On July 17 2013 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote: DOJ solicits email tips in Zimmerman civil rights probe
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law – who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, said that later in the afternoon, she joined a U.S. Department of Justice conference call to discuss the prospects.
“They were calling on us to actively refer anyone who had any information,” that might build a case against Zimmerman for either a civil rights violation or a hate crime, Arnwine said. “They said they would very aggressively investigate this case.”
Arnwine said the call was convened at about 3:30 p.m. by Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice, and included representatives from the FBI, and several federal prosecutors, she said. DOJ officials also said they would open a public email address so people could send in tips on the case.
That email address, which is now in operation, is Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov.
In addition to Arnwine’s group, Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Laura Murphy, Washington Chapter head of the ACLU; and several national, Florida and Sanford-based “human relations” groups participated, Arnwine said.
During the call, DOJ officials announced they had set up a way for people to send email tips that could help aid in their investigation. The email address will be operational later this week.
Also Monday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said a speech at the social action luncheon of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, that he shares concerns about “the tragic, unnecessary shooting death” of Trayvon Martin last year, and he vowed to pursue a federal investigation into the matter, the Washington Post reported.
Holder pledged that the Justice Department would work to “alleviate tensions, address community concerns and promote healing” in response to the case.
Translation: My god please bring us all your tips that he was racist, so we can review them and all still not bring a case. Please make sure you send every one, because we are only going to do this once.
Didn't the FBI kind of do an investigation and find that there was no racist motives to this or anything?
On July 17 2013 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote: DOJ solicits email tips in Zimmerman civil rights probe
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law – who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, said that later in the afternoon, she joined a U.S. Department of Justice conference call to discuss the prospects.
“They were calling on us to actively refer anyone who had any information,” that might build a case against Zimmerman for either a civil rights violation or a hate crime, Arnwine said. “They said they would very aggressively investigate this case.”
Arnwine said the call was convened at about 3:30 p.m. by Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice, and included representatives from the FBI, and several federal prosecutors, she said. DOJ officials also said they would open a public email address so people could send in tips on the case.
That email address, which is now in operation, is Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov.
In addition to Arnwine’s group, Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Laura Murphy, Washington Chapter head of the ACLU; and several national, Florida and Sanford-based “human relations” groups participated, Arnwine said.
During the call, DOJ officials announced they had set up a way for people to send email tips that could help aid in their investigation. The email address will be operational later this week.
Also Monday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said a speech at the social action luncheon of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, that he shares concerns about “the tragic, unnecessary shooting death” of Trayvon Martin last year, and he vowed to pursue a federal investigation into the matter, the Washington Post reported.
Holder pledged that the Justice Department would work to “alleviate tensions, address community concerns and promote healing” in response to the case.
Translation: My god please bring us all your tips that he was racist, so we can review them and all still not bring a case. Please make sure you send every one, because we are only going to do this once.
Didn't the FBI kind of do an investigation and find that there was no racist motives to this or anything?
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
Even if that is true, what more can be done? Convict an innocent man?
1. The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. 2. Outrage. 3. The police do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. 4. Outrage.
Legitimate anger, perhaps, but now misdirected and purposeless. Unless new evidence suddenly appears from nowhere a future conviction would be a fiasco after such a lengthy trial.
On July 17 2013 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote: DOJ solicits email tips in Zimmerman civil rights probe
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law – who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, said that later in the afternoon, she joined a U.S. Department of Justice conference call to discuss the prospects.
“They were calling on us to actively refer anyone who had any information,” that might build a case against Zimmerman for either a civil rights violation or a hate crime, Arnwine said. “They said they would very aggressively investigate this case.”
Arnwine said the call was convened at about 3:30 p.m. by Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice, and included representatives from the FBI, and several federal prosecutors, she said. DOJ officials also said they would open a public email address so people could send in tips on the case.
That email address, which is now in operation, is Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov.
In addition to Arnwine’s group, Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Laura Murphy, Washington Chapter head of the ACLU; and several national, Florida and Sanford-based “human relations” groups participated, Arnwine said.
During the call, DOJ officials announced they had set up a way for people to send email tips that could help aid in their investigation. The email address will be operational later this week.
Also Monday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said a speech at the social action luncheon of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, that he shares concerns about “the tragic, unnecessary shooting death” of Trayvon Martin last year, and he vowed to pursue a federal investigation into the matter, the Washington Post reported.
Holder pledged that the Justice Department would work to “alleviate tensions, address community concerns and promote healing” in response to the case.
Translation: My god please bring us all your tips that he was racist, so we can review them and all still not bring a case. Please make sure you send every one, because we are only going to do this once.
Didn't the FBI kind of do an investigation and find that there was no racist motives to this or anything?
