George Zimmerman verdict thread

[Plutarch]

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

I make no assumptions on those jury members because I don’t know them, and I don’t know their motivations. And if one jury member was a black woman, then what about her? Didn’t she approve Zimmerman’s acquittal. Is she flawed as well? Or does she get a pass because she’s black? As a jury member, you make your decision based on EVIDENCE. Not so much prior experience, prejudices, sympathies, and other emotions. It’s simply evidence and law. Again, if these jury members were flawed, and if there is proof that this is so, then a retrial or appeal should be imminent if possible.

was it not the plan of the defense to feed into the jury's fears and prejudices when they paraded around an old picture of a shirtless trayvon with a gold grill...and do you honestly feel they would've tried the same tactic had the jury been made up of black men and women. seriously doubt it

If that is truly how it went down, then that’s deplorable. But let’s not act like that kind of bs happens on both sides. This is slightly not the same thing, but we can’t forget the old pictures of very young Trayvon that was paraded around in order to give the impression that Zimmerman ruthlessly shot a cute kid.

yes, there may be more pressing issues i agree...but sensible people know rallies like the ones where people were demanding justice for the martin family, aren't going to curb a complex issues such as black on black violence which has deep socioeconomic roots. that's accomplished through policy making from a seemly inept government that has time and time again championed corporate interest over those of its people, no matter who was in office

I agree. But I wouldn’t write off protests and rallies off so quickly. That’s where activism and support gathers and organizes public opinion to pressure our government into much needed reform. What I despise is this senseless and pointless bitching and violence and hatred that is only making things worse and helping us further divide amongst ourselves.

also understand we live in a day in age where in black men as well as Muslims, latinos, gays are being strategically targeted and/or profiled by state officials across the nation...that's another big reason why narratives like trayvon martin's stir so many emotions and consequently got so much media coverage

I agree and disagree, but I think that you trust the media more than me. The media imo just wants a juicy story that most people will find some interest in. If the media cared about the trials and tribulations that blacks, Muslims, latinos, and gays experience, they’d have so many stories to run, they wouldn’t have the time to cover them all. On the contrary, most of the stories we get are exclusively about the trials and tribulations of relatively wealthy white people, especially pretty white women. Chicago gang wars don’t make it on the national stage. Poverty or incompetent schools in the inner-city don’t either.

as far as class goes .... race and class as inextricably intertwined categories because of this country’s centuries of racial oppression. no coincidence that there is wage, wealth gap between whites and non-whites

Agreed. But I personally think that class is a much more important, comprehensive, and less sensational topic that needs considerable attention in comparison to race.

 

[desertrain10]

so this was no media creation. thousands of people had signed petitions and marched the down the streets of sanford before most the media had even began to follow the story.

wait, doesn't this also say that thousands of people had decided what the verdict should be before they had access to a complete range of forensic and eyewitness testimony? because that doesn't really sound like the best way to decide a court case

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

what would have been going through Trayvon's mind that would have made Zimmerman more likely to be convicted, though?

look, my contention was that Martin saw this mysterious guy following him, confronted him about it and things ended up as they did. i completely understand why he would do something like that. but if you're talking about Zimmerman not being convicted... what in the mindset of Martin is going to do that?

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something, people just felt he should be tried in the court of law

Anyways the point i was trying to make was the media didnt introduce race into the mix, race was always apart of the conversation...

One could say they fanned the flames but Im thankful they did. We as nation need to have more open and honest dialogues about race and the role it plays in our everyday lives. Maybe itll inspire individuals to confront and question their own prejudices

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

Where as they could connect with and sympathize with george because they too share a fear the black man making his story believable... trayvon was blk and therefore gz was fearful of this unarmed kid and rightfully so

 

[desertrain10]

@plutarch

Thanks for reading and from your responses I can tell your a very smart guy

With that said I feel as though your downplaying the role race plays in our everyday lives...

