In Sanford, Florida, murder is not a crime as long as the victim is African American - Page 16

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackyShimSham 

I'm so fucking hammered right now I want to stick up for Hyrbis. Seriously. I think he got a raw deal. I think we fuckers were acting hysterical in dismissing his valid criticisms. None of us were there. His original point does still stand. JUst saying. I mean, regardless of how angry you are, you see that's still the truth, right?   

I've been thinking about this and, while I still disagree with Hybris, his view, and how he handled the situation, I do feel bad about how it all went down and for my part in it.  It was just the perfect storm of shit that allowed it to happen.  Still, Hybris, I'm sorry.  It got way out of hand and after thinking about it, I too jumped to conclusions.  I apologize.

EDIT:  Aw, crud, top of the page.  Heh, well, can't be helped.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

This thread has been an amazing read over the past 3 pages.  I really want to input my own moments of conflict when it comes to my race, assimilation, empathy with other minorities... but I find it kinda intimidating at the moment. 

Instead, I'll toss in something I heard about on NPR today and desperately want to see.  A documentary co-directed by Bill Duke!

 

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/05/148921156/many-colors-of-prejudice-are-revealed-in-dark-girls

More so then racism, people are absolutely bewildered by "colorism."  I remember talking to a friend about this, and he could not understand how people can hate others of their own race because of the complexity of their skin.  Look at the media:   In television, music videos, and film, it's girls with a lighter complexion that are considered beautiful. It's funny how there are those who try to play the victim card in this whole Treyvon Martin case, claiming that whites are the victims of "reverse-racism," when "being white" is the still the standard equated with being successful.  And the lighter your skin is, the closer you are to being "white." 

Hell, the more you act white in general, the more society will accept you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake 

On behalf of all white people, fuck white people. Sorry, nonwhite people. We're terrible, but some of us actually give a shit enough to try and fix that. Work with us.

Fuck you Jake. I'm NOT white and you can stick your apology right back in your sniveling pie-whole. You don't represent white people any more than Sharpton represents all black folk. I can take care of my own shit so keep whatever white guilt induced pussy apology you have to yourself ok?  Have a nice day citizen

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rain Dog 

Look I completely agree - except at the end of the day there are always going to be selfish simple assholes - if you rationalise away their racism, they'll simply be selfish simple assholes to people based on some other arbitrary criteria.

I agree with you. I'm not trying to rationalize away racism. But I think the interventions for reducing racism have to be different for someone who is deliberately and thoughtfully being racist  and for people who don't know that they are being racist, but are because of their privileged position. I mean, the mere title of Elliot's experiments, "How racist are you?," is problematic. If she is trying to get at power dynamics, labeling people who do discriminatory acts as racists puts them on the defensive and doesn't allow for a real conversation about power. I'm a huge fan of this video, "How to tell people they sound racist." People are not going to hear what you have to say if you accuse them of *being* racist. Rather one should fashion the conversation around what they are *doing* is racist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parker 

Nobody disagrees with that, but that's also part of the point of the training or experiment or whatever. If you only deal with this for two hours, imagine having to deal with it routinely. If at the end of the day, those two hours forces someone to think about the world differently, then it's better than not having the experience at all, no?

I'd be interested in seeing a 5- or 10-year followup with participants. I'm betting few of the blue-eyed people have changed their tune. There is a bunch of research on interventions that show their effects fade over time mainly because without the lessons being reinforced and supported by others in their community, the lessons get lost. My friend works with a peer summer camp in which kids do all sorts of prejudice reduction exercises, etc. Kids who would never have sat in the same room are playing together and being friends. But follow-up interviews suggest that when they go back to school and hang with their friends or parents, who often have differing opinions, they don't have the support to maintain those changed attitudes.

And I already mentioned that Elliot was fighting the good fight. Her intentions are great and if people get something out of these exercises, then it is worthwhile. My point for conversation is, if we are going to bring people together to work on a common social problem, having one group of people assault and harass another group of people is not the ideal way to do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muzman 

They're interesting those things.  I always think that I can 'beat' them by virtue of being a gamer though. It'd be interesting to see how other people do.