Or am I thinking of something else?
Yes, but the FBI wasn't headed by a black man said "we will do everything we can for the black community". This is a whole bunch of politics and theater.
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
I didn't pay much attention at the start but how did the police bungle the case?
On July 17 2013 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote: DOJ solicits email tips in Zimmerman civil rights probe
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law – who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, said that later in the afternoon, she joined a U.S. Department of Justice conference call to discuss the prospects.
“They were calling on us to actively refer anyone who had any information,” that might build a case against Zimmerman for either a civil rights violation or a hate crime, Arnwine said. “They said they would very aggressively investigate this case.”
Arnwine said the call was convened at about 3:30 p.m. by Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice, and included representatives from the FBI, and several federal prosecutors, she said. DOJ officials also said they would open a public email address so people could send in tips on the case.
That email address, which is now in operation, is Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov.
In addition to Arnwine’s group, Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Laura Murphy, Washington Chapter head of the ACLU; and several national, Florida and Sanford-based “human relations” groups participated, Arnwine said.
During the call, DOJ officials announced they had set up a way for people to send email tips that could help aid in their investigation. The email address will be operational later this week.
Also Monday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said a speech at the social action luncheon of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, that he shares concerns about “the tragic, unnecessary shooting death” of Trayvon Martin last year, and he vowed to pursue a federal investigation into the matter, the Washington Post reported.
Holder pledged that the Justice Department would work to “alleviate tensions, address community concerns and promote healing” in response to the case.
Translation: My god please bring us all your tips that he was racist, so we can review them and all still not bring a case. Please make sure you send every one, because we are only going to do this once.
Didn't the FBI kind of do an investigation and find that there was no racist motives to this or anything?
Or am I thinking of something else?
Yes, but the FBI wasn't headed by a black man said "we will do everything we can for the black community". This is a whole bunch of politics and theater.
What's worse is that mob mentality not only got this to become a case in the first place but now they feel like justice wasn't served even though it was. So now mob mentality is going to force the DOJ to do something that it shouldn't be doing. Funny how justice being served only means him going to jail. Sorry, those 6 people decided what justice was, and they decided it was GZ being a free man. Mob mentality is turning this country into a circus.
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
Watch the video, the lawyer actually cover the topic well.
On July 17 2013 08:04 dAPhREAk wrote: DOJ solicits email tips in Zimmerman civil rights probe
The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday afternoon appealed to civil rights groups and community leaders, nationally and in Sanford, for help investigating whether a federal criminal case might be brought against George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, one advocate said.
The DOJ has also set up a public email address to take in tips on its civil rights investigation.
Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law – who earlier in the day joined calls for federal civil rights charges against Zimmerman, said that later in the afternoon, she joined a U.S. Department of Justice conference call to discuss the prospects.
“They were calling on us to actively refer anyone who had any information,” that might build a case against Zimmerman for either a civil rights violation or a hate crime, Arnwine said. “They said they would very aggressively investigate this case.”
Arnwine said the call was convened at about 3:30 p.m. by Tom Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice, and included representatives from the FBI, and several federal prosecutors, she said. DOJ officials also said they would open a public email address so people could send in tips on the case.
That email address, which is now in operation, is Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov.
In addition to Arnwine’s group, Sherrilyn Ifill, President and Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Laura Murphy, Washington Chapter head of the ACLU; and several national, Florida and Sanford-based “human relations” groups participated, Arnwine said.
During the call, DOJ officials announced they had set up a way for people to send email tips that could help aid in their investigation. The email address will be operational later this week.
Also Monday, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said a speech at the social action luncheon of the Delta Sigma Theta sorority, that he shares concerns about “the tragic, unnecessary shooting death” of Trayvon Martin last year, and he vowed to pursue a federal investigation into the matter, the Washington Post reported.
Holder pledged that the Justice Department would work to “alleviate tensions, address community concerns and promote healing” in response to the case.
Translation: My god please bring us all your tips that he was racist, so we can review them and all still not bring a case. Please make sure you send every one, because we are only going to do this once.
Didn't the FBI kind of do an investigation and find that there was no racist motives to this or anything?
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
Ah, yes, the "institutional racism" of a Police department that knew Zimmerman thought they weren't very good at their job (which, with the handling of the physical evidence, Zimmerman had a point), knew he was Hispanic and a local activist and took a man with a bleeding head to the station to interview rather than the hospital.
Yes, that local police department. If the local department had been trying to railroad Zimmerman, people might have a point. But since almost no evidence came up from later parts of the investigation that wasn't impeached, it's as it has been since the beginning.
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
How exactly did the police bungle the case so much? The investigator even recommended manslaughter so that the investigation would continue, they gathered all the evidence they could, but it really looked like self defense. If it was a white on white crime and they didn't charge him, this outrage wouldn't exist. It was not because of improper police work. I can't recall a single big mistake from the police, there were issues like improper conditioning of the evidence, but nothing really huge.
On July 17 2013 06:13 Kleinmuuhg wrote: I just had a brilliant idea. If all the uninformed people who hate on the verdict are gathered anyway (when protesting), why dont they bring a big screen and hold a public viewing of the trial? That way some of them actually get to know what they are protesting about.
I don't think African Americans can think about this trial rationally. I try and persuade some of my friends but they can't get over the idea of being Martin being profiled in the first place. They can't move from that spot so they won't then acknowledge that Martin probably started the altercation, etc.
I tried to have a rational conversation with a black guy about my age at a bar once. This was before it went to trial and he was the one who brought it up. My only issue with his line of thinking was that he insisted that he racially profiled Martin. He was even willing to agree that it was self-defense, which was pretty shocking, just that he was positive that he profiled Martin because he was black. Interestingly at that point in time I wasn't even sure it was self-defense, I was just confident it wasn't about race. I thought that it was arguable whether or not he was acting in self-defense, but definitely not about race. Now that the verdict has been reached and all of the facts have come out, I am now also convinced that it was self-defense.
Fortunately we just agreed to disagree, and that was that. I think it boils down to a group mentality that it would be blasphemous to many of them if one were to deny an alleged case of racism towards someone who is black. They would rather be wrong, but still side with their race, than to risk being an "Uncle Tom" and disliked by their peers.
Some people hate things and believe in them so much they just don't care about facts anymore. I mean, I'm sure most of them thought something like:
1) Black guy killed by white/hispanic guy 2) Black guy's only crime was being black 3) White/hispanic guy probably won't go to jail 4) Trial happens 5) ----Doesn't look up any facts or even pays attention to the trial--- 6) Innocent 7) "See, the system failed us again, be outraged people! Demand Justice!"
Sadly many people run purely on emotion, which is basically the entire reason racism is still an issue.
People are focused too much on the trial. Did we all forget how this started? The police bungled the case and didn't even bother to do a proper investigation of the incident and let Zimmerman go free. It drew outrage because the fact is institutional racism exists in the criminal justice system. If I was on the jury I would probably rule not guilty too, but that does not negate the legitimate anger black people have in this country for the way they are still treated.
By the way, how do you respect the decision of 6 people and then sprint swiftly to the millions of people that didn't agree?
Susteren (originally a lawyer herself): ... It's the jury's duty to weigh them [the facts] and all of a sudden, suddenly afterwards you say they can't do their job?
Rand: I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that's to be a social engineer and when the law doesn't get it right, I believe that we have the right to peacefully and morally .... conscientiously object to the decision of the jury
On July 17 2013 08:41 Danglars wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qhhnNw6UaU By the way, how do you respect the decision of 6 people and then sprint swiftly to the millions of people that didn't agree?
Susteren (originally a lawyer herself): ... It's the jury's duty to weigh them [the facts] and all of a sudden, suddenly afterwards you say they can't do their job?
Rand: I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that's to be a social engineer and when the law doesn't get it right, I believe that we have the right to peacefully and morally .... conscientiously object to the decision of the jury
What a family lawyer.
Wow. I'd hit it, but she's pretty dumb for a lawyer.
On July 17 2013 08:41 Danglars wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qhhnNw6UaU By the way, how do you respect the decision of 6 people and then sprint swiftly to the millions of people that didn't agree?
Susteren (originally a lawyer herself): ... It's the jury's duty to weigh them [the facts] and all of a sudden, suddenly afterwards you say they can't do their job?
Rand: I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that's to be a social engineer and when the law doesn't get it right, I believe that we have the right to peacefully and morally .... conscientiously object to the decision of the jury
What a family lawyer.
Wow. I'd hit it, but she's pretty dumb for a lawyer.
On July 17 2013 08:41 Danglars wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qhhnNw6UaU By the way, how do you respect the decision of 6 people and then sprint swiftly to the millions of people that didn't agree?
Susteren (originally a lawyer herself): ... It's the jury's duty to weigh them [the facts] and all of a sudden, suddenly afterwards you say they can't do their job?
Rand: I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that's to be a social engineer and when the law doesn't get it right, I believe that we have the right to peacefully and morally .... conscientiously object to the decision of the jury
What a family lawyer.
Wow. I'd hit it, but she's pretty dumb for a lawyer.
She's not a lawyer, she's a "Social Engineer." Which guess means she tries to direct lynch mobs when the jury doesn't go her way.
EPT![[image loading]](http://bossip.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/jasmine-rand.jpg?w=600&h=449)
