We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
First they keep referring to a shooting of a black man by a white man. Pretty sure George Zimmerman is Latino.
Second no one in the media seems to mention that "Zimmerman back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from his nose and the back of his head"
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin%20Lakes%20Shooting%20Initial%20Report.pdf
Lets not bring in any facts that might spoil the news agenda of the story?
Second no one in the media seems to mention that "Zimmerman back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from his nose and the back of his head"
http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin%20Lakes%20Shooting%20Initial%20Report.pdf
Lets not bring in any facts that might spoil the news agenda of the story?
Show More
Depends who you ask
liberals will tell you Trayvon was an 11 year old who was shot to death by a white raycist for being black and buying candy
conservatives will tell you stuff like this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.html
cynics will say the whole circus was ginned up in the run up to the 2008 election for obvious reasons.
liberals will tell you Trayvon was an 11 year old who was shot to death by a white raycist for being black and buying candy
conservatives will tell you stuff like this:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.html
cynics will say the whole circus was ginned up in the run up to the 2008 election for obvious reasons.
great opportunity for the race industry - but hang on - the guy who shot him wasn't a honkey - oh well it doesn't matter - lets not bother with detail even if he was from the hispanic minority
!!! It was a racist attack NAP !!!
!!! It was a racist attack NAP !!!
I was in a local pub this morning having breakfast and sky news was on. This is how it was described
George Zimmerman has been found not guilty of Shooting the Unarmed Black Teenager Trayvon.
Hmm, seems a little weighted to me.
George Zimmerman has been found not guilty of Shooting the Unarmed Black Teenager Trayvon.
Hmm, seems a little weighted to me.
WHERE ARE ALL THE CHEST BEATERS AND HAND WRINGERS - imagine if a black lad went free and the edl demonstrated - they would be all over the forum
!!!!
!!!!
I was the only one on this forum that stood up for Mr Zimmerman's right to self defense on this forum.
Where is my parade? Where is my parade? Where is my parade?
Where is my parade? Where is my parade? Where is my parade?
please go to the Deep South of the USA. easy to find, look out for the white-robed men with pointy hats : they are your friends.
blacks lost so are flinging bricks at the cops - good one!!! An all white jury - so must be racist - they have to change their verdict - even if he was not guilty!!!
Helissio
I was the only one on this forum that stood up for Mr Zimmerman's right to self defense on this forum.
Where is my parade? Where is my parade? Where is my parade?AngryAngry
No parade.
Zimmermann called the police. They said they would take care of it.
He ignored the instruction, followed the person and shot him.
In America that is defending yourself. And in America people have a constitutional right to carry guns.
Cheer and self-congratulate if you like.
I was the only one on this forum that stood up for Mr Zimmerman's right to self defense on this forum.
Where is my parade? Where is my parade? Where is my parade?AngryAngry
No parade.
Zimmermann called the police. They said they would take care of it.
He ignored the instruction, followed the person and shot him.
In America that is defending yourself. And in America people have a constitutional right to carry guns.
Cheer and self-congratulate if you like.
What happened there. You can't really suggest that it was biased to report that dead man was unarmed. It was probably necessary in order to differentiate between the normal 'gangland' type of killing.
Apart from that it was correct. The guy with the gun shot the one without.
Apart from that it was correct. The guy with the gun shot the one without.
The aggressive black who attacked the hispanic and then continued to beat him while he was on the ground was shot dead.
the whiteys put him up for it - a clear conspiracy then organised an all white jury!!!
They should be allowed to shoot whoever the hell they want. What's the point in being American if you can have as many guns as you want but can't use them?
No parade.
Zimmermann called the police. They said they would take care of it.
He ignored the instruction, followed the person and shot him.
In America that is defending yourself. And in America people have a constitutional right to carry guns.
Cheer and self-congratulate if you like.
I will because as said above The aggressive teenager who attacked the hispanic and then continued to beat him while he was on the ground was shot dead.
Zimmermann called 911. The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that.
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
Zimmermann called the police. They said they would take care of it.
He ignored the instruction, followed the person and shot him.
In America that is defending yourself. And in America people have a constitutional right to carry guns.
Cheer and self-congratulate if you like.
I will because as said above The aggressive teenager who attacked the hispanic and then continued to beat him while he was on the ground was shot dead.
Zimmermann called 911. The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that.
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
Was the teenager aggressive before Zimerman followed him?
At what stage did he become aggressive Hellissio?
If Zimmerman had not followed him then none of this would have happened, so in my eyes he is guilty. We only have Zimmermans word for what happened
At what stage did he become aggressive Hellissio?
