Wouldn't the big guy who followed the smaller kid around with the gun be the one who started the fight?
Again, you're making assumptions. And the guy was 5'9", over 200lbs., while the kid was 6'3" at around 150. So big is pretty much relative there. I don't doubt the possibilty of Zimmerman starting the fight. I also don't doubt that Martin could have either. Better than that, I'll admit that I flat out don't know.
Presactly. We don't know what happened. We should see what really transpired and let a court decide what law does and doesn't apply before we make a decision about how to react.
Otherwise, this is just another attempt to politicize something before the facts are in, no different than the Giffords shooting or the Duke Lacrosse case.
Great point.
I see you guys already discussed the size issue. The media likes to portray it as big Zimmerman and little Martin. Just as they portray Zimmerman as white (distorting that he is half white/half hispanic), vs black Trayvon Martin.
Chris Serino, the Sanford, Florida investigator, filed an affidavit on the night of crime saying he was unconvinced of Zimmerman’s account. However, the state attorney’s office Norman Wolfinger told Serino not to press charges against Zimmerman after he said there wasn’t enough evidence against him.
Lack of evidence would seem to be a different legal impediment than the "stand your ground law." If so, this tends to contradict, rather than bolster, your theory that "stand your ground" is somehow responsible.
In order to charge someone with a crime, there needs to be sufficient evidence to establish probable cause. The fact that a police officer does or does not believe a suspect may not, by itself, be probable cause.
Unless and until there is probable cause to charge someone, the question of justification would not be reached.
Yes.
What good is arresting someone, if it forces the police department to release the suspect within a few days for lack of evidence.
I spoke to a friend of mine who is an officer for the Broward Sherriff's office, and he said they were likely trying to gather the evidence before arresting Zimmerman, because once you arrest a suspect, there's a clock ticking, and if you don't have the evidence in time, you won't be able to hold him, and can blow your case.
So while the media, along with the Al Sharptons, Jesse Jacksons and Black Panthers are demonizing the Sanford police as giving Zimmerman a free pass and not arresting him for alleged racist reasons, the police may be aggressively investigating to build a case that they did not have the evidence to arrest Zimmerman for the first night.
That's y'know, in the spirit of the liberal media's eagerness to identify Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' shooter as a right-wing Republican, which shooter Jared Loughner turned out not to be, despite the slanders and insinuations otherwise.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
police in this case cited the stand your ground law ... as the reason for Zimmerman not being arrested.
If a law was struck down simply because a police officer had misunderstood it or misapplied it there would be no laws on the books whatsoever. Police can, and do, make mistakes.
Quote:
(signed by Jeb Bush)
No, you're not trying to politicize this, not one bit...
Has it been established that the police did that? While Jeb Bush and the lower level republican guy that came up with it say the law they got passed shouldn't apply in this case, well reallity is that it was applied.
When analyzing a statute, one of the things to look at is the intent of the legislators who enacted it. If the people who wrote and passed the law say it doesn't apply that is good evidence the police misunderstood the law.
I think your post does what your all about justice WB.
Taking liberal smear tactics, and throwing them right back in your face?
As I pointed out, when liberals did this with Jared Loughner, it was a blatant lie and smear. Loughner is described by those who know him as a "pothead liberal".
Zimmerman in contrast is as described: a registered Democrat, and half-white/half-hispanic.
I was demonstrating that if conservatives wanted to do the same in the mainstream press, they could, with devastating effect. Because that portrayal of Zimmerman is absolute truth. Whereas the same spin of Loughner was an absolute lie.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Couple in fear after wrong address tweet: An elderly Florida couple have been forced to move into a hotel after their home address was wrongly tweeted by Spike Lee and others as belonging to the man who shot teen Trayvon Martin.
When analyzing a statute, one of the things to look at is the intent of the legislators who enacted it. If the people who wrote and passed the law say it doesn't apply that is good evidence the police misunderstood the law.
The legislators also now have a political motive to get some distance between their law and Zimmerman.
I think your post does what your all about justice WB.
Taking liberal smear tactics, and throwing them right back in your face?
As I pointed out, when liberals did this with Jared Loughner, it was a blatant lie and smear. Loughner is described by those who know him as a "pothead liberal".
Zimmerman in contrast is as described: a registered Democrat, and half-white/half-hispanic.