And I also disagree that class now trumps race...fact is poor white people still do not face the same problems, barriers as poor blacks...pretending that it does does blacks more harm then good

 

[joshuaboy]

so this was no media creation. thousands of people had signed petitions and marched the down the streets of sanford before most the media had even began to follow the story.

wait, doesn't this also say that thousands of people had decided what the verdict should be before they had access to a complete range of forensic and eyewitness testimony? because that doesn't really sound like the best way to decide a court case

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

what would have been going through Trayvon's mind that would have made Zimmerman more likely to be convicted, though?

look, my contention was that Martin saw this mysterious guy following him, confronted him about it and things ended up as they did. i completely understand why he would do something like that. but if you're talking about Zimmerman not being convicted... what in the mindset of Martin is going to do that?

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something....

Anyways the point i was trying to make was the media didnt introduce race into the mix, race was always apart of the conversation...

One could say they fanned the flames but Im thankful they did. We as nation need to have more open and honest dialogues about race and the role it plays in our everyday lives. Maybe itll inspire individuals to confront and question their own prejudices

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

Where as they could connect with and sympathize with george because they too share a fear the black man making his story believable... trayvon was blk and therefore gz was fearful of this unarmed kid and rightfully so

The media had a lot to do with race. The edited 911 recording tried to make it seem like GZ targeted TM because he was black. This was one of the first reports out and has stuck with a lot of people even after it was discovered that it was edited and the people involved were fired.

 

[desertrain10]

so this was no media creation. thousands of people had signed petitions and marched the down the streets of sanford before most the media had even began to follow the story.

wait, doesn't this also say that thousands of people had decided what the verdict should be before they had access to a complete range of forensic and eyewitness testimony? because that doesn't really sound like the best way to decide a court case

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

what would have been going through Trayvon's mind that would have made Zimmerman more likely to be convicted, though?

look, my contention was that Martin saw this mysterious guy following him, confronted him about it and things ended up as they did. i completely understand why he would do something like that. but if you're talking about Zimmerman not being convicted... what in the mindset of Martin is going to do that?

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something....

Anyways the point i was trying to make was the media didnt introduce race into the mix, race was always apart of the conversation...

One could say they fanned the flames but Im thankful they did. We as nation need to have more open and honest dialogues about race and the role it plays in our everyday lives. Maybe itll inspire individuals to confront and question their own prejudices

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

Where as they could connect with and sympathize with george because they too share a fear the black man making his story believable... trayvon was blk and therefore gz was fearful of this unarmed kid and rightfully so

The media had a lot to do with race. The edited 911 recording tried to make it seem like GZ targeted TM because he was black. This was one of the first reports out and has stuck with a lot of people even after it was discovered that it was edited and the people involved were

fired.

i remember NBC or ABC doin

that and it was wrong but the story had already had gained steam way before they aired the edited 911 tape....and again race was always apart of the

convo

Reading about the case online way before it was this juicy story and the major media networks had caught wind of it, it was more then obvious gz had racially profiled tm

 

[joshuaboy]

so this was no media creation. thousands of people had signed petitions and marched the down the streets of sanford before most the media had even began to follow the story.

wait, doesn't this also say that thousands of people had decided what the verdict should be before they had access to a complete range of forensic and eyewitness testimony? because that doesn't really sound like the best way to decide a court case

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

what would have been going through Trayvon's mind that would have made Zimmerman more likely to be convicted, though?

look, my contention was that Martin saw this mysterious guy following him, confronted him about it and things ended up as they did. i completely understand why he would do something like that. but if you're talking about Zimmerman not being convicted... what in the mindset of Martin is going to do that?

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something....

Anyways the point i was trying to make was the media didnt introduce race into the mix, race was always apart of the conversation...

One could say they fanned the flames but Im thankful they did. We as nation need to have more open and honest dialogues about race and the role it plays in our everyday lives. Maybe itll inspire individuals to confront and question their own prejudices

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

Where as they could connect with and sympathize with george because they too share a fear the black man making his story believable... trayvon was blk and therefore gz was fearful of this unarmed kid and rightfully so

The media had a lot to do with race. The edited 911 recording tried to make it seem like GZ targeted TM because he was black. This was one of the first reports out and has stuck with a lot of people even after it was discovered that it was edited and the people involved were

fired.

i remember NBC or ABC doin

that and it was wrong but the story had already had gained steam way before they aired the edited 911 tape....and again race was always apart of the

convo

Reading about the case online way before it was this juicy story and the major media networks had caught wind of it, it was more then obvious gz had racially profiled tm

yea it was NBC. They are being sued heavy right now.

only time race came into the convo was when the dispatcher asked what race he was.

the media been pushing for a racial divide since Day 1. They even back peddled when they found out Zimmerman was Hispanic and created a new term "White-Hispanic".