If Zimmerman had not followed him then none of this would have happened, so in my eyes he is guilty. We only have Zimmermans word for what happened
Steamship.
It is quiet common for unarmed people to confront and attack armed people.
Fer christ sake the victim was black and therefore unable to weigh up the odds of victory.
Zimmerman only used his weapon to shoot dead the unarmed victim as a last resort.
A court of law has proven this perfectly sensible assumption to be true.
Do not try and ask awkward questions because they is the facts.
It is quiet common for unarmed people to confront and attack armed people.
Fer christ sake the victim was black and therefore unable to weigh up the odds of victory.
Zimmerman only used his weapon to shoot dead the unarmed victim as a last resort.
A court of law has proven this perfectly sensible assumption to be true.
Do not try and ask awkward questions because they is the facts.
I love the way noone wants to address the fact that witness accounts tally with Zimmermans version that Trayvon was on top of him slaming his head into the pavement.
I think this is aggressive. If someone was following me, I would not do that to them. (Even if I could)
Following him is not a crime, and doesnot mean you should be beaten up.
I will repeat:
Zimmermann called 911. The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that.
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
I think this is aggressive. If someone was following me, I would not do that to them. (Even if I could)
Following him is not a crime, and doesnot mean you should be beaten up.
I will repeat:
Zimmermann called 911. The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that.
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
Here is the transcript of the 911 call
http://misterbillohno.newsvine.com/_news/2013/07/10/19392176-transcript-of-george-zimmerman-911-call
http://misterbillohno.newsvine.com/_news/2013/07/10/19392176-transcript-of-george-zimmerman-911-call
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/01/jury-hears-tapes-of-zimmermans-accounts-to-investigators-of-confrontation-with-martin/
One of the officers who questioned Zimmerman, lead investigator Chris Serino, testified that he tried to bluff Zimmerman into thinking the clash had been recorded to convince him that he would be in more trouble if he lied.
“I believe his words were, ‘Thank God, I was hoping somebody would videotape it,’” Serino said.
Asked by defense lawyer Mark O’Mara what he thought of that comment, Serino said, “Either he was telling the truth or he was a complete pathological liar. One of the two.”
When questioned further, Serino said he thought Zimmerman was telling the truth and was not a pathological liar.
One of the officers who questioned Zimmerman, lead investigator Chris Serino, testified that he tried to bluff Zimmerman into thinking the clash had been recorded to convince him that he would be in more trouble if he lied.
“I believe his words were, ‘Thank God, I was hoping somebody would videotape it,’” Serino said.
Asked by defense lawyer Mark O’Mara what he thought of that comment, Serino said, “Either he was telling the truth or he was a complete pathological liar. One of the two.”
When questioned further, Serino said he thought Zimmerman was telling the truth and was not a pathological liar.
Jury member being interviewed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijZcYETrDIU
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztXIDBz95ew
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijZcYETrDIU
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztXIDBz95ew
the whitey honkey liberals and the blacks don't like the verdict so chuck bricks - the handwringers on here moan - you couldn't make it up
I would so much have preferred zimmerman to have been white but the waters are somewhat muddies by him being of hispanic extraction - the irony and hypocrisy is wonderful to behold
I would so much have preferred zimmerman to have been white but the waters are somewhat muddies by him being of hispanic extraction - the irony and hypocrisy is wonderful to behold
Steamship
15 Jul 13 23:34 Joined: Was the teenager aggressive before Zimerman followed him?
At what stage did he become aggressive Hellissio?
If Zimmerman had not followed him then none of this would have happened, so in my eyes he is guilty. We only have Zimmermans word for what happened
He's guilty of murder in your eyes becuase he followed him? Surely only having Zimmermans word for what happened is a reason for having reasonable doubt that it was a murder?
15 Jul 13 23:34 Joined: Was the teenager aggressive before Zimerman followed him?
At what stage did he become aggressive Hellissio?
If Zimmerman had not followed him then none of this would have happened, so in my eyes he is guilty. We only have Zimmermans word for what happened
He's guilty of murder in your eyes becuase he followed him? Surely only having Zimmermans word for what happened is a reason for having reasonable doubt that it was a murder?
There is no mention of a struggle in the report, just what they found. ?
You do realize there has been a trial. There are witness accounts that tally with Zimmermans version that Trayvon was on top of him slaming his head into the pavement.
Do you accept that Mr/Mrs/Miss kincsem?
You do realize there has been a trial. There are witness accounts that tally with Zimmermans version that Trayvon was on top of him slaming his head into the pavement.
Do you accept that Mr/Mrs/Miss kincsem?
Probably the same witness accounts that saw Rodney King knocking seven colours out of those poor cops.
