George Zimmerman

[nmoira]

Bolding, etc is not working on my computer

Click on the little switch over the B for bold.

[LizzyBee]

Click on the little switch over the B for bold.

 

It worked!  Thanks.

 

[Harriet Vane]

Harriet Vane, on 11 Jul 2013 - 5:37 PM, said:

Quote

I don't intend to imply that all law enforcement officers are under-responsive or hostile. A very dear friend of mine from college is a police officer, and he is everything one would want a police officer to be--hard working, principled, ethical, and absolutely not racist.

 

 

... as are the people I know in law enforcement.

 

 

 

Quote

However, it is a historic fact as well as a current reality that the police (generally) under-respond to people of color or are actively hostile towards them. It is also a historic fact as well as a current reality that people of color have been terribly mistreated in this country and continue to be treated badly, despite the strides we have made in moving towards a more fair society.

 

 

I am not denying the historical facts of racism or past police brutality. My point was that I felt the post was implying that all or even most police were/are hostile towards people of color. I am not saying none were/are but I highly doubt I could expect most to be.

I said I did not mean to imply all.

You personally would not expect most police officers to be hostile because you personally do not have either the experiences or the cultural context to think that. An African-American, however, has had a different set of experiences, and like it or not those experiences do shape their viewpoint. Every single AA I know has either directly experienced police racism or personally knows someone who has. Their collective experiences give them a justifiable suspicion of law enforcement officers. It is an entirely reasonable response to a long history, both in the past and in the current reality.

 

Quote

Because people of color have so often been badly treated (and yes, beaten or killed in the not-so-distant past, not to mention so many other injustices of a less violent nature), people of color rightfully view police authority as always potentially hostile.

 

 

So because some people of color have been poorly treated in the past/present by law enforcement we should assume all/most law enforcement are like that.. kind of like if I said since some Rotweillers bite-then all do... or since some Irish have a temper then all do... the single most racist human being I have ever met was AA-it is ok for me to assume that of all of them . That is a true statement by the way-In College Tameka Collins threatened to beat me up because I was dating someone who was "not my kind" he was Puerto Rican... She was expelled from school for beating up another girl. She is the single most hateful racist human being I have ever met and the only one that was violently so...

I, too, have known racists of all colors, including African-Americans at times. However, our history tells me that African Americans have more reason to fear me than I do them.

Also, it's not just "some people" of color. It is an overwhelming majority. I will reiterate--every single African-American I know has either experienced or personally knows someone who has experienced injustice at the hands of law enforcement. Some such incidents included violence, though many were simply unfair or unjust behavior. The weight of our history bears this out as well. This collective experience, which was lived by most African-Americans, does result in a collective and fully justified suspicion of law enforcement officers.

 

Quote

It is NOT the victim's responsibility to reach out to the aggressor with the olive branch. It is the responsibility of the aggressor to make right what has been done wrong.

 

 

Once again.. Is there some assumption that every person that witnesses a crime or offense has been a victim of police? Does every police officer have to be judged by what someone else has done? I was never a big fan of punishing the whole class for something one kid did... I also don't know how someone that has never personally committed an offense can "make up for" something they have never done.

No, no one has made any assumptions of police brutality in the TM case, and each case does have to be weighed on its own merits. I posted in response to the assumption by a white, female poster who felt that a young African-American male would call the police if he felt threatened in some way. I posted to say that it would be rare and unusual for an African-American male to do so, for good reason.

I wrote what you quoted above specifically because of your assertion that African-Americans should work harder to get along with the police. As a people group, they have every reason to fear the police, and the reasonable fear of injustice or brutality makes it almost impossible for them, as victims, to trust. There is a very real possibility that interaction with the police will result in personal pain, so there is very little incentive for them to make that effort. Rather, the onus is on the police (and frankly, on all white people) as the ones with power, to show extra care knowing the history of injustice and brutality.

 

Quote

I lived in an African-American neighborhood (almost 100% people of color) and was active in African-American churches for fourteen years. I have many African-American friends. I am well aware of the urban criminal subculture and have no sympathy for them. However, my years of experience have also made me well aware of just how many good, ethical, honorable people who happen to be African-American have been mistreated, and who live in reasonable fear of the police.

 

 

Do you not think there is anything the good people in those neighborhoods could do to make the relationship better? -like I mentioned the cooperating with police in investigations, calling in on crimes they witness, not harboring known criminals... What could the police do to "make up for" something they as individuals had nothing to do with? I have heard the "oh poor me" victim mentality before and find it worthless in changing anything... I'm more of a can do kind of person. In saying that, I do not diminish the wrongs (on both sides) in the past. I'm saying I don't see the point of using it as an excuse to not make positive changes now-and in the future. I know a lot of places have officers that work with school kids, teach safety, do car seat checks...among other things that are positive in the community.

It's easy to be a "can-do" person when you have not and will not suffer the repercussions of systemic and/or personal racism.

There are people who do try all the things you suggest, and do suffer for it, yet keep trying. That doesn't change the fact that African-Americans have valid reasons BOTH in our shared history AND in their current reality to be suspicious of law enforcement.

 

Quote

To get back to Trayvon--as an African-American male he is very, very unlikely to call the police if he feels himself to be in danger.

 

That is too bad... too bad he didn't... too bad he felt he couldn't/shouldn't ... too bad for the culture that perpetuates that fear... and too bad for the past injustices.  It is just too bad...