 

[kingblaze84]

so this was no media creation. thousands of people had signed petitions and marched the down the streets of sanford before most the media had even began to follow the story.

wait, doesn't this also say that thousands of people had decided what the verdict should be before they had access to a complete range of forensic and eyewitness testimony? because that doesn't really sound like the best way to decide a court case

smh....you don't think it mannered the jury of 6 was made up of 5 white women who more then likely have no idea what it means to be racially profiled, you think they have the same natural distrust of whites, police officers that most blacks have....how could they possibly understand what may have been going through the mind of tray or sympathize with his plight that night

what would have been going through Trayvon's mind that would have made Zimmerman more likely to be convicted, though?

look, my contention was that Martin saw this mysterious guy following him, confronted him about it and things ended up as they did. i completely understand why he would do something like that. but if you're talking about Zimmerman not being convicted... what in the mindset of Martin is going to do that?

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something....

Anyways the point i was trying to make was the media didnt introduce race into the mix, race was always apart of the conversation...

One could say they fanned the flames but Im thankful they did. We as nation need to have more open and honest dialogues about race and the role it plays in our everyday lives. Maybe itll inspire individuals to confront and question their own prejudices

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

Where as they could connect with and sympathize with george because they too share a fear the black man making his story believable... trayvon was blk and therefore gz was fearful of this unarmed kid and rightfully so

The media had a lot to do with race. The edited 911 recording tried to make it seem like GZ targeted TM because he was black. This was one of the first reports out and has stuck with a lot of people even after it was discovered that it was edited and the people involved were

fired.

i remember NBC or ABC doin

that and it was wrong but the story had already had gained steam way before they aired the edited 911 tape....and again race was always apart of the

convo

Reading about the case online way before it was this juicy story and the major media networks had caught wind of it, it was more then obvious gz had racially profiled tm

yea it was NBC. They are being sued heavy right now.

only time race came into the convo was when the dispatcher asked what race he was.

the media been pushing for a racial divide since Day 1. They even back peddled when they found out Zimmerman was Hispanic and created a new term "White-Hispanic".

White Hispanic is not a new term. There are many White Hispanics, in fact most Puerto Ricans consider themselves White Hispanic. Zimmerman's father is White so he technically is a White Hispanic

 

[janklow]

Huh?

People originally gravitated to the story and took to the streets to voice their displeasure because a 28 yr old man who followed then killed a teenager whom he had profiled was never arrested and charged with a crime....not necessarily because they already made their mind up he was guilty of something, people just felt he should be tried in the court of law

i'll grant you that a lot of people were angry about him not being arrested/charged and nothing more. but there's a point where when people are saying, prior to hearing the level of evidence that subsequently came out, that he needed to be tried and convicted, then it's not about displeasure over the lack of charges, it's having decided PRIOR to the case that you know what the outcome should be. works both ways, to be frank (this is where the guys who just said "Martin's a thug so he had it coming" come in)

About the juries not being able to relate to trayvon....I was simply asserting they wouldnt be able to relate to a person like trayvon making it harder for the prosecution to humanize him.

no argument on that; just commenting more on the "what would have been going through Trayvon's mind" thing

i remember NBC or ABC doin

that and it was wrong but the story had already had gained steam way before they aired the edited 911 tape....and again race was always apart of the convo

not saying race wasn't part of the conversation, but that tape was REALLY tossed out there as proof of Zimmerman's racism. and that tape is 100% on the media.

White Hispanic is not a new term. There are many White Hispanics, in fact most Puerto Ricans consider themselves White Hispanic. Zimmerman's father is White so he technically is a White Hispanic

the problem remains people thinking Hispanic is a race

so once again, as the guy making all the official race calls for the SL, i'll settle this: "white Hispanic" is a legitimate term and it's what Zimmerman is. white people, you will stop pretending Zimmerman is somehow "not white" and thus free of racial issues

 

[Plutarch]

@plutarch

Thanks for reading and from your responses I can tell your a very smart guy

Respect.