My students never believe the results. They take the same test again and again because they think if they know what they are supposed to do, they can beat it. Unfortunately, our instincts get the better of us under time constraints.

Here's one thing for sure: most of this thread (especially the last few pages)  has been a great and mature discussion of race, and that doesn't happen enough in this country. Cheers, folks. Yet another reason why this message board is wonderful. 

Yeah, I was thinking the same. For the most part in this thread, having dissenting opinions didn't disintegrate the conversation into name calling. That's a pretty great accomplishment.

Does that mean we can finally commence with some sweaty monkey-time...cuz I'm ready.

Oh, shit! The People 'round Matin's mom should NOT have let her speak in public...she said thinks it's an accident. She's grieving for shit's sake! I can see Zimmerman getting off on 2nd degree murdernow b/c of the mom's comments now. Og, shit....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diva 

My students never believe the results. They take the same test again and again because they think if they know what they are supposed to do, they can beat it. Unfortunately, our instincts get the better of us under time constraints.

Yeah, I'm not up with the literature or anything.  I have this vague memory of some other research I heard about a little while ago that was on automatic preference for all sorts of different little things.  It was illustrating pretty well how these preferences were post hoc rationalised and really sunk in to people, affecting their decisions in ways that could theoretically alter their outlook on the world.  People would swear blind they had control over these decisions and their choice would depend on this or that and changed all the time, or even that they always made the opposite choices to the ones the experiment showed.  I forget the details. I imagine these race preference tests tie in nicely with that sort of look at cognition though.

What sort of results do the students get?  Are 'errors' fairly common?  I've taken the race one twice now, several years apart, and got pretty much the same result:  Slight preference for African American, only one or two mistakes.  I didn't spot a detailed speed breakdown if it was there.  This does seem a bit out of whack to me.  I doubt I'm better than neutral, if that (of course, this test isn't supposed to give detailed insights into my feelings or anything.  Just squeeze a bit and see if anything automatic pops out).  I still can't help thinking I'm too good at it though.  I know exactly what it's doing and am quicker than most in adjusting (which isn't especially quick, just "trained" in that area where others might not be).  I don't know though. It might be interesting if they tracked that variable in participants all the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Writhing Walt 

Oh, shit! The People 'round Matin's mom should NOT have let her speak in public...she said thinks it's an accident. She's grieving for shit's sake! I can see Zimmerman getting off on 2nd degree murdernow b/c of the mom's comments now. Og, shit....

What legal weight do you think Trayvon's mom's opinion has in a court of law?

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdBighead 

Fuck you Jake. I'm NOT white and you can stick your apology right back in your sniveling pie-whole. You don't represent white people any more than Sharpton represents all black folk. I can take care of my own shit so keep whatever white guilt induced pussy apology you have to yourself ok?  Have a nice day citizen

 

Okay?

I make some interesting choices when I drink. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake 

Okay?

sorry man. just cranky.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat?

Trayvon's mom is not a witness to the event. She may be called to talk about Trayvon to drum up sympathy, though I am 100% certain that would be objected to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Writhing Walt 

Oh, shit! The People 'round Matin's mom should NOT have let her speak in public...she said thinks it's an accident. She's grieving for shit's sake! I can see Zimmerman getting off on 2nd degree murdernow b/c of the mom's comments now. Og, shit....

 

She made that statement back in February before much of the information now known was released. She has since changed her stance. Personally, I do think it was accident. I don't think Zimmerman set out to kill Trayvon from the get-go. I do think Zimmerman racial profiled him and wanted to detain Trayvon until cops could arrive. Unfortunately, when Zimmerman confronted Trayvon they engaged in a scuffle and that's when Zimmerman decided to use his gun. Again, I think it's tough to say whether Zimmerman meant to kill Trayvon. Personally, I've always felt he should be charged with manslaughter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Dickson 

I wonder if the trial will end up here in Orlando.  If so, it'll make the Casey Anthony trial look like a misdemeanor parking offense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diva 

Zimmerman is in custody. That is the greatest news I've heard in awhile. I'm guessing the prosecutor is going for 2nd degree murder so that the jury will eventually render a manslaughter verdict. Aim high, but settle for a lesser charge. Which with manslaughter, it is still pretty much a "win" for the Martin side.