Jul 16, 2013 -- 8:51AM, Mikael D'Haguenet wrote:
Probably the same witness accounts that saw Rodney King knocking seven colours out of those poor cops.
You have a link for that?
the prosecution made a right mess of this trial.........it should have been a manslaughter charge from day one. of course releasing him without charge in the first place was hilarious...........so the whole thing was a mess.
if it was dealt with correctly by the police and prosecution there would not be such a fuss.
if it was dealt with correctly by the police and prosecution there would not be such a fuss.
1) Eyewitness accounts don't hold water
2) in the Sean Bell case the police found an eyewitness that managed to include an extra person on the scene who fired shots at the police, despite ballistic investigation showing the only guns fired were by the cops.
Wether Trayvon slammed his head into the pavement or not,what gives someone the right to chase someone down with a concealed weapon, then shoot them?
Well, Florida law does.
Even if the shooter is a known violent person like Zimmerman.
2) in the Sean Bell case the police found an eyewitness that managed to include an extra person on the scene who fired shots at the police, despite ballistic investigation showing the only guns fired were by the cops.
Wether Trayvon slammed his head into the pavement or not,what gives someone the right to chase someone down with a concealed weapon, then shoot them?
Well, Florida law does.
Even if the shooter is a known violent person like Zimmerman.
This is not about race...it is about guns and the US attitude to guns...they are nutters.
Blades , it is very much about race. Although you are right about the attitude in the US to guns.
Brgtwt Florida law clearly doesn't allow that but it does allow self defence as does the UK.
what gives someone the right to chase someone down with a concealed weapon, then shoot them
With that king of embellishment you could get a job for a tabloid newspaper.
what gives someone the right to chase someone down with a concealed weapon, then shoot them
With that king of embellishment you could get a job for a tabloid newspaper.
blades has this spot on........."This is not about race...it is about guns and the US attitude to guns...they are nutters."
these american right wingers think they are living in the 19th century.......ideological nuters
these american right wingers think they are living in the 19th century.......ideological nuters
what gives someone the right to chase someone down with a concealed weapon, then shoot them ??????????
Have you read anything about the trial? Are you sure your talking about the same case?
Have you read anything about the trial? Are you sure your talking about the same case?
So you telling me Zimmerman had his gun drawn?
But the victim still chose to attack him?
and "smash his head on the pavement"?
Now there is either some naive people here or selective choice of what really happened.
besides which...
"She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that."
teenager doing what teenagers do, trying to get the tools to get high. Chased by a known violent person with a weapon.
But the victim was a black kid, therefore not worthy of justice.
Change the colour of skin and someone is doing 25 yeears...
But the victim still chose to attack him?
and "smash his head on the pavement"?
Now there is either some naive people here or selective choice of what really happened.
besides which...
"She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that."
teenager doing what teenagers do, trying to get the tools to get high. Chased by a known violent person with a weapon.
But the victim was a black kid, therefore not worthy of justice.
Change the colour of skin and someone is doing 25 yeears...
"She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that."
Then he said OK
Your forgot that bit, wonder why?
Then he said OK
Your forgot that bit, wonder why?
besides which shrewd dude,self defence in the UK comes with the caveat of reasonable force, whereas in F
besides which shrewd dude,self defence in the UK comes with the caveat of reasonable force, whereas in F
in Florida the law is clearly different.
Stand your ground??
Stand your ground??
The defense team did not use the Florida "Stand your ground" defense.
They used simple self defense.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/15/202418599/stand-your-ground-laws-under-scrutiny-post-zimmerman-verdict
George Zimmerman's defense team didn't invoke Florida's "stand your ground" defense in winning his acquittal of murder in last year's shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
They used simple self defense.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/15/202418599/stand-your-ground-laws-under-scrutiny-post-zimmerman-verdict
George Zimmerman's defense team didn't invoke Florida's "stand your ground" defense in winning his acquittal of murder in last year's shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
What this case proves is how amazingly stupid the general public is and how easily lead they are, and even in a case which they apparently "care deeply about" they can't be bothered to shift their lazy dumb @rses to look up a single fact. Even when all the facts are widely available they will STILL continue to believe ridiculous politically driven fairy stories.
It might be interesting to hear the hear the other chap's version of events.
Hopefully, the true facts and reasons for this death will will be resolved without doubt doubt or bias when George is filling in his entry details at the Pearly Gates.
Hopefully, the true facts and reasons for this death will will be resolved without doubt doubt or bias when George is filling in his entry details at the Pearly Gates.
Hmmm. Lotta doubt there!
Old God doesn't like folk blaming everything on Him.
Old God doesn't like folk blaming everything on Him.