With that said I feel as though your downplaying the role race plays in our everyday lives...

I don't know. I know racism is a bitch, and all people of color experience it daily. I know I do. I just believe that race didn't have as much to do with this particular verdict as most people seem to think. I guess we just disagree.

And I also disagree that class now trumps race...fact is poor white people still do not face the same problems, barriers as poor blacks...pretending that it does does blacks more harm then good

Ok, if I said that class trumps race, I take that back. But I do believe that classism is just as important as racism. Blacks, more than anyone else in the world, just happen to experience both. But blacks don't fight against classism as nearly as I think they should. And I see blacks use race/racism to divide and conquer among themselves (even dark-skin vs. light-skin) and other people of color when it's unnecessary and detrimental to the fight against discrimination and prejudice.

I also think that poor whites get the short end of the stick as well when it come to employment, the court system, education, etc. Even if they don't experience racism like all blacks do.

 

[dwashington]

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE EVENTS LEADING UP TO TRAYVON MARTIN'S DEATH

1) Misconception: Zimmerman was told not to follow the person who he said he thought was suspicious but he then left his truck and did so anyway.

In actuality Zimmerman was first talking to police dispatch inside of he truck but then left his truck as they continued to talk. He told police dispatch that the person he thought was suspicious had come to check him out. He said that this person circled his truck and he rolled up his window. He then told dispatch after he rolled up his window that this person "ran off".

And while he was still talking to police dispatch on the phone that is when he got out of his his truck and dispatch asked him if he was following him. Zimmerman said "yeah". This is the point where Zimmerman was already out of his truck and dispatch told him "we don't need you to do that" . Zimmerman’s reply was “O.K.”

The misconception that many people have is that he was in his truck when they advised him not to follow Martin and then he ignored it and left his truck and continued to follow him.

But he was already out of his truck and says he had been looking for a street number address and was returning back to his truck when Martin confronted him.

He may be lying but the point is despite what the prosecution's theory that he continued to follow Martin after being advised he didn't need to they had no evidence to prove Zimmerman continued to follow Martin at that point. He was already out of his truck when they told him that and he came out because Martin ran away.

2) Misconception: If one person follows another person the person being followed has the right to attack the person following

Let's suppose a white person went into a black neighborhood at night and a black person started following them . The white person then punches the black person, knocks him to the ground sits on top of him and starts punching the black person over and over in the head.

He's not allowed by law to do that just because he's being followed.

It's not against the law to follow a person in a public area.

3) Misconception: If it wasn't for that Stand Your Ground Law Zimmerman would have been found guilty.

In fact the defense didn't use the Stand Your Ground Law in this case.

In states where there is NOT a Stand Your Ground Law if a person if threatened with bodily harm IF they have an opportunity to retreat they must try retreating first. They cannot retaliate first.

In states that DO have a Stand You Ground Law (sometimes these laws go by other names also) if you are threatened with great bodily harm you are not required to try to retreat first you can attack if someone advances on you. This is not a factor in this case because Zimmerman claims he had no option to retreat that

he had no ground to stand on, that he was cornered. The defense used a standard self defense argument.

4) Misconception: Trayvon Martin got mad because he thought he was being unfairly profiled due to being black.

It's possible but we don't know that. He may have been uncertain why he was being followed but didn't like it. Zimmerman claims he had stopped following Martin and he was returning to his truck when Martin came up from behind made a remark and then attacked him.

He could be lying but since no one was there to see the whole thing that is reasonable doubt and a person is considered innocent until proven guilty. The proof was not there that Zimmerman's account was false. The defendant is not responsible for proving their account true. The prosecution is responsible for proving their account false. They did a reasonable job in attempting this but lacked evidence and witnesses who might have seen the whole thing but none did.

 

[dwashington]

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE EVENTS LEADING UP TO TRAYVON MARTIN'S DEATH PT 2

If Zimmerman is lying you also have to come up with a theory of events that makes sense in relation to what we do know. For example, there were screams with time between them, pure sound screams

and separately screaming calls for "help", the word. The screams occurred before the gunshot is heard.

If the screams were Martin's and not Zimmerman's how did they come about?