Yes, it is too bad, and it's NOT his fault. You point a finger at the victims and their responsibility to reach out, to improve relations, without considering the validity of their concerns.

 

[Laurie4b]

I also thought I'd note (in response to a similar comment above about black people) that every white person I know has had an unpleasant, probably unfair/obnoxious encounter with the cops.  I've had a few myself.  And I've been pulled over for driving while white (I sure wasn't doing anything else wrong).  I am certain there are racist cops and profiling, but I also wonder if people aren't too ready to assume it's a race thing just because that's what we're brought up to assume.  It's hard to say how prevalent the racist cop encounter really is.

 

On counterbalancing anecdote, I am white, too. I have never been pulled over when I wasn't doing something wrong. When I was young, I was pulled over fairly frequently.  :blushing:  I got a total of 2 tickets (state trooper out of state; the other when I was in my late 30s) . I bet I got out of at least 6. :auto:

 

I know of only one other person who is white who was pulled for "nothing." But it was a car full of teenaged boys.

[Anne in CA]

I would like to add to this conversation that most reasonable people are terrified of the thought of killing someone. I have been thinking today of all the years I was growing up on a cattle ranch in the middle of eastern Oregon. My father is an AVID gun collector. He has EVERY kind of gun he legally can and yet the ranch is a magnet for people trying to steal chemicals to make meth with, or scrap metal or anything else. And yet, in the middle of the night when he catches someone out there and he calls out from the house for them to go away, he NEVER pulls out a gun. Even when he stands on the porch he leaves all those many guns in the house. He knows that stuff is only stuff and privacy is always subject to being violated and that he has tempting stuff. He would never want someone to die over it, not even scummy drug dealers going through his sheds. GZ does not have the good character of the simple people I grew up with who were responsible enough to own guns. I have never believed in gun control until GZ. Idiots with bad character should not be allowed to own guns.

[weaver_67579]

 

Harriet Vane, on 11 Jul 2013 - 5:37 PM, said:

 

 

Harriet Vane, on 11 Jul 2013 - 5:37 PM, said:

Quote

Quote

I don't intend to imply that all law enforcement officers are under-responsive or hostile. A very dear friend of mine from college is a police officer, and he is everything one would want a police officer to be--hard working, principled, ethical, and absolutely not racist.

 

 

... as are the people I know in law enforcement.

 

 

 

Quote

Quote

However, it is a historic fact as well as a current reality that the police (generally) under-respond to people of color or are actively hostile towards them. It is also a historic fact as well as a current reality that people of color have been terribly mistreated in this country and continue to be treated badly, despite the strides we have made in moving towards a more fair society.

 

 

I am not denying the historical facts of racism or past police brutality. My point was that I felt the post was implying that all or even most police were/are hostile towards people of color. I am not saying none were/are but I highly doubt I could expect most to be.

I said I did not mean to imply all.

You personally would not expect most police officers to be hostile because you personally do not have either the experiences or the cultural context to think that. An African-American, however, has had a different set of experiences, and like it or not those experiences do shape their viewpoint. Every single AA I know has either directly experienced police racism or personally knows someone who has. Their collective experiences give them a justifiable suspicion of law enforcement officers. It is an entirely reasonable response to a long history, both in the past and in the current reality.

 

I saw you said you were not implying.. I also said that my response had been in reference to the comment I felt was implying such and that is why I commented as I did....

 

I also don't think that every single AA has the same experiences. I don't find it to be a good idea to portray all or even most all of any group as a certain way... Isn't that how racism happens-people making assumptions about a group of people based on some? All/most police are not a certain way and all/most people of color don't have the same experiences in the same context. You may know a bunch that had that experience and I venture to say that that is not true of everyone. I also am sure I wouldn't agree with anyone in whatever demographic I am in as being just like me or having my experiences.

 

Quote

Quote

Because people of color have so often been badly treated (and yes, beaten or killed in the not-so-distant past, not to mention so many other injustices of a less violent nature), people of color rightfully view police authority as always potentially hostile.

 

 

So because some people of color have been poorly treated in the past/present by law enforcement we should assume all/most law enforcement are like that.. kind of like if I said since some Rotweillers bite-then all do... or since some Irish have a temper then all do... the single most racist human being I have ever met was AA-it is ok for me to assume that of all of them . That is a true statement by the way-In College Tameka Collins threatened to beat me up because I was dating someone who was "not my kind" he was Puerto Rican... She was expelled from school for beating up another girl. She is the single most hateful racist human being I have ever met and the only one that was violently so...

I, too, have known racists of all colors, including African-Americans at times. However, our history tells me that African Americans have more reason to fear me than I do them.

Also, it's not just "some people" of color. It is an overwhelming majority. I will reiterate--every single African-American I know has either experienced or personally knows someone who has experienced injustice at the hands of law enforcement. Some such incidents included violence, though many were simply unfair or unjust behavior. The weight of our history bears this out as well. This collective experience, which was lived by most African-Americans, does result in a collective and fully justified suspicion of law enforcement officers.

 

I can't think of any reason a person would have to fear me simply due to the color of their skin -vs-mine. If they do-that is their racist assumption-not mine. I was taught to determine what I think of a person by their actions and nothing else. Frankly, If racism is wrong for me as a white person-it is equally as wrong for someone that is AA, or whatever other group.

