Trayvon Martin's murderer George Zimmerman is still a free man

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The part that does have to do with race is the sense that I (and many other blacks) have that if Zimmerman had been black he would not have been found not guilty. In all the "oh yeah look at this story, black man commits heinous violence against white person" that have been circulating on Facebook this past week none have as the capper that the black guy was acquitted. If there is such a story out there besides the OJ Exception I have yet to hear it. What we in the black community hear in this acquittal is that the justice system has spoken and said that a white man can kill black man and suffer no consequences. Obviously that has a long historical precedent so it doesn't come from a vacuum. You can understand the difficulty in persuading that historical precedent no longer applies when you have a situation that looks awfully like exactly that historical precedent.


:up:
 
What we in the black community hear in this acquittal is that the justice system has spoken and said that a white man can kill black man and suffer no consequences.

That's far too much weight to put into a case that was in no way going to be a slam dunk. This wasn't To Kill a Mockingbird, where the jury gave a guilty verdict against to a black man despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
 
I think we need to separate the purely legal arguments from the emotional/life experience arguments.

Yes, from a legal point of view, the correct verdict was reached. This was not a miscarriage of justice, it wasn't a tainted jury (though strangely composed wrt sex and race but that's just an observation), there is no suggestion of prosecutorial misconduct or anything of the sort.
If only the media and politicians agreed with you.

But this case also brought up the way young black men are often looked at with suspicion, from the way they dress to the way they walk, talk, appear, etc. So yes, race matters in that respect.
Yes, it is worthy to discuss. But it seems many would convict Zimmerman simply to make a point, to have him be the sacrificial lamb for all the prior injustice against blacks.

When you say race doesn't or shouldn't matter but then go on to discuss whether TM was dressed like a "gangsta" (what is a "gangsta" exactly) it sounds bit like cognitive dissonance.

You're taking me slightly out of context here. I was using TM's own texts to demonstrate that this was the image he wanted to project (he called himself a "gangsta" alongside pics of him wearing fake gold teeth, holding a handgun, smoking pot...etc)- so it shouldn't have been that much of surprise that this was how Zimmerman saw him that night.
 
You're taking me slightly out of context here. I was using TM's own texts to demonstrate that this was the image he wanted to project (he called himself a "gangsta" alongside pics of him wearing fake gold teeth, holding a handgun, smoking pot...etc)- so it shouldn't have been that much of surprise that this was how Zimmerman saw him that night.

He's probably your average teenage boy.

There is no evidence that I'm aware of that he was holding a handgun, smoking pot or wearing fake gold teeth THAT NIGHT. So Zimmerman had nothing to go on but the fact he was in a hoodie? That alone made him gangsta? Think about it a bit...
 
He's probably your average teenage boy.

There is no evidence that I'm aware of that he was holding a handgun, smoking pot or wearing fake gold teeth THAT NIGHT. So Zimmerman had nothing to go on but the fact he was in a hoodie? That alone made him gangsta? Think about it a bit...

The hoodie and he was walking around aimlessly at night (taking 40 minutes to walk a distance covered easily in 10 minutes) in the rain in a neighborhood recently besieged by break-ins...
 
How so?

My younger brother is a high school teacher. He has stories that would make your hair stand on end.
 
He's probably your average teenage boy.

Lots of teenagers make neighborhood watch people annoyed. When I was a teenager, I would frequently hang out with friends in my neighborhood. Some neighbors would tell us to get out of the street. We usually complied. We were followed once by a neighbor, till I explained that I lived nearby and was heading home. He followed us until I went inside. That dude was annoying, but I don't remember thinking that he was a problem. (When I was 12 there was a brutal murder three blocks from my house, so people being somewhat on-edge wasn't necessarily a problem.)

There is no evidence that I'm aware of that he was holding a handgun, smoking pot or wearing fake gold teeth THAT NIGHT. So Zimmerman had nothing to go on but the fact he was in a hoodie? That alone made him gangsta? Think about it a bit...