If they were the screams of Martin he was either in pain before the gunshot or made these high pitched screaming sounds out of pure fear of Zimmerman. If it was physical pain then Zimmerman would have been beating him up but that seems unlikely because he had a gun and would not need to risk getting in close to throw some punches.

Did Zimmerman have the gun out and say he was going to kill Martin and then Martin screamed a couple of times out of pure fear? It's slightly more possible but to me seems unlikely. People are more likely to say "don't shoot" if threatened then to just scream or at least scream “help” only.

Zimmerman had wounds suggesting he lost a fist fight. Was his pride hurt and had Martin stopped beating him when Zimmerman pulled out his gun and shot him, not out of self defense but just because he just wanted to?

It seems unlikely because he knew police were on their way and could have seen him do that.

He also has no history of racist remarks even though he might have profiled Martin on the basis of race. However any unknown male walking around at night in that neighborhood with a black hoodie on might have looked suspicious Zimmerman.

One problem with this case if that we first saw the young picture of Trayvon. It seemed like there is no way he could have been a threat to Zimmerman and only harmless kids eat skittles.

So this was the perfect case to hang our hats on, to speak out about against racial profiling.

It seemed at the time like an easy case to win and if we won it would serve as a warning that it is wrong to racially profile. A heavy looking frowning Zimmerman and a small younger Trayvon with a big smile.

But we invested too heavily in the politics of this case.

Trayvon was not a criminal or thug but when we saw the later pictures it looked possible that he was athletic enough could have beaten up a flabby George Zimmerman. He was not a little kid either, in fcat taller than Zimmerman.

So even if we thought Zimmerman was guilty our perspective changed. It was no longer physically impossible for Trayvon to have beaten him in a fight and once we realize that we realize that we really can’t be certain who started the physical confrontation.

In the beginning there was a big debate about Zimmerman walking around the police station not appearing to be bruised. It seemed like he was lying about being attacked but later we saw the picture of his swollen broken nose , bleeding lip and bruised head. So even if we thought Zimmerman was responsible for the whole situation the whole situation was different. A 17 year old who ate Skittles might not have beaten up Zimmerman but after seeing these pictures it became possible. Who threw the first punch? We don’t know.

Do we want new laws making it illegal to follow somebody? Do we want to make new laws that if somebody follows you illegally that you can attack them? I don’t know but these things are issues raised by this case even though we don’t know if Zimmerman took it to a physical level first.

We don’t know exactly how the fight may have went. Hypothetically, in general not even looking at this case, if someone is sitting on you punching you in the head and you are yelling help and you have a gun should you be able to shoot them?

Some lawyers are saying that a civil case is easier to prove that the burden of evidence is 50% of what it takes to prove a criminal case but most are not for a different reason. The fact is that a civil case would be based on a recent 2009 hate crime law which came about based on some murders of gay people. To use this law you may not need as much physical evidence but what you need is several overt anti-gay hate remarks or in this case overt anti-black hate remarks and they don’t have that and there are even some stories that he helped some black people.

That is not to say he might not also have had prejudiced concepts as well but that is not against the law and you can't read a person's mind.

Even though Zimmerman wasn’t convicted this case has brought a very large spotlight to the issue of racial profiling and some newspapers, even conservative ones have been more sympathetic than expected. That is a good thing.

We are very frustrated about profiling. But one lesson from this case is we must deal with it intelligently and not lose our cool. My philosophy is that I can’t stop you from following me just make sure you don’t touch me.

And think did Trayvon necessarily think he was being racially profiled? He was being followed and didn’t like it. I feel for him and I feel for the Martin family.

Message to George Zimmerman, there was a reason you didn’t make the police force, you were protecting no one,

peace

 

[godbynature]

I actually do take offense to this drivel that you posted

Meh, well so much for civility and maturity. If you do take offense to my "drivel," then that's out of my hands because, once again, I meant no disrespect.

because its an insult to my intelligence.

Not sure I'm understanding you here. If you're saying that I'm being condescending, then you've misunderstood me. Either that or you don't handle criticism very well. [/quote]

You could've kept this to yourself

Heh, and why would I do that? And why are you taking this so personal heh? I'm getting the impression that you thought that whole post was addressed to you. If so, don't flatter yourself. Only the first three sentences were addressed to you. The other 90% of the post had nothing to do with you and was just a general post.

because you didn't say shit.