I thought that the Casey Anthony case proved that if the prosecutors aim high, and the jury doesn't agree, the defendant gets an acquittal. Not a lesser charge for the same crime. I'm no lawyer, but this sounds delicate to me. And I agree with you Diva on your earlier post. I don't envy Corey here. But I thought she gave good press conference Wed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diva 

She made that statement back in February before much of the information now known was released. She has since changed her stance. Personally, I do think it was accident. I don't think Zimmerman set out to kill Trayvon from the get-go. I do think Zimmerman racial profiled him and wanted to detain Trayvon until cops could arrive. Unfortunately, when Zimmerman confronted Trayvon they engaged in a scuffle and that's when Zimmerman decided to use his gun. Again, I think it's tough to say whether Zimmerman meant to kill Trayvon. Personally, I've always felt he should be charged with manslaughter.

 

They charged him with 2nd degree murder because they know it will probably get reduced to manslaughter.  Always aim higher.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DARKMITE8 

Quote:

 

I thought that the Casey Anthony case proved that if the prosecutors aim high, and the jury doesn't agree, the defendant gets an acquittal. Not a lesser charge for the same crime.

I'm not versed in Florida's criminal code, but manslaughter most likely qualifies as a lesser included offense to 1st/2nd degree murder.  Meaning that the prosecution has to prove X for a manslaughter conviction, X + Y for a 2nd degree and X + Y + Z for 1st degree.  The judge should be able to instruct the jury that a manslaughter conviction is appropriate even if they don't believe the prosecution adequately proved Y. 

It's still a risk to overcharge, because juries are human beings and if they feel the prosecution is overreaching with Y, the loss of credibility will spill over into X.

Trayvon Martin's mother's statement/opinion viv-a-viv believing it to be an accident is really moot. However, the police brutality video of Rodney King didn't convinvce a jury of the LAPD's [i]actual[/i] quilt.

You CANNOT underestimate the stupidy and or reluctance of a jury to come to the rightful conclusion based on evidence alone. And Martin's mom's statement will be played over and over. It will affect a jury. Especially in FL (they GAVE the election to Bush in 2000, and also let Casey Anthony go).

I agree the best way to get a conviction was to charge Zimmerman w/ 1st degree manslaughter, but that didn't happen. And now I won't be surprised he's let off.

Shit, when he's free...he should hook up Casey Anthony. Then maybe they'll get a reality show for the masses...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

I'm not versed in Florida's criminal code, but manslaughter most likely qualifies as a lesser included offense to 1st/2nd degree murder.  Meaning that the prosecution has to prove X for a manslaughter conviction, X + Y for a 2nd degree and X + Y + Z for 1st degree.  The judge should be able to instruct the jury that a manslaughter conviction is appropriate even if they don't believe the prosecution adequately proved Y. 

 

It's still a risk to overcharge, because juries are human beings and if they feel the prosecution is overreaching with Y, the loss of credibility will spill over into X.

 

Hmmm. I guess that's what happened in the Anthony case. Was she charged with Murder AND Manslaughter? Or does the jury determine the outcomes of the lesser degree if one could apply? She was acquitted of both.

Not to get morbid, but don't you think it makes a difference where the victim was shot? I have never heard this information. If the victim was shot in the torso it adds credibility to the argument that the gun discharged during a scuffle. If he was shot point blank in the head, it's a bit harder for Zimmerman to claim he wasn't trying to kill him. 

So Sanford residents who call 911 have been asking for Seminole County sheriffs to be sent rather than Sanford police.

