Neighborhood watch shooting in FL

[Zarathud]

If Martin had been white and Zimmerman black, and the resulting tension after the trial was this high, I have no reason to believe he wouldn't be speaking up in an effort to calm things down. Why do you believe he wouldn't?

He'd be trying to calm people down who were upset that black Zimmerman was going to jail for 30 years. Which, incidentally is why he has to try to calm people down in this scenario.

Absolutely.

President Obama is also trying to remind people of the other viewpoint -- racial profiling is arguably part of the reason why Zimmerman was found by the jury to be "afraid for his life" and justified by acting in self-defense. The standard is supposed to be a hypothetical reasonable person, but the African American community feels (rightly or wrongly) that society accepts that it is reasonable to be afraid of a black man because he's in a hoodie and you don't recognize him. Until Obama became a famous Senator, people could have been found "justifiably" afraid of him on the street or in a court of law:

"There are very few African American men in this country who haven’t had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me," Obama said. "And there are very few African American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator."

If you don't think there's anything racial about the Zimmerman case than the media or the politicians, you're tone deaf not color blind.

[Combustible Lemur]

If every leader was prevented from speaking about injustices or wrongs because they might be hypocrites by doing so, we'd have a hell of a lot more problems in this world than we do now.

If Martin was white, would our white black President have used the office of the Presidency to talk about the case?

If Martin was white, the president wouldn't have to talk about the case because GZ would be arrested on the spot and found guilty by the court.

I disagree.

As much as I would like to agree with you I suspect the statistics show you to be WRONG! and again I would hope that I am.

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

[Combustible Lemur]

Obama:

"And when you think about why in the African-American community at least there is a lot of pain around what happened here, I think it's important to recognize that the African-American community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a history that doesn't go away. There are very few African-American in this country who haven't had the experience of being followed when they were shopping in a department store. That includes me.

"There are very few African-American men who haven't had the experience of walking across the street and hearing the locks click on the doors of cars. That happens to me, at least before I was a senator. There are very few African-Americans who haven't had the experience of getting on an elevator and a woman clutching her purse nervously and holding her breath until she had a chance to get off. That happens often."

Yep.

But oh my. Here we go.

There is not one American that hasn't had the experience of wondering if Big Brother is listening in, watching them, tracking their money, and what they do on the internet.

First world probleeeems!

Sent courtesy of the Galaxy.... note2.

[RunningMn9]

RunningMn9, you can't open your mouth without being insulting. Or at the very least smug and condescending.

I'm aware of my reputation, which is why I wanted to stress the disclaimer.

I just wanted to clear that I don't think that the issue is that you're being a goon. I just think you need to consider things from the other perspective, that's all. If you haven't watched the Louis CK bit that I linked earlier, go watch it now. That's more or less what I'm trying to get at. Younger white people today desperately want racism to be declared over already because for the most part we aren't (and never have) engaging in it. But you can't just take a group's historical context away from them. You need to understand it to understand why they don't interpret the same set of facts in the same way that you do.

[hepcat]

If this is true, I would imagine that a lot of folks are going to be doing the "I told you so!" face this weekend.

[Chrisoc13]

If this is true, I would imagine that a lot of folks are going to be doing the "I told you so!" face this weekend.

Maybe I'm missing something but why is anyone going to be saying "I told you so" based off this story? I think most people just don't think that there was enough evidence to convict, not that Zimmerman was a good guy or that he didn't have the ability to be violent. It wasn't a trial of his character, it was a trial of the facts. There simply wasn't enough evidence to convict.

[hepcat]

I think you missed a LOT of opinion pieces during the trial...not to mention the mood of the general populace.

There were numerous discussions surrounding his character throughout the trial. The image of the "failed wannabe cop with anger issues" was a common theme in those discussions (along with the racial component). While I agree that it came down to "did he have the right to shoot under the terms of self defense", one cannot simply pretend that those other discussions weren't taking place...or that they were completely irrelevant.

p.s. I never said that I was going to be wearing one of those faces.

[LawBeefaroni]

If this is true, I would imagine that a lot of folks are going to be doing the "I told you so!" face this weekend.

Sounds like it's a matter between his [soon to be ex] wife and her father. Was he even there? EDIT: When I first read the linked article it just mentioned that he was being questioned about an incident between his wife and FIL. Now I see what everyone is talking about.

Also, he pulled did Arod-Shaq on that car accident. Surely he's a saint now?

[Chrisoc13]

I think you missed a LOT of opinion pieces during the trial.

Most likely
I stopped caring what the media had to say about it quite soon after they displayed their ineptitude. I try to miss most opinion pieces from the media as much as possible actually.

