|
This is a sensitive and complex issue, please do not make comments without first reading the facts, which are cataloged in the OP.
If you make an uninformed post, or one that isn't relevant to the discussion, you will be moderated. If in doubt, don't post. |
On July 02 2013 11:21 Chylo wrote:
This is a fascinating example of why the justice system was created and it does show one proof of why America is a great place.
Thank God the Rule of Law prevails over the mob.
Mob psychology is so interesting.
To be fair the way the media represented the whole thing gave people the wrong impression of what had actually happened. People were emotionally charged and made a lot of uninformed posts because of what the media was saying, it was something along the lines of Zimmerman just shot and killed Martin in cold blood.
EDIT: Oh looks like ConGee beat me to it.
|
people should trust the media less then. its a cop out to say "well, the media lied to them." they did the same thing with the Duke Lacrosse Case, which was a media fuck up as well.
|
Good point, the media is heavily to blame. HEAVILY. They basically incited the mob.
Still, people reacting so quickly is scary also.
|
Funny what the media can do to folks sometimes. Remember when the media had everyone itching to invade Iraq? Facts came out later and way less people supported it. Regardless of the decision in this case, it is pretty terrible that the media put their own spin on the story initially... If Zimmerman is innocent he's still gonna have to deal with the racist/kid murderer labels associated with his name
|
Interesting, after watching the trial today, I'm watching all the commentary shows, and now everybody is all up on "why didn't Zimmerman tell Trayvon that he was neighborhood watch?". That's what came up in trial today, but really, given the evidence that we know, how would it have been different ? Rachel's testimony was that George hit Trayvon, wasn't it ? How does one claim he should have announced himself if they claim he physically assaulted Trayvon anyways ? Aren't they implicitly admitting that they know Trayvon attacked him for whatever reason ?
Trayvon appears to have been upset because he's an innocent black kid being followed simply because he's black. Does anybody think that if Zimmerman had said he was neighborhood watch, than Trayvon would have been like, "yeah, that's cool, it's ok that you're following me then, cracker." Based on the only evidence that we have, the tapes of GZ's explanation is that Trayvon wanted to beat him up, presumably because he was upset that he was being followed.
Had George told him he was neighborhood watch, how do people think things would have gone differently and based on what evidence ?
|
On July 02 2013 11:21 Chylo wrote:
This is a fascinating example of why the justice system was created and it does show one proof of why America is a great place.
Thank God the Rule of Law prevails over the mob.
Mob psychology is so interesting.
If you really want to have fun with mob psychology, play some Mafia in Arcade. People will abandon all logic in favor of the mob a majority of the time.
|
On July 02 2013 11:27 dAPhREAk wrote:
people should trust the media less then. its a cop out to say "well, the media lied to them." they did the same thing with the Duke Lacrosse Case, which was a media fuck up as well.
I personally don't believe the garbage the media churns out.
I wouldn't call it a cop out though. Most people don't care enough to get the facts other than what they're told. Although I think that's a really bad thing to do, that's just how the masses are. Heck even now major news networks are still spinning this case improperly as you said the Obama "If I had a son..." way.
It's just disgusting how the media gets away with this though. I feel like a conspiracy nut sometimes when it comes to this case because it feels like the media is pushing for some sort of race war.
|
Let's be honest here:
George Zimmerman has prevailed over:
- President Obama (public sympathy for Trayvon and casting George unfavorably by association)
- Attorney General Eric Holder
- The NAACP and many other black leaders
- Mob rule in his home city
- One of the biggest internet bashings we have yet seen
He has prevailed simply due to one thing - due process.
I'm sure all of these people will apologize publicly to George in the same manner they convicted him.
|
I would love for a First Amendment exception applying to media for shit like this similar to the exception for yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. In fact, I'm not a lawyer, maybe such irresponsible reporting actually already does fall under that exception. I would love to see the media held accountable. Or a legal requirement that a show either reports actual news and is held to a higher standard to not mislead, or they can give opinion, but in such a case, they have to have text on the screen like a disclaimer along the lines of "Nothing we say is to be taken for truth. It is opinion only, and as such, full of shit."
|
Obama will offer him a beer in his garden.
|
On July 02 2013 11:36 Chylo wrote:
Let's be honest here:
George Zimmerman has prevailed over:
- President Obama (public sympathy for Trayvon and casting George unfavorably by association)
- Attorney General Eric Holder
- The NAACP and many other black leaders
- Mob rule in his home city
- One of the biggest internet bashings we have yet seen
He has prevailed simply due to one thing - due process.
I'm sure all of these people will apologize publicly to George in the same manner they convicted him.
I highly doubt this..I feel as if most people will think he was acquitted (if it happens) because of the jury selected and other factors and won't believe that the evidence proved him innocent.
|
Anybody watching HLN After Dark right now ? Hilarious.
edit:
They did a little hypothetical walkthrough on what they think happened. One Trayvon supporter created some outlandish scenario involving Zimmerman recruiting a neighbor to help stage the scene, denying any scuffle took place, and two shots fired. Unbelievable that they actually put this shit on tv.
edit2: Holy fuck. Trayvon's parents being interviewed by Anderson Cooper, an old interview. However, Tracy Martin said that screaming was his son screaming, "He was afraid for his life. He saw his death coming. He saw his death coming. The screams got more frantic[er]". He totally attributed the sounds of the screams as pleading for life by someone who saw their death coming. Not sure if the defense will use this, but damn, talk about more prosecution testimony getting shoved back up their ass.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 02 2013 11:39 Kaitlin wrote:
I would love for a First Amendment exception applying to media for shit like this similar to the exception for yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. In fact, I'm not a lawyer, maybe such irresponsible reporting actually already does fall under that exception. I would love to see the media held accountable. Or a legal requirement that a show either reports actual news and is held to a higher standard to not mislead, or they can give opinion, but in such a case, they have to have text on the screen like a disclaimer along the lines of "Nothing we say is to be taken for truth. It is opinion only, and as such, full of shit."
