolute, Schrodinger-esque reading of "reasonable doubt".  You can't judge a crime based on intent, and you can't judge it on the outcome.  I'm not sure what you feel the level of proof should be for an arrest in a murder case, much less a conviction.  A confession?  Confessions are actually shockingly unreliable according to many, many studies.  And besides, Zimmerman has confessed to the act, just not the intent necessary to secure a murder conviction.  And since we don't expect people to volunteer for death row, the law allows intent to be proven through a variety of circumstantial evidence. 

Where's Katherine Harris when you need her, she would have wrapped this up in no time!

You know people get done for murder for running people over in cars, not even on purpose, right?  Shooting someone with a gun is even more cut and dried than that.

Oddly, it seems killing someone with a gun in effect grants you certain special privileges other murderous implements do not, the way the law has been arranged to protect them and people who own them.

ed.  I see Schwartz is on the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

 I wasn't there. I don't know Zimmerman, or Martin, or the cops involved. I didn't see or hear or otherwise witness what they saw that day, or what led them to react the way they did. 

 

Were you there when MLK Jr was assassinated? Or any other racially charged murder or assassination? If you were there, would that mean anything? You can conclude that most of those murders were racially charged, even if you weren't "there," right? Because things like facts and accounts and histories were recorded, and you have the luxury of listening to those accounts and facts and histories. Do you honestly believe that "being there" is the answer to any crime ever? That only if the police were "there" at the time of the incident, they wouldn't need to do an investigation?  Give me a fucking break.

Genius, the problem isn't that people weren't "there" at the time. The problem is that the people who were "there" after the shit went down did nothing. And if you think they did anything, or if you think that their response was adequate, or not racially motivated, you're not on Zimmerman's side, you're just flat out on the side against common fucking sense. 

Yes, NBC fucked up with editing their tape. But the truth is, the tapes I listened to weren't from NBC, but the internet. Non-edited. It still gives you the impression that the crime was, if not racially charged, certainly Zimmernan's fault. And the rest of the investigation certainly leads one to believe that in the very least, the Sanford police did not do their job. And it doesn't take a genius to see the evidence suggesting that the reason they didn't do their job had to do with assumptions made about Trayvon's race. If you have evidence of the contrary, lets hear it. And why does NBC have to apologize profusely when Twitchy ran that faked photograph of Trayvon, which Fox initially ran? I don't hear Fox being all "we're really sorry" about that shit!

Great, Schwartz, but where does self-defense factor in? Serious question. 

Is there a law that states self defense goes out the window if you verbally instigated an "altercation"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

 

Is there a law that states self defense goes out the window if you verbally instigated an "altercation"?

Verbally instigated an altercation while holding a gun while the other person is unarmed? Yeah, I think self defense goes out the fucking window at that point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

 

Do you honestly believe that "being there" is the answer to any crime ever? 

I think that "being there" probably presents you with a lot more clear cut evidence than "reading about it on the internet", yes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

 

Verbally instigated an altercation while holding a gun while the other person is unarmed? Yeah, I think self defense goes out the fucking window at that point.

How do you know he was holding a gun? Statement is that the gun came out when he was getting his bashed on the pavement. It was concealed. Were you there? No? Oh.

You "think" self-defense goes out the window? Oh.

The fact is that the man with the gun instigated the altercation, even after 911 told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. Even if he was defending himself after initiating contact, all that means is that a murder charge would conceivably be downgraded to manslaughter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

 

I think that "being there" probably presents you with a lot more clear cut evidence than "reading about it on the internet", yes.

You're an idiot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

 

This is part of the problem too. It's your personal opinion that it should be illegal, but it's not. It's my personal opinion that abortion should be illegal, but it's not. That doesn't mean I can start levying punishments on women who have abortions because of my own personal view of what the law should be. 

 

Zimmerman had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. If your neighborhood has been on the receiving end of a swath of burglaries, would you think "I'm going to leave my concealed weapon at home while I go investigate this person I've never seen before who is staring at houses in the dark"? You can't judge intent. You also can't up the charges because of the way something turned out. People aren't crying for him to be tagged with "carrying a concealed weapon in violation of Neighborhood Watch policy while tailing someone". They're calling for MURDER, and that's a hell of a lot more serious, and carries a lot more potential penalties. 

 

What are you saying, exactly? That, assuming reports are correct, Zimmerman should have lay there and let Martin potentially do him serious physical harm, even kill him, because "he started it"? Or that they should ignore certain paragraphs of the law because someone ended up dead? People are simultaneously bitching that parts of the law were ignored, and then calling for other parts of the law to BE ignored. It's mindboggling. 

First off, you are the one coming in here saying nobody knows what happened.  So how can you be so sure what Zimmerman did wasn't illegal?