 

Of course violet behavior should not be tolerated. However, sometimes the things I have heard as "unjust" seemed to be logical police work.... such as young black male about 6 feet tall just robbed a convenience store wearing a white t-shirt and black jeans... I would expect if I fit that description, to be questioned if I was in the area. I would also expect to be questioned if the description was fat, white woman with 3 kids driving a Honda mini van wearing capri pants and green patterned shirt. Around here the typical thug is a skinny white teenage boy with is pants falling off his butt. I know someone whose kid matches that description and has been stopped...

 

Quote

Quote

It is NOT the victim's responsibility to reach out to the aggressor with the olive branch. It is the responsibility of the aggressor to make right what has been done wrong.

 

 

Once again.. Is there some assumption that every person that witnesses a crime or offense has been a victim of police? Does every police officer have to be judged by what someone else has done? I was never a big fan of punishing the whole class for something one kid did... I also don't know how someone that has never personally committed an offense can "make up for" something they have never done.

No, no one has made any assumptions of police brutality in the TM case, and each case does have to be weighed on its own merits. I posted in response to the assumption by a white, female poster who felt that a young African-American male would call the police if he felt threatened in some way. I posted to say that it would be rare and unusual for an African-American male to do so, for good reason.

I wrote what you quoted above specifically because of your assertion that African-Americans should work harder to get along with the police. As a people group, they have every reason to fear the police, and the reasonable fear of injustice or brutality makes it almost impossible for them, as victims, to trust. There is a very real possibility that interaction with the police will result in personal pain, so there is very little incentive for them to make that effort. Rather, the onus is on the police (and frankly, on all white people) as the ones with power, to show extra care knowing the history of injustice and brutality.

 

I think I was the someone that posted as to gee he was on the phone and people said he was scared-why in the world wouldn't he call the police? I realize that he may not trust them, however this case may have been very different if he did.

 

I do find it almost offensive to say all white people have "power" and should show extra care. I have no power and expect to treat everyone the same. If someone is a decent person they are treated with respect. If they are not-well not so much... Isn't that what everyone is supposed to do? I also have a real problem with having to apologize or somehow make up for something I didn't do. I also don't know what is expected of the police. How can they take extra care-not arresting people? I haven't heard any suggestions for how they can improve relations in the mentioned communities other than the public service type things I mentioned.

 

Quote

Quote

I lived in an African-American neighborhood (almost 100% people of color) and was active in African-American churches for fourteen years. I have many African-American friends. I am well aware of the urban criminal subculture and have no sympathy for them. However, my years of experience have also made me well aware of just how many good, ethical, honorable people who happen to be African-American have been mistreated, and who live in reasonable fear of the police.

 

 

Do you not think there is anything the good people in those neighborhoods could do to make the relationship better? -like I mentioned the cooperating with police in investigations, calling in on crimes they witness, not harboring known criminals... What could the police do to "make up for" something they as individuals had nothing to do with? I have heard the "oh poor me" victim mentality before and find it worthless in changing anything... I'm more of a can do kind of person. In saying that, I do not diminish the wrongs (on both sides) in the past. I'm saying I don't see the point of using it as an excuse to not make positive changes now-and in the future. I know a lot of places have officers that work with school kids, teach safety, do car seat checks...among other things that are positive in the community.

It's easy to be a "can-do" person when you have not and will not suffer the repercussions of systemic and/or personal racism.

There are people who do try all the things you suggest, and do suffer for it, yet keep trying. That doesn't change the fact that African-Americans have valid reasons BOTH in our shared history AND in their current reality to be suspicious of law enforcement.

 

I have suffered the repercussions of racism-read above comment on Tameka Collins-you know the racist hate filled person that threatened to beat me to a pulp because I was white and dating a Hispanic. I had to make sure I had others with me all of the time and avoid her at all costs.  I never knew what a "cracker" was other than something you put in tomato soup till she called me one and told me she hated all white people because they were all racist. like I said above-she was also violent and got thrown out of college due to actually beating another girl up. Gee 25 years later and she still is clear in my mind. However-I do not associate her horrible, hate-filled obnoxious and criminal behavior with all African Americans and believe that all like her should be called out like the horrible people they are.

 

I do think my can-do spirit is due to my personality and upbringing. There are certainly people like that in all demographics. It is a choice-to work to solve problems -vs- to sit and wallow in them. I applaud anyone that stands up for what is right and tries to make changes for the better. Once again-recognizing past wrongs is good-to learn never to repeat them. How is the suspicion of all law enforcement working out for those communities?? Is it working as well as say-in mine where people like me do call in things they see in the community and have a generally good relationship with law enforcement?

 

Quote

Quote

To get back to Trayvon--as an African-American male he is very, very unlikely to call the police if he feels himself to be in danger.

 

That is too bad... too bad he didn't... too bad he felt he couldn't/shouldn't ... too bad for the culture that perpetuates that fear... and too bad for the past injustices.  It is just too bad...

Yes, it is too bad, and it's NOT his fault. You point a finger at the victims and their responsibility to reach out, to improve relations, without considering the validity of their concerns.

I will leave the fault to be decided by the jury. I am not there to see all of the evidence and really, only GZ knows what happened that night. Martin is the only one who knew what he was doing walking around that night as well...

 

No finger pointing here at all. I don't think I said anything about what I thought of the validity of their concerns. So if they have concerns-talk about it... send community leaders to talk about it. I think it goes both ways. I think law enforcement also has concerns-lack of reporting, the danger to them in some of the neighborhoods, gangs...

[WagsWife]

That may well be. As a 17yo he may well have felt that he would be fine, just keep talking and keep walking. We don't know what was in his mind, because he is dead. However, I did want to address the poster who insisted that if there was a threat he should have called the police, or other posters who are saying that they (as white women) would have done so. In evaluating the case, it's not fair to make assumptions on his behavior based on what we as white women would have done. We have to think fairly about how he would have perceived the situation as an African-American--I doubt it would occur to him to call the police.

 

Then why can't the same be afforded to Zimmerman?  I would say that most people here do not understand how Zimmerman perceived the situation.  He lived in a neighborhood that had steadily gotten more and more dangerous.  Numerous neighbors had been robbed...one while she was still at home with her child.  Zimmerman lived close enough to that robbery that his wife saw the men leave the house.  Time, and time again these criminals had gotten away.  It was only a matter of time before one of the burglaries turned into something worse.  He sees someone acting suspiciously, and this time he is close enough to possibly allow the police to stop and question the person this time...if he can keep his eye on him.  I can totally see my husband doing something similar...and believe me, he is not a racist, he is not a cop wanna be (he was one in the AF...but that really does not count), he does not go out looking for people to stalk...and he is *not a confrontational person.  He is however, someone who takes seriously his responsibility to protect his family...and others who may not be able to protect themselves. 

[poppy]

I think it's very obvious how Zimmerman perceived the situation. It's not that we don't get it. It's that he killed a completely innocent person because he is a fool with a deadly weapon. And according to the law, it's possible nothing he did was wrong. That is a terrible thing.

 

Trayvin Martin existing = 'acting suspiciously'. That is a terrible thing too.

[Joker]

Then why can't the same be afforded to Zimmerman?  I would say that most people here do not understand how Zimmerman perceived the situation.  He lived in a neighborhood that had steadily gotten more and more dangerous.  Numerous neighbors had been robbed...one while she was still at home with her child.  Zimmerman lived close enough to that robbery that his wife saw the men leave the house.  Time, and time again these criminals had gotten away.  It was only a matter of time before one of the burglaries turned into something worse.  He sees someone acting suspiciously, and this time he is close enough to possibly allow the police to stop and question the person this time...if he can keep his eye on him.  I can totally see my husband doing something similar...and believe me, he is not a racist, he is not a cop wanna be (he was one in the AF...but that really does not count), he does not go out looking for people to stalk...and he is *not a confrontational person.  He is however, someone who takes seriously his responsibility to protect his family...and others who may not be able to protect themselves. 

 

In regards to the bolded, you're right. It was only a matter of time before the wannabe cop/neighborhood watchman went out armed and killed an unarmed person. That is definitely worse than what was going on previously in the neighborhood. To my knowledge, no one had been physically harmed prior to this event. I also don't believe anyone would have been harmed that night had Zimmerman not followed and killed Martin.

 

My dh is a former Marine. There have been times that he has run out of our house to help someone. He has never stopped to get armed first. He has never left the house that way and he would never follow a teenager that way. Zimmerman knew this was a teen. He followed him armed and already had decided he was up to no good. Zimmerman is responsible even if the jury finds him not guilty.

[NASDAQ]

I'm sure it is very unpleasant to be pulled over more often. How do people suggest that police and the public deal with the fact that a minority of people commit a disproportionately large percentage of the crime, without unduly inconveniencing innocent members of this minority?

[Slartibartfast]

I'm sure it is very unpleasant to be pulled over more often. How do people suggest that police and the public deal with the fact that a minority of people commit a disproportionately large percentage of the crime, without unduly inconveniencing innocent members of this minority?

 

 

 

Today people of color continue to be disproportionately incarcerated, policed, and sentenced to death at significantly higher rates than their white counterparts. Further, racial disparities in the criminal-justice system threaten communities of color—disenfranchising thousands by limiting voting rights and denying equal access to employment, housing, public benefits, and education to millions more. In light of these disparities, it is imperative that criminal-justice reform evolves as the civil rights issue of the 21st century.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/

[NASDAQ]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/race/news/2012/03/13/11351/the-top-10-most-startling-facts-about-people-of-color-and-criminal-justice-in-the-united-states/

 

Even if I were to consider a left-wing think tank to be a reliable source, it wouldn't explain away why a vastly higher share of crime victims than population would suggest identify their assailants as young black men (take this sort of thing). That means that police are looking for young black men much more often than they are looking for old Chinese women. Very aggravating for young black men, but I'm not sure what can be done about that.

[Slartibartfast]

Even if I were to consider a left-wing think tank to be a reliable source, it wouldn't explain away why a vastly higher share of crime victims than population would suggest identify their assailants as young black men (take this sort of thing). That means that police are looking for young black men much more often than they are looking for old Chinese women. Very aggravating for young black men, but I'm not sure what can be done about that.

Do non-left wing think tanks even have statistics on race and ethnic issues? I haven't noticed them caring much about issues specific to my culture. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2013/0331/School-suspensions-Does-racial-bias-feed-the-school-to-prison-pipeline

[NASDAQ]

Do non-left wing think tanks even have statistics on race and ethnic issues? I haven't noticed them caring much about issues specific to my culture.

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Education/2013/0331/School-suspensions-Does-racial-bias-feed-the-school-to-prison-pipeline

 

The FBI keeps crime statistics. Those are usually the ones people go by -- the Uniform Crime Report, or the National Crime Victimization Survey, or sometimes independent groups such as Pew Research.

 

Do you think that in victim surveys, people are falsely claiming that their assailants were black? Because it's either people falsely claim that black people assault them, or black men commit more of these types of person-on-person crimes. Since most crime is intraracial, the theory would have to be that black victims are wrongly identifying black men as perpetrators.

[Slartibartfast]

The FBI keeps crime statistics. Those are usually the ones people go by -- the Uniform Crime Report, or the National Crime Victimization Survey, or sometimes independent groups such as Pew Research.

 

Do you think that in victim surveys, people are falsely claiming that their assailants were black? Because it's either people falsely claim that black people assault them, or black men commit more of these types of person-on-person crimes. Since most crime is intraracial, the theory would have to be that black victims are wrongly identifying black men as perpetrators.

Seeing how the actual discussion was regarding profiling then we would be discussing non-violent crimes, unless these people are being pulled over while carjacking someone. Do you think the statistics are lying that minorities are targeted disproportionately and then penalized more harshly?

[Mrs Mungo]

Seeing how the actual discussion was regarding profiling then we would be discussing non-violent crimes, unless these people are being pulled over while carjacking someone. Do you think the statistics are lying that minorities are targeted disproportionately and then penalized more harshly?

Did you see that What Would You Do scenario where there was a young white male trying to get a bike unchained from a pole and only two people called the cops; they changed it to a young black male trying to get a bike unchained from a pole and a whole bunch of people confronted him and called the cops? They tried it with a lovely young white woman and people helped her get the bike off the pole, even when she told them it wasn't her bike.

 

That is why the crime stats are slanted.

[Harriet Vane]

Then why can't the same be afforded to Zimmerman?  I would say that most people here do not understand how Zimmerman perceived the situation.  He lived in a neighborhood that had steadily gotten more and more dangerous.  Numerous neighbors had been robbed...one while she was still at home with her child.  Zimmerman lived close enough to that robbery that his wife saw the men leave the house.  Time, and time again these criminals had gotten away.  It was only a matter of time before one of the burglaries turned into something worse.  He sees someone acting suspiciously, and this time he is close enough to possibly allow the police to stop and question the person this time...if he can keep his eye on him.  I can totally see my husband doing something similar...and believe me, he is not a racist, he is not a cop wanna be (he was one in the AF...but that really does not count), he does not go out looking for people to stalk...and he is *not a confrontational person.  He is however, someone who takes seriously his responsibility to protect his family...and others who may not be able to protect themselves. 

 

You are asking an entirely different question here (which is fine, but I want to make this clear before I answer). I initially posted what you quoted in response to your assertion that if TM felt threatened he could have or would have called the police. I posted that that would be unlikely due to the natural, justifiable suspicion I am guessing he had towards law enforcement.

 

You are now asking why we cannot give the benefit of the doubt to GZ, to understand his perspective. His concerns about burglaries are valid. However, as someone who lived for fourteen years in a high-crime neighborhood in the city, I can also say that his actions are inappropriate. What exactly was TM doing that was so suspicious? Walking with a hoodie on and talking on the phone? What is suspicious about that? He had no drugs, had not interacted with anyone other than to buy snacks, and had not approached any homes. TM felt spooked enough by a stranger following him that he did what many of us would have done in the same situation--called someone. What makes it acceptable to follow someone like this? If TM had been a young, white teenager posting the situation on this board, every one of us would have been concerned about r@pe or kidnapping because being followed is creepy and indicates danger to the one who is being followed. Your premise is that there was something inherently suspicious about TM, but by all accounts he was not exhibiting suspicious behavior. So what made him so suspicious? The fact that he was not personally recognized by GZ?? The fact that he was black??

[Matryoshka]

Do you think that in victim surveys, people are falsely claiming that their assailants were black? Because it's either people falsely claim that black people assault them, or black men commit more of these types of person-on-person crimes.

 

Like, say, Charles Stuart?

[Trish]

I think it's very obvious how Zimmerman perceived the situation. It's not that we don't get it. It's that he killed a completely innocent person because he is a fool with a deadly weapon. And according to the law, it's possible nothing he did was wrong. That is a terrible thing.

 

Trayvin Martin existing = 'acting suspiciously'. That is a terrible thing too.

 

Was it terrible that someone initiated a physical altercation?

[*Michelle*]

What the heck is up with this?

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353105/judge-confronts-zimmerman-testy-exchange-dimitrios-halikias

[MyThreeSons]

What the heck is up with this?

 

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/353105/judge-confronts-zimmerman-testy-exchange-dimitrios-halikias

Was the jury present during this questioning? I see appeal written all over this case if there is a conviction on any charge.

[unsinkable]

Was the jury present during this questioning? I see appeal written all over this case if there is a conviction on any charge.

Afaik, jury was NOT present.

[QueenCat]

I think it's very obvious how Zimmerman perceived the situation. It's not that we don't get it. It's that he killed a completely innocent person because he is a fool with a deadly weapon. And according to the law, it's possible nothing he did was wrong. That is a terrible thing.

 

Trayvin Martin existing = 'acting suspiciously'. That is a terrible thing too.

 

Exactly right. 100%.