I was demonstrating that if conservatives wanted to do the same in the mainstream press, they could, with devastating effect. Because that portrayal of Zimmerman is absolute truth. Whereas the same spin of Loughner was an absolute lie.
How do you feel about the conservative media on this story?
When analyzing a statute, one of the things to look at is the intent of the legislators who enacted it. If the people who wrote and passed the law say it doesn't apply that is good evidence the police misunderstood the law.
The legislators also now have a political motive to get some distance between their law and Zimmerman.
There is a very good chance that, the Florida state legislature has contemporaneous documents, including minutes and memoranda, detailing the evolution of the bill and the opinions of its sponsors and detractors as to what it means.
Why is he blaming the incident on Trayvon wearing a hoodie? It's not as simple as "Trayvon was shot because people who wear hoodies are discriminated against."
...and people would have to be stupid not to be suspicious of people who are hiding their face in settings that don't really call for it. If it's just a fashion statement, then it falls to the wearer to accept the suspicions he gets for wearing suspicious clothing. We've got similar problems in here, lots of robbers try to avoid being recognized in CCTV cameras by wearing baseball caps. So, can people be faulted for being wary of someone wearing a baseball cap even when it's not sunny at all?
Also, that dude totally looks like morgan freeman.
I think your post does what your all about justice WB.
Taking liberal smear tactics, and throwing them right back in your face?
As I pointed out, when liberals did this with Jared Loughner, it was a blatant lie and smear. Loughner is described by those who know him as a "pothead liberal".
Zimmerman in contrast is as described: a registered Democrat, and half-white/half-hispanic.
I was demonstrating that if conservatives wanted to do the same in the mainstream press, they could, with devastating effect. Because that portrayal of Zimmerman is absolute truth. Whereas the same spin of Loughner was an absolute lie.
How do you feel about the conservative media on this story?
Just fine.
How do you feel about Al Sharpton hosting a rally, and then doing his daily program for MSNBC on the rally that he led! Nice neutral objectivity.
How do you feel about liberals trying Zimmerman in the court of public opinion before the facts are known, and giving plenty of airtime to people screaming for Zimmerman's blood, offering a million-dollar bounty for his hide, and otherwise giving a platform and sympathy to those calling for lawless vengeance?
Classic liberal race-baiting, divisive partisan rhetoric, that can only obstruct the actual investigation. Yet another example of how liberals would destroy the country itself just to score a few cheap political points and short-term gain.
Liberals like to portray conservatives as a racist lynch mob.
But it's the Democrats and liberal media who are calling for lawless payback against Trayvon Martin's "white" assailant. And when the media are forced to honestly revise Zimmerman's true ethnic background, the New York Times on down revises Zimmerman's description to "white hispanic".
As Bernard Goldberg said with perfect humor and sarcasm: "I guarantee you that if Zimmerman had won the Nobel prize for science, the New York Times would not describe him as "white hispanic".
This brings back memories of how Obama was winning state primaries, and then Hillary Clinton started winning primaries in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania. For which the liberal media labelled these states as ignorant and "racist" for not selecting the Annointed One. And Obama made his infamous remark about blue collar white Americans "clinging to their guns and religion."
But when Hillary won again in Peurto Rico, somehow hispanics weren't subjected to the same ignorant and racist labels. Because liberals are only comfortable labelling whites as racist. It's a one-way street, no matter how blatant and vile the minority racism directed at whites.
And white liberals are only too happy to give this anti-white vileness a free pass, so long as it advances the liberal cause against Republicans.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
Why is he blaming the incident on Trayvon wearing a hoodie? It's not as simple as "Trayvon was shot because people who wear hoodies are discriminated against."
...and people would have to be stupid not to be suspicious of people who are hiding their face in settings that don't really call for it. If it's just a fashion statement, then it falls to the wearer to accept the suspicions he gets for wearing suspicious clothing. We've got similar problems in here, lots of robbers try to avoid being recognized in CCTV cameras by wearing baseball caps. So, can people be faulted for being wary of someone wearing a baseball cap even when it's not sunny at all?
Also, that dude totally looks like morgan freeman.
He's a politician, they aren't known for their grasp of reality. Just look at any of the posts from the former politician on these boards.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
Why is he blaming the incident on Trayvon wearing a hoodie? It's not as simple as "Trayvon was shot because people who wear hoodies are discriminated against."
...and people would have to be stupid not to be suspicious of people who are hiding their face in settings that don't really call for it. If it's just a fashion statement, then it falls to the wearer to accept the suspicions he gets for wearing suspicious clothing. We've got similar problems in here, lots of robbers try to avoid being recognized in CCTV cameras by wearing baseball caps. So, can people be faulted for being wary of someone wearing a baseball cap even when it's not sunny at all?
Also, that dude totally looks like morgan freeman.
He's a politician, they aren't known for their grasp of reality. Just look at any of the posts from the former politician on these boards.
SoM has it right. The "hoodie" that hides a person's face certainly makes others around them cautious.
Similarly, innocent people in L.A. and other cities can get beaten up or shot for unwittingly wearing what could be perceived as gang-colors. Many U.S. schools require uniforms to prevent gangs from wearing colors to school and clashing.
I disagree with Geraldo on immigration issues. But he is a prominent journalist with a 40-year career, and I do agree with him on some issues.
I rejected his hoodie argument initially. But in context of the other gang-colors and uniforms issues I mentioned, it does make sense that wearing a hoodie puts the wearer in potentially more danger, of either getting shot by other thugs, more suspect to police, or to gun-toting people who think they're about to be jumped or robbed.
I disagree with Geraldo on immigration issues. But he is a prominent journalist with a 40-year career, and I do agree with him on some issues.
He started his career by wasting hours opening an empty vault. fox gives him the weekend night slot because no one watches during that time. He's a joke, he's the news media version of you.
November 6th, 2012: Americas new Independence Day.
How do you feel about the conservative media on this story?
Just fine.
How do you feel about Al Sharpton hosting a rally, and then doing his daily program for MSNBC on the rally that he led! Nice neural objectivity.
....
I've seen some dumb/biased reporting on this by both sides. The one doesn't excuse the other. Sharpton doing that isn't any different than what Beck has done with his events other than you complain when the other side does it.
Last edited by Matter-eater Man; 2012-03-2910:54 AM.
This reveals more about the liberal media than it does about Trayvon Martin or the white supremacist who hacked martin's information.
It continues the narrative of trying to downplay anything negative about Martin, and portraying anyone who investigates or questions Martin's part in his own death as racist. Love all the [sic]'s that they would have corrected from a leftist website. I've seen plenty of typos on every board from pretty much everyone posting, either left or right, from WBAM to M E M to myself.
This much is still true:
1) Trayvon Martin was suspended three times from school, and was on suspension at the time he was shot.
2) There were witnesses who reported that it was Martin (not Zimmerman) who initiated the confrontation. There are also witness accounts of the reverse.
3) Martin is not a little kid, he was 6 foot 3, to Zimmerman's 5 foot 9, despite the liberal media's attempts to portray Zimmerman as the bully chasing a small kid. But you have to dig through coverage to see that.
4) Zimmerman regularly tutored black and other minority kids in his home, which isn't consistent with the "racist" profile that the liberal media is pushing, and the mainstream media are selectively omitting facts that disprove the Zimmerman-is-a-racist narrative.
inShare.0Share thisEmailPrintBy Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. at FindLaw.com
Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:23pm EDT
Have you heard about the George Zimmerman domestic violence allegations? What about the claims that he once attacked a cop?
They both appear to be true. Media has unearthed Zimmerman's criminal record, finding evidence that, in 2005, he was charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery of a law enforcement officer. That same year, his ex-fiance filed for a domestic violence restraining order, which was granted.
inShare.0Share thisEmailPrintBy Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. at FindLaw.com
Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:23pm EDT
Have you heard about the George Zimmerman domestic violence allegations? What about the claims that he once attacked a cop?
They both appear to be true. Media has unearthed Zimmerman's criminal record, finding evidence that, in 2005, he was charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery of a law enforcement officer. That same year, his ex-fiance filed for a domestic violence restraining order, which was granted.
So a history of violence for the guy who shot the kid.
What? That's impossible! Just ask Dave! He'll tell you! The white guy is a decent, white 'Merican citizen and the guy he gunned down in cold blooded murder was a dirty black kid. Don't you understand, MEM?
You're such a fucking, literal racist it's not even funny anymore. I hope you don't procreate and ruin the gene pool. Pathetic old man...
So you don't think it's funny that the media has actually hidden these more up to date pictures in favor of showing ones where he's a child?