Second, it's not my personal opinion that Zimmerman had no legal authority to detain or question Martin.  That he had no authority to accost him with a loaded weapon in his possession.  To imagine that the armed instigator bears no responsibility is laughable.  What responsibility Martin had in the eventual outcome, as I have said repeatedly, he has already more than paid his due.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

Great, Schwartz, but where does self-defense factor in? Serious question. 

 

Is there a law that states self defense goes out the window if you verbally instigated an "altercation"?

Generally, yes (and it takes considerable restraint for me not to post the dictionary definitions of "instigate" and "defense" here). In Florida post-Stand Your Ground, apparently not, and this case is illustrating just how ludicrous that standard is, as it essentially declares the winner of a fight immune to prosecution as long as he kills the other guy.

What constitutes "instigating" a fight without throwing the first blow is a very thorny issue, but it's one for a trial court.  But they can't judge it without an arrest being made, and in this case has probable cause* wildly spurting from every pore.

*a vastly looser standard than reasonable doubt

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

People aren't crying for a gun charge because there was a homicide.  Not all homicides are murders, but then most of them don't come equipped with a recording of the killer initiating a confrontation with an unarmed stranger.  Also you seem to be arguing as if Zimmerman had been tried and acquitted of the crime.  The reasonable doubt standard only applies to convictions, not arrests, and it's the fact that there hasn't even been an arrest that has people so incensed.  And that's without getting into the thousands upon thousands of murder convictions have been obtained over the years with less evidence than the tape alone provides.

 

I honestly don't know what you're arguing for if not an absolute, Schrodinger-esque reading of "reasonable doubt".  You can't judge a crime based on intent, and you can't judge it on the outcome.  I'm not sure what you feel the level of proof should be for an arrest in a murder case, much less a conviction.  A confession?  Confessions are actually shockingly unreliable according to many, many studies.  And besides, Zimmerman has confessed to the act, just not the intent necessary to secure a murder conviction.  And since we don't expect people to volunteer for death row, the law allows intent to be proven through a variety of circumstantial evidence. 

 

No, I understand that. And I appreciate that you are this informative and well-spoken. 

As for what I'm arguing, it isn't even so much "reasonable doubt" as it is that people like to jump on a bandwagon and ride it until the horses die and the wheels fall off. I've been following the case since it opened (thought admittedly with a layman's understanding of the law, which has been improved - if not wholly, at least somewhat - by the research I've done), and have seen details on both sides of the case, on pretty much every possible level, that have disgusted me. It is a fucking whirlwind of messed-up laws, unclear evidence and general incompetence of the people who arrived on scene and handled the situation, from what I can tell. A really unfortunate clusterfuck of circumstance that has a lot of people (who have a much clearer understanding of the law and make a lot more money than me) scratching their heads. 

I understand what you are saying. I understand that an arrest should have been made, and that was essentially completely botched by the police department. I guess all that I am really trying to say is that the commentary from the peanut gallery is inconsequential at best. FUCKING CUT HIS HEAD OFF, STRING HIM UP AND GUT HIM, etc. The general point of view I seem to be getting from people is that it would be pure justice to just walk right in there and either clap this guy in prison for life or kill him outright, and I'm glad those people aren't the ones in charge.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

You're an idiot.

Hey thanks, your opinion is noted and disregarded. 

Two of Zimmerman's lawyers have called it quits.  They haven't heard from him in days.

Of course it also bears mentioning that speaking up with anything other than a rar rar, me-too circlejerk response on this site earns you the "idiot" badge, so this whole thing is really pointless.

You're right, though, you're all experts who are FAR more qualified than the paid professionals who arrived on-scene, and every one of your armchair quarterback low-slung opinions should be treated as fact. I'm done here. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

Of course it also bears mentioning that speaking up with anything other than a rar rar, me-too circlejerk response on this site earns you the "idiot" badge, so this whole thing is really pointless.

 

You're right, though, you're all experts who are FAR more qualified than the paid professionals who arrived on-scene, and every one of your armchair quarterback low-slung opinions should be treated as fact. I'm done here. 

I'm not an expert and never claimed to be. What we're trying to convey to you is that it doesn't take an expert to understand that the "experts" didn't do their jobs. You seem to think, however, that if you were at the scene you'd know exactly what happened. What you're not realizing is that investigations into the truth come from more than our limited senses. They come from information; multiple sources of information, specifically. I know you'd like to think that all it would take is to "see" and "hear" what happened, and that would certainly give you perspective. But my point is that even if the cops were there, witnessing everything, they should still do their diligence and try to find out what actually happened, and use other sources of information to check that determination. And THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. That's a fucking fact. They weren't there, and they didn't do any of that. What about this don't you understand? They did less then the minimum requirement of investigation. They didn't even do the typical procedure. 