Brgtwt the self defence law in Florida look very similar to that of both England and Scotland requiring 'reasonable force' or 'proportionality' in that there must a reasonable threat of serious bodily harm or death. The only difference seems to be that they don't have a duty to retreat in Florida and it's questionable whether he would have been able to retreat if he was being attacked or the jury felt he would have being capable of doing so.
Obama will probably classify Zimmerman as a terrorist. Then he can get one of his drones to take him out.
So, a man advised to not follow someone who he had decided was acting suspiciously decides to ignore that.
Follows him, ends up in a fight and fortunately happens to be in possesion of a gun and shoots the victim dead.
for the people that accuse me of not seeing the facts...
What exactly did the victim do wrong?
Apart from appear suspicious to a man who was known to be violent?
A man who had made multiple such calls about "suspicious behaviour" about black males.
A man who it is debatable wether he should have been allowed to carry a concealed weapon given his police record?
Come on FACT merchants, what did Trayvon Martin do that was wrong enough for Zimmerman to track him in the first place?
Follows him, ends up in a fight and fortunately happens to be in possesion of a gun and shoots the victim dead.
for the people that accuse me of not seeing the facts...
What exactly did the victim do wrong?
Apart from appear suspicious to a man who was known to be violent?
A man who had made multiple such calls about "suspicious behaviour" about black males.
A man who it is debatable wether he should have been allowed to carry a concealed weapon given his police record?
Come on FACT merchants, what did Trayvon Martin do that was wrong enough for Zimmerman to track him in the first place?
Well, he was young and he was black and he had one of those 'hoodie' things. S'pose that's about it, really.
But it was dark and George's ever-alert sixth sense told him that something wasn't right with this young fella. George had seen his type before...in lots of films.
But it was dark and George's ever-alert sixth sense told him that something wasn't right with this young fella. George had seen his type before...in lots of films.
correct Naydam,anyone of the FACT crew seen the actual injuries to George after he had his head SMASHED!! off the floor?
The police photographs?
I've had worse bumping my head on a kitchen cupboard.
Not saying there wasn't a fight but.....
The police photographs?
I've had worse bumping my head on a kitchen cupboard.
Not saying there wasn't a fight but.....
Well, he was young and he was black and he had one of those 'hoodie' things. S'pose that's about it, really.
But it was dark and George's ever-alert sixth sense told him that something wasn't right with this young fella. George had seen his type before...in lots of films.
Only racism in the trial seems to have been the racist bastard calling the acquitted white man a cracker.
But it was dark and George's ever-alert sixth sense told him that something wasn't right with this young fella. George had seen his type before...in lots of films.
Only racism in the trial seems to have been the racist bastard calling the acquitted white man a cracker.
Or the member of the jury that called the victim " a man of colour" ????
The same member of the jury that said Zimmermans heart was in the "right place"
The same member of the jury that said Zimmermans heart was in the "right place"
Heart in the right place is racist is it? and while 'colour' is now non-pc it's hardly 'cracker'.
So,obviously you are unclear on the fact that referring to a "man of colour" harks back to era of segregation.
Secondly how can someone dish out justice to someone on the grounds that they just assume he had his "heart in the right place"
Was the juror aware of Zimmermans track record of violence when she assumed this?
Come on Shrewd, you are supposed to like FACTS.
Albeit the rest of the mocking FACT crew have gone a bit quiet.
Secondly how can someone dish out justice to someone on the grounds that they just assume he had his "heart in the right place"
Was the juror aware of Zimmermans track record of violence when she assumed this?
Come on Shrewd, you are supposed to like FACTS.
Albeit the rest of the mocking FACT crew have gone a bit quiet.
Track record of violence? Zimmerman has never been convicted of any violent crimes?
brngtwt - if you had a 17yr old on top of you smashing your head against the pavement - as per the accounts that the witnesses gave at the trial.
Would you have hsed that gun?
brngtwt - if you had a 17yr old on top of you smashing your head against the pavement - as per the accounts that the witnesses gave at the trial.
Would you have hsed that gun?
brngtwt - we have been through many of your points above.
You seem to want to ignore them
You seem to want to ignore them
Zimmermann called 911. The 911 dispatcher is not a police officer. She asked Zimmerman if he was following the teenager. HE said YES. She said we do not need you to do that.
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
Zimmermann said OK. They then chatted for a couple of min. Zimmerman then got out of his car.
Dont let the facts get in the way of your bloodlust for Zimmermann!
What exactly did the victim do wrong?
Other than punching him and then smashing his head repeatedly against the pavement.
Nothing.
Other than punching him and then smashing his head repeatedly against the pavement.
Nothing.
I'll give you fact hunters a fact.
I don't give a fack who kills who in the U.S. of A.
I don't give a fack who kills who in the U.S. of A.
Jul 17, 2013 -- 6:14PM, SqueezeFirmly wrote:
I'll give you fact hunters a fact. I don't give a fack who kills who in the U.S. of A.
What about Homer Simpson killing Maude Flanders ?
Watched it a few times, didn't know he had killed anybody.
This is my take on this thread and this case.
I thought that the OP started off with some reasonable points regarding media bias. I didn't necessarily agree with them, but they were reasonable. The thread then moved on to a lot of wild speculation about what may have happened that night, which is fair enough because this is Chit Chat. Personally, I don't really see how anyone, with the evidence presented in the press, could really be all that sure about what happened. Let's be honest: there is a fairly wide spectrum of possibilities, basically going from Martin giving Zimmerman no choice but to shoot him to Zimmerman getting off scot free for murder as a result of having killed the only other person who knew exactly what happened. Both extremes, and a lot of what lies in the middle, are possible though a bit strange.
So I find it rather unpalatable and inappropriate that the OP is rejoicing to this extent. Unpalatable because it's tragic in either, or any case, and inappropriate because the jury's result, although it must be respected and certainly adds weight to Zimmerman's innocence, really only proves that they could not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
I'm prepared to give him the benefit of that doubt, but I'm not going to be rejoicing.
I thought that the OP started off with some reasonable points regarding media bias. I didn't necessarily agree with them, but they were reasonable. The thread then moved on to a lot of wild speculation about what may have happened that night, which is fair enough because this is Chit Chat. Personally, I don't really see how anyone, with the evidence presented in the press, could really be all that sure about what happened. Let's be honest: there is a fairly wide spectrum of possibilities, basically going from Martin giving Zimmerman no choice but to shoot him to Zimmerman getting off scot free for murder as a result of having killed the only other person who knew exactly what happened. Both extremes, and a lot of what lies in the middle, are possible though a bit strange.
So I find it rather unpalatable and inappropriate that the OP is rejoicing to this extent. Unpalatable because it's tragic in either, or any case, and inappropriate because the jury's result, although it must be respected and certainly adds weight to Zimmerman's innocence, really only proves that they could not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
I'm prepared to give him the benefit of that doubt, but I'm not going to be rejoicing.
It should also be noted that it is most likely that the jury would not be made aware of any previous history of violence on the part of the accused. That is how it should be. The jury should reach their verdict based solely on the evidence presented in court. Anything else would lead to prejudice.
"This is my take on this thread and this case."
Here's my take on your take
"I thought that the OP started off with some reasonable points regarding media bias."
Since proven true, beyond a shadow of a doubt. For months the media lied and encouraged the fiction that zimmerman was unmarked. To quote tobermory 22/312 "I've read a lot about this, and hadn't heard Zimmerman was injured". This info was available on video and in report, the media presented edited grainy black and white video and reported otherwise.
"I didn't necessarily agree with them"
You were wrong then
"but they were reasonable"
Accurate would be a more reasonable description
"The thread then moved on to a lot of wild speculation about what may have happened that night"
Helissio got the heights wrong, but the media weren't reporting the heights, or the clear difference in strength, or actual appearance, or criminal record, or drug use, etc. Most of the wild speculation were anti-Zimmerman fantasies about Zimmerman being a mugger, or Martin being chased, or possessed by gods...
The discussion of the facts vs lies however is pertinent to his original point, you could argue it is his original point.
"Personally, I don't really see how anyone, with the evidence presented in the press, could really be all that sure about what happened."
Bingo. However, if look beyond the mainstream liberal media, it becomes abundantly clear.
"Let's be honest: there is a fairly wide spectrum of possibilities, basically going from Martin giving Zimmerman no choice but to shoot him to Zimmerman getting off scot free for murder as a result of having killed the only other person who knew exactly what happened. Both extremes, and a lot of what lies in the middle, are possible though a bit strange."
As long as you're going by what is possible, and not what is rational, why leave out the possibility that it was aliens what done it? Why leave out the possibility that we all dreamed it? Why leave out the possibility that was god's plan? Why leave out the possibility you did it? Why leave out the possibility that in a parallel universe Zimmerman attacked Martin and was shot in self defence? Your possibility portfolio seems a little incomplete...
"So I find it rather unpalatable and inappropriate that the OP is rejoicing to this extent."
What, that a person innocent of any crime is eventually and fairly cleared in a court of law despite a ginned up media driven lynch mob campaigning to stir up racial division and hate purely for political points in an election year?
No, I don't think so. What I believe you find unpalatable is that you were either part of that mob, or those who who looked on impassively, and those positions are becoming increasingly exposed. Just "my take" of course.
"Unpalatable because it's tragic in either, or any case,"
No, an innocent person sentenced, lynched, or murdered (still might happen, because people love fairy stories, and many love to hate people of the wrong colour) would have been tragic, but this was averted, so possibly something to celebrate? No?
"and inappropriate because the jury's result, although it must be respected and certainly adds weight to Zimmerman's innocence, really only proves that they could not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt."
A begrudging and minimal concession here, after the wall of fairy stories have collapsed leaving little more than a "just cos we can't prove it don't mean he ain't done it".
"I'm prepared to give him the benefit of that doubt"
How gracious!
"but I'm not going to be rejoicing."
No, that would be raycist
So what do think of my take? Too harsh? Unfair?
You're one of the more moderate voices on the thread, so of all the posts to argue, why your one?
Here's my take on your take
"I thought that the OP started off with some reasonable points regarding media bias."
Since proven true, beyond a shadow of a doubt. For months the media lied and encouraged the fiction that zimmerman was unmarked. To quote tobermory 22/312 "I've read a lot about this, and hadn't heard Zimmerman was injured". This info was available on video and in report, the media presented edited grainy black and white video and reported otherwise.
"I didn't necessarily agree with them"
You were wrong then
"but they were reasonable"
Accurate would be a more reasonable description
"The thread then moved on to a lot of wild speculation about what may have happened that night"
Helissio got the heights wrong, but the media weren't reporting the heights, or the clear difference in strength, or actual appearance, or criminal record, or drug use, etc. Most of the wild speculation were anti-Zimmerman fantasies about Zimmerman being a mugger, or Martin being chased, or possessed by gods...
The discussion of the facts vs lies however is pertinent to his original point, you could argue it is his original point.
"Personally, I don't really see how anyone, with the evidence presented in the press, could really be all that sure about what happened."
Bingo. However, if look beyond the mainstream liberal media, it becomes abundantly clear.
"Let's be honest: there is a fairly wide spectrum of possibilities, basically going from Martin giving Zimmerman no choice but to shoot him to Zimmerman getting off scot free for murder as a result of having killed the only other person who knew exactly what happened. Both extremes, and a lot of what lies in the middle, are possible though a bit strange."
As long as you're going by what is possible, and not what is rational, why leave out the possibility that it was aliens what done it? Why leave out the possibility that we all dreamed it? Why leave out the possibility that was god's plan? Why leave out the possibility you did it? Why leave out the possibility that in a parallel universe Zimmerman attacked Martin and was shot in self defence? Your possibility portfolio seems a little incomplete...
"So I find it rather unpalatable and inappropriate that the OP is rejoicing to this extent."
What, that a person innocent of any crime is eventually and fairly cleared in a court of law despite a ginned up media driven lynch mob campaigning to stir up racial division and hate purely for political points in an election year?
No, I don't think so. What I believe you find unpalatable is that you were either part of that mob, or those who who looked on impassively, and those positions are becoming increasingly exposed. Just "my take" of course.
"Unpalatable because it's tragic in either, or any case,"
No, an innocent person sentenced, lynched, or murdered (still might happen, because people love fairy stories, and many love to hate people of the wrong colour) would have been tragic, but this was averted, so possibly something to celebrate? No?
"and inappropriate because the jury's result, although it must be respected and certainly adds weight to Zimmerman's innocence, really only proves that they could not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt."
A begrudging and minimal concession here, after the wall of fairy stories have collapsed leaving little more than a "just cos we can't prove it don't mean he ain't done it".
"I'm prepared to give him the benefit of that doubt"
How gracious!
"but I'm not going to be rejoicing."
No, that would be raycist
So what do think of my take? Too harsh? Unfair?
You're one of the more moderate voices on the thread, so of all the posts to argue, why your one?
http://washingtoninformer.com/news/2013/jul/15/jackson-investigate-racial-context-martin-death/
Jesse Jackson:
We need a national investigation of the racial context that led to Trayvon Martin’s slaying. Congress must act. And it’s time to call on the United Nations Human Rights Commission for an in-depth investigation of whether the U.S. is upholding its obligations under international human rights laws and treaties. Trayvon Martin’s death demands much more than a jury’s verdict on George Zimmerman. It calls for us to hear the evidence and render a verdict on the racial reality that never had its day in court at the trial.
Now its getting really silly. Zimmerman wont even be able to flee abroad!