Well, I guess we disagree.

And the fact that you got into your feelings may say otherwise. And the fact that you replied to me but didn't really address anything means that you're the one who didn't say shit. And I still have no idea why you're butthurt. [/quote]

I actually do take offense to this drivel that you posted

Meh, well so much for civility and maturity. If you do take offense to my "drivel," then that's out of my hands because, once again, I meant no disrespect.

because its an insult to my intelligence.

Not sure I'm understanding you here. If you're saying that I'm being condescending, then you've misunderstood me. Either that or you don't handle criticism very well.

You could've kept this to yourself

Heh, and why would I do that? And why are you taking this so personal heh? I'm getting the impression that you thought that whole post was addressed to you. If so, don't flatter yourself. Only the first three sentences were addressed to you. The other 90% of the post had nothing to do with you and was just a general post.

because you didn't say shit.

Well, I guess we disagree.

And the fact that you got into your feelings may say otherwise. And the fact that you replied to me but didn't really address anything means that you're the one who didn't say shit. And I still have no idea why you're butthurt.

I'm not "butthurt" about anything, I meant exactly what I said. Your post was an insult to me and every other black person who followed the Zimmerman trial. This situation was all about race and people like you try to deny or downplay that is part of the problem. This whole deal has been nothing but an illustration of how little this society values the lives of black people. The police did a half ass job with this case from the very beginning because they simply didn't value the life of Trayvon Martin. By all accounts it was a sloppy investigation by a police department that has been accused of improperly investigating crimes involving black victims in the past. Remember, the police weren't even going to charge Zimmerman initially. They were just going to let him go. The outcry from the black community is the only reason that he was charged in the 1st place.

Again, it's clear that race played a monumental factor in this case from the very beginning and you denying or trying to downplay it is an insult. There's a reason that Zimmerman has been adopted by racist whites and propped up as some kind of hero. There's a reason that the jury was 5/6 white in the 1st place. You can keep your head in the sand and ignore the role that race played here, but try as convince others of that dumb shit.

 

[joshuaboy]

I actually do take offense to this drivel that you posted

Meh, well so much for civility and maturity. If you do take offense to my "drivel," then that's out of my hands because, once again, I meant no disrespect.

because its an insult to my intelligence.

Not sure I'm understanding you here. If you're saying that I'm being condescending, then you've misunderstood me. Either that or you don't handle criticism very well.

You could've kept this to yourself

Heh, and why would I do that? And why are you taking this so personal heh? I'm getting the impression that you thought that whole post was addressed to you. If so, don't flatter yourself. Only the first three sentences were addressed to you. The other 90% of the post had nothing to do with you and was just a general post.

because you didn't say shit.

Well, I guess we disagree.

And the fact that you got into your feelings may say otherwise. And the fact that you replied to me but didn't really address anything means that you're the one who didn't say shit. And I still have no idea why you're butthurt. [/quote]

I actually do take offense to this drivel that you posted

Meh, well so much for civility and maturity. If you do take offense to my "drivel," then that's out of my hands because, once again, I meant no disrespect.

because its an insult to my intelligence.

Not sure I'm understanding you here. If you're saying that I'm being condescending, then you've misunderstood me. Either that or you don't handle criticism very well.

You could've kept this to yourself

Heh, and why would I do that? And why are you taking this so personal heh? I'm getting the impression that you thought that whole post was addressed to you. If so, don't flatter yourself. Only the first three sentences were addressed to you. The other 90% of the post had nothing to do with you and was just a general post.

because you didn't say shit.

Well, I guess we disagree.

And the fact that you got into your feelings may say otherwise. And the fact that you replied to me but didn't really address anything means that you're the one who didn't say shit. And I still have no idea why you're butthurt.

I'm not "butthurt" about anything, I meant exactly what I said. Your post was an insult to me and every other black person who followed the Zimmerman trial. This situation was all about race and people like you try to deny or downplay that is part of the problem. This whole deal has been nothing but an illustration of how little this society values the lives of black people. The police did a half ass job with this case from the very beginning because they simply didn't value the life of Trayvon Martin. By all accounts it was a sloppy investigation by a police department that has been accused of improperly investigating crimes involving black victims in the past. Remember, the police weren't even going to charge Zimmerman initially. They were just going to let him go. The outcry from the black community is the only reason that he was charged in the 1st place.