I just don't think this has much bearing on the trial that occurred. I never thought Zimmerman was a particularly bright or stand up person. But then again the trial was never about that, but rather about the evidence on hand. There simply was not enough evidence to convict him. This information, if true, does nothing to increase the information needed to meet the burden of proof to convict him. Does it show he has a potential to be violent? Sure, but then again carrying a gun and shooting someone after confronting them already gave us a window into that potential. It doesn't change the fact that the only living person who knows what happened that night is Zimmerman.

[hepcat]

Divorcing opinion of an individual from the facts of a case is often quite difficult. Yes, this incident has no bearing on the outcome of the case...legally. But it will cause a lot of folks to nod their heads and say, "I KNEW it!"

[Chrisoc13]

I think you missed a LOT of opinion pieces during the trial...not to mention the mood of the general populace.

There were numerous discussions surrounding his character throughout the trial. The image of the "failed wannabe cop with anger issues" was a common theme in those discussions (along with the racial component). While I agree that it came down to "did he have the right to shoot under the terms of self defense", one cannot simply pretend that those other discussions weren't taking place...or that they were completely irrelevant.

p.s. I never said that I was going to be wearing one of those faces.

Sorry quoted before the edit to add more. Never meant to imply you would be wearing one of those faces, sorry if it came across as such.

It may add into the narrative of the case and America's reaction to it, and in that sense it is relevant, but I have trouble finding much relevance in the actual trial which took place. That's really all I am trying to say. As for the people who say "I told you so" I guess I still don't really get what they are saying I told you so too. The main narrative seemed to always be racial. In fact that was THE narrative of the story not and "along with" component. That is what the media played up from day one (or thirty or whenever they became involved with the story), that is the reason the President got involved etc. Failed cop was the side narrative, not the other way around.

[Chrisoc13]

Divorcing opinion of an individual from the facts of a case is often quite difficult. Yes, this incident has no bearing on the outcome of the case...legally. But it will cause a lot of folks to nod their heads and say, "I KNEW it!"

Again knew what exactly? What did they know? The story was always about racism. This does nothing in that regard. They knew he had anger problems? I guess I will take your word that people said he didn't have a possibility of being violent, but all I heard, read, and saw being thrown out by the media was the race card. It proves nothing still about his intentions that night. It doesn't prove that he wasn't attacked first by Martin.

[Exodor]

Brandon McCarthy ‏@BMcCarthy32 9m
Tanned, relaxed and finally feeling like himself after the trial, George Zimmerman's lawyer returned to work today. *phone rings* "oh for f

[Pyperkub]

Divorcing opinion of an individual from the facts of a case is often quite difficult. Yes, this incident has no bearing on the outcome of the case...legally. But it will cause a lot of folks to nod their heads and say, "I KNEW it!"

Especially in a Divorce proceeding.

[Rip]

Perhaps if the prosecution had went for the correct charge in the first place and made the trial more about a person who carries a gun having a responsibilty to be more prudent and not run into an obviously unwise situation this would have never happened.

But alas the camera and publicity whores and politicians looking to suck some votes out of an easy to woo mob sort of doomed any real justice from the start. Perhaps next time they will seek to assist the justice system in working properly rather than trying to fabricate their own justice.

[hepcat]

Divorcing opinion of an individual from the facts of a case is often quite difficult. Yes, this incident has no bearing on the outcome of the case...legally. But it will cause a lot of folks to nod their heads and say, "I KNEW it!"

Again knew what exactly? What did they know? The story was always about racism. This does nothing in that regard. They knew he had anger problems? I guess I will take your word that people said he didn't have a possibility of being violent, but all I heard, read, and saw being thrown out by the media was the race card. It proves nothing still about his intentions that night. It doesn't prove that he wasn't attacked first by Martin.

You'll have to excuse me as I'm not quite sure what you're arguing against/for at this point.

[Chrisoc13]

Divorcing opinion of an individual from the facts of a case is often quite difficult. Yes, this incident has no bearing on the outcome of the case...legally. But it will cause a lot of folks to nod their heads and say, "I KNEW it!"

Again knew what exactly? What did they know? The story was always about racism. This does nothing in that regard. They knew he had anger problems? I guess I will take your word that people said he didn't have a possibility of being violent, but all I heard, read, and saw being thrown out by the media was the race card. It proves nothing still about his intentions that night. It doesn't prove that he wasn't attacked first by Martin.

You'll have to excuse me as I'm not quite sure what you're arguing against/for at this point.

Fair enough, probably because I'm not really sure what you are getting at. This doesn't seem to add anything relevant to the story, especially since the main story the media kept playing over and over again was about racism. This seems to have little to no relation to the Martin case. Who exactly is going to be able to say "I told you so" and what exactly did they tell us? What does this new information add to the case exactly? I would argue nothing relevant.