I think libel is pretty much that.
|
On July 02 2013 11:45 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 11:39 Kaitlin wrote:
I would love for a First Amendment exception applying to media for shit like this similar to the exception for yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. In fact, I'm not a lawyer, maybe such irresponsible reporting actually already does fall under that exception. I would love to see the media held accountable. Or a legal requirement that a show either reports actual news and is held to a higher standard to not mislead, or they can give opinion, but in such a case, they have to have text on the screen like a disclaimer along the lines of "Nothing we say is to be taken for truth. It is opinion only, and as such, full of shit." I think libel is pretty much that.
Well, libel (or slander) is really only about George Zimmerman. I'm talking about accountability / culpability for stirring up rage, potentially leading to riots. If they report things accurately, we don't get the violence because people can understand what we are learning from watching the trail more closely.
|
On July 02 2013 11:40 Kaitlin wrote:
Anybody watching HLN After Dark right now ? Hilarious.
edit:
They did a little hypothetical walkthrough on what they think happened. One Trayvon supporter created some outlandish scenario involving Zimmerman recruiting a neighbor to help stage the scene, denying any scuffle took place, and two shots fired. Unbelievable that they actually put this shit on tv.
edit2: Holy fuck. Trayvon's parents being interviewed by Anderson Cooper, an old interview. However, Tracy Martin said that screaming was his son screaming, "He was afraid for his life. He saw his death coming. He saw his death coming. The screams got more frantic[er]". He totally attributed the sounds of the screams as pleading for life by someone who saw their death coming. Not sure if the defense will use this, but damn, talk about more prosecution testimony getting shoved back up their ass.
link?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 02 2013 11:49 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 11:45 LegalLord wrote:On July 02 2013 11:39 Kaitlin wrote:
I would love for a First Amendment exception applying to media for shit like this similar to the exception for yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater. In fact, I'm not a lawyer, maybe such irresponsible reporting actually already does fall under that exception. I would love to see the media held accountable. Or a legal requirement that a show either reports actual news and is held to a higher standard to not mislead, or they can give opinion, but in such a case, they have to have text on the screen like a disclaimer along the lines of "Nothing we say is to be taken for truth. It is opinion only, and as such, full of shit." I think libel is pretty much that. Well, libel (or slander) is really only about George Zimmerman. I'm talking about accountability / culpability for stirring up rage, potentially leading to riots. If they report things accurately, we don't get the violence because people can understand what we are learning from watching the trail more closely.
I don't think they really did enough to be liable for it, although I'm sure that if you could pin the blame on them for something substantial, they would be liable.
Speaking of Zimmerman libel suits, turns out he did file one, pending the end of this suit: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-02-26/news/os-george-zimmerman-nbc-stay-20130226_1_trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-nbc-universal-media-llc
|
On July 02 2013 11:50 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2013 11:40 Kaitlin wrote:
Anybody watching HLN After Dark right now ? Hilarious.
edit:
They did a little hypothetical walkthrough on what they think happened. One Trayvon supporter created some outlandish scenario involving Zimmerman recruiting a neighbor to help stage the scene, denying any scuffle took place, and two shots fired. Unbelievable that they actually put this shit on tv.
edit2: Holy fuck. Trayvon's parents being interviewed by Anderson Cooper, an old interview. However, Tracy Martin said that screaming was his son screaming, "He was afraid for his life. He saw his death coming. He saw his death coming. The screams got more frantic[er]". He totally attributed the sounds of the screams as pleading for life by someone who saw their death coming. Not sure if the defense will use this, but damn, talk about more prosecution testimony getting shoved back up their ass. link?
Watching it on CNN right now. The interview was something he had previously recorded.
edit: I guess AC 360 will play again in a few hours, so record that. The interview with the Martins was something he must have previously aired, I guess it would be on youtube somewhere. Search AC360 interview Martin parents, etc.
|
I don't see how any reasonable person can look at the evidence and testimony presented thus far and not at least see reasonable doubt.
Sure there's a >0% chance it was a murder, but that's not good enough. He shot and killed him, that's not in dispute. He contends it was self defense. The prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt it was not.
I see reasonable doubt all over the place, coming out of the prosecution's witnesses mouths themselves.
This trial should have never been such a media circus.
The media narrative of "racist white guy hunts down and kills an innocnet black child and the police let him get away with it" was so juicy that was what the media wanted to be true and that was the story they told.
The facts started to come out which destroyed that narrative but the damage was done.
Assuming he's acquited there very well might be civil unrest and rioting, and the media will be largely to blame for that, for basically lying to people in their race baiting hystery a few months ago.
|
I'm anxious to hear the first leader of the African-American community come out and use this as a teaching moment about how young African-Americans are better off to restrain themselves rather than using violence when they feel they've been profiled or otherwise treated unfairly. It seems the community is defending his response as how he grew up, or part of his culture, which I don't contend to be false, but it definitely needs to change.
|
Question to the lawyers:
What's the chance that the case is concluded without the defense having to take their turn on the stand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