Again, it's clear that race played a monumental factor in this case from the very beginning and you denying or trying to downplay it is an insult. There's a reason that Zimmerman has been adopted by racist whites and propped up as some kind of hero. There's a reason that the jury was 5/6 white in the 1st place. You can keep your head in the sand and ignore the role that race played here, but try as convince others of that dumb shit.

[/quote]

How did you wish the jury to be made up?

 

[godbynature]

I wish the jury was made up in a way that was more reflective of the community. Blacks make up 31% of the Sanford population yet not one black person was on the jury.

This whole trial was nothing but window dressing. Zimmerman was never going to be convicted. It's a shame that so many people are so stupid.

 

[joshuaboy]

I wish the jury was made up in a way that was more reflective of the community. Blacks make up 31% of the Sanford population yet not one black person was on the jury.

This whole trial was nothing but window dressing. Zimmerman was never going to be convicted. It's a shame that so many people are so stupid.

Jurors cannot be hand picked. They are selected randomly and anonymously one by one. Lawyers can object to a juror when he/she is selected if they feel the person has prior knowledge to the case or in any way related or known to any of the people involved or other reason, but they cannot object based on race or class. Also, you are judged by a jury of your peers ........ so the jury pool would be the peers of the Defendant.

 

[kingblaze84]

Good point Godbynature.....I shouldv'e known Zimmerman's White Hispanic ass wouldv'e gotten off once the jury was made of 5 Whites and one White Hispanic. We now know a White guy can stand his ground in this country and a Black boy armed with Skittles and iced tea is not allowed to stand his ground.

 

[joshuaboy]

I don't know why everybody was so surprised when the verdict was read. The prosecution in this case messed up worse than in the Casey Anthony case. After the first three days it was clear he was gonna be acquitted. Only way he would be convicted is if he had the worst lawyers in the world or the jurors made a decision that was not based on law and evidence, in which case it would be overturned by appeal. You need to remember that the jurors are not privy to information that the rest of us get of TV and the opinions that are shared by panelists after the day in court. They cannot make a decision based on feelings or "common sense", they have to make it based on what facts and evidence they are allowed to use and on the law of the district.

I guarantee that if any of you were on the jury you would have made the same decision too.

 

[Plutarch]

I'm not "butthurt" about anything, I meant exactly what I said.

To be fair, I never denied that you didn’t mean exactly what you said. I’m sure that you did, and I can respect that. But it’s exactly what you said that gave me the impression that you were butthurt. But I think that arguing about whether you were butthurt or not isn’t entirely relevant or desirable so meh.

Your post was an insult to me and every other black person who followed the Zimmerman trial.

Bullshit. That’s ridiculous. So you now speak for every other black person (which includes me ironically and many others) who followed the Zimmerman trial? Perhaps you think I’m white or a “coon,” but that’s beside the point for at least two reasons:

1. When people get all high and mighty and heavily invest in their own emotions about an issue, an intellectual and respectful debate (like the one I had with desertrain for instance) about said issue with someone with an opposing viewpoint is highly unlikely. Your post was a good example of this.

2. Just because you despise my opinion, doesn’t mean that it’s false or unworthy. Once again, let me reiterate. Nothing that I said was meant and nothing that I say is meant to insult anyone. The fact that you feel insulted is your problem and not mine. I think that we’d actually get somewhere if you set aside your feelings and actually debate the issue at hand. But if you feel so hurt/insulted about what I said and want nothing more to do with me, then why are you still responding to me?

This situation was all about race and people like you try to deny or downplay that is part of the problem.

You see? I disagree and would say that your viewpoint is actually part of the problem. And I have thoroughly explained and defended my viewpoint already. You offered no evidence for viewpoint, ignored mine, and just assumed that you were right. I still honestly have no idea how I was so “insulting.” But what’s the point in arguing with someone who already has their mind made up and is harping about how “insulting” I am as if that is the real issue?

This whole deal has been nothing but an illustration of how little this society values the lives of black people.