[hepcat]

There was more than racism at play in the Zimmerman trial. It also touched on subjects such as gun control, Stand Your Ground, and finally self defense laws in general. If Zimmerman loves to wave a gun around when he's angry, that's going to serve as justification for some of the voices that spoke up before, during and after his trial on those issues.

You've decided it's irrelevant. That's fine. However, relevance is often subjective.

I'm not saying it is, by the way. I'm simply stating that for some, it will be relevant.

I think you missed a LOT of opinion pieces during the trial.

Most likely
I stopped caring what the media had to say about it quite soon after they displayed their ineptitude. I try to miss most opinion pieces from the media as much as possible actually.

This might be the issue.

[Rip]

There was more than racism at play in the Zimmerman trial. It also touched on subjects such as gun control, Stand Your Ground, and finally self defense laws in general. If Zimmerman loves to wave a gun around when he's angry, that's going to serve as justification for some of the voices that spoke up before, during and after his trial on those issues.

You've decided it's irrelevant. That's fine. However, relevance is often subjective.

I'm not saying it is, by the way. I'm simply stating that for some, it will be.

This is true and a lot of ground "could" have been made on that front had the talking idiot heads not hijacked the discussion and made it a case about racism when it clearly wasn't. It was a case about an armed person either being able to be foolish and shoot someone or having a responsiblity to be more reserved in how they run into situations where they may have no choice but to employ said weapon.

This is what happens when leaders fail to lead.

[hepcat]

This is what happens when leaders fail to lead.

Say this three times and Eco will appear...

[Chrisoc13]

There was more than racism at play in the Zimmerman trial. It also touched on subjects such as gun control, Stand Your Ground, and finally self defense laws in general. If Zimmerman loves to wave a gun around when he's angry, that's going to serve as justification for some of the voices that spoke up before, during and after his trial on those issues.

You've decided it's irrelevant. That's fine. However, relevance is often subjective.

I'm not saying it is, by the way. I'm simply stating that for some, it will be relevant.

I think you missed a LOT of opinion pieces during the trial.

Most likely
I stopped caring what the media had to say about it quite soon after they displayed their ineptitude. I try to miss most opinion pieces from the media as much as possible actually.

This might be the issue.

When I am saying it is irrelevant I mean in the actual case. But the public seems to really struggle with how our legal system works and the Martin case only more fully exposed that. It may be relevant in the course of public discourse, but it is not relevant in the case.

When I say I didn't read opinion pieces I didn't mean I didn't follow the case closely, I did. But I don't enjoy opinion pieces. I find them rather insufferable on their best days, and the Martin case was far from the media's best days. I followed the facts of the case and was very much informed on it.

And like it or not the case turned to be about racism first and foremost. But I wouldn't put the blame on the President, although he certainly inflamed the situation. I would put it on the media.

Anyways not much discussion to be had about this at this point anyways so I will bow out. I have yet to see it as relevant. It adds to the argument of Zimmerman's general douchbaggery though I will say that.

[hepcat]

but it is not relevant in the case.

Who said it was?

And like it or not the case turned to be about racism first and foremost.

And like it or not, it also sparked numerous debates on guns and self defense laws in our country.

But I wouldn't put the blame on the President, although he certainly inflamed the situation.

That statement makes me believe you apparently place some blame on him. P.S. I felt that was poppycock when I first heard it from the conservative media. I still feel that way.

Anyways not much discussion to be had about this at this point anyways so I will bow out. I have yet to see it as relevant.

That's okay.

[Chrisoc13]

I absolutely place some blame on him. He didn't calm the issue he inflamed it. The whole my son would like like him. Wtf was that? That inflamed the race issue so yes I give him some blame.

[hepcat]

We take out of things what our personal bias dictates. That can't be helped, I suppose.

In any case, I already addressed this earlier.

edit: and here...with you.

[Chrisoc13]

I remember your response then. I found it rather unconvincing then as I do now. I do not dislike president obama by any means. In fact I rarely say anything negative about him. Did I vote for him? No. Do I agree with his policies? Usually no. But I don't look for faults in everything he does and I think he does lots of stuff right. I'm just not that into partisan politics. But I'll call a spade a spade when I see it. That wasn't the first time he interjected himself into a racially charged issue either so the precedent had been set. Perhaps your bias is coloring your view as much as you feel it is coloring mine?

[hepcat]

Which is why I used "we" in my reply.

But to be honest, I still think your belief that he was inflaming racial tension during the incident is poppycock.

[Zarathud]

I'll say it here, because I've said it before -- Zimmerman was a thug with a gun.

His entire defense was that he was a good, well intentioned creampuff who got in over his head with a young tough. The case came down to corroborating Zimmerman's testimony as the sole survivor. Knowing that he's willing to threaten his wife with a gun over a domestic dispute could cause a reasonable person to question whether Zimmerman really needed to shoot Trevyon to save his own life.