[QueenCat]

Did you see that What Would You Do scenario where there was a young white male trying to get a bike unchained from a pole and only two people called the cops; they changed it to a young black male trying to get a bike unchained from a pole and a whole bunch of people confronted him and called the cops? They tried it with a lovely young white woman and people helped her get the bike off the pole, even when she told them it wasn't her bike.

 

That is why the crime stats are slanted.

 

By the time that episode was over, I was outraged. I knew it still happened but to see it was heart wrenching.

[NASDAQ]

Like, say, Charles Stuart?

You think that accounts for a majority of car jacking reports? People trying to cover up their own murderous behaviour, apparently back when I was in primary school?

 

Do you think the majority of rape reports are fabricated too? Or just murder/car jacking?

[Slartibartfast]

You think that accounts for a majority of car jacking reports? People trying to cover up their own murderous behaviour, apparently back when I was in primary school?

 

Do you think the majority of rape reports are fabricated too? Or just murder/car jacking?

The discussion is still about profiling, a carjacking and rape were not in progress during the altercation between Zimmerman and Martin.

[Murphy101]

I think this court is a shambles and an embarrassment to our supposed justice system regardless of any implied race issue. (And I don't necessarily think there is a race issue at all. Not every black man shot by someone not black is shot because he is black. I'm not discounting it either. Zimmerman could be racist, but I'm not going to presume it.)

 

For all intent and purpose, he has been tried and found guilty by the media. I don't think he will get a fair trial and the ridiculous antics in the courtroom don't give me any reason to believe otherwise.

 

I don't know whether he is guilty or not. My verdict is out on that because I have not been keeping up on the daily court proceedings. What little I have heard on the radio has left me with such a sour taste for our justice system that I have not been able to tolerate listening to more of it.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I think this court is a shambles and an embarrassment to our supposed justice system regardless of any implied race issue. (And I don't necessarily think there is a race issue at all. Not every black man shot by someone not black is shot because he is black. I'm not discounting it either. Zimmerman could be racist, but I'm not going to presume it.)

 

For all intent and purpose, he has been tried and found guilty by the media. I don't think he will get a fair trial and the ridiculous antics in the courtroom don't give me any reason to believe otherwise.

 

I don't know whether he is guilty or not. My verdict is out on that because I have not been keeping up on the daily court proceedings. What little I have heard on the radio has left me with such a sour taste for our justice system that I have not been able to tolerate listening to more of it.

I believe he is getting a fair trial, and I trust that the jurors are taking their duties seriously.

[WagsWife]

I believe he is getting a fair trial, and I trust that the jurors are taking their duties seriously.

 

My concern is not about getting a fair trial, it is how the public and media has already tried and convicted him.  This man and his family will never be safe.  At the beginning of this case, we had celebrities tweeting out the addresses of GZ family. 

[poppy]

I am concerned about the message young black men get from this whole tragedy and trial: You are viewed with suspicion. You are seen as a predator. You are not safe, even your own neighborhood. And the justice system is not doing a thing about it. That is a recipe for despair and alienation. It also does not exactly inspire that "can-do spirit".

[Harriet Vane]

I am concerned about the message young black men get from this whole tragedy and trial: You are viewed with suspicion. You are seen as a predator. You are not safe, even your own neighborhood. And the justice system is not doing a thing about it. That is a recipe for despair and alienation. It also does not exactly inspire that "can-do spirit".

 

:iagree:   Well said. Thank you.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I am concerned about the message young black men get from this whole tragedy and trial: You are viewed with suspicion. You are seen as a predator. You are not safe, even your own neighborhood. And the justice system is not doing a thing about it. That is a recipe for despair and alienation. It also does not exactly inspire that "can-do spirit".

Trying someone for murder 2 is "not doing a thing about it"?

[poppy]

The riots didn't happen because Rodney King was beaten by police. The riots happened because the men who did it were acquitted by a jury. Now that was a shocking verdict.

 

Please let's not debate Rodney King, I am just saying, just having a trial doesn't make it ok. It might might make it worse.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

If it didn't have such devestating consequences for so many people, the (evidently wide-spread) notion that black folks need to just be more can-do.....be more "active" in their dialogues with the police, and their so-called self-perpetuating struggles would be over...would be laughable.

 

You know what GZ and his ilk.....SO WORRIED about the increasing buglaries in his area coulda can-do'd? Met his freaking neighbors and had conversations about how to improove the safety of the neighborhood. If he'd TALKED to the people in his neighborhood about his super pressing concerns, he would have perhaps KNOWN TM or at least his family, and so would have waved and said "Hey man" when he saw him walking down the street instead "taking the law in his own hands" and in the end someone is dead. Dead, dead, dead, super dead, forever.

 

Absolutely ridiculous.

Actually I believe GZ did a lot of what you suggested. Martin was visiting his father so it isn't like he would be well known in the neighborhood.

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

If it didn't have such devestating consequences for so many people, the (evidently wide-spread) notion that black folks need to just be more can-do.....be more "active" in their dialogues with the police, and their so-called self-perpetuating struggles would be over...would be laughable.

 

You know what GZ and his ilk.....SO WORRIED about the increasing buglaries in his area coulda can-do'd? Met his freaking neighbors and had conversations about how to improove the safety of the neighborhood. If he'd TALKED to the people in his neighborhood about his super pressing concerns, he would have perhaps KNOWN TM or at least his family, and so would have waved and said "Hey man" when he saw him walking down the street instead "taking the law in his own hands" and in the end someone is dead. Dead, dead, dead, super dead, forever.

 

Absolutely ridiculous.

How do you know GZ didn't go out and met and talk to his neighbors? You are making an assumption that if he did, he'd know who TM was. The fact is that TM was visiting his dad at his dad's girlfriend's home in the gated community. (Look up why he wasn't in school, hint, it wasn't because he was homeschooled).

 

Perhaps, TM was not known in that small community?

[Mrs Mungo]

You know what GZ and his ilk.....SO WORRIED about the increasing buglaries in his area coulda can-do'd? Met his freaking neighbors and had conversations about how to improove the safety of the neighborhood. If he'd TALKED to the people in his neighborhood about his super pressing concerns, he would have perhaps KNOWN TM or at least his family, and so would have waved and said "Hey man" when he saw him walking down the street instead "taking the law in his own hands" and in the end someone is dead. Dead, dead, dead, super dead, forever.

I don't know that it would have mattered. Zimmerman has such a terrible memory that he had to walk around to find street signs on two of the three streets in the neighborhood he patrolled constantly.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I don't know that it would have mattered. Zimmerman has such a terrible memory that he had to walk around to find street signs on two of the three streets in the neighborhood he patrolled constantly.

Yup. Just a big liar about everything.

Well, except what eyewitnesses saw...

---Zimmerman said Martin was on top assaulting him. (Supported by a witness.)

--Zimmerman said after the shot he rolled Martin over and was on top of him. (Supported by two witnesses - although the defense tried to obscure that timeline.)

 

FTR, I had lived in the same neighborhood for 11 years. I still have to look up the name of the side steet I use to get to my subdivision daily. I walk the neighborhood 4-5 times/week and cannot name the street directly behind mine. Ever met someone terrible with directions/names but good with faces? Of course you have.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

How do you know GZ didn't go out and met and talk to his neighbors? You are making an assumption that if he did, he'd know who TM was. The fact is that TM was visiting his dad at his dad's girlfriend's home in the gated community. (Look up why he wasn't in school, hint, it wasn't because he was homeschooled).

 

Perhaps, TM was not known in that small community?

I am fairly certain he wasn't but that doesn't fit the game of pretend that has been played throughout this case.

[Scarlett]

Not everyone who believes GZ bears most of the responsibility for TM being dead is misrepresenting the facts or playing some sort of game.

[Mrs Mungo]

Not everyone who believes GZ bears most of the responsibility for TM being dead is misrepresenting the facts or playing some sort of game.

Nobody is. The various witnesses have presented conflicting stories. Anyone using the word "fact" to describe the evidence is the one playing a game.

 

Is it enough to acquit? I believe it is. Is it enough for him to be cleared or all moral and ethical responsibility on a non-legal level? I don't think it is. Florida doesn't have an imperfect self-defense law, so a manslaughter conviction would not be surprising to me.

[poppy]

Yup. Just a big liar about everything.

Well, except what eyewitnesses saw...

---Zimmerman said Martin was on top assaulting him. (Supported by a witness.)

--Zimmerman said after the shot he rolled Martin over and was on top of him. (Supported by two witnesses - although the defense tried to obscure that timeline.)

 

FTR, I had lived in the same neighborhood for 11 years. I still have to look up the name of the side steet I use to get to my subdivision daily. I walk the neighborhood 4-5 times/week and cannot name the street directly behind mine. Ever met someone terrible with directions/names but good with faces? Of course you have.

Cheap trick, refuting a ridiculous charge (that he lied about everything) that no one made.

 

It actually is a really simply designed neighborhood. Map: http://www.hlntv.com/interactive/2013/06/17/zimmerman-trayvon-map-interactive

[SKL]

What about this.  If you were going about with the intent to pick a fight and hurt or kill a black teen for the offense of being black, would you call the cops and tell them where you were and what you were doing?

 

I believe GZ himself regrets what it came to (loss of life, regardless of legal implications).  But that does not make it implausible that at the moment he pulled his gun, he felt he was in danger of his life.

 

A lot of the comments here only make sense if there is no right to self-defense, ever.  Whether folks would feel the same way if it were a black-on-black or white-on-white shooting, I don't know; I'm guessing not.

 

What if GZ was right in his feeling that, given a chance, TM would have grabbed the gun and shot him?  Would you all feel better with that outcome?  Half of me thinks that maybe you would.

 

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Cheap trick, refuting a ridiculous charge (that he lied about everything) that no one made.

 

It actually is a really simply designed neighborhood. Map: http://www.hlntv.com/interactive/2013/06/17/zimmerman-trayvon-map-interactive

My neighborhood is an incredibly simple design. I still can't name either of those streets. DH? Can name every street in neighborhoods he lived in 30 years ago.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Not everyone who believes GZ bears most of the responsibility for TM being dead is misrepresenting the facts or playing some sort of game.

Many are. The moment anyone says "Martin was shot because he was walking home with Skittles!" they are intentionally misrepresenting what allegedly happened. And they know it.

[poppy]

I believe GZ himself regrets what it came to (loss of life, regardless of legal implications). But that does not make it implausible that at the moment he pulled his gun, he felt he was in danger of his life.

It is plausible that he thought that, if his testimony is true. But I believe the standard for self defense is not "if he felt his life was in danger" but "would any reasonable person feel his life was in danger". And that is a very open question. Pulling the gun was one of many poor judgements Zimmerman made that night. So, even if his testimony is true, I think a manslaughter conviction would be entirely appropriate.

[Laurie4b]

It is plausible that he thought that, if his testimony is true. But I believe the standard for self defense is not "if he felt his life was in danger" but "would any reasonable person feel his life was in danger". And that is a very open question. Pulling the gun was one of many poor judgements Zimmerman made that night. So, even if his testimony is true, I think a manslaughter conviction would be entirely appropriate.

 

In FL, it appears that the "reasonable person standard is not part of the law:

 

Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;

 

: http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.012.html

 

I am not an attorney, but it appears that the statute only requires the person to fear great bodily harm. It also doesn't require that they have sustained any harm, just that they fear it. Again, I'm not an attorney, just a lay person reading the words.

 

ETA: in the judge's interpretation to the jury, she does mention "reasonable person" here, but I can't copy and paste the text: http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf

 

[ChocolateReignRemix]

It is plausible that he thought that, if his testimony is true. But I believe the standard for self defense is not "if he felt his life was in danger" but "would any reasonable person feel his life was in danger". And that is a very open question. Pulling the gun was one of many poor judgements Zimmerman made that night. So, even if his testimony is true, I think a manslaughter conviction would be entirely appropriate.

Being pinned and beaten is generally a reasonable belief that you may be in danger of death or serious bodily harm. The testimony from the self defense expert certainly helped Zimmerman's defense, particularly as he pointed out you do not have to wait until you are seriously injured to act.

If Zimmerman's claim is correct, a manslaughter conviction is not any more legally justified than murder 2 as self defense is a valid defense against both. For a conviction to be possible, the jury must determine that the state proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman did not have a reasonable fear.

 

Btw, IF Martin was striking Zimmerman in the manner described I do not believe pulling the gun was poor judgement.

[Mrs Mungo]

It is plausible that he thought that, if his testimony is true. But I believe the standard for self defense is not "if he felt his life was in danger" but "would any reasonable person feel his life was in danger". And that is a very open question. Pulling the gun was one of many poor judgements Zimmerman made that night. So, even if his testimony is true, I think a manslaughter conviction would be entirely appropriate.

 

Exactly. He left his car armed with a loaded gun that had the safety off. He got out of his car ready to kill. The ME, Detective Serino and others testified that his injuries were not consistent with a fight for his life. He didn't receive stitches, he didn't go to the hospital. He went to work the next day (one of his main concerns that night, which was surprising to Serino). Would a reasonable person conclude that he was he in a fight for his life? That is the question. 

 

eta: 

 

1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony

 

The questions stands whether it was reasonable for Zimmerman believe he had to shoot and kill Martin to avoid imminent death or great bodily harm. Sure, being punched in the nose hurts, but it isn't imminent death or great bodily harm.

 

Detective Serino felt Zimmerman was exaggerating the manner in which he was hit. Serino told the FBI that Zimmerman's story seemed scripted. When Zimmerman told Serino what happened, Serino told his that WAS following.

 

While Zimmerman said he was looking for an address at the request of the dispatcher, Serino testified that there were addresses on the front of the homes *and* there is no such request from the 911 operator. Serino testified that there had NOT been a crime spree, but Zimmerman believed there had been. There is *one minute* between the time Martin's phone call ends and when the shot was fired. There were only a few seconds between the time the phone call ended and the first 911 call happened. Zimmerman lied about knowing self-defense law because he knew it would make him look bad. Zimmerman told his friend that Martin grabbed his gun. Why? Because he didn't want to appear guilty of shooting an unarmed, non-burglarizing teenager for no reason. Zimmerman was hiding money, speaking "in code" with his wife, and she's been charged with perjury as a result. We KNOW Zimmerman has lied, and we KNOW he encouraged his wife to lie under oath. You can't pretend he hasn't lied or that he wasn't paranoid and stalking (in the vernacular sense) an unarmed teenager.

 

Does it make sense that Martin hit Zimmerman "dozens" of times, was bashing Zimmerman's head against the sidewalk, covering Zimmerman's mouth and reaching for (and/or grabbing, depending upon his changing story) Zimmerman's gun...in a one minute time frame? But, there is no bruising on Martin's hands after hitting someone "dozens" of times? Does it make sense that Martin jumped out of non-existent bushes and started beating Zimmerman *while he was still on the phone*? Does it make sense that Zimmerman was *not* following Martin, but he wanted officers to call him upon their arrival because he didn't know where he would be? 

 

Zimmerman wasn't profiling Martin but complained about the "f'ing punks" and "a--holes" who always get away and referred to him as "the suspect" for no other reason than walking through his dad's neighborhood while on the phone? 

[poppy]

Pinned to me implies that the person being attacked does not have use of his arms. Clearly Zimmerman's arms were free, since he found his gun, aimed and fired. I think a more appropriate term is "straddling".

[Mrs Mungo]

Pinned to me implies that the person being attacked does not have use of his arms. Clearly Zimmerman's arms were free, since he found his gun, aimed and fired. I think a more appropriate term is "straddling".

 

Had both of his arms free, since according to him he was holding Martin back with his other arm so carefully made sure his own hand wasn't in the way before shooting. That doesn't imply a desperate struggle for your life to me.