I think that certainly applies to some of this ordeal but not all of it. But really though? This whole ordeal is nothing but racism? I’ve seen people compare Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till. Now if you ask me, that is insulting. Incredibly insulting. There are a lot of Emmett Tills that exist today in this nation, and they need our attention, but Trayvon Martin is no Emmett Till no matter how hard we want to force the issue.

You talk about how little “society” values the lives of blacks, but who and what the hell is society? Seems like a pretty big generalization. If you speak of our government, then yes, I can agree. I realize how racist America can be, but the Zimmerman verdict isn’t a shining example of this racism. We need to pay more attention to other less-sensationalized cases that happen every day in America.

 

[Plutarch]

The police did a half ass job with this case from the very beginning because they simply didn't value the life of Trayvon Martin. By all accounts it was a sloppy investigation by a police department that has been accused of improperly investigating crimes involving black victims in the past. Remember, the police weren't even going to charge Zimmerman initially. They were just going to let him go. The outcry from the black community is the only reason that he was charged in the 1st place.

Great, you’re finally offering some evidence. I can’t outright agree or disagree with a lot of what you’ve said here. Honestly, this and many parts of the whole ordeal are very complicated and debatable to me. Did the police do a shitty job? Probably. Though it might be fair to say that they did in follow standard procedures, arrested him, questioned him at a police station for hours, made him take a lie-detector test, photographed him and took more evidence, and only released him because they did not have enough evidence to legally detain him. But state AND federal officials (and fortunately the local citizens as well) were still in the process of drawing up a difficult charge against him.

Now, did the police intentionally do a shitty job because Martin was black? That I find dubious and hard to prove. Is it even possible that the police were incompetent to begin with since they might have done a poor job with other cases that DID NOT involve blacks? That’s much more likely in comparison imo. Would the police have done a better job if Martin was white? I honestly don’t know, but I think it would depend mostly on his class like if he was rich. Police deal with whites and look down on them for many reasons as well. Regardless, if police do a shitty job, the family or the community will always demand justice and usually succeed just as it fortunately happened with Martin. And Zimmerman was successfully investigated, tried, and a verdict, which was faulty but not necessarily racist, happened as a result.

Again, it's clear that race played a monumental factor in this case from the very beginning

I still disagree and have stated my case.

and you denying or trying to downplay it is an insult.

I’m sorry that you feel this way. And to be fair, I will reiterate that I think that race played a role, but I think that you are exaggerating its role because of bias, and I find that insulting.

 

[Plutarch]

There's a reason that Zimmerman has been adopted by racist whites and propped up as some kind of hero.

Why would anyone take what racist whites believe in seriously? And just because someone is adopted as a hero by racists, doesn’t mean that said person is racist. That’s clearly faulty logic. Hitler idolized Nietzsche, but Nietzsche would’ve been rolling over in his grave at the time. And again, let’s not forget that Zimmerman is NOT white. It’s too convenient that people are basically stretching this into a white vs. black thing, and Zimmerman is supposed to be the white oppressor. Zimmerman is a fucking patsy!

There's a reason that the jury was 5/6 white in the 1st place.

Ridiculous. Someone has already pointed out your error here. I was talking to my (black) homegirl (who apparently should also feel insulted by what I say) about this case. She’s a lawyer and happens to agree with me. But she told me that people fallaciously expect juries to be racially diverse because they’re legally supposed to be a jury of your peers. But it’s all generally random, and if any kind of diversity is implemented, it only occurs after a random yet large sample of potential jury members are selected. If you’re mad that there was a predominantly white jury, and you don’t believe that it was an intentional “conspiracy,” then your beef is with a fault within the court system that has very little to do with race/racism. Nothing special or out-of-the-ordinary was done in this specific regard to accommodate this particular court case.

And why does everyone seem to be downplaying the role of the sixth jury member who wasn’t white? Why does she conveniently get a pass? Was she not part of the process of coming up with an acquittal verdict?? Again, people stretching themselves to make this so racial when it’s just not there.

You can keep your head in the sand and ignore the role that race played here, but try as convince others of that dumb shit.

This kind of sounds like what I think of your opinion about this case. Imo you’re the one that’s ignorant.