It doesn't change anything at trial, it just gives you more insight about the consequences and social justice of the situation.

[hepcat]

That reminds me Z, Mage Wars soon?

(sorry...just trying to lighten things up)

[Chrisoc13]

I'll say it here, because I've said it before -- Zimmerman was a thug with a gun.

His entire defense was that he was a good, well intentioned creampuff who got in over his head with a young tough. The case came down to corroborating Zimmerman's testimony as the sole survivor. Knowing that he's willing to threaten his wife with a gun over a domestic dispute could cause a reasonable person to question whether Zimmerman really needed to shoot Trevyon to save his own life.

It doesn't change anything at trial, it just gives you more insight about the consequences and social justice of the situation.

See now that argument made it more relevant. But like you said it still wouldn't change the trial because the prosecution simply didn't have evidence to prove that it wasn't self defense. It does strongly increase the argument of his douchebaggery though. I wouldn't feel safe around him. I'm guessing he's pretty unstable.

[hepcat]

But like you said it still wouldn't change the trial

Again, no one has ever said it would.

[Chrisoc13]

But like you said it still wouldn't change the trial

Again, no one has ever said it would.

Fair enough.

[LawBeefaroni]

Shellie Zimmerman and her father said they do not want to press charges, Bracknell said. Both Shellie's lawyer, Kelly Sims, as well as George Zimmerman's lawyer were at the home, ABC News has learned.

GZ's Lawyer: Don't press charges and you'll get 25% of the book and movie rights in the divorce.
SZ's Lawyer: Half.
GZ's Lawyer: Done.
SZ's Lawyer: Buy me a drink?
GZ's Lawyer: Goddman right, let's get out of this asylum.




Lot of enabling going on. Don't see this ending well for him.

[Rip]

As usual initial reports were totally wrong.

Hudson told ABC Action News Shellie provided a written statement Monday night saying she never saw a gun and only assumed her estranged husband was carrying a weapon because he touched his stomach.
Shellie called police to her father's home on Sprucewood Road around 2 p.m. She claimed George punched her father in the face and threatened both of them with a gun.
"He accosted my father and then took my IPad and then smashed it and cut it with a pocketknife. I don't know what he is capable of. I am really really scared," Shellie told dispatchers.
According to authorities, Shellie's father did not have any visible injuries.
In the 911 call, Shellie asked the dispatcher to send paramedics because her father's nose looked like it was broken.
There are also other inconsistencies police pointed to on the 911.
Shellie told dispatchers that officers arrived and had their guns drawn. She said George was sitting in his car. Fearing George would start shooting, she told the dispatcher her and her father were going inside.
According to police, George was not in his car when they arrived but was standing in the yard. They say he was also very cooperative and allowed police to search his person.

http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/r ... ade-to-911

She was convicted of lying for a reason.

[gameoverman]

When I am saying it is irrelevant I mean in the actual case. But the public seems to really struggle with how our legal system works and the Martin case only more fully exposed that.

I think the main struggle, in this case and other cases such as the Casey Anthony one, is the public expects someone to pay when a sympathetic person is killed, especially if a young person is killed.

So in this Martin case, the public's mindset is more "Okay, how much time in prison is Zimmerman going to get?" not "What evidence is there of a crime? Is there ANY evidence of a crime?".

[Chrisoc13]

When I am saying it is irrelevant I mean in the actual case. But the public seems to really struggle with how our legal system works and the Martin case only more fully exposed that.

I think the main struggle, in this case and other cases such as the Casey Anthony one, is the public expects someone to pay when a sympathetic person is killed, especially if a young person is killed.

So in this Martin case, the public's mindset is more "Okay, how much time in prison is Zimmerman going to get?" not "What evidence is there of a crime? Is there ANY evidence of a crime?".

Exactly. The public wanted blood regardless of how our legal system works.

But this is old news... The new news is Zimmermann smashed an ipad and then cut it with his pocket knife, which frankly I find somewhat impressive

The whole family seems like real pieces of work.

[Zarathud]

Well, she must be lying NOW rather than before...nevermind that she admitted lying to protect the money and her husband. And stabbing a poor defenseless iPad isn't really a crime.

It's thuggery, with or without a gun.

[Zarathud]

Well, she must be lying NOW rather than before...nevermind that she admitted lying to protect the money and her husband. And stabbing a poor defenseless iPad isn't really a crime.

It's thuggery, with or without a gun.

[Blackhawk]

He tried to cut an iPad with a pocket knife?

Trying to whittle himself and iPhone, perhaps?

[hepcat]

How the hell else do you get an iPad mini?

[Toe]

He was testing his new screen protector.

Didn't work.