For what it's worth, Zimmerman's defense at tourney--the new guy, not the clowns that were all over TV for the last month--has already discounted the idea of using Travon's mom's words against her. 

"She's a grieving mom."

At least this guy seems to know what he's doing, as opposed to the two guys who never actually met Zimmerman but were "representing" him. Both sides deserve the best legal representation, so neither side can claim malfeasance afterwards. The OJ trial will forever be marred by what many consider terrible prosecution.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackyShimSham 

Not to get morbid, but don't you think it makes a difference where the victim was shot? I have never heard this information. If the victim was shot in the torso it adds credibility to the argument that the gun discharged during a scuffle. If he was shot point blank in the head, it's a bit harder for Zimmerman to claim he wasn't trying to kill him. 

The consensus seems to be that he was shot once in the chest at close range.

 Yesterday I needed something to read while I ate, and the only thing was The Pittsburgh Tribune Review, its a Richard Mellon Scaife paper. The editorial cartoon was Mallard Fillmore saying is it double jeopardy if a case has already been tried in the media? If this wasn't a big media story, somebody who shot an armed 17 year would still be a free man. The right should just let this one go. Go back to bitching about teleprompters.

Mallard Filmore is like Doonesbury, if Doonesburt was a) unfailingly, unflinchingly ultra-conservative and b) completely devoid of humor and insight.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/16/florida-fire-captain-trayvon-died-because-of-shtbag-welfare-dependent-parents/#.T4x98GANUL4.facebook

Like I said before, this case is like a Rorschach test, and people are outing themselves as despicable human beings left and right.  This guy might very well have kids and if he does, is instilling the same racist, bullshit bigoted attitudes in his spawn, either directly or indirectly.  I wonder how many black co-workers he has.

Anyway, this is a tough call because on the one hand, there is free speech, on the other, he is a public servant and his attitude toward the public should be taken into account since it most certainly would have some kind of impact on his performance.  If he feels such loathing for blacks, what happens if/when he is called to a black neighborhood where an apartment block is on fire?  They're just a bunch of shitbag, welfare dependents, so why hurry or put much effort into rescue? 

It's like the Obama/secret service scandal.  If your job is to protect the highest profile individual in the world, who is always under possible grave danger, should you be out drinking and banging hookers while on a protective assignment in another country?  Bang all the hookers you want, just don't be a secret service agent.  You sign up for a higher level of responsibility...if you're not up for that, then turn in your fucking badge.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diva 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/16/florida-fire-captain-trayvon-died-because-of-shtbag-welfare-dependent-parents/#.T4x98GANUL4.facebook

 

A Miami-Dade fire captain is under investigation after he asserted that the death of an unarmed Florida teen was the fault of “failed, shitbag, ignorant, pathetic, welfare dependent excuses for parents.”

 

of note, from the rawstory link

I'd like to imagine that Beckmann thinks that "Rick Perry is a 'cool dude' " and Sarah Palin is  "smart AND a really hot piece of tail" 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diva 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/16/florida-fire-captain-trayvon-died-because-of-shtbag-welfare-dependent-parents/#.T4x98GANUL4.facebook

 

 

 

Yep. I guess because I walk around in a hoodie and baggie clothes, it's because my parents failed me and are totally on welfare.  So white people, if you see me coming your way, feel free to shoot me without provocation--I probably had it coming anyways.

It's 2012.  I'm pretty sure it's legal in all 50 states and Puerto Rico to shoot anyone who publicly reps ska on sight.

The fire marshal thing is a tricky issue.  Any citizen, even public officials, should be free to express their private views however they want, but you have to be really uncomfortable with a guy expressing such vitriol toward the people for whom he is required to be willing to risk his life as a matter of course.  You can't really mandate optimism and general philanthropy as a requirement for all government job, but how well can a public servant be expected to do his job if he despises the public?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

It's 2012.  I'm pretty sure it's legal in all 50 states and Puerto Rico to shoot anyone who publicly reps ska on sight.