A car parked in front of our house a few nights ago -- one we haven't seen before. We could not see in the dark. I promptly locked the doors, walked out to the car, asked the gentleman to roll down his window and told him to please take no offense, but we've had some break-ins in the area recently and I was going to have to ask him to move along. He moved along. (Not that I think it matters, but he was white.)

Two weeks ago someone from the neighborhood watch was out when a loud BANG went off. A guy was walking around in the neighborhood who wasn't from around here, and the neighborhood watch guy called out to him and questioned him. A car sped up and the guy got in and drove away. I don't think our neighborhood watch guy was wrong for questioning somebody who was lurking in the shadows in the aftermath of a loud gunshot-like sound.

Sometimes lurkers are enough for people to be suspicious -- especially people who are members of a neighborhood watch. And if you're in an area with a high crime rate...

Or to put it another way -- was wearing a hoodie an automatic sign that TM was black?
 
Two weeks ago someone from the neighborhood watch was out when a loud BANG went off. A guy was walking around in the neighborhood who wasn't from around here, and the neighborhood watch guy called out to him and questioned him. A car sped up and the guy got in and drove away. I don't think our neighborhood watch guy was wrong for questioning somebody who was lurking in the shadows in the aftermath of a loud gunshot-like sound.

Sometimes lurkers are enough for people to be suspicious -- especially people who are members of a neighborhood watch. And if you're in an area with a high crime rate...

Or to put it another way -- was wearing a hoodie an automatic sign that TM was black?

Do any of your neighborhood watch folks follow people around and not call out to them and ask what they are doing while being armed?
 
How so? Martin had "disappeared" for several minutes - even though his home was only about 30 seconds from the the place he was last scene. Zimmerman went into the general direction looking for a street sign to give the dispatcher the exact location of where he last saw Martin - when the dispatcher told Zimmerman he shouldn't follow - he turned back around toward his truck to meet the police (which he told the dispatcher he was doing). He was on his way back toward his truck that Martin "appeared" and the fight occurred.

Since he was less than 30 seconds from his home, and Zimmerman was well behind him at this point (and still in the truck) it is obvious Martin decided not to go home, but remain near the "T-section" for several minutes until Zimmerman walked through the area to the street - then came back through the area toward his truck.

Whether Martin was hiding can't be proven - but it's fact based on the phone records of Zimmerman and Martin that Martin remained in the "T-section" area for almost 4 minutes instead of simply going home (if he was truly afraid for his life - he already had Zimmerman beaten on the the path home). This just adds yet more weight the self-defense claim.

Waiting for him to "catch up to him" implies following, which isn't matching up with your understanding of the story. I'm also very confused by some of your facts. Who cares about "30 seconds from his home"?

And please explain to me by what you mean by this:
and Zimmerman was well behind him at this point (and still in the truck) it is obvious Martin decided not to go home, but remain near the "T-section" for several minutes until Zimmerman walked through the area to the street - then came back through the area toward his truck.
Was he still in the truck, or coming back towards the truck?
 
In which way? How can we hold someone accountable if they are not guilty of committing a crime as they are written today? Yes, we can (and should) use this case to rewrite some of these laws around self-defense and being armed in a public place, but that was not the job of this jury. Their only job was to come up with a verdict based on current, not hypothetical, law.

Many great points here, Sean. Is it possible the media initially made the mistake of setting this trial up as such an example? A jury can't acquit/convict anyone based on emotion and/or historical baggage - they must come to a verdict based on evidence and knowledge of the law.

Let me ask you a question, AEON. What would you be saying if the jury had come back with a guilty verdict?
 
That's far too much weight to put into a case that was in no way going to be a slam dunk. This wasn't To Kill a Mockingbird, where the jury gave a guilty verdict against to a black man despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

You know what would really support your point of view? Show me a recent case where a white man was accused of killing a black man and was convicted. Or better yet, a case besides the OJ Exception where a black man was accused of killing a white person but was acquitted.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom