Trayvon Martin Case

[B-Man]

FIVE MYTHS about the killing of Trayvon Martin.

 

 

Though given Zimmerman’s ancestry, when Trayvon said “[N-word] still following me” is literally correct, since Zimmerman is blacker than Homer Plessy. Which makes it even odder that the press has consistently treated this as a black-white affair when, in fact, nobody involved was white. On the other hand, that coverage let them gin up black turnout for 2012, helping Obama.

[Rob's House]

One thing I find interesting about this case, and particularly this thread, is the political divide here. Other than the contrived racial angle, there's really nothing about liberal idealogy that would cause libs to flock to the prosecution side of this case. In fact, strangely enough, liberals tend to overwhelmingly flock to defense and conservatives to prosecution. Yet, here we are. Even in this thread the resident libs that have shown up have almost unanimously (save SameoldBills) supported convicting Zimmerman.

 

I get that the major players want to push this case for political reasons, but other than a theory of confirmation bias (belief perseverence to be exact), I can't see why the rank and file continue to support this bogus cause.

[Oxrock]

For those that want to think and educate themselves:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-killing-of-trayvon-martin/2013/07/03/0d76c176-e368-11e2-80eb-3145e2994a55_story.html

 

 

Five Myths About That Night

 

 

Who the aggressor was that fateful night is the central — and most unanswerable — question of the case. Those who fault Zimmerman have latched on to this back-and-forth with Sean Noffke, the operator, as proof that Zimmerman defied a direct police order.

Not so. Noffke testified on the first day of the jury trial that it is dispatchers’ policy not to give orders to callers. “We’re directly liable if we give a direct order,” he explained. “We always try to give general basic . . . not commands, just suggestions.” So, “We don’t need you to do that” is different than a more direct “Don’t do that.”

Did anyone see the photo of the rapper Game in a claim that it was TM? I've followed this case closely and never saw that photo before today.

[Wacka]

He's busy talking to himself in shout box right now. Maybe I can get clues there.

 

He's just replying to the voices in his head.

[3rdnlng]

Did anyone see the photo of the rapper Game in a claim that it was TM? I've followed this case closely and never saw that photo before today.

 

Once or twice, but I think as a joke. Not like the one of an obviously much younger Martin in his "Hollister" shirt. Did you see in the article where Attny Crumb tried to say that picture was taken a few months before his 17th birthday? What a joke.

Edited July 7, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[B-Man]

 

In busting Zimmerman myths, Jonathan Capehart perpetuates the greatest myth of all

 

Posted by William A. Jacobson

 

Zimmerman was not, in fact, in his vehicle at the time the police said “we don’t need you to do that”

 

Jonathan Capehart at The Washington Post writes of Five myths about the killing of Trayvon Martin

 

the first myth listed concerns alleged police instructions for Zimmerman not to leave his vehicle. This is a fundamental myth in the case, and gives rise to a claim one hears constantly and to this day: If only Zimmerman had not left his vehicle when police told him not to, this never would have happened.

 

Capehart correctly debunks the myth that the police ordered Zimmerman not to follow Martin.

 

But in so doing, Capehart does not address the most important part of the myth — that Zimmerman was in his car at the time. In so doing, Capehart assumes a fact which we know not to be true.

 

Zimmerman was not in the car at the time of the comment “we don’t need you to do that.”

 

Here’s the transcript of the call from Andrew Branca’s post at his blog addressing the call:

Zimmerman:

****, he’s running.

Dispatcher:

He’s running? Which way is he running?

[sound of car door opening.]

Zimmerman:

[Grunts.] Down towards the other entrance of the neighborhood.

[sound of car door closing.]

Dispatcher:

OK, and which entrance is that he’s heading towards.

Zimmerman:

The back entrance. . . . [mutters] !@#$ing punks [puddles?].

[Wind/breathing noise.]

Dispatcher:

Are you following him?

Zimmerman:

Yeah.

Dispatcher:

OK, we don’t need you to do that.

Zimmerman:

OK.

 

 

On direct examination, the 911 operator acknowledged hearing the car door chime go off right after the “he’s running” statement by Zimmerman (at 3:15):

 

That narrative is spun, incorrectly, into legal theories that Zimmerman must have been the aggressor because he left the car against police orders and followed Martin.

 

This is important because it defeats a key narrative of the case, that Zimmerman was in his car at the time the police made the suggestion (not the direction) that “we don’t need you to do that.”

 

 

.

Edited July 7, 2013 by B-Man

[14127]

One thing I find interesting about this case, and particularly this thread, is the political divide here. Other than the contrived racial angle, there's really nothing about liberal idealogy that would cause libs to flock to the prosecution side of this case. In fact, strangely enough, liberals tend to overwhelmingly flock to defense and conservatives to prosecution. Yet, here we are. Even in this thread the resident libs that have shown up have almost unanimously (save SameoldBills) supported convicting Zimmerman.

 

I get that the major players want to push this case for political reasons, but other than a theory of confirmation bias (belief perseverence to be exact), I can't see why the rank and file continue to support this bogus cause.

Man I have admired your posts but you missed on this one. First of all, they hate that Zimmerman should own a gun. Gun control [confiscation] has been their dream for decades. Also to get your lib credentials in order you MUST always support blacks [unless it's Clarence Thomas.]

[boyst]

Did anyone see the photo of the rapper Game in a claim that it was TM? I've followed this case closely and never saw that photo before today.

I've seen it and many other. martin giving the double tall man is fake. Martin with a joint is real. Pictures of his pot plants are real. The three pictures, in color, of his corpse are real, and there is even a photo shopped image of black Zimmerman and white Martin that makes you pause.

 

He's just replying to the voices in his head.

it really does get out of hand but it used to be funny. As soon as you mention him in any post he comes back to reply its funny.

[Rob's House]

Man I have admired your posts but you missed on this one. First of all, they hate that Zimmerman should own a gun. Gun control [confiscation] has been their dream for decades. Also to get your lib credentials in order you MUST always support blacks [unless it's Clarence Thomas.]

 

I suppose you're right, although interestingly enough, they haven't really used this story as a gun control vehicle, at least not on the national stage. They tried to use it to attack "stand your ground" laws until all but the slowest of the imbeciles figured out it wasn't applicable. The main angle seems to be the racial one, which would have seemed to have collapsed once they realized that the Great White Klansman who shoots down little black boys for kicks, turned out to be Hispanic - I missed the chapter in American history where there was an ongoing legacy of black oppression at the hands of racist Hispanics, but then there's a lot about this case (and its coverage) that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

My working theory right now is that they committed themselves to their side of the story when it was reported as a little black angel methodically profiled, hunted down, and slaughtered for being black, by a racist white devil, and now that the story is debunked they refuse to re-evaluate their position. I assume it is because they lack the character, courage, self-awareness, and morality to admit they jumped the gun and take a look at this case from a logical POV.

[14127]

you know thats not such a bad analogy,

 

maybe theres hope for you yet...

 

 

 

 

maybe I can gain clues from the fact that within 6 posts you call me out, odd don't you think,

 

maybe I can clues from the fact you chose to use a zip like I do before calling me out,

 

I want the truth...

 

Did you order the code red?

Your ignorance knows no bounds. 14127 is Orchard Park. What happens to be there? Hint this is a bills forum.

14787 is H.H. Richardson Complex I assume.

[boyst]

Your ignorance knows no bounds. 14127 is Orchard Park. What happens to be there? Hint this is a bills forum.

14787 is H.H. Richardson Complex I assume.

que whimsical response in 3, 2, 1...

 

 

I don't see how this behavior is tolerated. It is blatant trolling. No one is that dense

[Chef Jim]

Not intentionally. There actually was a cornfield across the road where the kids used to fight after school where I went.

 

I felt it would have been a more appropriate field of battle to challenge jboyst than out behind the swings, considering he's a farmer and all.

 

How the hell do you fight in a cornfield? Don't the stalks get in the way?

[14127]

I suppose you're right, although interestingly enough, they haven't really used this story as a gun control vehicle, at least not on the national stage. They tried to use it to attack "stand your ground" laws until all but the slowest of the imbeciles figured out it wasn't applicable. The main angle seems to be the racial one, which would have seemed to have collapsed once they realized that the Great White Klansman who shoots down little black boys for kicks, turned out to be Hispanic - I missed the chapter in American history where there was an ongoing legacy of black oppression at the hands of racist Hispanics, but then there's a lot about this case (and its coverage) that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

 

My working theory right now is that they committed themselves to their side of the story when it was reported as a little black angel methodically profiled, hunted down, and slaughtered for being black, by a racist white devil, and now that the story is debunked they refuse to re-evaluate their position. I assume it is because they lack the character, courage, self-awareness, and morality to admit they jumped the gun and take a look at this case from a logical POV.

Oh I am sure they are embarrassed as more and more facts come out on this case. Response? Same as it's been for many years. Oops that didn't work out, let's move on to our next black oppression case! One of them gotta stick!

[boyst]

 

I knew YouTube would help. My god, this will get some good colorful feedback.

 

Where was this filmed that a black kid would be fighting a redneck in a cornfield?

[3rdnlng]

How the hell do you fight in a cornfield? Don't the stalks get in the way?

 

Depending upon the seriousness of the fight we would either meet on the hospital grounds next door to the school or at a cemetary close by. If you timed it right and took care of business quickly you might not even miss the bus.

Edited July 7, 2013 by 3rdnlng

[14127]

que whimsical response in 3, 2, 1...

 

 

I don't see how this behavior is tolerated. It is blatant trolling. No one is that dense

I have seen this before. Interesting thread important subject, many well informed posts. then Conner would start his nonsensical babble, and every one would feel a need to respond to him. End of thread.

[Rob's House]

I have seen this before. Interesting thread important subject, many well informed posts. then Conner would start his nonsensical babble, and every one would feel a need to respond to him. End of thread.

 

It's kind of like playing Madden on the easy settings. Not terribly challenging, but it's still a lot of fun...for a while anyway.

[14127]

It's kind of like playing Madden on the easy settings. Not terribly challenging, but it's still a lot of fun...for a while anyway.

Problem is dog and Ryan? what's his name have been beaten up, pounded, lumped up, clobbered time after time and still the match go's on and on. Are there no rounds here?

[boyst]

Problem is dog and Ryan? what's his name have been beaten up, pounded, lumped up, clobbered time after time and still the match go's on and on. Are there no rounds here?

not when you keep asking for more. NRyan doesn't take it too seriously, though. He won't lose sleep over any verdict.

[3rdnlng]

I have seen this before. Interesting thread important subject, many well informed posts. then Conner would start his nonsensical babble, and every one would feel a need to respond to him. End of thread.

 

Dog---"he's guilty of manslaughter because he disobeyed a police order to not get out of his car"

 

Me---"that's not what the transcript of the NEN call says. The dispatcher asks him if he's out of his vehicle and following him. GZ says that he is and the dispatcher says that we don't need you to do that. GZ says ok".

 

Dog---"he's still guilty of manslaughter because he disobeyed a police order to not get out of his car".

 

I think I'll just copy and paste this at least once on every page in this thread. It would save both dog and I a little bit of time.