 

The fire marshal thing is a tricky issue.  Any citizen, even public officials, should be free to express their private views however they want, but you have to be really uncomfortable with a guy expressing such vitriol toward the people for whom he is required to be willing to risk his life as a matter of course.  You can't really mandate optimism and general philanthropy as a requirement for all government job, but how well can a public servant be expected to do his job if he despises the public?

You know me, skanking in the early hours of the morning with my hood up.

But seriously, that is a rather disturbing though.  Though it's insane how many people miss the fucking point as to why people are publicly outrage by this case.  It doesn't matter if Martin's parents were in fact "ignorant shitbags," he didn't deserve to die that night.  Sadly, there seems to be way too many people who think otherwise.

"Any citizen, even public officials, should be free to express their private views however they want"

But that doesn't mean he's free from criticism.  If you can't handle what other people might think of you, keep your hateful comments to yourself.

Re: the fire chief

An outright dismissal because of a private opinion steps over the privacy line. Everyone has a right to their private opinion, even if it's wrong. The fair & sensible thing to do is to give him an automatic 2 strike warning, placing him on an indefinite probation. If his private thoughts interferes compromises how he responds to emergency situations, that would earn him an immediate dismissal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

Re: the fire chief

 

An outright dismissal because of a private opinion steps over the privacy line. Everyone has a right to their private opinion, even if it's wrong. The fair & sensible thing to do is to give him an automatic 2 strike warning, placing him on an indefinite probation. If his private thoughts interferes compromises how he responds to emergency situations, that would earn him an immediate dismissal.

While I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, one could argue that once you put your thoughts on facebook, it's no longer considered to be "private."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

Re: the fire chief

 

An outright dismissal because of a private opinion steps over the privacy line. Everyone has a right to their private opinion, even if it's wrong. The fair & sensible thing to do is to give him an automatic 2 strike warning, placing him on an indefinite probation. If his private thoughts interferes compromises how he responds to emergency situations, that would earn him an immediate dismissal.

It's not a private opinion once one publicizes it.

There are many, many ways to fire this man which do not touch first amendment issues. As fire chief, the man can be considered a spokesperson for the fire department, by extension the city.

One street over from me there was a fatal shooting this weekend.  My daughter knew all the people involved on some level, although she is younger than all of them.  Two guys were shot, one of them died.  The one who died is still a teenager; the shooter is 18.  They're all white.

The dialogue about this in town and on the local news websites has been fairly typical.  Calling it a tragedy, saying they'd pray for the families, wondering if the murderer's parents or teachers could have done more to teach him, etc...

But as I have been listening and reading, I noticed something.  There was a similar shooting a couple years ago in town.  The only differences- the victim was an older woman, and all the people involved were black.  Back then, many of the people commenting used words like "thug", "animal", "gangster", and "monster."  Not surprising in and of itself, but I have yet to hear the white murderer called any of those words.  Not saying it hasn't happened, obviously this is purely anecdotal, but it's striking the difference in tone.  When the shooters were black, it was much more aggressive and angry.  When the shooter is white, it's more "what is wrong with our community?"

Anyway, it's depressing.

As an aside to that fire chief's raging douchebaggery, I love this meme that's been popping up after Corey's press conference:

There seems to be some degree of outrage that Corey didn't offer a sober, impartial recount of the events that in no way casts a negative light on George Zimmerman. This outrage, of course, overlooks the fact that Corey is the fucking prosecuting attorney who almost definitely thinks Zimmerman is guilty of the crime with which she's charging him. 

And a question for Fire Chief Fuckwit: How exactly does one "pre-pass" judgment?

But his private facebook page is (presumably, I don't know what the Miami-Dade FD's actual rules about this are) not part of his official "spokesman for the Dept" role.  It's like saying that it's not longer a private opinion once you say it in front of people at a party.  You've made it "public" in the colloquial sense, but it's still "private" in that you aren't putting the official authority/approval of an institution behind it.

There's a reason it's so hard to fire people from government jobs.  It's because while no one is free from criticism for their opinions, when it's the government punishing you* for something you said, it becomes a Constitutional issue.  When it's a private company or individual attacking you for your speech, they're exercising their own equal right to free speech, but the government isn't supposed to be making judgments on what opinions are and are not acceptable to hold.  There are reams of exceptions to that principle, obviously, but each one gets a little closer to the point where the government  suppresses a type of expression you or I actually care about.

This post brought to you by the letters A, C, L, and U.

*And it's a well-established legal precedent that while employment is not a fundamental right a la speech or assembly, firing counts as a punishment

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

Re: the fire chief

 

An outright dismissal because of a private opinion steps over the privacy line. 

Yeah but he made his private views public, as anybody can read them on facebook (as facebook owns everything you do on that site and it becomes public domain).  And I'm sorry, being a fireman and especially a fire chief comes with a very high level of responsibility, your fucking job is to serve the public, not just in action and deed, but in dialogue.  And oldie but goodie which is fitting: If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.  I really don't care what the guy says, but if his job depends on his opinion of the public, there's something wrong there and it needs to be dealt with.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bailey 

One street over from me there was a fatal shooting this weekend.  My daughter knew all the people involved on some level, although she is younger than all of them.  Two guys were shot, one of them died.  The one who died is still a teenager; the shooter is 18.  They're all white.

 

The dialogue about this in town and on the local news websites has been fairly typical.  Calling it a tragedy, saying they'd pray for the families, wondering if the murderer's parents or teachers could have done more to teach him, etc...

 

But as I have been listening and reading, I noticed something.  There was a similar shooting a couple years ago in town.  The only differences- the victim was an older woman, and all the people involved were black.  Back then, many of the people commenting used words like "thug", "animal", "gangster", and "monster."  Not surprising in and of itself, but I have yet to hear the white murderer called any of those words.  Not saying it hasn't happened, obviously this is purely anecdotal, but it's striking the difference in tone.  When the shooters were black, it was much more aggressive and angry.  When the shooter is white, it's more "what is wrong with our community?"

 

Anyway, it's depressing.

Yeah, it's amazing how the temperature changes depending on the color of the perpetrator's (or even the victim's) skin color.  If blacks are involved, the word "monster", "animal", "savage", "ape", etc. are bandied about...words fit for a serial killing psychopath are routinely used for petty black criminals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

But his private facebook page is (presumably, I don't know what the Miami-Dade FD's actual rules about this are) not part of his official "spokesman for the Dept" role.  It's like saying that it's not longer a private opinion once you say it in front of people at a party.  You've made it "public" in the colloquial sense, but it's still "private" in that you aren't putting the official authority/approval of an institution behind it.

When you are a representative of an entity, you are always a representative of that entity. Facebook is not a private correspondence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI 

 

When you are a representative of an entity, you are always a representative of that entity.

No, you aren't.  The government doesn't own you or your opinions, even if they pay your salary.  It's why we have a Bill of Rights.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeI  Facebook is not a private correspondence.

I honestly don't know how online postings are treated Constitutionally at the moment, but there's certainly an argument to made that they are.  They only go out to people you select as "friends", right?

Firing him just feeds the racists' persecution complexes. Was he elected to the post? Organize an effort to defeat him next round. Was he appointed? Keep pointing out that Trayvon's parents were both employed, and ask whether this sort of opinion is rampant amongst city officials. Remind people that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism. Etc..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

 

I honestly don't know how online postings are treated Constitutionally at the moment, but there's certainly an argument to made that they are.  They only go out to people you select as "friends", right?

Not if his privacy settings are on "public". I agree with you for the most part, Schwartz. Even if I don't agree with what he said, he has a right to say it. Restricting free speech is dangerous precedent to set.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwartz 

They only go out to people you select as "friends", right?

It's been a while since I quit facebook, but I believe your preferences are what set the limits.  Generally only firends can read it, BUT, if they comment on it, THEIR friends can read their comments and the original posting even if they're not friends with the originator.