Jesse Jackson:
We need a national investigation of the racial context that led to Trayvon Martin’s slaying. Congress must act. And it’s time to call on the United Nations Human Rights Commission for an in-depth investigation of whether the U.S. is upholding its obligations under international human rights laws and treaties. Trayvon Martin’s death demands much more than a jury’s verdict on George Zimmerman. It calls for us to hear the evidence and render a verdict on the racial reality that never had its day in court at the trial.
Now its getting really silly. Zimmerman wont even be able to flee abroad!
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/353502/still-america-thomas-sowell
In summary: it's ok to harass folk then shoot them when they give you a bit of hassle in return. Thanks guys.
God bless America!
God bless America!
polybot 18 Jul 13 10:34
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/353502/still-america-thomas-sowell
Sad
Why so sad? I thought you'd have enjoyed Uncle Tom Sowell's article.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/353502/still-america-thomas-sowell
Sad
Why so sad? I thought you'd have enjoyed Uncle Tom Sowell's article.
Mikael, never mind the US, you could start your own campaign in the UK.
Tobermory: "If someone follows you for hundreds of yards when you are not doing anything wrong it is understandable that you would feel threatened and that the person is intending you harm, so he was entitled to defend himself*."
Bizarrely, using the Tobermory Defence, the killers of Martin Laurence and tens of thousands of other killers would have a strong case to appeal, they would only have to prove the attacker (Laurence) was walking behind or near the victims (them) or had provoked (eg shouted out or similar). They would simply need to prove they felt threatened or offended and that there was there was no intention to stab or beat the victim to death. But any defence by Lawrence, either by hand, knife or gun, would be considered either assault or possibly murder.
*attack someone
Tobermory: "If someone follows you for hundreds of yards when you are not doing anything wrong it is understandable that you would feel threatened and that the person is intending you harm, so he was entitled to defend himself*."
Bizarrely, using the Tobermory Defence, the killers of Martin Laurence and tens of thousands of other killers would have a strong case to appeal, they would only have to prove the attacker (Laurence) was walking behind or near the victims (them) or had provoked (eg shouted out or similar). They would simply need to prove they felt threatened or offended and that there was there was no intention to stab or beat the victim to death. But any defence by Lawrence, either by hand, knife or gun, would be considered either assault or possibly murder.
*attack someone
Jul 18, 2013 -- 4:40AM, Mikael D'Haguenet wrote:
In summary: it's ok to harass folk then shoot them when they give you a bit of hassle in return. Thanks guys.God bless America!
You obviously havent read anything about the trial.
Which bit have I missed? Did he or did he not pursue the victim?
Do you equate a bit of hassle with punching someone to the ground. Then slamming their head against the pavement?
"Why so sad? I thought you'd have enjoyed Uncle Tom Sowell's article."
Woooaaaahh. Uncle Tom?
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal?
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet?
We don'ts want to upset our grand and first class superiors.
We is simple folks from the country and the ghettos you see, while you is edukated, from the chateaus and such, an you knows whats best fo us.
Woooaaaahh. Uncle Tom?
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal?
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet?
We don'ts want to upset our grand and first class superiors.
We is simple folks from the country and the ghettos you see, while you is edukated, from the chateaus and such, an you knows whats best fo us.
"Mikael D'Haguenet
...Uncle Tom Sowell's"
You're racist scum. But let me guess, it's other people who are filthy racists?
...Uncle Tom Sowell's"
You're racist scum. But let me guess, it's other people who are filthy racists?
Strange post. Are you suggesting I'm racist or is it merely an admission on your part?
It's not a strange post, it's as clear as fooking day. You gonna answer it or are you hoping to back away with your bvllsh!t "no, you're a racist!" line?
I was referring to your 11:09 post. Is there a real question in there?
There's 4 explicit questions there. Makes a total of 6 explicit questions awaiting reply. The clue is the squiggly line with the dot underneath.
polybot 18 Jul 13 11:09
Woooaaaahh. Uncle Tom? Yup
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? I don't own a plantation. Or any blacks.
Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal? No.
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet? This...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0
Woooaaaahh. Uncle Tom? Yup
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? I don't own a plantation. Or any blacks.
Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal? No.
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet? This...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet? "This..."
So, you think blacks should be refered to as ni***rs, gays are f*gs, that blacks should beat police (or neighbourhood watch?) to a coma, but particularly if they are unarmed. How do you calculate the difference between beating someone into a coma and beating someone to death?
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? "I don't own a plantation. Or any blacks."
I see, just leasing.
Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal? "No."
How should this black man have behaved then?
So, you think blacks should be refered to as ni***rs, gays are f*gs, that blacks should beat police (or neighbourhood watch?) to a coma, but particularly if they are unarmed. How do you calculate the difference between beating someone into a coma and beating someone to death?