Of course, I wasn't THERE to NOT see them NOT do the typical procedure. I only read about it on the Internet. So, who the fuck knows?

No. That's stupid, and if that's truly your argument, so are you. Go live a happy life as an ignorant fool. 

To be totally clear, if you were there and had an account of what happened, your account of what happened would indeed have weight. But the investigators also need to be weighed next to the other accounts to ensure that lined up with each other. Which is why you being there means absolute shit to me, and why the information coming from the case does. Because there is a ton of information that is available to analyze. And because I don't need to be a cop or a lawyer to know when something is right or wrong. And this was very clearly wrong. 

You should also consider that this is a "rar-rar circle jerk" for a reason. We're not padding ourselves on the back. We're angry about this. We're informed about this because we're angry. And the more we're informed the angrier we get. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

Of course it also bears mentioning that speaking up with anything other than a rar rar, me-too circlejerk response on this site earns you the "idiot" badge, so this whole thing is really pointless.

 

You're right, though, you're all experts who are FAR more qualified than the paid professionals who arrived on-scene, and every one of your armchair quarterback low-slung opinions should be treated as fact. I'm done here. 

I look forward to such a dispassionate, moderate approach to all matters in future and not just in cases where a knee-jerk contrarianism by the right-wing press seems to have appeared.
 

I don't know where you frequent, but the general point of view I get from people is "Justice for Trayvon", which means arresting and charging Zimmerman and giving him his day in court. If he is so innocent, he should have no problem providing real justification for what he did and not just claim "self-defense". I also find it funny that the people who defend Zimmerman claim that he should be considered innocent until proven guilty. Yet, that is exactly what Zimmerman did not do for Trayvon. Zimmerman saw a kid he didn't recognize, declared him "suspicious" enough to call the police, and assumed to kid "guilty" of trespassing. The price Martin paid was his life. Justice means that Zimmerman needs to face his peers and explain what happened. Until the full story comes out in court, there is not only no justice for Trayvon, but there is no justice for every citizen of this country who believes they are protected under our laws.

ETA: Holy typos. Edited for clarity.

Quote:

 

Originally Posted by Hybris 

It's screwed up. I hate that expressing any doubts whatsoever means you're ON ZIMMERMAN'S SIDE and you are a RACIST. 

This really bothers me. Has any one here called you racist? No. Idiot, yes, a few times, but no one's called you racist. You can have doubts about this case without being a racist, though your glasses would have to be rose-colored to the point of opacity to not at least recognize the racial angle of this.

People that have nothing better to offer paint themselves as a victim. You did that before an argument even started. Kudos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

I'm done here. 

Smartest thing this guy has typed all day.

Hybris what you essentially inferred was that in order to have an opinion about the case, or any case, that you have to "be there", and witness it.  Which is an idiotic thing to say.  

Anyway, Zimmerman can't be considered a fugitive since he isn't currently being arrested or questioned, unless I'm mistaken.  Sounds like he's panicking.  

I'm not a lawyer, but there's one in the cubicle next to me, he smells like pickled athlete's foot, and when the office gets warm, the smell is overpowering...

...I'm sorry, I forgot what I was going to say. Oh yes, on Zimmerman's lawyers quitting:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-press-conference-20120410,0,4146078.story

Th' hell does that mean?

The issue of race aside, this case pretty clearly demonstrates the fundamentally obstructive design of the "Stand your ground" law.

That Zimmerman is crazy.

Not to add to the beatdown here, but this requires you to actively trust the police.

I do not trust the police as a rule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega 

Not to add to the beatdown here, but this requires you to actively trust the police.

 

 

I do not trust the police as a rule.

and on that note....

I just saw this earlier today. There are some interesting links to more info within the article.

7 Rules for Recording Police

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega 

 

Not to add to the beatdown here, but this requires you to actively trust the police.

 

 

I do not trust the police as a rule.

And yet if I said something like this, I'd be crucified for posting something general, or something that didn't directly relate to the case at hand, because that's what people do here. Everyone that posts about this posts as if they, specifically, are personally qualified to handle the entirety of the case, and any dissenting opinion is met with scorn and mockery. My opinion isn't even ENTIRELY dissenting, it's just that I'm willing to admit there are things I DON'T KNOW about the case, and that I think people getting so up-in-arms about something based on what they're spoon fed by selective media is silly. 

I thought it was fairly clear that my initial posts were about the way the case is being handled on a NATIONAL BASIS, i.e. the "We'll pay money for Zimmerman's head" thing (which went by the wayside, as far as I know.. weird, nobody is upset about that), the "JUSTICE FOR TRAYVON" rallies, and the amount of "U R RACIST" comments that get posted on any blog or article that is not completely and unapologetically PRO-TRAYVON... and not specifically about the posters in this particular thread. 