The [liberal] media showed pictures of Trayvon Martin that made him look smaller and more innocent.
That same media showed older (2005) pictures of George Zimmerman that make him look larger, heavier, and more criminal and threatening. (Zimmerman has since lost a lot of weight, as you can see in the video of him at the police station the night of the shooting, when he was brought in handcuffs.)
SEE?!!! HE'S A NON-WHITE THUG!! HE DESERVED TO BE GUNNED DOWN!!! SOOOORRROOOOSSSSS!!!!
You're such a fucking, literal racist it's not even funny anymore. I hope you don't procreate and ruin the gene pool. Pathetic old man...
Ignoring your worthless taunts, slanders and baseless insults, it's not about Trayvon Martin being racially black. Many good and hardworking people in this country are black, that I'm glad to include among my professional associates and friends.
The issue is that Trayvon Martin, by his own self-chosen Facebook photos (that the media selectively omits) demonstrate that Trayvon was immersed in a criminal/thug subculture within the black community that was leading him down a criminal path. As Trayvon's three suspensions from school for drugs, spraying graffitti, and assaulting someone also manifest. Trayvon Martin was on a 10-day suspension from school on the night of the shooting. This kid was definitely not on his way to Harvard.
We're not talking about a black honor student who just innocently crossed paths with the wrong guy. Clearly, Martin's own actions --confronting Zimmerman physically, when Zimmerman had only watched him from a distance and reported him to police-- had a large role in what happened.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
inShare.0Share thisEmailPrintBy Stephanie Rabiner, Esq. at FindLaw.com
Wed Mar 28, 2012 9:23pm EDT
Have you heard about the George Zimmerman domestic violence allegations? What about the claims that he once attacked a cop?
They both appear to be true. Media has unearthed Zimmerman's criminal record, finding evidence that, in 2005, he was charged with resisting arrest with violence and battery of a law enforcement officer. That same year, his ex-fiance filed for a domestic violence restraining order, which was granted.
The circumstances of each was clear. What you portray as a "violent assault" on a police officer, the article (L.A. Times) describes as a booking of non-violently resisting arrest.
Zimmerman also filed a restraining order against his wife, when she filed one on him. But those incidents are more than 6 years in the past, and he was at the time of the shooting back in scool to become a police officer.
And against Pro's slanders, Zimmerman is clearly half white/half hispanic, and a fluent spanish speaker. So my defense of Zimmerman is not a case of white=good, minority=bad.
In my initial posts, I clearly leaned toward Zimmerman being the one at fault. Further evidence and witnesses, and Martin's own media-supressed criminal thug tendencies, have made me lean more toward Zimmerman's account. But clearly, neither of these guys has a perfect record, and plenty more can still be revealed later.
[ So a history of violence for the guy who shot the kid.
In other words two people with a history of violence had a run-in and, as a result, one is dead and the other may be arrested. Pretty typical and sad crime story all in all.
However, that would seem to be further indication that 'stand your ground' was irrelevant to the case. This kind of thing (two hotheads have a run in) has been a cause of violent crime since time immemorial
How do you feel about the conservative media on this story?
Just fine.
How do you feel about Al Sharpton hosting a rally, and then doing his daily program for MSNBC on the rally that he led! Nice neural objectivity.
....
I've seen some dumb/biased reporting on this by both sides. The one doesn't excuse the other. Sharpton doing that isn't any different than what Beck has done with his events other than you complain when the other side does it.
Glenn Beck had a peaceful rally that was, if I recall, the third largest-attended protest ever in Washington square. Its intent was to restore values and accountability of Washington leadership (and trustworthiness) to the American people they represent, a return to our founding principles, and --specifically-- an elimination of deficit spending, decreasing federal growth, decreasing federal power.
Al Sharpton's rally, in contrast, was basically about hating whitey, and lynching George Zimmerman without a trial. That without evidence, advocated getting Zimmerman without any regard for (lack of) evidence, and circumnavigating the law to exact vengeance.
In Beck's case --and I watched the programs where Beck covered his rally-- he limited himself to focus on what the rally was truly about, vs. how it was portrayed on all other outlets of the [liberal] media, who dismissively downplayed it, and looked desperately to find that one questionable protest sign that they could portray as racist out of 10,000, and that other protestors often said was not representative of them and asked them to put away.
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