The black man wandered off your plantation eh? "I don't own a plantation. Or any blacks."
I see, just leasing.
Black man not behavin like black man oughta eh Mikeal? "No."
How should this black man have behaved then?
Another question. What if the ni***r doesn't know for sure that the cop/f*g is armed, he should still beat him into a coma? What should the black man be thinking here Monsieur Mikael D'Haguenet?
Somebody on the politics forum said that Zimmerman drew his gun before the victim attacked him.
I'm facked if I'd attack somebody who had drawn a gun on me.
I'd have run for it.
I'm facked if I'd attack somebody who had drawn a gun on me.
I'd have run for it.
Some career advice please Master Monsieur Mikael D'Haguenet.
I was looking to studying toward a career in boilermaking, but heard that you'd prefer us black folk to beat white folk into a coma as a better career alternative, can you give me some hints regarding when to stop the beating so as to leave the victim in a coma but not dead?
I was looking to studying toward a career in boilermaking, but heard that you'd prefer us black folk to beat white folk into a coma as a better career alternative, can you give me some hints regarding when to stop the beating so as to leave the victim in a coma but not dead?
polybot 18 Jul 13 12:30
Some career advice please Master Monsieur Mikael D'Haguenet.
I was looking to studying toward a career in boilermaking, but heard that you'd prefer us black folk to beat white folk into a coma as a better career alternative, can you give me some hints regarding when to stop the beating so as to leave the victim in a coma but not dead?
I'm not an expert in this field but I recommend you experiment on yourself first.
Some career advice please Master Monsieur Mikael D'Haguenet.
I was looking to studying toward a career in boilermaking, but heard that you'd prefer us black folk to beat white folk into a coma as a better career alternative, can you give me some hints regarding when to stop the beating so as to leave the victim in a coma but not dead?
I'm not an expert in this field but I recommend you experiment on yourself first.
"I'm not an expert in this field..."
No?
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet? "This...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0"
No?
Do tell us what the black man oughta be thinkin and sayin if it so please Master D'Haguenet? "This...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2YgZX9Thm0"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vEB3bgi3ag
At about 4.55s - Trayvon Martins friend who was on the phone with him just before the incident, tells us that Trayvon would have bashed/whoop assed Zimmerman.
At about 4.55s - Trayvon Martins friend who was on the phone with him just before the incident, tells us that Trayvon would have bashed/whoop assed Zimmerman.
Squeezefirmly, no, I'm good thanks. Also, the planet is spherical, and the internet extends beyond England.
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
This is a very angry thread, it's a long way away and a black man is dead, you'd think chit-chat would be over the moon.
polybot 18 Jul 13 13:18
Squeezefirmly, no, I'm good thanks. Also, the planet is spherical, and the internet extends beyond England.
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
Again, this is not a field in which can demonstrate much expertise. However, ever since I was knee-high to a grasshopper I have understood the planet to be an imperfect oblate spheroid. I'd hate to see any distortion of facts.
Squeezefirmly, no, I'm good thanks. Also, the planet is spherical, and the internet extends beyond England.
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
Again, this is not a field in which can demonstrate much expertise. However, ever since I was knee-high to a grasshopper I have understood the planet to be an imperfect oblate spheroid. I'd hate to see any distortion of facts.
Couldn't find any spelling errors to use as diversions eh?
Ken, nice of you to step in and try and calm the waters, but sometimes, in my opinion, a simple bit of humour doesn't fix things.
Interesting that a situation created to divide, and spread racial fear and suspicion has done precisely that, and maybe brought a little bit extra to the surface.
Interesting that a situation created to divide, and spread racial fear and suspicion has done precisely that, and maybe brought a little bit extra to the surface.
polybot
Squeezefirmly, no, I'm good thanks. Also, the planet is spherical, and the internet extends beyond England.
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
No. Never. This summed me up, at just after midnight.
SqueezeFirmly
18 Jul 13 00:14
I'll give you fact hunters a fact.
I don't give a fack who kills who in the U.S. of A.
Squeezefirmly, no, I'm good thanks. Also, the planet is spherical, and the internet extends beyond England.
How are you? Are you feeling nervous or uncomfortable?
No. Never. This summed me up, at just after midnight.
SqueezeFirmly
18 Jul 13 00:14
I'll give you fact hunters a fact.
I don't give a fack who kills who in the U.S. of A.
I think you want to check out and worry about what goes on in London rather than the USA - mind you they do say we are 10 years behind america!!!!
I've been in a cave for the past week but I'd expected Helissio or polybot to have posted something about this...
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/13/george-zimmerman-florida-police-chief
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/13/george-zimmerman-florida-police-chief
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539