Everyone is very keen to point out that I have a victim complex, though, so I guess that means it must be true. Everybody else must like to be immediately shut down and called an idiot for daring to post something that is the least bit different from the mob mentality of the thread at hand. 

Anyway, I said I was done. I should be done. I just think it's passive-aggressive and shitty that people continue to take shots at you after you try to walk away from something like this. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hybris 

And yet if I said something like this, I'd be crucified for posting something general, or something that didn't directly relate to the case at hand, because that's what people do here. Everyone that posts about this posts as if they, specifically, are personally qualified to handle the entirety of the case, and any dissenting opinion is met with scorn and mockery. My opinion isn't even ENTIRELY dissenting, it's just that I'm willing to admit there are things I DON'T KNOW about the case, and that I think people getting so up-in-arms about something based on what they're spoon fed by selective media is silly. 

 

I thought it was fairly clear that my initial posts were about the way the case is being handled on a NATIONAL BASIS, i.e. the "We'll pay money for Zimmerman's head" thing (which went by the wayside, as far as I know.. weird, nobody is upset about that), the "JUSTICE FOR TRAYVON" rallies, and the amount of "U R RACIST" comments that get posted on any blog or article that is not completely and unapologetically PRO-TRAYVON... and not specifically about the posters in this particular thread. 

 

Everyone is very keen to point out that I have a victim complex, though, so I guess that means it must be true. Everybody else must like to be immediately shut down and called an idiot for daring to post something that is the least bit different from the mob mentality of the thread at hand. 

 

Anyway, I said I was done. I should be done. I just think it's passive-aggressive and shitty that people continue to take shots at you after you try to walk away from something like this. 

We don't want the man's head, we want the man arrested. The "bounty" was not for his murder, but for a citizen's arrest. It was spectacularly ill-advised, but it was for the man's arrest. Arrest him and let the courts interpret Stand Your Ground.

The same as with people on the right saying that those that voted for him worship Obama as the messiah, there is a lot more of people decrying that they are being accused of racism than there are actual accusations of racism.

Just because you say you're leaving doesn't mean you're entitled to the last word. You toss around strong language, expect some to be tossed back at you.

p.s. I should hope everyone is pro-Trayvon. He got shot because he wanted some skittles and Ice Tea. Believe it or not, he's a bigger victim in this than you or Zimmerman.

You have GOT to stop trying to paint yourself as some victim here, Hybris.  I know you're not him, but you're starting to sound a bit like CreepyThinMan (what with all the criticisms of groupthink/hivemind, which is to be expected in a community brought together by similar interests).  If you're going to go against the grain a bit and don't want to deal with the aggressive pushback, you're going to have to change up your approach a bit.  There was a good way to bring up your qualms with the 'calls for Zimmerman's head.'  A snarky-sounding quip about how nobody was there didn't do you any favors.  Nor did your previous stance in a past thread.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

We don't want the man's head, we want the man arrested. The "bounty" was not for his murder, but for a citizen's arrest. It was spectacularly ill-advised, but it was for the man's arrest. Arrest him and let the courts interpret Stand Your Ground.

 

The same as with people on the right saying that those that voted for him worship Obama as the messiah, there is a lot more of people decrying that they are being accused of racism than there are actual accusations of racism.

 

Just because you say you're leaving doesn't mean you're entitled to the last word. You toss around strong language, expect some to be tossed back at you.

 

p.s. I should hope everyone is pro-Trayvon. He got shot because he wanted some skittles and Ice Tea. Believe it or not, he's a bigger victim in this than you or Zimmerman.

"Dead or alive" doesn't sound like a citizen's arrest to me. It sounds like exactly what it is: advocating judgement and death for death. People call me an idiot, and then pretend they can't see the implications of this. Addresses were tweeted. Hell, they weren't even the RIGHT addresses. People at these homes are living in fear for their lives, have been forced to move, etc. Tell me how that is all justified because one guy got killed, and another got away with something. This whole thing is out of hand. 

The Obama thing is unrelated, as is my imagined political affiliation. But I have (personally) been accused of being a racist over this case by a handful of (African-American) people that I associate with. Thankfully, I was able to explain my point of view in the case, which is that blowing it up into a RACE WAR and causing more senseless violence (which, as stated, is already happening) is completely pointless, even counter-productive. People are working on the case. Evidence is surfacing, resurfacing, being removed from the table. Things are developing. Trying to FORCE things to develop (thus causing other, unseen things to develop) does nothing but slow this down or turn it in another direction.

Everybody on the internet words things strongly. It's easy to be self-assured behind a keyboard. HOWEVER, it seems pithy and shitty to judge me and my intelligence based on my posts (hell, based on some things I didn't even SAY, but are just assumed) just because I don't agree with you.